on3's MLB 2012 Opening Game system thread 194-8 last year +60 units

[oklahoma]

Boston can't even hit the toilet when they puke...

dont burn those socks just yet, 2 on 1 out.

[WVU9494]

You gotta be muther f'n kidding me!!!!!

[Gndias]

[WVU9494]

How many losses for the entire year in 2007?

In 2007 there were SIX losses from April to May. I don't know how that season turned out in terms of profit/losses, but this sort of thing is not unprecedented.

[dlunc3]

the fact that boston couldnt score 1 run in 2 full innings vs a first baseman is an absolute joke.... getting thrown out at home bottom of the 16th cost me 2k... aka a $3400 swing in the bankroll

[WVU9494]

Me and you both brother. How close was that play at home

[darkmatter117]

How many losses for the entire year in 2007?

13 total losses.

[Mrscofield25]

dont burn those socks just yet, 2 on 1 out.

We're done! Burn them. I'm done with Boston. They're playing just as bad as last season. Not worth a penny.

Have a nice night guys. Looking forward to tomorrows new plays.

[J.M. Disciple]

new system... Fade Boston

[darkmatter117]

2007 backtest yielded 178 wins and 13 losses. The average ML was -172. I don't know how to calculate profits/losses using Labby for an entire season, but using Martingale that would be -19.13 units per loss. So for the season we would be -185.47. Yes, NEGATIVE 185.

According to therizz's backtest there were 252 wins that season. (We both counted 13 losses). I don't know where those additional 74 wins came from -- maybe he used opening lines for his test -- but even with those the system would finish -111 for the year using Martingale. I suppose the numbers would be a tad better using Labby, but I don't think it would get us above -100. I really hope my math is off somewhere; otherwise this is alarming.

NOTE: Those numbers are from using ML only.

[therizz]

2007 backtest yielded 178 wins and 13 losses. The average ML was -172. I don't know how to calculate profits/losses using Labby for an entire season, but using Martingale that would be -19.13 units per loss. So for the season we would be -185.47. Yes, NEGATIVE 185.

According to therizz's backtest there were 252 wins that season. (We both counted 13 losses). I don't know where those additional 74 wins came from -- maybe he used opening lines for his test -- but even with those the system would finish -111 for the year using Martingale. I suppose the numbers would be a tad better using Labby, but I don't think it would get us above -100. I really hope my math is off somewhere; otherwise this is alarming.

NOTE: Those numbers are from using ML only.

We are on a pace to go 140-12 right now and we are about even. I never proclaimed people play this system martingale and have actually cautioned against it. I am not sure how On3 is doing it. I would only consider playing martingale for the filtered plays (but would not do that either). My hopes in backtesting this is that the good win% for each level of play would result in profit but as we are seeing with out game 3's this year past performance does not guarantee future results. Hopefully it will turn around, as it has been a very crappy week or so.

[WVU9494]

Is that right with the martinggale? Your 178 wins give you 178 units profit not including the bigger plays on filtered games. The 13 losses would give you 250 units of loss. Different between the two is a loss of 72 units. I think my calls are right.

2007 backtest yielded 178 wins and 13 losses. The average ML was -172. I don't know how to calculate profits/losses using Labby for an entire season, but using Martingale that would be -19.13 units per loss. So for the season we would be -185.47. Yes, NEGATIVE 185.

According to therizz's backtest there were 252 wins that season. (We both counted 13 losses). I don't know where those additional 74 wins came from -- maybe he used opening lines for his test -- but even with those the system would finish -111 for the year using Martingale. I suppose the numbers would be a tad better using Labby, but I don't think it would get us above -100. I really hope my math is off somewhere; otherwise this is alarming.

NOTE: Those numbers are from using ML only.

[thelimit0310]

For the 4/5 method, the system also went negative. But by a much more managable number, -9 units. This was the worst season I had in my entire sample.

[darkmatter117]

Is that right with the martinggale? Your 178 wins give you 178 units profit not including the bigger plays on filtered games. The 13 losses would give you 250 units of loss. Different between the two is a loss of 72 units. I think my calls are right.

You're right. I had an error in my Excel formula. It's -248 for the losses and +178 for the wins, so net -70.

[KennyM10]

This system is now down what a bunch of clowns you all are!

[WVU9494]

Still sucks either way you look at it. I wonder how he got 50 more wins and the same amount of losses.

How many years of back testing did you do? Were there any other years over 10 losses?

[KennyM10]

The rizz and on3 are clowns, where is on3 now?

[dlunc3]

The rizz and on3 are clowns, where is on3 now?

get out of here man.. you troll every thread you go in..

[oklahoma]

Please no one feed the troll. Lots of series to make it all back and then some.

[darkmatter117]

Still sucks either way you look at it. I wonder how he got 50 more wins and the same amount of losses.

How many years of back testing did you do? Were there any other years over 10 losses?

I'm in the process of backtesting. In 2006 I count six losses. That's the only other season I've done so far.

Based on what limit said, I think 2007 was the worst season in recent years.

[airattackers]

Let's not diss the system because of a few losses...you can't win all the time..

[airattackers]

Let's stay focused and get this money...

