[Vince Lombardi]

Fuckabunch of Touts. They're all pieces of shit.

[BGboothA]

Ummm yeah this was a great thread

[andywend]

Andy, You should offer: out of the next 500 games, if you have a 100 game run where you hit 60% the bet is on. Or offering 10-1 odds. Otherwise it is a totally BS offer.

Wrecktangle, what part of "I realize I have a huge edge if anyone ever took me up on this wager" did you fail to understand?

By the way, if you're willing to offer up 10-1 odds on picking 60% over a 100 selection sample, I would gladly take you up on it. Were you serious about the 10-1 or is your response just full of B.S.?

1. We would need some sort of reputable 3rd party to hold the funds (I would trust someone like Bill Dozer or Lou @ SBR). That would be no problem, though I would trust you.

2. All selections must be made using lines available at the time of selection with a -110 maximum (any selection made over -110 would be on a game by game basis). Does that include "College Football Games of the Year" (aka "future") wagers?

3. You have to tell me before the contest begins how many selections you would like to make with 100 being the minimum number. Obviously, if you wanted to make over 100 selections that would be acceptable... No way. No one knows in advance how many selections they will make. 100 or more is acceptable, but no set number.

4. You can only bet on one side of any event... Bull S**t. One of the huge advantages that professional gamblers have is playing "middles". If you knew what you were doing, you would know this. The winning gambler is going to combine "Game of the Year" wagers with lines that actually come out on the week of the game to find winning middles. He is also going to wager on certain games the minute the lines come out (the Sunday preceeding that weeks action) in Vegas, in hopes of capitalizing on bad lines that will be corrected as the week wears on.

BigDaddy, while I agree with you completely when it comes to politics, you clearly have some anger management issues you need to deal with as you seem incredibly pissed off all the time.

Regarding your comments:

1. That would be no problem, though I would trust you.
Even if I knew you quite well, I would insist that the money be put up in advance. If you would honestly trust someone to make good on a $100,000 wager after the fact, then you are far more of a trusting person than I or 99.99% of the world's population.

2. Does that include "College Football Games of the Year" (aka "future") wagers? As long as you're talking about -110 pricing by a reputable book, then all events would be accepted. College Football Games of the Year are no more likely to win than any other. The only type of wager I would truly be concerned about would be college basketball totals (especially involving lesser known smaller schools).

3. No way. No one knows in advance how many selections they will make. 100 or more is acceptable, but no set number. There has to be a pre-determined/set amount of selections as the handicapper picking the games would NEVER stop at 100 unless he was over the 60% threshold. If the handicapper had a record of 60-40 after 100 selections, they would stop and collect the $100K. If the final record was 59-41, they would keep picking games and stop as soon as they hit the 60% threshold. "IF YOU KNEW WHAT YOU WERE DOING, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO EASILY FIGURE THIS OUT".

4. Bull S**t. One of the huge advantages that professional gamblers have is playing "middles". If you knew what you were doing, you would know this. The winning gambler is going to combine "Game of the Year" wagers with lines that actually come out on the week of the game to find winning middles. He is also going to wager on certain games the minute the lines come out (the Sunday preceeding that weeks action) in Vegas, in hopes of capitalizing on bad lines that will be corrected as the week wears on

Once again, you fail to understand the reasoning behind this condition as well and it has nothing to do with the handicapper trying to find winning middles. As long as the spread came with a regular -110 price tag from a reputable book, I would have no problem including it as a valid selection. The reason for this 4th condition is to ensure the gambler doesn't pick both sides of an event once the 60% threshold is in reach. For example, lets say after 90 selections, the player has a record of 55-35. In that case, they would simply pick both sides of an event for their final 10 selections to guarantee winning the contest.

With that being said, if you wanted to take me up on this, I would waive the 4th condition as if you're good enough to have 60% locked up, then you should be able to pick both sides of an event down the stretch.

BigDaddy, life is too short to be angry all the time so try and lighten up some when posting in the forum. I admit I have gotten pretty nasty in the past when arguing with flaming left-wing liberal whackos but I have tried to calm it down lately.

[Wrecktangle]

Dearest Andy, I have much better things to do with my time and any amount of money, much less $100K to tie it up on a silly bet like this with an unknown personality such as you and in a legally ambiguous situation within my country (The Peeples Republik of Kalifornia within the United National Socialist States of Amerika).

I didn't make such a claim of wins on demand, I was merely pointing out what a ridiculous proposition it was.

[BigdaddyQH]

Andy is O.K, but he just does not know too much about wagering. He made a very honest comment about the difficulty of hitting 60%, but then offered a ridiculous wager, with conditions that no one would accept. A perfect example of his lack of knowledge is this statement he made under #3. of his comments: "There has to be a pre-determined/set amount of selections as the handicapper picking the games would NEVER stop at 100 unless he was over the 60% threshold. If the handicapper had a record of 60-40 after 100 selections, they would stop and collect the $100K. If the final record was 59-41, they would keep picking games and stop as soon as they hit the 60% threshold." Now that statement shows how little he knows about the laws of probability. Anyone who has the slightest hint of what they are doing knows that the more games you wager on, the closer to 50% your average will be, NOT 60%. Do the math people. At 6-4, you have hit a 60% rate, but have won just two more games than you have lost. At 60-40, you have the same 60% rate, but would have to win 20 more games. The laws of probability say that you will win about 50% of the time. The more games you wager on, the more chance you have of finishing somewheres around the 50% mark, give or take 3-4%. So the odds of someone hitting 60% of their wagers by playing 200 games is a lot higher than playing 100 games. The more you play, the MORE chance you have of finishing around 50%, and the LESS chance you have to hitting 60%. To say that someone could get to the 60% level and quit after playing 100 games, if they are not there before, is rather foolish.

