[Scrivero]

Yes, kind of Still, it takes roughly 1 hour to make the plays, as there's so many people I am taking into account. Makes it also slow for me to make the plays because some people post the City and some people the team name and some the opposite team if they play that instead. And as I am new to MLB I do not yet remember which city has which team so I have to keep checking the abbreviations and names and cities of the teams and see which team is against which team to see which games are playable. If that made sense at all

RESULTS
5/1: 1 unit each:
betting (fading):
Rays SU (Marlins) WIN
Brewers/Cardinals Over 8 (Under 8) WIN

Evening: 2-0: +2,42 units

RECORD
SU: 7-3: +3,035 units
O/U: 9-6: +1,654 units
All fades: 16-9: +4,689 units



Plays coming soon, lets see how long it actually takes to check them, starting right now.

[TechnicalTrader]

Killing it!

[Scrivero]

Seems so Ok, 17 minutes in, I have now all the possible fades in front of me, altogether 29 O/U plays and 28 SU plays from ca 10-12 different people. Now to the annoyingly slow part of seeing which teams are playing against each other, figuring out the cities/teams/abbreviations etc. Then checking which of these plays actually becomes our fades of the day.

[Scrivero]

5/2: 1 unit each:
betting (fading):
Astros SU (Rangers)
Braves SU (Mets)
Indians/Tigers Over 7.5 (Under 7.5)
Angels/Mariners Under 7 (Over 7)

I am trying to keep my units bet for the night at ca 3-4 units. Still, max 1 units per bet, even with 1 game nights. 5 games or more would be 0,5 units each. 2 and 3 and 4 games are 1 units each. Max 10 plays per day, but it doesnt seem to go that high.

So it took 55 minutes in the end. Brain fried in the end too as its actually hard work. It will get faster though.

[The Hat]

I am fading myself (my plays) today. I didn't post these fades. Figured if you faded my fades they wouldn't be true fades. Long story short, didn't wanna contaminate the real fades

[BigOrange]

Good job!

[Scrivero]

I am fading myself (my plays) today. I didn't post these fades. Figured if you faded my fades they wouldn't be true fades. Long story short, didn't wanna contaminate the real fades

I appreciate you protecting the trustworthiness of my fades!

[Scrivero]

Good job!

Thanks man! We already hit the Braves SU and Astros SU today. Indians/Tigers were already at 6 runs after 3 innings, couldnt make it past 7 runs though. Well, it happens both ways. Angels/Mariners is at 4 runs on the bottom of the 5th. Please dont score more dudes

Love your avatar, Elky is the man.

[Scrivero]

RESULTS
5/2: 1 unit each:
betting (fading):
Astros SU (Rangers) WIN
Braves SU (Mets) WIN
Indians/Tigers Over 7.5 (Under 7.5) LOSS
Angels/Mariners Under 7 (Over 7) LOSS

Evening: 2-2: -0,422 units

RECORD
SU: 9-3: +4,613 units
O/U: 9-8: -0,346 units
All fades: 18-11: +4,267 units

[Scrivero]

I said I'd have max 10 fades per day. But lets play all that we got tonight, as we got a lot for once.

5/3: 0,5 units each:
betting (fading):
Yankees SU (Blue Jays)
Dbacks SU (Nationals)
Phillies SU (Cubs)
Rays SU (Marlins)
Orioles SU (Red Sox)
Tigers SU (Indians)
Marlins/Rays Over 8.0 (Under 8.0)
Indians/Tigers Over 7.5 (Under 7.5)
Rangers/Astros Under 8.5 (Over 8.5)
Blue Jays/Yankees Under 8 (Over 8)
White Sox/Royals Under 8 (Over 8)
Giants/Dodgers Under 7.5 (Over 7.5)

[Scrivero]

We went 4-8. Ca minus 2 units, exact stats later. Was 1-5 with SU bets. I took a new poster to my fade pool after following him for a while. Well, he went 5-0 with those SU plays yesterday. Not making an excuse, I decided to add him. Just gotta think these through well.

[Scrivero]

Minus 2 units, not 5 Had to post this correction. Would have been 5 with 1 unit bets but keeping it small.

[Scrivero]

Just thinking out loud a bit about choosing who to fade:

The starting point of the thread/system:
- Take the biggest posters and fade the picks that they all play.

1. Original criteria revised from it:
- Take the plays from everyone who have 3 or more plays for the day.

2. The updated criteria already from the third day:
- Do not take plays from people who seem to do well in the long run.

3. Adding posters to the fade pool:
- Add posters who seem to be struggling in the long run but just had a good start to the year.

4. Taking out posters from the fade pool:
- Take out posters who seem to doing well in the long run but just had a bad start to the year.