[dlunc3]

Just my two cents...

I personally bet less then 1% per unit on this system... and I know with less then 1%, these bets are starting to become uncomfortable for me. I have followed this system for a few years now, and have never seen lines get juiced like they are right now. I know that many of you bet a full 1%, 2% or even 3%, so I know that many here are at a tough spot. The biggest key to this is DONT QUIT WHILE WE ARE DOWN. I know, that is tough, as there comes a point where the bankroll cant take anymore... But I personally have faith in this system, and KNOW that we will get out of this hole.

My thought at this point is to adjust our labby lines and possibly divide our lines in half... look to clear our first set of lines, and then go for our 2nd 1/2 once our 1st 1/2 is cleared. Just a quick thought...wondering what you all think? As like I said, I bet a small % and know my bets are becoming uncomfortable, so I can only guess I am not the only one..

BOL this week boys... lets take back whats ours

[airattackers]

the way i look at it is like this..these losses that we are incurring only means that there is a MEAN win streak coming our way...what i suggest is that we start parlaying some of the system plays so that we can take full advantage of the win streaks that are coming...

[airattackers]

also lets not diss rizz and on3 because the system works...we just have to be patient..

[J.M. Disciple]

Lets not go changing the system over a weeks bad stretch. Martingale has always been cautioned and as discussed we already have a few losses but are only down a little bit. The labby is taking care of business and a couple of 5-10unit plays should be reasonable if your unit size is no bigger then 1%.

For future reference we should just provide a simple guide line of 1% per labby line instead of 2%, so labby line would be:

.25 - .25 - .25 - .25

instead of the .5 - .5 - . 5 - .5 Then 7-10 unit plays woudl then just become 3-5unit plays with a risk of 10 units total if the juice is like -200. I say we keep going forward and finish clearing these lines then just be aware of all the bad stretches that can occur with this system and adjust your own unit sizes to the info we been given.

On3 is running this system based on a $20 unit size so if you have a $2k bankroll adjust your unit size to $10 instead of $20 and you will be fine. There was a good post in LTA's thread about how sports betting compares to stock market. We should all be very patient and not try to get rich too quick based on a system that is 198-6. Yes great record but what does that actually mean? Based on 1% as a unit size on a decent year

198 wins = 198 units
6 losses = 120 units

Profit over a season around 78units.

Thats 78units for martingale players on a decent year. From year 2007 with 13 losses as a 1% unit size your bankroll could be almost entirely wiped out. So Dlunc offers great advise of having a .5% unit size instead of 1% or higher.

I would not change this system too much, but if we were to change it at all I would just say use a -1RL instead of ML to reduce the juice by quite a bit. This would cause a bit of confusion for martingale players, but it should help the labby players quite a bit. The system integrity thread uses -1RL over a 6 year sample and has been very successful doing so chasing the biggest favorite of the day.

Its all up to on3 on how he wants to run the thread in the future. Either keep it the same and adjust your unit size or play the -1 RL or only play the filtered games. The main point being is do not try and get rich quick off this system because it is a long process and usin 1% as a unit size can cause a bit of stress as we an all see from this weeks post.

[J.M. Disciple]

System record 36-2-0; 9-0-0
Units +4.5
1 unit = $20

5/6

#39 -- baltimore @ BOS -143 (C)

Game 1 win = 20-19; 7-2
Game 2 win = 14-5; 2-0
Game 3 win = 2-2; 0-0

Labby Line (regular)

x-x-70-83
x-x-80-46
55-55-51-89

Labby Line (filter)

10-10-10-10

BOS to win 140

Roughly 10units risk today so system is down -5.5units. Not too bad for 3 losses already. Keep your unit size small and let the labby do the work.

[knugen]

Atleast 1 new serie starts today, lets get some money back

[CrazyCarl]

If being down 5 units has ruined you, you did not plan very well.

Hopefully tomorrow is better.

[J.M. Disciple]

If being down 5 units has ruined you, you did not plan very well.

Hopefully tomorrow is better.

I think we are planning for future bad runs based on the -70unit 2007 season when using martingale. No one really knows how the labby did that year. Would have to go back and test that year via labby and see what the biggest bet would of been and worst downswing in terms of units in play so we can play for future seasons.

There is a lot of complaining about this series and the Sf series cause they are so close together so it just raised some interest. I do not think anyone is super freaking out because this is how blind systems are at times. Had on3 been trying to cross off two #s instead of 1# on some of these games I think our bet would be a lot bigger right now.

[The HOFF]

MAY 7
Orioles vs Rangers
Indians vs White Sox
Royals Red Sox
Twins vs Angels
Mariners vs Tigers
Phillies vs Mets
Cubs vs Braves
Astros vs Marlins
Brewers vs Reds
D-Backs vs Cardinals
Dodgers vs Giants
Padres vs Rockies

[darkmatter117]

Phillies just dropped from -195 to -180 at 5dimes. Wow.

[Gndias]

yeah i just hope the mets don't f\*\*k this one tonight....

[J.M. Disciple]

Phillys -170
Dodgers -146

Only two plays today?

[wolvereen]

Are these bets to win 20 or risk 20?