Vegas forecasts a 28 to 25 finish, or thereabouts, with the Dawgs coming out on top. I lean toward Bama as the underdog, but a few factors warn away: first, some big smart wise guy $ (the best respected sports bettors in Vegas) have their cash on Georgia (which is why the spread went up to 3 even though 66% of the tickets went to Alabama); second, in rematches, the favorite wins a ridiculous 80% of the time; and third, Georgia will likely readjust defensively to tighten the game substantially by bringing pressure all night from the get-go. On the flip side, my most respected gambler, Krackomberger, took Alabama; Alabama is slightly more talented than Georgia overall; and third, I've never liked Stetson Bennett as QB for Georgia, especially in the comparison to Young. As of now, I have a futures bet already in from early in the year on Georgia, which I may hedge with an Alabama spread pick, but otherwise my only two bets so far are for the first score to be something other than a TD (at +240 odds), and for no TD to be over 48 1/2 yards. Enjoy!
🔥 August 7 Degenerate Special 🔥
Zack Wheeler Over 5.5 Ks (-164) is the clearest individual strikeout prop on the entire slate.
Elite Tier arm (10.8 K/9) projects ~7.1 strikeouts tonight. The 5.5 is pure floor — he clears it the overwhelming majority of the time even when limited. Highest projected strength gap vs any posted line today.
Safe. High-conviction. Locked.
#MLBProps #StrikeoutBets #DegenerateMode
First, four factors dictate whether there is major turnover in the Senate in a midterm election independent of the favorability of the Senate map (due to only one-third of seats being up in any given midterm). Often, as was the case in both 2018 and 2022, is that incumbents are not destined to lose seats, outside of realigning elections in unfavorable maps. This cycle's map favors the GOP, which is why the prediction markets and most forecasters expect a GOP majority in the 2027 Senate. The four factors that prove dangerous to the incumbent party are: first, a recession or cost of living crisis; second, a war; third, a major scandal; and fourth, a sense of betrayal in the voter group that backed the incumbent amongst some portion of their prior electoral coalition. Five midterms feature some combingation of those factors in some significant degree: 1930, 1946, 1958, 1974 and 2006.
Without those factors present in multiple forms, the incumbent party can expect to hold on to seats in states it previously won outside the national margin. When those factors are present, the landscape shifts dramatically. Examining those White House incumbent seats that showed a state-wide election decided by single digits in the prior decade produces the following probabilities: the incumbent White House party lost at least 67% of its incumbent held seats, as much as 85% of its incumbent held seats, and an average of 75% of its incumbent hold seats, rarely upsetting the opposition party in any seat and often losing a surprise or two in seats considered completely safe.