I think I need to be doing the number 3 and 4 continuously to keep my fade pool good. That is because if I fade the wrong people I end up losing money because they do well. I cant just add players in and take them out after one day. I must trust my assessment and stick with it until it starts to slow us down.

Every play faded can potentially cost us money. Every play faded can potentially save/make us money. I need to find the best possible pool to fade and try to think long term. Not make too many fast changes. I need to also try to add/take out people who are on the same "level" in their plays. We want to get as many plays to our list of possible plays each night. That is the list we then use to find the fades. That is because we want to find the best plays on this system. The best plays are in theory and also what I have noticed, the ones who have 3 or more people playing it and none playing the opposite. I dont have the stats for it but I will now start following how many people have played the plays that I fade. I will keep track of it to see whether we should just concentrate, in the future, on plays that at least 3 people have played.

Ok, those were some thoughts just to make it clear to myself and to put it out there so that I have some "promise" that I have made to make it easier to follow the guidelines that I have set.

Stats and plays coming soon!

[Scrivero]

RESULTS
5/3: 0,5 units each:
betting (fading, how many played):
Yankees SU (Blue Jays, 3 people played) WIN
Dbacks SU (Nationals, 2 people played) LOSS
Phillies SU (Cubs, 2 people played) LOSS
Rays SU (Marlins, 2 people played) LOSS
Orioles SU (Red Sox, 2 people played) LOSS
Tigers SU (Indians, 2 people played) LOSS
Marlins/Rays Over 8.0 (Under 8.0, 2 people played) WIN
Indians/Tigers Over 7.5 (Under 7.5, 4 people played) LOSS
Rangers/Astros Under 8.5 (Over 8.5, 2 people played) LOSS
Blue Jays/Yankees Under 8 (Over 8, 2 people played) LOSS
White Sox/Royals Under 8 (Over 8, 4 people played) WIN
Giants/Dodgers Under 7.5 (Over 7.5, 3 people played) WIN

Evening: 4-8: -2,256 units

RECORD
SU: 10-8: +2,603 units
O/U: 12-11: -0,592 units
All fades: 22-19: +2,011 units

How many people played the play that I faded:
2 people played: 1-7
3 people played: 2-0
4 people played: 1-1

[Scrivero]

5/4: 0,5 units each:
betting (fading, how many played):
Rockies SU (Padres, 2 people played)
Brewers SU (Cardinals, 2 people played)
Rangers/Astros Under 8.5 (Over 8.5, 2 people played)
Angels/Mariners Under 8.5 (Over 8.5, 2 people played)
Mets/Braves Under 8.5 (Over 8.5, 2 people played)

[Scrivero]

I think we can assume that the Angels/Mariners wont hit, as its already at 8 runs at the top of the fifth.

So evening is 2-2 (Mets game was postponed). Profit of ca 0,25 units because of the +++odds. Exact stats and today's plays later.

The SU games seem to be hitting better (today 2-0) even if we had that horrendous night of 1-7 with them yesterday. I made a minor tweak to my U/O fades today: I will first tail any O/U of sportsbetter and huskers and then keep those games out of my fades. Just to try to get the most value out of my plays and fades. We are getting close to having the "system" where we want it: Fun and making money I wish I could say that it was fast to make the plays too but we're not there yet Maybe the little tweak with the O/U tails/fades will make it faster as we have less games to check the plays for.

[Scrivero]

RESULTS
5/4: 0,5 units each:
betting (fading, how many played):
Rockies SU (Padres, 2 people played) WIN
Brewers SU (Cardinals, 2 people played) WIN
Rangers/Astros Under 8.5 (Over 8.5, 2 people played) LOSS
Angels/Mariners Under 8.5 (Over 8.5, 2 people played) LOSS
Mets/Braves Under 8.5 (Over 8.5, 2 people played) PTD

Evening: 2-2: +0,245 units

RECORD
SU: 12-8: +3,848 units
O/U: 12-13: -1,592 units
All fades: 24-21: +2,256 units

How many people played the play that I faded:
2 people played: 3-9
3 people played: 2-0
4 people played: 1-1



Plays coming soon.

By the way, is the way that I am following and posting the results looking good/easy to follow? Any wishes of additions or changes?

[Scrivero]

5/5: 0,5 units each:
betting (fading, how many played):
Marlins SU (Mets, 3 people played)
Royals SU (Indians, 2* people played)
Royals RL-1,5 (Indians, 2* people played)
Blue Jays SU (Rays, 4 people played)
Blue Jays RL-1,5 (Rays, 4 people played)
Orioles SU (White Sox, 3 people played)
Padres SU (Dodgers, 2* people played)



Two new things:
1. The plays that have the 2* mark are plays where the was a difference of 2 between people playing the matchup. E.g. 3 people played for other team to win, and 1 for the other. I will follow the stats of these fades separately.
2. RL-1,5 bets appeared. These plays where at least two people played the other team RL-1,5. AND there was an at least difference of two people with the plays (check the previous point).

