I consider myself an educated gambler, perhaps more "old school" (i.e. pre-internet), though I recently was stumped.
I had gotten annoyed by people saying, "[underdog] was getting 7 points and [favorite] only won by 3... so [underdog] covered"
It's my assertion that only favorites can "cover" the spread. At least that's the way I was raised, riding with my Grandpa on the way to his bookie's office at the Longshoreman's Union.
In essence, "covering" is "exceeding". Like covering up your toes with your blanket. Team X was favored by 7 and they won by nine, so they covered the 7. Covering, in general, is providing an act or presence at or over what would be considered adequate. To envelop... or canvas.
If Team X was favored by 7 and won by 3 over Team Y... Team Y didn't "cover", they prevented Team X from covering.
So, the person to whom I confronted with this (the habitual points taker who relished "covering" [as dog]), came back with this - "Okay, I see the difference and it's logical. BUT what does the successful underdog do?" Sure, he prevents the favorite from covering, which is, in essence, defensive.
But what is the verb to proclaim that an underdog "took points" and the favorite did not exceed those points? These days, most people call that "covering" as well. I don't think that's proper, but I can't defend my position.
Just like many posters here "could care less" about this topic, but they really, "could NOT care less".
I had gotten annoyed by people saying, "[underdog] was getting 7 points and [favorite] only won by 3... so [underdog] covered"
It's my assertion that only favorites can "cover" the spread. At least that's the way I was raised, riding with my Grandpa on the way to his bookie's office at the Longshoreman's Union.
In essence, "covering" is "exceeding". Like covering up your toes with your blanket. Team X was favored by 7 and they won by nine, so they covered the 7. Covering, in general, is providing an act or presence at or over what would be considered adequate. To envelop... or canvas.
If Team X was favored by 7 and won by 3 over Team Y... Team Y didn't "cover", they prevented Team X from covering.
So, the person to whom I confronted with this (the habitual points taker who relished "covering" [as dog]), came back with this - "Okay, I see the difference and it's logical. BUT what does the successful underdog do?" Sure, he prevents the favorite from covering, which is, in essence, defensive.
But what is the verb to proclaim that an underdog "took points" and the favorite did not exceed those points? These days, most people call that "covering" as well. I don't think that's proper, but I can't defend my position.
Just like many posters here "could care less" about this topic, but they really, "could NOT care less".
