In the black

[ShirleyJester]

That safety at the end of the game was a money saver/burner for many people. My research on Super Bowls regarding safeties is that previous to this year there were 6 safeties in the first 46 Super Bowls, and also 6 in the last 28 years (not including this years game). I'm not sure if rule changes in the NFL have led to an increase in safeties in general, but it appears that the line on this prop is about right. Anyone laying -900 on this wager over the last 27 years has lost a bunch of money. Laying more than -700 over the history of the Big Game has also resulted in a net loser.

Shirley

[Brock W]

70 percent ATS is not possible long term by handicapping.

[Brock W]

I know several people that can get 70% win rate at certain sports. So I must disagree. College basketball is a particularly vulnerable game. The key is picking only the best bets and have weeks where you are much better than 70% to make up for the rare weeks that go poorly. No matter how good you are you will have a losing week once in a blue moon. You would be amazed how many jump ship from a great handicapping service after 1 losing week following many weeks at about 70% accuracy. Perhaps this idea that it was a fluke and can't be done makes people think the "lucky streak is over. When I worked for a service this happened all the time. I guess people figured you were due for a correction because your success was a fluke. Anyway the long term college basketball win rate ATS was over 70% for the service. The pro football picks were over 65% long term ATS. That was were my contribution was. One bad week and lots of people wouldn't use you service again. There were smart people who knew that unexpected things happen once in a while.

So against a -110 line that's a 37% edge on college ball and 26.5% on pro football. The more likely explanation is tout services hire 100 people like yourself who think they are experts and some of them will go 70% for a season so they pump that record to the squares. When their picking reverts to the mean they replace them with new 'experts' that are picking 70% ATS and pump those guys. To quote Stanford Wong "If someone tells you he can hit 70 percent winners and you should pay him for his picks, hang onto your wallet because he’s lying about the 70 percent.
The BEST pro handicappers can hit +55%. Even that 55% is likely against less liquid markets such as college, totals, props, and overnight lines. 55% against a closing pro football pointspread is probably not attainable. That's the reality.