New Baseball Power Rating System

[HoulihansTX]

New System plays

Rockies <-175
Cubs<175
Mets<-175
Tex
Toronto
No Brew Crew(Pirates 2 wins row)

Boston fits also, but are traveling across country for first game.

If I am wrong let me know.

[EXhoosier10]

New System plays

Rockies <-175 (Florida streak = W2)
Cubs<175 between -160 and -175
Mets<-175
Tex (Det can't move lower than -109 (-108 makes it a no play))
Toronto
No Brew Crew(Pirates 2 wins row)

Boston fits also, but are traveling across country for first game. Oak is on a win streak anyway

If I am wrong let me know.

The rest looks good

[ShivaBowl]

Team Projected Run Plays for 7/19/2010

TAM if <-175
CUBS if <-175

Complimentary Selection for 7/19/2010

Take Chi Cubs W/Silva over Houston W/Rodriguez NO PLAY if < -160 or > -175

quote
Formulawiz; Today's ML plays based on early lines CHC, TEX

[ShivaBowl]

Originally Posted by barts185
I can see how OAK is a play on the SA system.
You said that OAK was a play on the ML system. The question I posted was asking how they could be a play on the ML system.Can you explain how OAK are a play on the ML system?
Thanks,
Bart
You still dont get it. OAK was a play this morning using the ML system. Cant you see the opening line had them at -120, thats the criteria for the 25 cent overlay. Do you understand the plays are based on early lines and its your responsibility is to follow through on your own before the game starts.


When you post, your M/L System plays, could you also post, the criteria, that you came up with?

Wiz, M/L play, CHC
CHC Proj ML -135 +.25 = n/p if <-160
TEX, NO PLAY if DET > -115

This would end some of the confusion with the M/L System.
Thanks

[barts185]

When you post, your M/L System plays, could you also post, the criteria, that you came up with?



This would end some of the confusion with the M/L System.
Thanks

I agree 100%.

As I pointed out by posting the line movements, I can't see anytime yesterday that OAK was -120 on any sort of consensus line.

He listed OAK, doesn't give a reason why, and then when I question it, says that OAK was -120, as though I'm supposed to read his mind knowing that he had OAK as a play at a line that didn't exist. If he had just said that OAK was a play at -120, I would at least have known it was because he was using a bad line and that would have elminated the whole question about how they were a ML play.


Thanks,
Bart

[Formulawiz]

I agree 100%.

As I pointed out by posting the line movements, I can't see anytime yesterday that OAK was -120 on any sort of consensus line.

He listed OAK, doesn't give a reason why, and then when I question it, says that OAK was -120, as though I'm supposed to read his mind knowing that he had OAK as a play at a line that didn't exist. If he had just said that OAK was a play at -120, I would at least have known it was because he was using a bad line and that would have elminated the whole question about how they were a ML play.


Thanks,
Bart

Barts, stop stirring up this forum. I make the ML plays and if your not satisfied with it go somewhere else. I have run this forum for over 2 years now and there have been no complaints, we have made alot of money and we dont need your comments.

You keep cluttering up the forum with your stupid questions because you cant fathom how both systems work. I am asking you nicely to stop your comments, I am getting alot of emails that your aggrevating alot of people and I have asked them not to respond to your comments.

[barts185]

Barts, stop stirring up this forum. I make the ML plays and if your not satisfied with it go somewhere else. I have run this forum for over 2 years now and there have been no complaints, we have made alot of money and we dont need your comments.

You keep cluttering up the forum with your stupid questions because you cant fathom how both systems work. I am asking you nicely to stop your comments, I am getting alot of emails that your aggrevating alot of people and I have asked them not to respond to your comments.

This from the person who gave out wrong plays because they got the systems confused?


I can't fathom how systems work because you change how they work to suit your record.

I went somewhere else - you complained about that as well.

Is it really so hard to just define the systems and how you use them instead of giving contradicting examples?

How's this - if you, just once, explain how the systems work, and answer the questions that have been posed about the examples, I won't comment in this thread ever again unless you then contradict how you say the systems work.


So, it's on you.

[barts185]

Hey,

I'll make it even better.


If you define the systems, and answer the questions about the examples, I won't comment ever again even if you do post plays which go against the systems.


How's that?

[HoulihansTX]

It looks as though Oak may be a play B4 gametime. I'm seeing -115 @pinny, not sure what other books are dealing.

[Formulawiz]

This from the person who gave out wrong plays because they got the systems confused?


I can't fathom how systems work because you change how they work to suit your record.

I went somewhere else - you complained about that as well.

Is it really so hard to just define the systems and how you use them instead of giving contradicting examples?

How's this - if you, just once, explain how the systems work, and answer the questions that have been posed about the examples, I won't comment in this thread ever again unless you then contradict how you say the systems work.


So, it's on you.

I dont have to explain it to you, everyone understands it. You read to read the filters but obviously your too lazy. Sportrends clearly explains their systems so that a kindergarden kid can understand it. I also dont need you to contradict me or anyone else on this forum. I asked you nicely not to clutter up this thread and here you go again complaining.
AND please dont post any system plays, we have someone already doing a good job.

