Betting 101: An Insight Into Super Bowl Betting Madness

Betting 101 is now in session.

Remember that last class where I said you shouldn't gamble if you haven't started already? Yeah....about that.

Most of my friends around me stayed in the classroom, looking for a lesson in how true degenerates gamble away their hard-earned money.

Enter Professors Little Man & Tim.

Betting 101 isn't a class to them - it's a lifestyle. Specifically, betting 101 Super Bowl props.

Yes, 101 separate bets. Thank God it's just 101 separate 1 dollar bets, with the biggest winner in their 5-6 year run of betting this being about $6, according to Professor Little Man.

In their run of doing this, the prop semantics and some of the props themselves have been refined. I can vouch for these gentlemen not messing around when it comes to gambling.

Have you ever met anyone who has wagered on games of Madden on a video game system? With a point spread created for the game by the gamblers themselves? Well, if you have met either of these gentlemen, then you have met a degenerate gambler. (Not like I have room to talk, as I am the proud winner of once selecting the correct infant in a baby race at the halftime of a Bulls game).

After a two-day process of picking props on a rotating basis (Little Man won the right to pick the first prop - funny enough, by winning the "coin flip"), I asked the gentlemen some questions about their degenerate gambling ways through Facebook messaging:


Please note that this is unedited for some salty language, which you should know is coming when Tim (and references of Tim) is involved


B-Bo Knows: When and how did you come up with this idea to do 101 bets?

Tim: I'm trying to look at past super bowls to narrow down the time. Feels like 2004, car vs ne wouldn't be surprised if it was earlier though. And as for as coming up with the idea...as we all know props are extremely popular this time of year and we want to go above and beyond and pick a ridiculous number.

LM: ...standby to receive narrative...

Tim: Haha, I knew Little Man would be good at this...

LM: Well, you see there laddy, in the irrationally exuberant times of the early new millennium, when cares were light and money freely disposable, and particular people unburdened by the soul-dimming responsibilities of adulthood, there was a compulsive gambling atmosphere that flourished deep underground. That's not to imply that there were hipster gamblers; the gambling literally took place underground, in the basements of houses occupied- but naturally not owned- by the gambling participants. This was back in the heyday of compulsive small-time gambling, when gambling wasn't about money, but about the act itself; a time when quarters were won and lost on simulated Madden Games, and $100 phones were smashed to oblivion in disproportionate response to losing bets on said Madden games. When Super Bowl squares were applied to a regular season NBA basketball game, and then to every regular season NBA basketball game for an entire year. When proposition bets were picked just for the novelty of being untraditional and offered the best free-form medium to express your inner gambling chi. It was only in this type of atmosphere that such a tradition could have been born: 101 Super Bowl Proposition Bets.

101 Super Bowl proposition bets, because it's the single biggest sporting event in world. 101 Super Bowl proposition bets, because it's our small token of appreciate to the gods of sport and competition. 101 Super Bowl proposition bets, because professional gamblers don't have the stomach or the stamina to see it through. 101 Super Bowl proposition bets, each for a dollar, because it's not about getting money, it's about getting money you didn't have to work for. 101 Super Bowl proposition bets: Just because.

B-Bo: Awesome response. What the 8 to 10 regular readers of B-Bo Knows will want to know is - why the 1-2 year break in the 101 bets?

Tim: It basically stopped because of time constraints, couldn't find a common time to get this through this long process.

And back to the Madden bet, with the breaking of the phone...my team could have ran out the clock but apparently had Andy Reid coaching them and did not have proper time management. So I lost my cool and spiked that phone like I scored a touchdown in the Super Bowl. Booze may have been a factor, but I rarely touch the stuff.

LM: #TrueStory

Yeah, it was very tiring renegotiating the bets that needed to be changed every year, which is why it stopped for 3 years. This is why we moved towards more generic prop bets (NFC starting RB, for example, or team leader in tackles) rather than deciding beforehand which players to specifically name.

Tim: Yea...looking up Nielsen ratings and commercial info the following days was also tiring and time consuming.

B-Bo: Does it always take about two days to make these picks? And how long are we talking from game's end till you're done grading the bets?

LM: It used to take through the next day, or sometimes longer depending on when the Nielsen ratings became available. We used to have a prop for that.

Tim: Normally we would have a block of time and the bets would take about a few hours. Grading was helped out by the fact that we pay attention very closely to the game and score what we can during the game. And then like Little Man just said the rest usually gets cleaned up the next day.

LM: It used to take about 6-8 hours to negotiate new props and make the picks. this year it was spread out over a few days, but I'd say the elapsed time devoted to this was probably about 4 hours. I anticipate it taking about 2-3 in the future.

