OT: Weird NCAA Prop Bets

[RPI-Fan]

Bodog.com is offering REALLY funky odds on some props for NCAA.

They are offering bets on Leinart's passing yards, and there are two 100-yard ranges at 2/1 and evens, which just doesn't make sense to me. Adrian Peterson's rushing yards has similar odds.

Is this normal? It seems really strange to me.

hxxp://www.bodog.com/sports-betting/college-football-props.jsp

[Lathum]

a little strange. I would take the under 3000 at 8-1 just for value.

1. You have to assume he isn't going to finish alot of games because not only do they not want to risk injury to him, but they need to groom his replacement and there will be alot of blowouts.

2. If he DOES get hurt you're money.

[Ragone]

yea.. 8-1 on the under seems like a solid bet.. i'll be putting 20 down on that

[sovereignstar]

Originally Posted by Lathum

2. If he DOES get hurt you're money.

oh

Originally Posted by the rules

Matt Leinart must play a minimum of 10 games. No Parlays. Max $100. (Conference Championship and Bowl games are not included)

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by RPI-Fan

They are offering bets on Leinart's passing yards, and there are two 100-yard ranges at 2/1 and evens, which just doesn't make sense to me. Adrian Peterson's rushing yards has similar odds.

Is this normal? It seems really strange to me.

It is absurd, I agree.

The basic setup is fine, but it's ridiculous that the heavy odds are on such narrow windows of 100 yards.

The smart bet there is to put a little money on both 3000 or less at 8-1, and 3500 and higher at 4-1. It's got to be better than even money that he ends up outside that (fairly narrow) 500-yard window, and the odds make that a big overlay.


Same with Peterson, though I'd probably add in a bet at the 1501-1699 range. Think that through -- if each bet is essentially at 9-1, you are betting 3 units to win 10 that he'll end up with a rushing total anywhere outside 1700 to 2099. Better than 2-1 odds with such a narrow range? I'd take it.

[QuikSand]

One qualification - I'm not sure I completely understand their injury-related language (quoted above). It sounds almost like all bets lose if the player gets hurt or for any reason plays fewer than ten games -- making this a bigger risk than one would ordinarily imagine. If that just means the bets are "no action" (you just get your wager back) then this sounds like a major value opportunity. Worth checking before investing, I think.

[Ragone]

Yea i'm going to check into that.. if you get ti back if he tears his acl.. then its a great value low risk bet