[JacketFan81]

This thread is going places...

[Pricetopher]

It let me send my message, I just tried laying parameters down with settle-up dates and all that via a different platform so SBR doesn't take heat for it... but again... crickets.

[JacketFan81]

You sure math-ed him

[Pricetopher]

Good one.

[danshan11]

sorry I was watching the masters, that was pretty awesome. I am willing to do betpoints here so you are on front street for your picks.

for the forum purpose and rule compliance we shall do 1 betpoint as 1 unit.

post your 4 plays here and we will track them. you can bet only 1 unit to win whatever the moneyline is of course

1 Marlins +120= lose its -1 betpoint you win its +1.2 betpoints up! deal?

[Pricetopher]

sorry I was watching the masters, that was pretty awesome. I am willing to do betpoints here so you are on front street for your picks.

for the forum purpose and rule compliance we shall do 1 betpoint as 1 unit.

post your 4 plays here and we will track them. you can bet only 1 unit to win whatever the moneyline is of course

1 Marlins +120= lose its -1 betpoint you win its +1.2 betpoints up! deal?

That's fine, I've already posted my plays for the day. I wasn't sure if they did decimal bet points or not, but okay.

[danshan11]

good deal we are on!

[vicshap]

terrible start to all this , i must say.

[Pricetopher]

Amen... and it happens, can't control it. Follow them or don't, I don't control anything that happens, just along for the ride like you after they're in.

[vicshap]

it's just amazing to me how quickly someone starts a thread like this, and boom, zip and 5, already in a hole. real life is stranger than fiction.

[JacketFan81]

Tune in next week for his new handle and all sorts of new promises

[vicshap]

1-5 after 2 days. not the start we were hoping for, but i'll continue to bet with you.

[tsty]

People like this need to be banned quick

Scammers are the nut worst humans

Who bought your model and for how much?

[Believe_EMT]

i wonder if your plays will match plays from this:

The Baseball Underdog System is based on a law of averages showing that, over the long term, MLB underdogs beat favorites about 4 games out of 9 (or 44% of the time). Even with moneyline odds on underdogs earning you better than even money -- meaning that at +130 you lay $10 to win $13 -- you need to rack up better than a record of 4 wins and 5 losses every day to make substantial profits.

For example, let's assume you bet $10 on each of 9 underdogs today, with each getting +130 moneyline odds. If you win 4 games, you profit $13 each or $52 total. But the $50 you lose when 5 favorites win gives you a slim $2 profit overall. So instead of simply betting on the underdogs in every game, you must weed out about two-thirds of the games by following my 3 simple criteria:

First, eliminate games in which the underdog has lost 3 or more games in a row and/or the favorite has won 3 or more games in a row. This prevents you from throwing away money on an underdog on a bad skid or an underdog facing a red-hot offensive team whose bats may more than make up for its own mediocre pitching.
Second, eliminate games in which the moneyline odds on the underdog are greater than +150 or so. If the odds are any higher than this, there's undoubtedly a good reason, most probably that the underdogs are seriously out-manned. So scratch such games and move on.

Third, eliminate games in which the underdog is facing one of the Top 20 pitchers in the league, according to earned-run average (ERA). While various newspapers and Internet Web sites can provide you with ERA statistics, I strongly encourage you to use the adjusted (or "normalized") ERA rankings compiled by Jeff Sagarin(R) and displayed on USA Today's Web site at SAGARIN RATINGS in which Sagarin uses somewhat complicated data to assign each pitcher in the league a number for what his ERA "should be." He determines an ERA for every pitcher as compared to other pitchers' performances from 1946-1999, resulting in a stat he has dubbed an NPERA (or "normalized predicted earned-run average").
When you go the USA Today's site, you'll notice that it lists the American and National Leagues separately, and also that it breaks pitchers into categories according to number of innings pitched. For each pitcher ranked, there is much information included, but you're primarily interested in the first 5 columns, which list the pitcher's rank in the entire league, his name, his team, whether he's a righty or a lefty, and his NPERA: Rank Name Team R/L NPERA #1 Mike Mussina NYY R 1.99

Because ranked pitchers are broken into categories according to number of innings pitched, make sure you don't overlook a pitcher who's been injured or just moved from a reliever to a starter role or otherwise hasn't racked up enough innings to make the primary list. He still could be among the league's better pitchers yet is ranked highly in a category of lesser innings pitched further down the screen. This applies mostly early in the season.