The RL-1,5 is a bit.. umm, I dont know whether to just change that AND the SU for such cases to fading the RL-1,5 by betting the opponent to win RL+1,5. I will follow this too somehow.

No O/U fades today because I managed to tail on 13 of them. Normally this is where I fail, when I start to "give up" or change one part of the system (like now tailing good O/U posters instead of fading the unsuccesful ones). I just feel like there is more value in tailing than fading when it comes to O/U. I will still fade the ones taht I dont tail, if there are any that fulfill the criteria.

lol I hope all that made some sense I dont expect anyone to remember all these rules. I will remember them and make the plays according to them and follow the results separately to see what works and what not.

Have a nice weekend! BOL!

[The Hat]

By the way, is the way that I am following and posting the results looking good/easy to follow? Any wishes of additions or changes?

prob need a bigger, more consistent sample size of people to fade.

[Scrivero]

prob need a bigger, more consistent sample size of people to fade.

Most likely yes. I am fading the same people each day now (if they have posted their plays when I check the plays, ca 8-15 posters depending on the day, time of the games etc.). The sample size is very small indeed in any case. Cant backtest this either, at least it would be very ver very very slow lol. So forward testing it. And just trying to figure out the best way to do this. Lets hope we get through this phase of making the changes that I have made during the last few days. I feel that the changes are very much needed especially in this type of situation where there can not be any backtesting.

Its in any case loads of fun but VERY timetaking. Today's plays took me ca 1,5 hours altogether as there were ca 15 posters. It will get faster but right now its very slow.

[Scrivero]

Im gonna assume that the Padres wont hit even if they are losing just 3-2 now on the top of the 7th. Just to be able to make the stats for today already now as I am quite busy in the evening. Was a great day!

RESULTS
5/5: 0,5 units each:
betting (fading, how many played):
Marlins SU (Mets, 3 people played) LOSS
Royals SU (Indians, 2* people played) WIN
Royals RL-1,5 (Indians, 2* people played) WIN
Blue Jays SU (Rays, 4 people played) WIN
Blue Jays RL-1,5 (Rays, 4 people played) WIN
Orioles SU (White Sox, 3 people played) WIN
Padres SU (Dodgers, 2* people played) LOSS (still pending but just to make the stats)

Evening: 5-2: +3,398 units

RECORD
SU: 15-10: +4,586 units
RL: 2-0: +2,66 units
O/U: 12-13: -1,592 units
All fades: 29-23: +5,654 units

Record (w-l) of how many people played the play that I faded:
2 people played: 3-9
2* people played (difference of 2 people): 2-1
3 people played: 3-1
4 people played: 3-1

Well that went well. The changes seem to work although its a very small sample size. They feel good in any case. Gives more plays for the SU (and RL) now that we get less O/U plays because we are tailing almost all of them.

Not gonna follow my tails here but just for tonight as I started the "tails before fades" -change today: O/U tails went 8-5 thanks to huskers and sportbetter and MJ4th. I recommend tailing. I myself tail all of huskers' and sportbetter's bets and all 2x bets of MJ4th.

Have a nice day!

[MJ4thQuarter92]

This is working out very well for you.

[MJ4thQuarter92]

What odds did you get for Royals 1.5?? Pretty good I'm guessing

[Scrivero]

This is working out very well for you.
------
What odds did you get for Royals 1.5?? Pretty good I'm guessing

Thanks! Yea it has started really well, lets hope it continues

The odds for Royals -1,5 were +306. The BlueJays -1,5 was +226.

[Scrivero]

Posting this early so you can still play it:

Indians (fade Royals)

this game is 7-0 for Royals in my fade pool. The biggest so far by a mile. Im putting 1 unit on Indians SU and 0,5 units on Indians RL-1,5.

The rest of the plays for today coming soon. No O/U plays today.

Edit: Another play for a game starting very soon:

Blue Jays (fade Rays)

1 unit on this game SU as I dont know if we we will get more games tonight or not.

[Grivas_Digeni]

Did you fade Boston and/or the popular public over?

[Scrivero]

5/6: 0,5 units each (unless otherwise stated):
betting (fading, how many played):
Indians SU 1 unit (Royals, 7 people played)
Indians RL-1,5 (Royals, 7 people played)
Blue Jays SU 1 unit (Rays, 3* people played)
White Sox SU (Orioles, 2* people played)
White Sox RL-1,5 (Orioles, 2* people played)
Yankees SU (Cubs, 2* people played)
Reds SU (Giants, 3 people played)
Pirates SU (Brewers, 5 people played)
Astros SU (Angels, 4 people played)

Good luck!

