1. 10-31-13 11:12 AM #36
    No coincidences
    Baseball at The Corner
    No coincidences's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-18-10
    Posts: 76,300
    Betpoints: 16541

    Quote Originally Posted by Sam Odom View Post
    Yup... Value is Value regardless if it is a -300 fav or +130 dog
    True, but there are no guarantees in gambling. I know you aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I don't have to explain to you the difference between losing a -300 bet and a +130 bet.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  2. 10-31-13 11:22 AM #37
    PAULYPOKER
    I slipped Tricky Dick a hit of LSD!
    PAULYPOKER's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 12-06-08
    Posts: 36,585
    Betpoints: 1

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  3. 10-31-13 11:31 AM #38
    Sam Odom
    Sam Odom's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 10-30-05
    Posts: 58,063
    Betpoints: 37

    Real life example:

    Was laying R. FEDERER -300 (when he was -375 to -390 everywhere) and winning

    1) Sharp
    2) Square
    3) Lucky
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  4. 10-31-13 11:39 AM #39
    No coincidences
    Baseball at The Corner
    No coincidences's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-18-10
    Posts: 76,300
    Betpoints: 16541

    Quote Originally Posted by Sam Odom View Post
    Real life example:

    Was laying R. FEDERER -300 (when he was -375 to -390 everywhere) and winning

    1) Sharp
    2) Square
    3) Lucky
    The play won. The answer is 1.

    Or option 4 (degenerate).
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  5. 10-31-13 11:40 AM #40
    billysink
    billysink's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 03-29-09
    Posts: 5,172
    Betpoints: 0

    Quote Originally Posted by No coincidences View Post
    True, but there are no guarantees in gambling. I know you aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I don't have to explain to you the difference between losing a -300 bet and a +130 bet.
    Winning and losing are merely a bi-product of an assessment of value.

    Those whom folks have lovingly coined "squares" , bet to win or lose.

    Those commonly referred to as "sharps", play on value with little or no regard for wins and loses, letting the chips fall where they may. That approach combined with stringent money management takes the worry of wins/losses out of the mix.

    You never go broke if you make a profit.
    Nomination(s):
    This post was nominated 1 time . To view the nominated thread please click here. People who nominated: PAULYPOKER
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote 1
  6. 10-31-13 11:42 AM #41
    Sam Odom
    Sam Odom's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 10-30-05
    Posts: 58,063
    Betpoints: 37

    Quote Originally Posted by No coincidences View Post

    Or option 4 (degenerate).

    Beating the market by 90c (adjusted to 35-40c) AND winning is degenerate?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  7. 10-31-13 11:44 AM #42
    No coincidences
    Baseball at The Corner
    No coincidences's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-18-10
    Posts: 76,300
    Betpoints: 16541

    Quote Originally Posted by billysink View Post
    Winning and losing are merely a bi-product of an assessment of value.

    Those whom folks have lovingly coined "squares" , bet to win or lose.

    Those commonly referred to as "sharps", play on value with little or no regard for wins and loses, letting the chips fall where they may. That approach combined with stringent money management takes the worry of wins/losses out of the mix.

    You never go broke if you make a profit.
    Sharps win at the end of the day. Squares lose at the end of the day. It's really as simple as that.

    All of the "debates" I see here -- faves vs. dogs, public or not, RLM, BTCL, etc. -- is just mumbo jumbo. If the answer was as easy as blindly backing one side or fading the other, it'd be much easier to beat this game than it actually is.

    Well that, or you can just fade Brandon Lang and call it a day.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  8. 10-31-13 11:46 AM #43
    No coincidences
    Baseball at The Corner
    No coincidences's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-18-10
    Posts: 76,300
    Betpoints: 16541

    Quote Originally Posted by Sam Odom View Post
    Beating the market by 90c (adjusted to 35-40c) AND winning is degenerate?
    Laying -300 on an early morning tennis match seems pretty degenerate to me, but of course I can't argue now because (once again) you post/brag about a winner after the fact to protect yourself.