Tim: Yep, betting on it longer than it takes to play the game, that was the insane part of this in previous years.

LM: And part of the charm.

Tim: Yea, it was, unfortunately we don't have that type of time anymore.

B-Bo: Back to the Madden bet - I remember witnessing the breaking of the phone on a bet worth a George Washington coin, and I can vouch that drinking is out of Tim's character (I cannot vouch for this). I know there's been some games you've watched together when doing these bets. Do you guys show the same intensity for these 101 bets as the Madden simulation?

Tim: Definitely. One Super Bowl moment I wish he was there for was the NE-Philadelphia game. The infamous coin flip as I like to remember it. When a 10 year old portly (cant confirm he was portly) little bastard came out to do the coin "flip". Flip is in quotations because it wasn't really a flip. The coin did not make one rotation and I was fucking steaming. Little Man laughing at me through text didn't help.

LM: My personal favorite is the Burger King commercial moment. BK had been running football ads all year of the King scoring TDs, rushing TDs, interceptions run back for TD, everything, and the commercials were pervasive, several per game in like every market. So we had a prop, the BK King scores ov/un 1.5 TDs during the SB. Tim took the over and said, "The King is finding that end zone." Three quarters go by and there's no King, then finally, in the fourth, near the end of the game, a BK spot, and it's the weirdest commercial I've ever seen. Virtually unrelated to football. All I really remember is the King was swinging on a rope swing while a model brought him chicken or something. Tim was pissed, and I was laughing uncontrollably. "You spent a million and a half on that piece of shit?"

Tim: That commercial was ridiculous, what a piece of shit. Made not eat burger king for years....or maybe it was the food that did that.

B-Bo: I don't think you could be blamed for avoiding it in either regard. I'm guessing there's a little adjustment to these bets on a yearly basis?

Tim: Yea, with it being generic now there will be even less. We usually double check the wording to so there is no gray area on anything. So the language changes a little each year.

But in the past when specific player props were in there then there would be a good amount of changes.

B-Bo: You guys say it takes about a couple hours or so to make these bets. Do either of you do any extensive research on them before making your selections? Any strategy involved?

LM: I do some, not much research.

Tim: Same here, very little research. As far as picking is concerned we both pretty much know the strengths of these teams now.

B-Bo: To wind up this unofficial first "interview" of B-Bo Knows, I'd like to hear both of your thoughts on my prediction of Little Man winning the 101 bets 57-44. (I imagine some ties will ensue, but I refuse to pick ties)

Tim: I tend to agree with it. This year there were bets I didn't mind getting the Giants. And I kind of let him take those over more so than I have in the past. I wish I would have stopped it in hindsight, it just kind of got away from me at some point. But if the Giants have a big day, that number could be flipped.

LM: I'm going to predict 101-0.

And my secondary guess will be 52-49 in my favor.

Tim: Haha...if someone gets ejected, you will see a world class meltdown.

Thank you to the two gentlemen who shared their insight into the madness that is "101 Super Bowl Proposition Bets". For those curious on the props and their bets, here they are below. The ones highlighted in color were chosen by the person, with the other getting the other side by default.

For those interested, Little Man's first pick was "No" to there being a successful onside kick; the last category left, he chose New England getting more interceptions.

Feel free to browse the material below. Class dismissed.

