[No coincidences]

No it's actually exactly the same. Whether I make a post with a pick or don't post has no impact on how the game will be played

It's just a lot easier to sound like a know-it-all when you aren't putting picks out there for people to fade or follow.

You know your shit -- that goes without saying. And I didn't disagree with your CIN/HOU under play at all. I would just like to see what your record would be if you actually posted plays on a regular basis, since we're all a bunch of idiots to you.

[pacocn]

how many people lost the no run in the 1st in
that Padre/Dodger game? Ouch at -210

[God1]

Depends on the number you bet. Did you beat the closer in every one of your plays that lost? If yes, then what you say is true. If not....

No I didn't beat the closer on the reds/astros total. The idea of beating the closing line is extremely solid when looking at complete markets, there are niches and subsets in which the closing line is inefficient. This is significantly more true in totals as opposed to moneylines

[No coincidences]

No I didn't beat the closer on the reds/astros total. The idea of beating the closing line is extremely solid when looking at complete markets, there are niches and subsets in which the closing line is inefficient. This is significantly more true in totals as opposed to moneylines

How do you figure? It opened at 8.5.

[God1]

It's just a lot easier to sound like a know-it-all when you aren't putting picks out there for people to fade or follow.

See you are basing someone's level of say "skill" on posted records. Any idiot can win over 50 games or 100 or 200 games. The method is what matters, results will take care of themselves over the long term

I would just like to see what your record would be if you actually posted plays on a regular basis, since we're all a bunch of idiots to you.

Well I guess we'll never know. I don't care to have my work given out for nothing to a crowd of people who(mostly) are clueless

[NBA_Brosuf]

I don't know what you two guys are arguing about but what counts is picking the winners. It is all about picking the winners around here and the techniques in how we do it varies. All techniques are welcome and greeted with open arms so lets talk more about our commonality which is picking the winners.

I know one thing for sure. If you can't beat an idiot, what does that tell you about yourself?

Lets watch some games....

[God1]

How do you figure? It opened at 8.5.

The pinnacle close was 8 -105/-105 for a true close of +100, I got half my action at -108 and the other half at -103

[God1]

I don't know what you two guys are arguing about but what counts is picking the winners. It is all about picking the winners around here

my point exactly

[No coincidences]

Well I guess we'll never know. I don't care to have my work given out for nothing to a crowd of people who(mostly) are clueless

[No coincidences]

The pinnacle close was 8 -105/-105 for a true close of +100, I got half my action at -108 and the other half at -103

So it's irrelevant that it opened at 8.5?

[Love The Action]

No I didn't beat the closer on the reds/astros total. The idea of beating the closing line is extremely solid when looking at complete markets, there are niches and subsets in which the closing line is inefficient. This is significantly more true in totals as opposed to moneylines

Perhaps...but you mentioned that "short term results are nothing more than variance if your method is solid." The only true measure, other than your bank account, that determines whether you method is solid is beating closing lines consistently (whether ML's or totals). Good luck...hope you cash that big Astros play.

[God1]

So it's irrelevant that it opened at 8.5?

seriously? of course it's irrelevant. closing lines are infinitely more efficient than opening lines

[No coincidences]

seriously? of course it's irrelevant. closing lines are infinitely more efficient than opening lines

Obviously, but I wouldn't say it's "irrelevant" that early money obviously pounded this under -- it lost the hook despite the over being a solid public play.

[God1]

The only true measure, other than your bank account, that determines whether you method is solid is beating closing lines consistently (whether ML's or totals).

In many cases this is correct, for the totals subsets that I bet, it's not the case because the market can just be crazy inefficient for certain situations. The backtesting that was done is all ROI vs closing lines

[God1]

Obviously, but I wouldn't say it's "irrelevant" that early money obviously pounded this under

All that means is that the opener was mispriced. That has no bearing on whether the price you bet is profitable

it lost the hook despite the over being a solid public play.

Lost the hook? What matters is price. 8.5 +105 and 8.5 -103 are not the same animal dude 1 could be profitable the other could be losing

[God1]

wow I hate the phillies, thats the 2nd 2-out, 2-run bomb to tie it up in the 9th tonight

[No coincidences]

Nice call on that CIN/HOU under.

[God1]

Nice call on that CIN/HOU under.

an extra hit somewhere in the game with a couple guys on and then it wouldn't have been a good call huh

[God1]

dbacks line tomorrow is absurd. They should be at least 10 cents lower

[BiffTFinancial]

1-3 -8.38u, should've been 0-4. 227-206-34 for +13.33u season, down over 34u since the All-Star Break. May be time for a break until football.

[BigDan]

dbacks line tomorrow is absurd. They should be at least 10 cents lower

i believe them and tor are underpriced.