[Scrivero]

Did you fade Boston and/or the popular public over?

That would be a no to both. My fade pool had the O/U as 2-1 and the SU as 2-2. Interestingly both Boston and Minnesota both had one RL-1,5 too. The difference in plays needs to be at least two to get a play in either category.

[Scrivero]

RESULTS
5/6: 0,5 units each (unless otherwise stated):
betting (fading, how many played):
Indians SU 1 unit (Royals, 7 people played) WIN
Indians RL-1,5 (Royals, 7 people played) WIN
Blue Jays SU 1 unit (Rays, 3* people played) LOSS
White Sox SU (Orioles, 2* people played) LOSS
White Sox RL-1,5 (Orioles, 2* people played) LOSS
Yankees SU (Cubs, 2* people played) WIN
Reds SU (Giants, 3 people played) WIN
Pirates SU (Brewers, 5 people played) WIN
Astros SU (Angels, 4 people played) LOSS

Evening: 5-4: +0,675 units

RECORD
SU: 19-13: +4,976 units
RL: 3-1: +2,945 units
O/U: 12-13: -1,592 units
All fades: 34-27: +6,329 units

Record (w-l) of how many people played the play that I faded:
2 people played: 17-18 (added estimate of 14-9)
2* people played (difference of 2 people): 3-3
3 people played: 6-2 (added estimate of 2-1)
3* people played (difference of 2 people): 0-1
4 people played: 5-3 (added estimate of 2-1)
5 people played: 1-0
7 people played: 2-0

I added estimates of games lost/won under the last record of how many people played the play I faded. I underestimated the amount of 3 people played and 4 people played to avoid accidentally overestimating them. There were probably 1 or 2 more wins for each but as I am not sure, I will rather put those wins on the most common category of "2 people played" as there are much more plays there every day, and it wont skew the stats too much there. Looks like the more people that play a play, the higher chance it seems to have on hitting. I added the estimates to keep the stats "correct" in the long run. To have the same amount of plays in that last category as I have in the "All fades" stat. That then takes out the trouble of wondering/explaining why the numbers are different in different stats.

Thanks again to my tails of MJ, huskers, sportsbetter and LT for making me money in many ways. You make me money when I tail you and you save me money when I can then also avoid the wrong plays as others might have your plays too which I then would fade. But I dont, as I tail, so its very very good for my results.

[MJ4thQuarter92]

Good job. I was surprised to not see Nationals on the list yesterday. The board was in love with Philly (not sure why). Board loved Brewers too. I saw you faded them

[Scrivero]

Good job. I was surprised to not see Nationals on the list yesterday. The board was in love with Philly (not sure why). Board loved Brewers too. I saw you faded them

I was actually tailing Philadelphia so it didnt end up in my fades. The tails are bringing so good money though that its ok to miss a possible fade win from time to time. Ya the fade pool was 5-0 on Brewers to win. I could have even put a full unit on it as I did with fading the Royals who was 7-0 to win on my fade pool.

[Scrivero]

I will post these in the right format later, have a meeting in like 1 minute so just posting the plays:

All plays 0,5 units:
Braves SU and RL
Marlins SU
Athletics SU
Cubs SU
Blue Jays SU and RL
Royals SU
Rangers SU

Edit. Add one O/U:
RedSox/Twins Under 7

Edit2: Those RL are of course RL-1,5 like I always do.

[MJ4thQuarter92]

I saw a few guys playing the Braves (not sure why) so you probably should have faded them.

[Scrivero]

I saw a few guys playing the Braves (not sure why) so you probably should have faded them.

I gotta go with my pool of people that I fade, which were all betting on Cardinals so Braves was the play. I think the people you saw betting the Braves are not the ones I am fading or if they are, they posted the plays after I already posted mine/after I checked the fade pool available. Meeting just ended so I had to post early today (also because of the early games).

Lets do a live check of how things are going today, not doing this very often:
Team that I bet to win is mentioned first with the results (and currect win/loss):
Braves SU and RL 0-4 (top of the 4th) ("loss" and "loss"
Marlins SU 6-0 (top of 6th) ("win")
Athletics SU not yet on
Cubs SU not yet on
Blue Jays SU and RL 0-1 (bot of 5th) ("loss")
Royals SU 0-0 (top of 2nd)
Rangers SU not yet on
RedSox/Twins Under 7 At 3 runs (bot of 2nd) (looking like a loss)

Things move fast on MLB though. We shall see where we end up

[MJ4thQuarter92]

I know that you aren't fading "top posters", but I assure you that if you track their consensus picks; it's not pretty. Phillies buried them yesterday and Braves will today.

I've observed this site (closely) the past couple of years. Good cappers or not, public picks lose more than they win..