Week 2 odds?

[ivotuk]

I have no idea how too read these, i need to talk to Jim Moore, but it looks like Seattle opens as 4 point underdogs?

http://www.vegasinsider.com/nfl/odds/las-vegas/

 

[BubbaGump]

Good. I like it when the Hawks play underdogs.

 

[kf3339]

Looks to me like a 3.5 to 4 point underdog. Since that is the usual points given a home team I believe it means potentially a toss up game. Am I right or what?

Still picking the Hawks in another close one!

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Seem like a fair spread.

 

[xray]

Is that as accurate as the spread they gave the Bengals game ?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Give it a rest man. We get it, the Seahawks suck and are going to lose by 3 Touchdowns, and have zero chance to win on Sunday. Better?

 

[HawkRiderFan]

Looks to me like a 3.5 to 4 point underdog. Since that is the usual points given a home team I believe it means potentially a toss up game. Am I right or what?

Still picking the Hawks in another close one!

They usually say that home field is an automatic 3 points so on a neutral field they'd give the Steelers a slight edge. This will be tough. Take 1 game in NE aside and Pittsburgh does the Bengals did last week, but better.

 

[AgentDib]

The nature of randomness is that the spread will often be way off for one particular game but over the long haul it is very difficult to consistently outperform. The reason why you see most "experts" picking games straight up instead of against the spread is that their picks tend to be worse than Vegas over the course of a season. It's also why you will see plenty of posters talk about how odds are wrong but they don't gamble their own money on it.

One way to think about the spread is to convert them to probabilities of winning. In the modern NFL the spread translates to approximately these likelihoods:
59% chance of winning = -3
66% chance of winning= -4
75% chance of winning = -7
90% chance of winning = -13.5
95% chance of winning = -15

So as 3.5 point underdogs the Hawks have a ~37% chance of winning or so based on information available today. That sounds bad since as fans we'd like to have a 100% chance of winning every game. However, this is one of our 10AM EST road starts against a team that most pundits have ranked ahead of us. It's very plausible that we could steal this game if we get a bounce here or there or make one more play then they do.

 

[sutz]

The nature of randomness is that the spread will often be way off for one particular game but over the long haul it is very difficult to consistently outperform. The reason why you see most "experts" picking games straight up instead of against the spread is that their picks tend to be worse than Vegas over the course of a season. It's also why you will see plenty of posters talk about how odds are wrong but they don't gamble their own money on it.

One way to think about the spread is to convert them to probabilities of winning. In the modern NFL the spread translates to approximately these likelihoods:
59% chance of winning = -3
66% chance of winning= -4
75% chance of winning = -7
90% chance of winning = -13.5
95% chance of winning = -15

So as 3.5 point underdogs the Hawks have a ~37% chance of winning or so based on information available today. That sounds bad since as fans we'd like to have a 100% chance of winning every game. However, this is one of our 10AM EST road starts against a team that most pundits have ranked ahead of us. It's very plausible that we could steal this game if we get a bounce here or there or make one more play then they do.

The hidden point there is that point spreads are betting lines, designed to get equal numbers of folks betting on each team, so that the payouts are pretty balanced and the House lives on the vigorish.
:twisted:

Coaches and players don't get bonuses for beating the point spread. That's why Sunday's one point win was just fine by them.

 

[rjdriver]

Is that as accurate as the spread they gave the Bengals game ?

I’ve been thinking about writing a financial self help book. It goes something like this:

1. Take the points and the opponents early in the Seahawks season.
2. Deposit money in a low risk interest bearing account during games 6-10
3. Withdraw money and take the Hawks regardless of points games 11-16

 

[Sgt. Largent]

If I was a betting man, I'd take the Steelers +4.............especially if Britt's still dinged up, no Ansah and/or Collier again and Tedric's still playing safety.

But I'm not a betting man, so I like the Hawk's chances of keeping this one close, which Pete's teams usually do. Rarely do we lose by more than 4 pts.

 

[xray]

Give it a rest man. We get it, the Seahawks suck and are going to lose by 3 Touchdowns, and have zero chance to win on Sunday. Better?

Damn ; you just love putting words in my mouth don't you ? Read what I said . I asked if the spread for the Steelers game was as accurate as the Bengals game . Get some new glasses dude . :rumble:

 

[Sports Hernia]

If I was a betting man, I'd take the Steelers +4.............especially if Britt's still dinged up, no Ansah and/or Collier again and Tedric's still playing safety.

But I'm not a betting man, so I like the Hawk's chances of keeping this’s one close, which Pete's teams usually do. Rarely do we lose by more than 4 pts.

Yep, I wouldn’t touch the Hawks right now when it comes to betting, outside of futures bets. The offense usually pisses away the first quarter plus.

Sad thing is they aren’t even a good bet at home to cover. 2013-2015 you’d give the points at home and make easy money.
Now you are better off taking the points and the opponent.