	Tim	Little Man
1. Heads/tails:	heads	tails
2. Calling team picks:	tails	heads
3. Calling team wins/loses coin toss:	wins	loses
4. Coin toss winner chooses/defers:	defer	chooses
5. Football travels ov/un 1399.5 yards (Net offensive yards + return yards + punt yards + penalty yards):	under	over
6. NFC first play from scrimmage, pass/run:	run	pass
7. AFC first play from scrimmage, pass/run:	pass	run
8. First score, TD/FG:	FG	TD
9. First team to score:	NYG	NE
10. First turn-over, fumble/interception:	int	fumble
11. Which team benefits from the first turn over:	NE	NYG
12. Which team commits more turnovers:	NE	NYG
13. First team to take a timeout:	NE	NYG
14. First team to challenge play:	NE	NYG
15. Total number of red flag reviews in game, over/under 1.5:	under	over
16. First quarter points, over/under 13.5:	under	over
17. Total points second quarter, over/under 13.5:	under	over
18. Total points third quarter, over/under 13.5:	over	under
19. Total points forth quarter, over/under 13.5:	over	under
20. Total points for game, over/under 55:	under	over
21. All timeouts used in the first half:	yes	no
22. All timeouts used in second half:	yes	no
23. First penalty committed by which team:	NYG	NE
24. Length of first penalty, over/under 9.5 yards:	under	over
25. Most penalties, NFC/AFC:	NE	NYG
26. Most penalty yards, NFC/AFC:	NE	NYG
27. More QB rushing yards, NFC/AFC:	NYG	NE
28. Most team passing yards:	NYG	NE
29. Most team rushing yards:	NYG	NE
30. Most team passing TDs:	NYG	NE
31. Most team rushing TDs:	NYG	NE
32. AFC/NFC starting RB, more rushing yards:	NE	NYG
33. More starting RB TDs, AFC/NFC:	NE	NYG
34. More FG/TD in game:	FG	TD
35. Will there be a score in the first 6:30 of the game:A74	no	yes
36. Will there be a score in the last 2:00 of the half:	no	yes
37. Will there be a score in the last 3:30 of the game:A76	yes	no
38. Will there be a safety in the game:	no	yes
39. Will there be an OT:	no	yes
40. Will there be a successful 2 point conversion:	yes	no
41. Last team to score:	NE	NYG
42. Last team to score win/lose:	lose	win
43. Anyone ejected from game:	no	yes
44. From kick off to end of final play, over/under 3h 45m 00s:	over	under
45. First/second half, most points scored:	2nd	1st
46. Which team will record more sacks:	NYG	NE
47. Will there be 3 unanswered scores:	no	yes
48. Most tackles by team leader, AFC/NFC:	NE	NYG
49. Longest play of the game from scrimmage, over/under 35.5 yards:	over	under
50. Which team will score the longest TD:	NYG	NE
51. Will there be a defensive TD:	no	yes
52. Will there be a special teams TD:	no	yes
53. Which team will kick the longest FG:	NYG	NE
54. Will there be a successful onsides kick:	yes	no
55.Will game be tied after 0-0:	yes	no
56. Longest scoring drive of the game, over/under 6m 30s (game clock):	under	over
57. Winner of Super Bowl:	NE	NYG
58. Penalties resulting in first down, ov/un 1.5:	over	under
59. Highest passer rating starting QB AFC/NFC:	NYG	NE
60. AFC QB throw TD/Int first:	TD	int
61. NFC QB throw TD/Int first:	TD	int
62. Will starting NFC RB fumble:	no	yes
63. Will starting AFC RB fumble:	yes	no
64. Which team will recover more fumbles (not only turnovers):	NE	NYG
65. Which team will intercept more balls:	NYG	NE
66. NFC QB first pass complete?	no	yes
67. AFC QB first pass complete?	no	yes
68. More special teams yards, NFC/AFC:	NE	NYG
69. More offensive yards, NFC/AFC:	NYG	NE
70. After red flag review, more reversals/call stands:	stand	reverse
71. Longest pass completion of game, NFC/AFC:	NYG	NE
72. Longest rush of game, NFC/AFC:	NE	NYG
73. Longest kick off return, NFC/AFC:	NYG	NE
74. Longest punt return, NFC/AFC:	NYG	NE
75. Which team punts from deepest spot:	NE	NYG
76. Which team kicks for more points:	NE	NYG
77. Longer punt average, NFC/AFC:	NYG	NE
78. Number of drives that start inside own 15 yard line, ov/un 1.5:	under	over
79. Which is greater, AFC/NFC RB receiving yards:	NE	NYG
80. 4th down conversions, over/under 1.5:	under	over
81. Longest FG, over/under 44.5 yards:	over	under
82. Will there be a FG attempt over 50 yards:	no	yes
83. Will there be a missed FG:	yes	no
84. Last score, FG/TD:	FG	TD
85. Will there be a red zone turnover:	yes	no
86. Who places more punts inside the 20:	NYG	NE
87. Will a Super Bowl pylon be seen knocked over during the game:	no	yes
88. Will there be a roughing the passer penalty:	yes	no
89. Will there be a blocked FG:	yes	no
90. Will there be a blocked punt:	no	yes
91. Will a non-QB attempt a pass:	yes	no
92. Will a timeout be called to ice a kicker:	no	yes
93. More receptions by team leader, AFC/NFC:	NYG	NE
94. More receiving yards by team leader, AFC/NFC:	NYG	NE
95. Longest scoring drive, over/under 75 yards:	under	over
96. Shortest scoring drive, over/under 35 yards:	under	over
97. Is a double digit lead ever established:	no	yes
98. Who spends more clock time in the lead:	NE	NYG
99. Who has more time of possession:	NE	NYG
100. More points, kickers vs. NFC QB:	QB	kickers
101. More points, kickers vs. AFC QB:	kickers	QB

Bet Dreams

The Super Bowl is just over a week away, which means Vegas & offshore sportsbooks are lining up all sorts of bets for people to make.

