Posted Thursday, March 01, 2012 03:11 PM
As silly as this sounds, UC Davis is +1362 against Cal Poly. Last week, UCD came in ML (around+800) against CS Fullerton. Fullerton has a better team than Cal Poly and, in fact, beat Cal Poly. Moreover, UCD has been lights-out in triples and has significantly improved it's perimeter D, as well as cutting down on turnovers. This 5-23 team actually believes it can win games.
Look, Kenpom gives UCD a 9% chance of winning this game. Ok, so be it. I see UCD as having a 25% chance of bringing home the bacon. That's more than enough to provide a rock-solid ML play, for short money, on UCD to win the game outright
Posted Tuesday, November 02, 2010 03:53 PM
Front end: Sens/Leafs under 6.5 (-190). 5.5 is a solid number, but I'm willing to pay extra juice in two-team parlay. Sens Alfredsson not going tonight and Spezza still banged up. Sens Brian Elliot is pedestrian goalie, but is very cool and doesn't lose games by himself.
Next: Sharks #1 on PP and #2 in face offs won and fights. They don't have as much talent this year v. last, so have now successfully turned into league intimidators. Wild cooling off, while Sharks heating up; get Sharks at -127 while the gettin's good.
Posted Friday, September 04, 2009 04:17 PM
This just came down. It may change the way business is done offshore, or not. It will most certainly be used, as a public policy argument, to strike down Delaware gambling.
PHILADELPHIA — In an important decision on Internet commerce by a U.S.
appeals court, the federal Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act
of 2006 has been ruled constitutional.
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday rejected an appeal
by the Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association (IMEGA),
which found that the law "clearly provides a person of ordinary
intelligence with adequate notice of the conduct that it prohibits."
IMEGA, a New Jersey-based nonprofit, had sued the Federal Trade
Commission, the Federal Reserve System and the U.S. Attorney General,
claiming the law banning online gambling is vague and violates an
individual's privacy rights. It also said the act is contrary to U.S.
The act bans credit-card companies or other institutions from processing payments for online betting.
The 3rd Circuit kicked aside IMEGA's privacy arguments, finding that gambling is not protected by the Constitution.
The court said that in its effort to locate a constitutional
privacy right to
engage in Internet gambling from one’s home, IMEGA primarily focused on
two precedential cases for the privacy issue, including Lawrence vs.
Texas, which involved state laws that barred certain forms of sexual
conduct betw... [More]