[Vin_vermillion]

listen guys..

1)now I am sorry I even responded to this thread. I am not a "newbie" gambler. I am 38 years old and have been capping games for 10 years....Honestly I have only become really good over the past 4-5 years....

2) I a not trying to sell you guys anything...and I have offered to post my picks to the board for all of CFB season next year. There is no risk to you guys. Either fade me or follow me, I really dont give a crap.

3) I do cap for money, so this will be the only time I do this, and it will only be for Saturday picks. I have been capping only locally in the past for my paid picks, and honestly have only a small clientele....I am not some big time capper trying to sell picks.

4) as for the % I hit, you guys will just have to wait and see I guess.....see you come September....

[Vin_vermillion]

oh - one other thing. The big comment people like to make is "if you are so good, why dont you just play the games, and then you would be making money and wouldnt have to "sell" picks."

I do bet every game I post to the board. So I am just as invested as the people that follow me.

[Vin_vermillion]

AS for big daddy....I never said what amount of games I would cap. The thought that I need to hit 70% by picking 100 games is absurd.

I will only pick games that are great wagers....

That said, it will probably end up around 3 games a week....4 at the most....so it will b around 48 games or so I'd imagine.

[chunk]

listen guys..

1)now I am sorry I even responded to this thread. I am not a "newbie" gambler. I am 38 years old and have been capping games for 10 years....Honestly I have only become really good over the past 4-5 years....

2) I a not trying to sell you guys anything...and I have offered to post my picks to the board for all of CFB season next year. There is no risk to you guys. Either fade me or follow me, I really dont give a crap.

3) I do cap for money, so this will be the only time I do this, and it will only be for Saturday picks. I have been capping only locally in the past for my paid picks, and honestly have only a small clientele....I am not some big time capper trying to sell picks.

4) as for the % I hit, you guys will just have to wait and see I guess.....see you come September....

Vin, if you've really been around that long then you knew that "bullshit" would be called on the 70% claims. It was an attention grabber and it worked. Like you said, September will be here soon enough and the proof is in the pudding. I noticed that you have a baseball thread. Are you actually putting those games out at 100 units?

[fishmonger]

60 percent of the time it works every time.

[andywend]

3. You have to tell me before the contest begins how many selections you would like to make with 100 being the minimum number. Obviously, if you wanted to make over 100 selections that would be acceptable...

BigDaddy, the statement highlighted in red takes into account everything you stated in your post #40.

Andy is O.K, but he just does not know too much about wagering.

The only thing that matters when it comes to gambling is RESULTS and I can assure you that you're outclassed in this regard.

Grinding away betting pre-game is pointless from a financial standpoint since if you can make money long-term doing it, then you should be able to do far better concentrating on all the opportunities out there that have much higher EV's.

I know full well the offer I made is ridiculous and stated exactly that in my original posting. BD, I enjoy reading your political posts and we are on exactly the same page so I just assume end this discussion right here. If you want to get in the last jab, go ahead and do so and have a nice weekend.

[WorkHorse]

I love this ride.....Townes Van Zandt...Dead Flowers...........

I feel better.....................

[Vin_vermillion]

Vin, if you've really been around that long then you knew that "bullshit" would be called on the 70% claims. It was an attention grabber and it worked. Like you said, September will be here soon enough and the proof is in the pudding. I noticed that you have a baseball thread. Are you actually putting those games out at 100 units?

Chunk - I bet through a local at $100 per game - yes...

[chunk]

Chunk - I bet through a local at $100 per game - yes...

Oh, you were posting as units before. Must have been an oversight on your part. There is a difference between $100/game and 100 units/game unless your unit size is extremely small which would indicate an extremely small bankroll.

[Vin_vermillion]

Chunk - are you talking about units as in say (small, medium, and large) - like 1,2,3 units?

I talk like to give out plays in $$ amounts because I dont know what peoples bankrolls are. I believe I explained in my initial post (when if firs started posting) that it would all be based on $100 bets -

In baseball, I always bet even amounts (or what you would call 1 unit I guess) unless I see something that I can jump on.

If you were following my plays I am only up 7 units then, I believe. But my bankroll is +797 or something over the past two weeks.

Sorry for the confusion. Maybe I will clarify it in my week three thread today.

[chunk]

Vin,
Assuming each wager to win/risk 1 unit (fav to win, dog to risk)
1 unit= $100
Assuming +$797 YTD , you would be +7.97 units YTD
1 method ($ or units would suffice for tracking purposes)
If you already understood or I am wrong, I apologize in advance.

[Vin_vermillion]

Sure enough. I got ya.

[LostDadat34]

I am not big on following touts. I stick my hard core stats, situations, and going against public money... but If I had to follow one service, RAS is easily my go to spot.

[devilsrule]

I'am new to the sbr,but not new to betting cfb,which started in the 1997 season,always shoot to the 60% mark and have never done so,avg % about 55%,so anybody that says they hit 65 or better is a bullshitter.

[Vin_vermillion]

Again. We will see come football season