Following the 3 primary criteria, on a day with a full slate of as many as 15 games, you should be left with between 3 and 9 underdogs on which to wager. Using our example Formula, you will put $20 on each game's moneyline.

Don't forget that all bettors should have access to more than one sportsbook -- local bookies and/or online gambling sites -- and it's never more important than when betting on the moneyline. Odds can vary wildly from one bookie or site to the next, and you should shop around for the ones giving you the best possible odds on any particular game. For instance, if you're betting 5 games on a particular day, you may want to spread those wagers over 2 Web sites and 3 local bookies, depending on who's giving the best odds on each underdog.

[Believe_EMT]

My point is the market isnt always efficient even near or at close. So you cant categorically state that someone who took the Mets at 136 1 Minute before close is making a loosing play.

are you stating here that you judge the value of a bet based on the outcome of that single event?

[Pricetopher]

4/15
nym (+106)
mia (+114)
stl (+127)
tor (+114)
kc (+114)
cin (+146)

[danshan11]

i wonder if your plays will match plays from this:

The Baseball Underdog System is based on a law of averages showing that, over the long term, MLB underdogs beat favorites about 4 games out of 9 (or 44% of the time). Even with moneyline odds on underdogs earning you better than even money -- meaning that at +130 you lay $10 to win $13 -- you need to rack up better than a record of 4 wins and 5 losses every day to make substantial profits.

For example, let's assume you bet $10 on each of 9 underdogs today, with each getting +130 moneyline odds. If you win 4 games, you profit $13 each or $52 total. But the $50 you lose when 5 favorites win gives you a slim $2 profit overall. So instead of simply betting on the underdogs in every game, you must weed out about two-thirds of the games by following my 3 simple criteria:

First, eliminate games in which the underdog has lost 3 or more games in a row and/or the favorite has won 3 or more games in a row. This prevents you from throwing away money on an underdog on a bad skid or an underdog facing a red-hot offensive team whose bats may more than make up for its own mediocre pitching.
Second, eliminate games in which the moneyline odds on the underdog are greater than +150 or so. If the odds are any higher than this, there's undoubtedly a good reason, most probably that the underdogs are seriously out-manned. So scratch such games and move on.

Third, eliminate games in which the underdog is facing one of the Top 20 pitchers in the league, according to earned-run average (ERA). While various newspapers and Internet Web sites can provide you with ERA statistics, I strongly encourage you to use the adjusted (or "normalized") ERA rankings compiled by Jeff Sagarin(R) and displayed on USA Today's Web site at SAGARIN RATINGS in which Sagarin uses somewhat complicated data to assign each pitcher in the league a number for what his ERA "should be." He determines an ERA for every pitcher as compared to other pitchers' performances from 1946-1999, resulting in a stat he has dubbed an NPERA (or "normalized predicted earned-run average").
When you go the USA Today's site, you'll notice that it lists the American and National Leagues separately, and also that it breaks pitchers into categories according to number of innings pitched. For each pitcher ranked, there is much information included, but you're primarily interested in the first 5 columns, which list the pitcher's rank in the entire league, his name, his team, whether he's a righty or a lefty, and his NPERA: Rank Name Team R/L NPERA #1 Mike Mussina NYY R 1.99

Because ranked pitchers are broken into categories according to number of innings pitched, make sure you don't overlook a pitcher who's been injured or just moved from a reliever to a starter role or otherwise hasn't racked up enough innings to make the primary list. He still could be among the league's better pitchers yet is ranked highly in a category of lesser innings pitched further down the screen. This applies mostly early in the season.

Following the 3 primary criteria, on a day with a full slate of as many as 15 games, you should be left with between 3 and 9 underdogs on which to wager. Using our example Formula, you will put $20 on each game's moneyline.

Don't forget that all bettors should have access to more than one sportsbook -- local bookies and/or online gambling sites -- and it's never more important than when betting on the moneyline. Odds can vary wildly from one bookie or site to the next, and you should shop around for the ones giving you the best possible odds on any particular game. For instance, if you're betting 5 games on a particular day, you may want to spread those wagers over 2 Web sites and 3 local bookies, depending on who's giving the best odds on each underdog.

that reminds of the old the fave wins 1/3 of the time racing. lol

[vicshap]

First 2 games, then 4, now 6. 1-5 to start. Chasing?

