Has anyone tried chasing the team totals for these teams. So far I think only SF and Detroit would have failed to cover their team totals and the price would be under -130 too.
-
Comment -
here is a nice dog chase system. it was posted by ciscoLast edited by sstrunks52005; 05-10-12, 01:42 AM.Comment -
Game 1 win = 21-20; 7-2
Game 2 win = 14-6; 2-0
Game 3 win = 2-3; 0-0
I hope you realize 21-20 is not 60+% and you obviously did not read the rest of my post. Play the underdog for the FIRST game and then the FAVE thereafter. I suggested before splitting the bet between the RL and ML so if the fave DOES win the first game, you will be refunded if they only win by one run. This eliminates the problem of people losing massively on an ABC series.Comment -
I'm quoting from #1454:
"last year was fine and if the system was back tested only 1 year and that was the base of our future success not many would be jumping ship. However, in 2007 this system lost around 40-70units no matter how you managed your money wether it be labby or martingale. There was just no saving that system for that year."Comment -
Two things:
Firstly, past performance does not guarantee similar results now.
Secondly, you're right, it is a small sample size. All I am doing is putting out an idea that would help people avoid losing an entire ABC series. This system may have been amazing last year or some other year but the fact is that it is still early and there have already been three HUGE losses. Its no surprise people are having doubts now, especially when we know that the backtest revealed a big loss in 2007.Comment -
Well I'm not even talking about that. If you can't afford to lose, you shouldn't be gambling period. What I said was that the system should not be losing money. With the proper money management currently, it IS losing money. The problem is therefore not money management, but the system itself.Comment -
What are you even talking about? Can you even name a system that has gone 10 years without going negative once? The last time this system went negative was 5 years ago. Even if you played the losing season as your first season with the system, you would still have a substantial net gain by this point from the system. That is not a failure in the slightest.
This always happens on a system that hits a losing streak. Everyone freaks out. If your too timid to handle system anomalies then you shouldn't be playing systems.Comment -
where's the faith man? hahaComment -
in regards to the posts of money management. the $20/unit is based off of a $2000 bankroll at 1%. the system as it stands is -22 units or $440. i dont know how you would lose your entire bankroll if you only lost 25% of it. even if you jumped on the system at its peak +20 units, you are down 42 units, or 42%. if your entire bankroll is gone when the system AT MOST has lost 50%, your other 50% of losses have come from other areas.
System record 37-4-0; 9-0-0
Units -22
1 unit = $20
5/10
#42 -- cleveland @ BOS -147 (A) -- o/u 9 -- eligible for 5/2 if (A) loses
Game 1 win = 21-20; 7-2
Game 2 win = 14-6; 2-0
Game 3 win = 2-3; 0-0
Labby Line (regular)
65-67-82-95
40-40-87-93
85-152-126-134
Labby Line (filter)
10-10-10-10
BOS to win 65
BOS to win 20Comment -
There's a girl updating it dailyComment -
Well I'm assuming from the avatar its a girl?Comment -
damn boston is a filtered play too lolComment -
So every system should always be in the black? That's absurd. It's about long-term performance and this system does fine. If you're not in it for the long haul and want to make quick money, good luck to you.
The unit size should be 1% of your bankroll. This system is down 22 units. That should be 22% of your bankroll. The people complaining that this system bankrupted them are down 100%. THAT is a money management issue.Comment -
Finally a filtered play. Can't wait for the game to start.Comment -
let's go BOS. all in
Comment -
First time i went against the system was when philly lost the 1st game to mets and i fired mets the whole way. Made out for a good pay day. Not to knock the system but i think philly needs to be faded no matter what...LOLComment -
Ok. I just checked the last two pages and I get what you and alexknyc are saying. I'm not actually playing the system myself. I was just putting out a suggestion for all those who were saying things like 'I had several thousand two weeks ago, now I only have a few hundred'. Yes, that is a money management problem.
Comment -
On3 nailed it right on the dot in his post. People following the labby lines should only be down 42% of their roll at max. My problem was that I was using 1% and constantly changing unit sizes so even though I was in it from the begiinning with 20 net units gained I am still down 42units. constantly changing my unit size was my problem. Also following 2 other systems was my problem.
martingale players I believe are down more since its a straight chase, but shouldn't be broke because of it. Roughly 50-70units max considering a 3 game chase with the juice. Just readjust your unit size and start over; much better idea then going broke on the next 5-6 bets at 5% per bet with only 30units left.Comment -
People understand your trying to help, but a lot of people take it the wrong way when you post advice on an incomplete back test. I have done this many times and I am slowly learning my lesson about giving small sample size advice. Ok. I just checked the last two pages and I get what you and alexknyc are saying. I'm not actually playing the system myself. I was just putting out a suggestion for all those who were saying things like 'I had several thousand two weeks ago, now I only have a few hundred'. Yes, that is a money management problem.
Good LuckComment -
Also I think the only system in the positive over 10 years would be the NBA system where its a 6 game chase fading the home team on a 3 game road trip each half. Its solamans system I guess.
Good Luck on Boston tonight.
Keep up the good work on3. Im sure now a lot more people understand the variance and can start over with a more open mind and better understanding to sports betting.Comment -
Beckett not going tonightComment -
Hey On3... just wanted to discuss this a little more. The danger so far is not what has happened, it is what could potentially happen. Losing 22 units so far is nothing, and you should have plenty of bullets left in the barrel.. But right now, the way the labby lines are looking, I would really EXTREMELY caution anyone to continue the way the lines are. Spread them out / start over / whatever... but for example, tonights game on Boston, the -147 line is actually a low line for this system... and this number you are playing to win ($85), is much less then some of the other numbers on your lines. But with that $85 number you are playing to win tonight, you will be risking $125 to win $85 on this game. With the starting bankroll of $2000 down to $1560, this wager is 8% of your bankroll. Until/if/when this system goes on a great run, every bet will be basically a minimum of 8% of your bankroll. Since every series is completely independent, what is to say this win streak will start this week?
So just some caution. I am a huge fan of the system and have made great money of it.... but I would urge anyone following to be extremely careful right now. Making 5% bets on a regular, let alone 8% or more!, is a quick way to go bust...
Hopefully a huge streak is ahead... BOL and thanks for the hard work On3 cautionComment -
dlunc3 has a good point. people bringing up about bankroll management has no idea what they are talking about. consistently betting 8% of your roll isn't managing your roll properly. boston bet is already looking grim. how many more of these 8% bets can this system lose without breaking your roll? rethink this system before your egos get in the way...Comment -
Cool, 4-1. Trying to see if I can get down 150 units.Comment -
Comment -
Still early but Boston has no chance.Comment -
omg this is brutalComment -
Game over
Comment -
Red Sox really are a joke
These overrated big market teams have killed this system so farComment