Depending on the sites that you go on, you can bet on various things - from whether the coin toss will be heads or tails; who will score the first touchdown; whether the total score of the game will have more or less points than Michigan will score against Michigan State in college basketball.

I bet you a quarter that it'll be heads.

You can even bet on whether the total time of Kelly Clarkson's rendition of the National Anthem will be under about 93-94 seconds. You name it, you can bet it on some site or sports book.

Hell, as crazy as this sounds, you can even bet on the game itself if you have a strong feel on the Patriots or Giants or the total score. Of course this is said sarcastically - with how many prop bets there are to make in the game, it can be easy to forget that there is an actual game where a team will score at least 1 more point than another team.

Remember...this town wasn't built because people win money...

In my group of friends, I'd say a decent amount of us wager on sports. Some of us wager more than others. One thing is for certain - none of us are professionals at it.

I've been regularly gambling on sports for about 6 years, more than most of my friends. Even when I was a kid who raised himself on sports through ESPN & various periodicals, I had a good sense of what football lines would be. During my time betting, I've had the ups and downs (emotionally & monetarily) that goes with the territory of gambling. Admittedly, there were times where I definitely wasn't strong enough to handle the ups and downs. That's one thing I've gotten better at - the main reason why I've had better results.

As my social circle started to include more of the gambling types, some of my friends who didn't gamble started to show some intrigue into making bets themselves.

While I wish any of my friends the best of luck when it comes to betting on sports, I'll gladly provide an answer to any of my friends who are wondering if they should start gambling.

Don't.

Most people who I've known to start gambling on sports don't stop, with a few exceptions. It can get to be a very addictive thing. Bad losses are usually harder to deal with for people who are just starting. Everyone can handle a winning streak, but it takes a strong person to handle the losing.

That's when people start forcing bets, chasing losses, increasing amounts of their bets.

For those people who haven't started gambling on a website, you'd be better off continuing your enjoyment of these sports strictly on "being a fan" basis.

You'd think with how much you watch sports that you'd have a handle on gambling and winning money through it. Vegas loves that you think that way - that's how they make their money.

You can break a game down for hours and think there's no way the Saints are going to lose at San Fran. Much of this is likely on your perception of the Saints as you see how strong their offense has looked and how much you hear and read about them through various media outlets.

None the matter, your bet starts off horribly & despite a strong push to nearly cover the game, the losing writing is on the wall. Even with your time spent watching games all year (and likely your whole adult life), a lot of times your perception on what will happen versus what actually does happen ends up being way off.

So even if you think you know sports, that's not enough to succeed at gambling. Money management is crucial as well. Never gamble more than you can afford to lose. And never chase losses. If you barely have any money in your saving/checking accounts, odds are you shouldn't be gambling to begin with.

Also, if you can't stand losing money, even a fairly small bet, you shouldn't be gambling. Losing a buck or a 5 spot shouldn't be a worry. Don't get me wrong - no one loves losing money, but you have to be able to handle the losses. If losing even a small amount ruins your mood, you'd be better off using that money on a bag of chips or a slice of pizza. Where you can actually reap in the benefits of the money.

Walking Contradiction

A lot of this is "do as I say, not as I've done", because I've definitely had times where I wasn't mentally equipped to bet, nor should I have bet so much on games in an attempt to recoup losses (i.e. chase).

I know the urge for some people to start gambling is there, but I think you'd be better off enjoying it on your couch with your Sam Adams and bag of pretzels.

If you decide to, I can't stress enough starting on a small level & stick with a betting amount (win or lose).

As you watch the Super Bowl and think it'd be fun to bet on what color Gatorade the winning coach will have dumped on them, remember that these bets are lost more often than they are won.

Stick to watching the game & the over-hyped commercials (or Puppy Bowl, if you prefer). Leave the betting to the professionals.

Like me.

Yep....it lost.

Another Senator Letter About SOPA & Debating Masters

More political crap! Turn your head away if you don't want to read.

Just got this letter a week later from Sen. Durbin (woo hoo, 2 for 2 on Senator replies)...

This one wasn't as concise, especially about the money Durbin collected from lobbyists who were in support of the SOPA bill.

Durbin writes:

Dear Mr. Bolek:

Thank you for contacting me about the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 (PIPA) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). I appreciate hearing from you.

