[Maxi_EV]

He does. It struggled a bit last year but the backtest showed potential.

Mathematically unstable. Standard deviation too high. And that was BEFORE last season. I don't know how it ended last season...

The man can't be perfect!

[nrok2118]

Buffalo went to dog on Bookmaker, but I already took them at -110.

$100 says they lose by one

[Wallco99]

Mathematically unstable. Standard deviation too high. And that was BEFORE last season. I don't know how it ended last season...

The man can't be perfect!

Very good system actually.

[Wallco99]

Buffalo went to dog on Bookmaker, but I already took them at -110.

$100 says they lose by one

Bookmaker doesn't matter, that's not what we use. Buffalo is M/L, and they will probably still lose by 1.

[Maxi_EV]

Very good system actually.

How it ended last season?

I didn't jump in because:

Average win per season < standard deviation.
If your 2011 season was bad, that can just get this worst.

In both your NHL GOLD and CHASE 110 , average win > standard deviation.
Those systems are STABLE so far. Or reliable if you prefer. That's why I'm tailing you here!

MLB PLU$$$
Before 2011:
Average season wins 88 units
Standard deviation 126 units

How 2011 went?

[ClevelandNextYr]

Buffalo went to dog on Bookmaker, but I already took them at -110.

$100 says they lose by one

You called it.

[nrok2118]

Bookmaker doesn't matter, that's not what we use. Buffalo is M/L, and they will probably still lose by 1.

Good, cause the sons of bitches lost in a SO

[Wallco99]

How it ended last season?

I didn't jump in because:

Average win per season < standard deviation.
If your 2011 season was bad, that can just get this worst.

In both your NHL GOLD and CHASE 110 , average win > standard deviation.
Those systems are STABLE so far. Or reliable if you prefer. That's why I'm tailing you here!

MLB PLU$$$
Before 2011:
Average season wins 88 units
Standard deviation 126 units

How 2011 went?

You tend to overanalyze at times. Call it what you want, the back tests are great and so is the system. Deviation schmeviation, who cares, I'm not working Wall Street, I'm creating sports betting systems that usually net large +unit amounts by seasons end. Ever since you got on to this phrase "standard deviation" it's all you mention, it doesn't matter to me. If ending units are higher than starting units, then system is good. No need for fancy words there.

If a +88 unit average is bad, then I give up.

[Wallco99]

Wallco NBA Chase 110
2011-12 System to date: 37-2 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: -0.29 units (fin. series)
Current open series: 2 (-2.20 units)

(2/17/12):
#40 Milwaukee (+7½) (A) - Loss
#41 Phoenix (+8) (A) - Loss

v1 Plays
(A) 26-15
(B) 4-9
(C) 4-5
(D) 3-2

V2 Plays
In production


There are no system plays for (2/18/12):
#40 Resumes (B) on 2/19/12
#41 Resumes (B) on 2/19/12

[Wallco99]

Wallco NHL GOLD
2011-12 System to date: 143-6 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: +41.92 units (fin. series)
Current open series: 1 (-1.15 units)

(2/17/12):
#146 Nashville (+1½) (B) - Win
#149 New Jersey (M/L) (A) - Win
#150 Buffalo (M/L) v2 (A) - Loss

v1 Plays
(A) 60-47
(B) 35-12
(C) 8-4
Losses: OTT (-10.96 u), EDM (-14.96 u), DET (-22.03 u), MIN (-15.02 u)

v2 Plays
(A) 29-14
(B) 4-9
(C) 7-2
Losses: MON (-18.60 u), DET (-19.51 u)


There are no system plays for (2/18/12):
#150 Resumes v2 (B) on 2/19/12

[Maxi_EV]

You tend to overanalyze at times. Call it what you want, the back tests are great and so is the system. Deviation schmeviation, who cares, I'm not working Wall Street, I'm creating sports betting systems that usually net large +unit amounts by seasons end. Ever since you got on to this phrase "standard deviation" it's all you mention, it doesn't matter to me. If ending units are higher than starting units, then system is good. No need for fancy words there.

If a +88 unit average is bad, then I give up.

...

