OT: Never, ever bet on a Brady/Belichick SB
For my part, I never bet on sporting events anyway. But for those of you who do, be warned: you bet on a Brady/Belichick Super Bowl (BBSB) -regardless of the team you bet on- at your own considerable risk.
History has shown that the outcome of a BBSB is impossible to predict with any accuracy. Vegas has apparently recognized this, making this year's SB the first ever with a dead even betting line. Apart from the apparent evenness between the Seahawks and Pats, here are some history-based reasons supporting their decision as a wise one:
-The favorites in the 5 BBSBs are 2-3; none have covered. Two were favored by double digits; both lost.
- Average BBSB victory margin: 3.2 points (high: 4 points).
- In all 5 BBSBs, the winning score occurred in the 4th quarter.
- In 4 of 5 BBSBs, the winning score occurred in the final minute of play.
- On average, the winning score of a BBSB comes with 2:06 remaining in the game. Remove the Pats/Eagles SB as an outlier (8:43), and the average drops to :24 remaining.
- In 4 of 5 BBSBs, the losing team scored with <3:00 to play. In 3 of those 4, said score either tied the game or took the lead.
BBSBs have been great games with big surprises: Brady the upstart driving the length of the field to upset The Greatest Show on Turf, the thrilling back-and-forth fireworks of the Pats/Panthers SB, a 9-7 Giants team holding the undefeated Pats to 14 pts, etc. BBSBs have given us some of the best SB games ever...but only a fool would try to predict the outcome of one of them for money.
You have been warned...
January 23rd, 2015 at 2:48 PM ^
This wouldn't work with an even spread, but isn't this an argument for betting the underdog in Brady/Belichick Super Bowls? You're saying that these games tend to be closer than the line predicts.
Sample size problems, obviously.
January 23rd, 2015 at 3:27 PM ^
Which would make "pick em" game like this one impossible to do. There is no underdog.
That being said I AM going to bet it (the only game of the year I do bet on) and I AM going to bet the Pats. I'm going to my neighbors Super Bowl party and they are from Boston and huge Pats fans. I'm going to wear my Michigan gear and represent Sir Tom.
January 27th, 2015 at 12:45 AM ^
I mean, if you bet the game at even money, you are betting on the only thing the two teams care about -- who wins. You can't possibly lose because of some stupid nonsense like a garbage-time touchdown, or an overtime touchdown that inflates the winning margin. You win or lose because you picked the right team.
Granted, I don't actually believe anyone "knows football" well enough to beat the vig on sports betting. Maybe if you have some inside information. If so, post it!
January 23rd, 2015 at 6:50 PM ^
January 24th, 2015 at 3:33 PM ^
flipping a coin is decidely BETTER odds than anything Vegas lets you bet on.
January 23rd, 2015 at 4:07 PM ^
you don't know what you are talking about.
First off, when they beat St. Louis I cleaned up.
Second, New England plays to win, and to cover. They are a great team to dip.
I have one rule in gambling: I don't always bet on NE, but I never bet against him.
And if you don't gamble, don't tell other people how to do it.
jdon
January 23rd, 2015 at 6:48 PM ^
My only point is that, historically, BBSBs have been the least predictable SBs. The Pats won as upstarts and 14 pt dogs vs the Rams (no wonder you cleaned up!), but lost when they were the Historic Team on a March Toward Destiny and 12 pt favorites vs the Giants (how did you do with that game??).
Also, 4 of 5 BBSBs were decided by a score in the final minute. So any kind of predictability seems unlikely to me, that's all I'm saying...
January 23rd, 2015 at 7:14 PM ^
I'd recommend, in cases like this where your post is going to make you sound like a huge, gaping asshole if people don't realize you are being over-the-top for humorous reasons, go ahead and add the /s.
January 24th, 2015 at 10:39 PM ^
"And if you don't gamble, don't tell other people how to do it."
January 23rd, 2015 at 4:46 PM ^
on how many times deflated balls are mentioned.
January 23rd, 2015 at 11:05 PM ^
January 23rd, 2015 at 11:05 PM ^
... but found your post very entertaining.
January 24th, 2015 at 11:30 PM ^
I bet on the last two and won big. I'm a Giants fan.
January 25th, 2015 at 2:44 PM ^
If history holds, the losing team will score with less than 3 minutes left, only to see the winners drive the length of the field to break their hearts. Hopefully TB gets the ball last.
[EDIT: meant to respond to mgrowold]
January 27th, 2015 at 12:39 AM ^
They recognize where the money is coming from. They set the line with one motivation only: equalize the money on both sides, so that they are guaranteed to win. I'll grant there is some art to setting the opening line, but things can move quickly after that if they have to. At that point, it's just an algorithm.
When you say "never bet on event X!!!" and then you report that event X has always broken a certain way, you are not making much sense. For example, if the favorite has never covered in any of the five SBs that Brady and Belichek have been in, that suggests an easy and winning strategy (bet the underdog!). Granted, it doesn't apply in this particular case.
Observations like this can apply to any damned sporting event. Of course, they're hard to predict, and that's why basically nobody makes a living betting on sports. Ho hum.
January 29th, 2015 at 8:24 PM ^
Once look back into history. These people can't win, They can't even score half of them.
Comments