[JacketFan81]

First 2 games, then 4, now 6. 1-5 to start. Chasing?

We've got to give him some time to math, bro

[vicshap]

We've got to give him some time to math, bro

no worries.

[lonegambler23]

lol your no vegas dave

[Believe_EMT]

apparently also needs some time to create ghost account and start new thread


"finding value in MLB Dogs" system

[JacketFan81]

3-9 overall, no? 146% ROI any day now.

[qsgsg]

at least a hundred games to see if it is close to the ROI claimed.

[Pricetopher]

4/16
mia (+124)
ari (+125)
tor (+139)
stl (+108)
laa (+114)
kc (+106)

[danshan11]

finally making good picks, Go Angels Go!

[JacketFan81]

I have to admire the persistence

[Pricetopher]

apparently also needs some time to create ghost account and start new thread
"finding value in MLB Dogs" system

Yeah, that's not me... poor man's Seth Rogen.

[eaglesfan371]

Couple of observations. OP sounds to be located in the US. Thus, he will not have access to Pinnacle. It sounds like he uses 5dimes. While I have doubts as many do here, I would like to look at his statements and others' from a neutral standpoint.

1) 5dimes bans users who win a ton. Like 20k+. It sounds like this is side income to you and you do not wager large amounts. If your story is true, your unit amounts cannot be that large (or 5dimes would have kicked you by now).
2) 5dimes is not as sharp as Pinnacle. Many books follow Pinny movement mainly.
3) @danshan his ROI metric, if true, is likely his ending $ balance compared to starting balance of beginning of season. For example, 164% ROI, he finished with $26,400 from an initial $10,000 (hypothetical). Your ROI metric is the ROI per wager.
4) Just because someone does not beat closing lines initially does not mean they are not sharp. Yes, it is much more against them but all sharps started as being viewed as a rec bettor until proven otherwise. His "7 years" though is clearly a long enough period for being labeled as such.
5) Danshan you view closing lines as being the true odds. However, as we recently discussed, market makers were seeing 7-15% ROI on bets in Fairlay last 6 weeks. Obviously a somewhat small sample, but 7-15% is above expectation. This implies the public is heavier on losing sides or it could be argued the lines, such as a popular team such as the dodgers, is juiced more than the other side?

I consider myself smart in certain sports but do not have a model I use on my own. I look at several analytics though. Even though I have extreme doubts about this user's claim, I am enjoying the conversation between sharps in this thread.

[Believe_EMT]

now you've hit on a winning strategy! please clue us all in to where we can play numbers that don't exist

Time CHC MIA04/16

7:03 pm-131 +121

04/16 4:12 pm-128 +118

04/16 2:40 pm-131 +121

[Believe_EMT]

Yeah, that's not me... poor man's Seth Rogen.

please refrain from further insults towards Mr Mlodinow.

i humbly suggest you actually pick up one of his books and give reading comprehension your best shot. might learn something and will certainly improve your outlook on sports investing instead of posting this stupid fukkin losing system bullsh!t alerting the world to your stupidity.

do you need a link to his books, or can you safely navigate the intrawebs on your own?

jic
google
L-E-O-N-A-R-D
M-L-O-D-I-N-O-W
then press the enter key

[danshan11]

Couple of observations. OP sounds to be located in the US. Thus, he will not have access to Pinnacle. It sounds like he uses 5dimes. While I have doubts as many do here, I would like to look at his statements and others' from a neutral standpoint.

1) 5dimes bans users who win a ton. Like 20k+. It sounds like this is side income to you and you do not wager large amounts. If your story is true, your unit amounts cannot be that large (or 5dimes would have kicked you by now).
2) 5dimes is not as sharp as Pinnacle. Many books follow Pinny movement mainly.
3) @danshan his ROI metric, if true, is likely his ending $ balance compared to starting balance of beginning of season. For example, 164% ROI, he finished with $26,400 from an initial $10,000 (hypothetical). Your ROI metric is the ROI per wager.
4) Just because someone does not beat closing lines initially does not mean they are not sharp. Yes, it is much more against them but all sharps started as being viewed as a rec bettor until proven otherwise. His "7 years" though is clearly a long enough period for being labeled as such.
5) Danshan you view closing lines as being the true odds. However, as we recently discussed, market makers were seeing 7-15% ROI on bets in Fairlay last 6 weeks. Obviously a somewhat small sample, but 7-15% is above expectation. This implies the public is heavier on losing sides or it could be argued the lines, such as a popular team such as the dodgers, is juiced more than the other side?