The bipartisan PIPA bill (S. 968) was introduced to rein in foreign-based websites that have no purpose other than to sell or distribute pirated or counterfeit goods. U.S. law enforcement agencies already have authority to seize and shut down domestic websites that are dedicated to violating copyright or counterfeiting laws, and hundreds of sites have been shut down in recent years. However, our law enforcement agencies lack effective tools to stop foreign-based websites that are dedicated to the same illegal behavior. These websites deprive American innovators and businesses of revenue and result in the loss of American jobs.

PIPA aims to close the gap in our laws that enables rogue websites to simply locate themselves overseas in order to avoid accountability for stealing American intellectual property and selling pirated and counterfeit goods to Americans.  The legislation would authorize the Justice Department to seek a court-ordered injunction against a foreign website if the court found the website to be dedicated to illegal piracy or counterfeiting.  If an injunction were issued by the court, it could be served upon third-party payment processors, advertising networks, search engines and other companies who would then be obligated to take reasonable steps to cease doing business with the infringing website. 

The drafters of this legislation tried to address the serious problem of foreign rogue websites in a way that respects due process, protects freedom of legislation, and preserves the vitality of the Internet.  However, I have heard from many constituents that PIPA and a more expansive bill introduced in the House of Representatives, SOPA, fail to strike the right balance between the goals of combating illegal piracy and protecting the Internet.  Both the House and

the Senate have postponed consideration of these bills in order to engage in more discussion with stakeholders and achieve more consensus on a legislative approach.  I support these efforts and hope that stakeholders can agree on a reasonable solution that addresses these important issues.

I will keep your concerns in mind as the Senate continues to consider these matters. Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to keep in touch.

Sincerely,

Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator

RJD/bc

Looks like he still wants to support SOPA - and who could blame him with lobbyist money that comes his way?

I guess it feels good getting some feedback from my first political activities in forever. Still wish I never have to write these items.

Hopefully this keeping active thing will produce some positive results. Hopefully I'm not being delusional.

No Debate...

You watch a Republican debate this year - what do you see?

A couple of guys (Gingrich & Romney) basically stripping the other naked with accusations and calling the other on falsehoods, etc. The kind of thing you'd expect from two girls in high school who hate each other and start pulling each other's hair in the cafeteria.

Except the hair pullers in this case have an unusual habit that is often seen in politics but not with the high schoolers.

Once the fight is over, they unite and try fighting the bigger "bitch" in the room.

In this case, the bitch is Obama (although this isn't the point of my story to call him that). I find both parties to be equally repulsive and it's one reason why I have subscribed to either team's newsletter.

I didn't really start following primary season closely until 2008, when Hilary Clinton was thought by many to be the favorite to win the Democratic nomination. I remember hearing some publicity about a young senator from Illinois who was making some noise and threatening to win some of the early primaries.

Turns out, that guy not only won the early primaries, but also took the Democratic nomination for president. Along the way, his opponents (mainly Hilary but also John Edwards) critiqued anything and everything that they could about the man, especially about his inexperience.

No worries - the Senator from Illinois rolled with the punches and became the front-runner for the Democratic ticket. One would think with this harsh debating between the two that the nominee would have hard feelings about what happened.

Nope - this nominee (let's call him Bobama) goes on the campaign trail and has the person who was just critiquing him months ago campaigning for him. Lord knows Hilary doesn't want a Republican winning the ticket - so why not have the guy who she was basically calling inexperienced and unfit to lead become president?

He becomes president of course, and she becomes his secretary of state.

Enter 2012. The top Republicans are doing similar attacks, saying nearly the same things that Hilary & Obama (err, Bobama) were bickering about. These two seem like they'd never campaign for the other.

You'd be delusional to think that Romney wouldn't support Gingrich or vice versa when the presidential nominee is announced (my apologizes to Ron Paul, who doesn't look like he will win the nomination).

The same stuff that happened in 2008 will happen this year. The loser will support the winner by the time the Republican National Convention comes into play.

It'll be as if the mudslinging never happened. Only in politics.

No wonder why people are so disillusioned by the process.

To bring a sports metaphor into it, it'd be like a Bears fan actively rooting for the Packers after they lost to their hated rival in the playoffs. How could you do it? Only a fair-weather "Bears" fan would do that.

Not the same for politics. In this game, people who are Bears fans will root for Packers fans when their team is out. It makes no sense, but that's what it is.

I don't know how people can continually buy into this cycle on a 4-year basis or at least allow it to happen. I'm not even a political person and I see this coming a mile away.

I'd respect these politicians a lot more if they didn't support the people they just spent 3 months bashing across the nation.

Luckily for me, the words "respect" and "politicians" are far enough apart in the dictionary so they don't contaminate all the words in between.