[barts185]

I dont have to explain it to you, everyone understands it. You read to read the filters but obviously your too lazy. Sportrends clearly explains their systems so that a kindergarden kid can understand it. I also dont need you to contradict me or anyone else on this forum. I asked you nicely not to clutter up this thread and here you go again complaining.
AND please dont post any system plays, we have someone already doing a good job.

When's the last time you saw me post a system play?

The only times recently I talked about any system plays was when people (like you) posted the wrong ones. Not that you ever thanked me for pointing out the mistakes you made.


I've asked you nicely plenty of times, but apparently you asking me nicely is supposed to mean more than me asking you nicely - double standard?


Sportrends changed the wording on the website several times because of feedback I gave where it wasn't clear. So if you think it's clearer now, you're welcome for that as well.


Take Care,
Bart

[dsklein85]

Hey Shivabowl. first off, great job with what you are doing in here. really glad to see that your taking your time to interpret all these lines and post the plays. i myself have been following sportrends for a while and am an owner of the system they offer to sale. i just have one trivial comment to make about the plays you are posting. i will use the cubs play for tonight as an example. so the sportrends projected line is -135. the oddsmakers published line (as of 5:30 pm central time) is on average around -160. in your posts 1683 and 1684 you say that there is no play if line falls < -160 or > -175. Im no math wiz but i think that your less than/greater than signs are messed up. A filter we use is not to bet anything that the line is more negative (less than) -175. You are claiming greater than?? For a .25 cent overlay compared to sportrends projected -135 we need anything more negative (less than) -160 i.e. -160, -161, -162, -163...-175 You are claiming that less than -160 is no play?? I interpret it the complete opposite way that you posted. Anyways, Im sure we are still making the same plays but we are just thinking a little mathematically different. I dont know if this has been confusing for anyone else thats the only reason i bring it up. Good work with what you are doing and keep it up!!

-klein

[barts185]

I do agree with one thing you said - it is your thread. I came in here as a vistor trying to learn something, and trying to clear up some questions.

As the person running the thread, I thought you would help. Just like I've helped people understand when I had systems (anyone wanting to search can look at last NBA season where I helped sort out a system and helped people win by answering their questions instead of just telling them they were too dumb to understand).

I was wrong about you wanting to help.

You don't want to clear anything up, but it is your thread, so I'll go back to being a vistor.


To the people who have sent me messages thanking me for trying to clear things up, or hoping that things would get clearer, sorry - apparently they won't.

Take Care,
Bart



LET OBFUSCATION REIGN!!!

[Joe Dogs]

Hey Shivabowl. first off, great job with what you are doing in here. really glad to see that your taking your time to interpret all these lines and post the plays. i myself have been following sportrends for a while and am an owner of the system they offer to sale. i just have one trivial comment to make about the plays you are posting. i will use the cubs play for tonight as an example. so the sportrends projected line is -135. the oddsmakers published line (as of 5:30 pm central time) is on average around -160. in your posts 1683 and 1684 you say that there is no play if line falls < -160 or > -175. Im no math wiz but i think that your less than/greater than signs are messed up. A filter we use is not to bet anything that the line is more negative (less than) -175. You are claiming greater than?? For a .25 cent overlay compared to sportrends projected -135 we need anything more negative (less than) -160 i.e. -160, -161, -162, -163...-175 You are claiming that less than -160 is no play?? I interpret it the complete opposite way that you posted. Anyways, Im sure we are still making the same plays but we are just thinking a little mathematically different. I dont know if this has been confusing for anyone else thats the only reason i bring it up. Good work with what you are doing and keep it up!!

-klein

Thanks Sam

[HoulihansTX]

I have to agree with Bart on the fact that Sportrends technical writing skills is not their strong point.

Neverthelss I understand the systems clearly.

[ShivaBowl]

Hey Shivabowl. first off, great job with what you are doing in here. really glad to see that your taking your time to interpret all these lines and post the plays. i myself have been following sportrends for a while and am an owner of the system they offer to sale. i just have one trivial comment to make about the plays you are posting. i will use the cubs play for tonight as an example. so the sportrends projected line is -135. the oddsmakers published line (as of 5:30 pm central time) is on average around -160. in your posts 1683 and 1684 you say that there is no play if line falls < -160 or > -175. Im no math wiz but i think that your less than/greater than signs are messed up. A filter we use is not to bet anything that the line is more negative (less than) -175. You are claiming greater than?? For a .25 cent overlay compared to sportrends projected -135 we need anything more negative (less than) -160 i.e. -160, -161, -162, -163...-175 You are claiming that less than -160 is no play?? I interpret it the complete opposite way that you posted. Anyways, Im sure we are still making the same plays but we are just thinking a little mathematically different. I dont know if this has been confusing for anyone else thats the only reason i bring it up. Good work with what you are doing and keep it up!! -klein

dsklein85 thanks for the kind words.