    Tell me, Skkkammy, have you ever posted about a losing bet after the fact?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  9. 10-31-13 11:49 AM #44
    Sam Odom
    Sam Odom's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 10-30-05
    Posts: 58,063
    Betpoints: 37

    Quote Originally Posted by No coincidences View Post

    Laying -300 on an early morning tennis match seems pretty degenerate to me

    Only because you have swallowed the 'Squares bet the heavy juice' Forumville mantra and 'Sharps play the dogs'
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  10. 10-31-13 11:59 AM #45
    leetreaper
    leetreaper's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 10-23-10
    Posts: 34,841
    Betpoints: 2140

    I can sum it up what NoCoin is saying here: Betting -300 is RETARDED, if you don't get why, more power to ya...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  11. 10-31-13 12:02 PM #46
    Sam Odom
    Sam Odom's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 10-30-05
    Posts: 58,063
    Betpoints: 37

    Quote Originally Posted by leetreaper View Post

    Betting -300 is RETARDED

    Even when a capper has it at -500 ?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  12. 10-31-13 12:04 PM #47
    No coincidences
    Baseball at The Corner
    No coincidences's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-18-10
    Posts: 76,300
    Betpoints: 16541

    Quote Originally Posted by Sam Odom View Post
    Only because you have swallowed the 'Squares bet the heavy juice' Forumville mantra and 'Sharps play the dogs'
    Dude, have you read one thing I've said in this thread?

    Maybe I'm dealing with senility here. Or mental retardation. Not sure why I'm even responding to you anymore.

    Read through the thread again. Slowly and out loud this time.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  13. 10-31-13 12:06 PM #48
    No coincidences
    Baseball at The Corner
    No coincidences's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-18-10
    Posts: 76,300
    Betpoints: 16541

    Quote Originally Posted by Sam Odom View Post
    Even when a capper has it at -500 ?
    The fact that you're bragging about this -- especially after the fact -- says it all.

    Congrats on your win. Can't wait to find out tomorrow who you had big tonight.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  14. 10-31-13 12:08 PM #49
    No coincidences
    Baseball at The Corner
    No coincidences's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-18-10
    Posts: 76,300
    Betpoints: 16541

    Hey Skkkammy, was beating the closing number by 90 cents this morning on a -300 fave a bigger accomplishment than your mythical -127 Verlander bet where you supposedly BTCL by 75-80 cents (and still lost despite the bald-faced lie)?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  15. 10-31-13 12:11 PM #50
    Sam Odom
    Sam Odom's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 10-30-05
    Posts: 58,063
    Betpoints: 37

    This thread is a discussion therefore hypotheticals are used for illustration

    However , the R. FEDERER example happens to be real-life

    Sammy never said he had R. FEDERER (can anyone show where he did?)
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  16. 10-31-13 12:14 PM #51
    Sam Odom
    Sam Odom's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 10-30-05
    Posts: 58,063
    Betpoints: 37

    Quote Originally Posted by No coincidences View Post

    -127 Verlander

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  17. 10-31-13 12:17 PM #52
    No coincidences
    Baseball at The Corner
    No coincidences's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-18-10
    Posts: 76,300
    Betpoints: 16541

    Quote Originally Posted by Sam Odom View Post
    This thread is a discussion therefore hypotheticals are used for illustration

    However , the R. FEDERER example happens to be real-life

    Sammy never said he had R. FEDERER (can anyone show where he did?)
    OK, you bring up Federer as an example.

    I have two more:

    I bet the Pelicans on Monday at +2.5. They closed at -1.5. They lost.

    I bet Memphis on Monday at +3. They closed at +1 or +1.5. They lost.

    Was I "sharp" killing the closer last night and going 0-2? No. Were you "sharp" when you made your fabricated -127 bet on Verlander when it closed at -200 and still lost (even though it never happened, let's pretend for a second it did)? No.

    You win or you lose. If you are in the black long term, you're sharp. If you are in the red, you're square. The path to that end result is up to you.

    Everything else -- all the debates you see here daily -- is just nonsense.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
First 12
Top
« Previous Thread | Players Talk | Next Thread »