I consider myself smart in certain sports but do not have a model I use on my own. I look at several analytics though. Even though I have extreme doubts about this user's claim, I am enjoying the conversation between sharps in this thread.

the ROI is definitely done differently by everyone sure I will agree with that.
sharp plays are really difficult to define but in general for me a sharp bettor is buying with value.
BET A
bettor bets at -120 at max limits now if that game closes at -120 over a huge sample size that is not a sharp bettor because we know 1 game can be wrong but in general the line is efficient.
if it closes at -150 over a huge sample size that identifies the bettor saw value and that belief that the line had value is confirmed with the consensus agreeing -120 was a good value. now if the bet closes at +120 over a huge sample size we know the market did not agree that there was value at -120. win, lose or draw this is the only way I can identify value.
now I have a belief after looking at the data from a ton of bettor profiles that
it seems fairly reliable and easy to identify what bettors will bet based on team or matchups before they bet. so if dumb little me can identify consistent betting patterns you know books can too.
I think it might be possible books know they will never get bets on the Orioles after they lost yesterday. A bad team that lost yesterday does not get any action and if books know that they probably price the crap out of that. Now will sharps come in and suck up that juice sure but of course with good ol limits.
Pinnacle has modeled Yankees at -180 against the Orioles so they price it at -220 and now sharps see that and they bet but they can only bet their limit and the sharp also knows favelong bias and knows even though O's are at a good price almost all the juice is on that side.
so Nerf money comes piling in on Yankees at -220 and book gets limited action from sharps on O's and at the end of the day, they move it to sharpen it up to -200 and close the market.
so 80% of money is on Yankees at -220 true value -175 including vig and 20% of money is some sharp money who got a good price but also got hit with some favelong bias and also the higher risk of having to bet at an avg line of +190 or whatever, which can create bigger drawdowns. This is my idea of how books have an expected roi of 2% (juice) but actually make 4% avg.

its pretty simple to look at a card and see who or what people will bet today in general

never be confident betting, that is the 1st cause of ruin in sports betting, doubt everything and any success call it luck until you have reliable data other than wins to prove that it was not luck!

say you create a master system and it looks awesome backtesting and its ready for action.
you start betting and man this thing is killing it
you see great days and a few bad days bot overall doing great!
this sounds great until it starts losing
the thing we need more than anything is to know when our edge is gone. I use CLV to do this and nothing else. CLV has one purpose to tell me if I am in line with the market and if my edge still exists BEFORE I GO BROKE. you cannot go on a happy successful road trip unless you know how much gas you have still. Win and loss streaks come and go but ask yourself how will you know you are not getting attacked by a variance monster or have lost your edge BEFORE you go broke.

on a side note, you have to generate a fair line and that fair line better be darn close to the closing line in general. if you dont create a fair line it is almost certain your betting results will come down to luck!

[danshan11]

what happened dude, you never paid up, you just disappeared!

what was the term you used "crickets" LMAO

[Believe_EMT]

no plays for the 17th? i had zero action because of that.

if this is the end of this thread i want to take final opportunity to reinforce the most important lesson shared, by myself and danshan, possible others. it's not that we dislike the OP, this is tough love and i would like to see everyone improve and avoid going broke. of course if you were just a tout casting a wide net, happy to see the crash and burn.

every bettor looking to increase their performance:

Closing Line Value (CLV) should be your focus. if you showed me 10 winning bets, and they all had negative CLV, then they were are truly -EV plays. get this idea out of your head that winning a single play validates that play as a good bet or +EV. this is terribly misguided. stop judging plays based on if it won or lost, use the CLV to determine how the market judged your play.

just let go of your ego. the market is smarter than you. from the time a line opens until it closes, hundreds of thousands of opinions are logged. the market signals us as to the value (or lack of value) of our play up until the very end. natural selection wins out long term because the sharp, successful players thrive while the others get eaten by lions or get dysentery and die, never seeing the glory of oregon.

CLV is the end all be all key to this little drama we call gambling.

[Stallion]

I guess its really over.