When comparing our projected money lines to the oddsmaker's posted lines there needs to be at least a 25-cent differential or overlay in which the oddsmakers ML's are moving in the opposite direction to our lines.
Chi Cubs W/Silva over Houston W/Rodriguez NO PLAY if < -160 or > -175
No Play if >-175 the meaning is the same as, or > -175.... Cubs NO PLAY if < -160 or > -175 you have a play from -160 to -175?
I think I'm right, if not, please let me know.
Thanks, BOL

[HoulihansTX]

Its time to start ignoring the Cubs as a potential play. The system is playing the Cubs way to much. Oddsmakers, and sportrends have not noticed they have been overvaluing the Cubs. Its a shit team that does not deserve our money.

[dsklein85]

yup thats right shiva. the play was a line between -160 and -175. sounds like we are on the same page. ive been reading some posts from other members and some of them sound like they are confused by this. what ive deduced from reading the posts is that the greater than/less than symbols are confusing people. a kind suggestion may to start listing your plays as: CHC a play on lines in the range of -160 to -175. this should eliminate some confusion. obviously this is just a suggestion, you dont have to do it if you do not want to. i think you are doing a great job the way it is. keep it up!

[ShivaBowl]

No problem dsklein85, thanks for your help.
BOL


Team Projected Run Plays for 7/19/2010

Play on TAM,
Play on the CUBS
No TPR Plays, if lines, are over -175

[EXhoosier10]

Results for 7/18 are (at least by my count):
ML (Nyy-W, Bos-L, Hou-L)
1-2 ... -1.85u

TPR (Tor-W, Laa-L, Bos-L)
1-2 ... -2.1u

SA (Tex-W, TB-L, SD-W, Oak-W, Mil-L, Cin-L)
3-3 ... +0.00u

Results for 7/19 are (at least by my count):
ML (Tex-W, ChC-L, Oak-L)
1-2 ... -1.70u

TPR (TB-W, ChC-L)
1-1 ... -0.6u

SA (Tor-L, Tex-W, TB-W, ChC-L, NyM-L)
2-3 ... -1.85u

[Formulawiz]

ML system went 1-2 yesterday. Here are the plays so you can check.
CHC, TEX, OAK

ML plays later

[Formulawiz]

Todays ML plays based on early line. Just updated it

MIL, NYM, TEX

[ShivaBowl]

Sportrends.com

Todays Team Projected Run plays, based on early lines.

MIL, BOS, CWS, NYY, TAM, CUBS
NO Play on any team if your line is -175 and over
MIN out CLE won 5

Comp Selection for 7/20/2010
Take Milwaukee W/Bush over Pittsburgh W/Lincoln NO PLAY if < -120 or > -175
No Play on MIL if your line -120 or less

[ShivaBowl]

ML system went 1-2 yesterday. Here are the plays so you can check. CHC, TEX, OAK ML plays later

Nice job Wiz.
Thanks

[ShivaBowl]

HoulihansTX if you post the S/A plays I will be happy to delete this post. Thanks

S/A Plays based on early lines.

MIL, Reds, Mets, Tex, Tor, Cws, Cin, Tam?

?NO Play on any team if your line is -175 and over

[spartangreen]

Good Luck Today

[TonyP]

I see Tex as the play

[havana]

I see Tex as the play

Good Luck Today Everyone

[Formulawiz]

I see Tex as the play

Your correct. TEX is a play.

[barts185]

ML system went 1-2 yesterday. Here are the plays so you can check.
CHC, TEX, OAK

ML plays later

Asking very nicely:

Can you please tell us what site you use to determine the lines? Or what combination of books, if you don't use a particular site?

Not looking to cause problems, just trying to see how I can come up with the same lines you use to avoid any issues.

Thank you,
Bart

[Formulawiz]

Asking very nicely:

Can you please tell us what site you use to determine the lines? Or what combination of books, if you don't use a particular site?

Not looking to cause problems, just trying to see how I can come up with the same lines you use to avoid any issues.

Thank you,
Bart

Your asking questions that have been previously answered. Its the majority of casinos found right here on SBR. As far as Sportrends, I have no idea as to what opening lines they use or where they get them from when they post them early in the morning.

[barts185]

Your asking questions that have been previously answered. Its the majority of casinos found right here on SBR. As far as Sportrends, I have no idea as to what opening lines they use or where they get them from when they post them early in the morning.

Thank you.

I would normally have a follow-up question since based on what has been said previously, those lines wouldn't qualify at least 1 of the teams you have listed as a play, but I'd just be causing problems and not understanding, so I won't even ask and will end by thanking you for taking the time to respond.

Thanks again,
Bart

[Formulawiz]

ML System went 1-2 yesterday

ML plays later today

[HoulihansTX]

HoulihansTX if you post the S/A plays I will be happy to delete this post. Thanks S/A Plays based on early lines. MIL, Reds, Mets, Tex, Tor, Cws, Cin, Tam? ?NO Play on any team if your line is -175 and over

I will take on S/A system posting duties, and can post the Free Play also.

I bought a new computer yesterday... thanks to the Rangers

[Formulawiz]

Todays ML plays based on early lines

CHC, MIL, ARI, KC. Here we go with the CUBS again