Thursday's NCAA recap of Round 1 games

    This is a ViewFromVegas look at the opening day of the NCAA men's basketball tournament on Thursday, mostly culled from the ViewFromVegas Forums.

    Thursday's NCAA tournament tipped off at 9:20 a.m. VFV Time (that's ViewFromVegas time, aka Pacific Daylights Savings Time) and it looked like a typical March Madness as No. 14 seed Georgia, a 9-point underdog, gave No. 3 Xavier fits for most of their game. But Xavier rallied to not only win but also to cover in a 73-61 victory as Georgia missed their desperation 3-pointers and Xavier made their free throws to pull away late. That was a foreshadowing of things to come as the favorites went 3-0 in the morning games on the way to a 12-4 day.
    By mid-afternoon and two games at each sub-regional site, the 
first eight games have been completed and it was clear the public was having a field day and the sports books were bleeding money as favorites won and covered 7 of the 8 games before the latter sessions were to tip off. The lone underdog to win was UNLV, which closed as a 1.5-point dog to Kent St. despite being the lower-numbered seed (8 vs. 9).
    It was interesting to note how the broadcasters often keep their heads in the sand when it comes to who is really the betting favorites. During the BYU-Texas A&M game, Dick Enberg talked about how all the favorites had won all the early games. But I guess it's excusable with it being an 8-9 matchup...kind of.
    Another thing I noted when watching the early games was that Kansas-Portland St. was the game on local TV in Vegas. When it turned into a rout in the second half, the network changed to the much more competitive Xavier-Georgia game. The ironic thing is that when the Kansas-Portland St. got to the end, it had the most Vegas-style intrigue of any game as the point spread and total were in doubt until the very final shot. The Jayhawks won 85-61 as a 22-point favorite with Portland St. taking a late 3-pointer that had everyone involved in the sports books on the edge of their seats. The total ranged from 145.5 to 147 at books around town and landed on exactly 146. For people viewing at home, CBSsports.com probably had plenty of people logging on to watch it online to see what happened with the betting results.
    In totals wagering in the early games, the over went 5-2-1, so that probably hurt the books as well with the popular favorite/over parlay hitting in four of the games (and a fifth for books that had the Kansas total at 145.5 which included the Wynn and Golden Nugget earlier on Thursday as well as MGM Mirage at various times the past few days).
    In the late afternoon games (again, that's VFV Time, aka the early evening games back east), underdogs went 3-1 ATS and the over/under was split 2-2. The most exciting game was Belmont's near upset of No. 2 Duke as a 20-point underdog. The only money line I saw on the game was the Hilton offering 35-1 on Belmont. I was watching the game at Bally's Las Vegas and it sure seemed like everyone was cheering for Belmont down the stretch: all the Belmont bettors were cheering for the outright upset even if they just took the points, and all the Duke bettors who were pissed off that the Blue Devils were killing their parlays were rooting for them to lose as well. And I think everyone without bets were cheering against Duke as well. It was a wild atmosphere.
    In the late games, favorites went 4-0 with the Wisconsin-Cal State Fullerton game really being the only one in doubt down the stretch. The books got a big of a break as the overs went 1-3 in those games.
    For the day, favorites went 12-4 ATS with overs holding a slight 8-7-1 edge in totals wagering.
    A lot of people were talking late Thursday about how maybe the dogs will start barking with the favorites doing so well on the first day, but there's certainly no guarantee. Remember that last year the favorites went 13-2-1 against the spread on opening day, and then went 8-7-1 on Friday to finish the first round at 21-9-2 according to closing lines at the Las Vegas Hilton.


 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
  • No comments exist for this post.
Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Enter the above security code (required)

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.