posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 11:08 PM
With the point spreads for next week where they presently are, the computer only likes one game well enough to bet. Here are the current spreads,
according to scoresandodds.com, and what the computer says the true spreads should be:
(1) Real spread: Seattle minus 9
Computer sez: Seattle minus 4
(2) Real spread: Denver minus 3.5
Computer sez: Denver minus 5
(3) Real spread: Indianapolis minus 9.5
Computer sez: Pick 'em (I say: W.T.F.???)
(4) Real spread: Chicago minus 3
Computer sez: CAROLINA MINUS NINE
Computers are usually adjusted to take into account end-of-year games where a team wasn't really trying--e.g., the last two Indi games. I'm at a loss
to explain how Pitt could be a pick at Indi, but the fact they don't have that game starred to BET doubtless reflects the fact the spread is skewed by
those last 2 games.
And while, probably in disagreement with the rest of y'all, I can see making Carolina a favorite, I would make them a 3-point favorite.
This computer has been VERY accurate, so far. Is there something in individual MATCHUPS that justifies the "pick 'em" in the Pitt-Indi game? And how
in the world can the computer pick Carolina by NINE on the road at one of the most hostile forums in the game?
Of course, in January of 1989, I lost $1,000 on the f'ing Bears, and should have lost much more, when they hosted the Niners in the NFC Title game,
with a wind chill of something like 30 below, and the Niners were three-point FAVORITES, which I just couldn't believe.
It had opened with the Bears as three-point favorites, and it takes tens of millions of dollars to move a spread in a conference title game one team
by three to the other team by three. Also, betting AGAINST the public, as I did on that game, will in the long-term make you a ton in pro football.
So I bet my grand on the Bears and cursed myself as a coward for not borrowing money and betting more like $10,000.
Thank god I didn't do that. Final score. Niners 28, Bears 3. And that score DOES reflect the one-sidedness of the game.
The Niners went on to very nearly lose to a not-that-good Bengals team in the big one, but they mutilated the Bears, at Soldiers Field, in arctic
weather that the Niners were supposed to fall apart in.
So, is that supposed to happen again? Is that what the computer is saying? And is that a rational expectation? I can't see it. I see Carolina
winning, but by THAT much? Wouldn't dream of laying that many, even if you gave me 5-2 odds in exchange for all those points. No way, never.