Using standard deviation is NOT overanalysing a system. IT SHOULD BE USUAL as Risk of Ruin, Expected Value, and many more...
But since you don't like fancy words, let's keep it simple. Of course, you are not on Wall Street. Sports Betting can profit WAY MORE than Wall Street. But for this you will need basic statistics and probability concepts like standar....

An average of 80 units can come from:

Example A: 3 seasons of 91, 71 and 78 units.
Example B: 3 seasons of 72, -120 and 288 units

System A is stable. System B is not. They both generated the same average.

Your 2006 MLB season (-147 units) was desastrous for anyone playing it at more than 0.5% for 1 unit. Anyone at 0.75% or 1% would have GONE BROKE. One at 0.5% would have lost 73% of his roll !!!
That season affected terribly the mean vs standard deviation equilibrium. ( wooo...fancy words again)

What about 2011? Put your ego aside and give me the numbers. I just want to know where this system stands.
You are a great system builder. Again your NHL GOLD and CHASE 110 are more than impressive when analysed with all the fancy concepts you don't want to ear about.

But you already know that...just don't get blinded by your ego.
Try to protect yourself from high volatility.

If you think I bring complex analysis here...take a look at this:
http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/handicappe...on-part-i.html

Again, I would appreciate the 2011 season record. MLB is coming and WE ALL are looking to make money.
Only our paths are different.

[mrginandtonic]

I just want to say thank you to wallco for providing his systems and curious if there is a MLB system as well. I didn't not mean to stir up any "arguments". Again, thank you for helping us out and will be looking forward to MLB season!

[Maxi_EV]

I just want to say thank you to wallco for providing his systems and curious if there is a MLB system as well. I didn't not mean to stir up any "arguments". Again, thank you for helping us out and will be looking forward to MLB season!

Don't worry!
Just discussing here. There's no fight at all.
I tried to provide you with an accurate and honnest answer.

[Wallco99]

...

Using standard deviation is NOT overanalysing a system. IT SHOULD BE USUAL as Risk of Ruin, Expected Value, and many more...
But since you don't like fancy words, let's keep it simple. Of course, you are not on Wall Street. Sports Betting can profit WAY MORE than Wall Street. But for this you will need basic statistics and probability concepts like standar....

An average of 80 units can come from:

Example A: 3 seasons of 91, 71 and 78 units.
Example B: 3 seasons of 72, -120 and 288 units

System A is stable. System B is not. They both generated the same average.

Your 2006 MLB season (-147 units) was desastrous for anyone playing it at more than 0.5% for 1 unit. Anyone at 0.75% or 1% would have GONE BROKE. One at 0.5% would have lost 73% of his roll !!!
That season affected terribly the mean vs standard deviation equilibrium. ( wooo...fancy words again)

What about 2011? Put your ego aside and give me the numbers. I just want to know where this system stands.
You are a great system builder. Again your NHL GOLD and CHASE 110 are more than impressive when analysed with all the fancy concepts you don't want to ear about.

But you already know that...just don't get blinded by your ego.
Try to protect yourself from high volatility.

If you think I bring complex analysis here...take a look at this:
http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/handicappe...on-part-i.html

Again, I would appreciate the 2011 season record. MLB is coming and WE ALL are looking to make money.
Only our paths are different.

I have to take a look at 2011, remove the v2 plays, which never should have been added on my part, since all the losses were a result of that. I believe the system was close to even, or slightly ahead, the way I presented it day 1, that is, without the v2. And as I said before, I don't care about one season, I care about the whole package, and the whole package is a huge winner.

[Wallco99]

Don't worry!
Just discussing here. There's no fight at all.
I tried to provide you with an accurate and honnest answer.

As did I, and before I ever posted one play, I mentioned the 2006 season, and by almost unanimous agreement, no one cared about one season, they cared about the system as a whole, even as bad as that one season did.

[Maxi_EV]

I have to take a look at 2011, remove the v2 plays, which never should have been added on my part, since all the losses were a result of that. I believe the system was close to even, or slightly ahead, the way I presented it day 1, that is, without the v2. And as I said before, I don't care about one season, I care about the whole package, and the whole package is a huge winner.

I see...

The v1 system still ranges from -147 to + 201 units. High volatility. I just wanted to point that to the guy asking. People have to know what kind of ride they're taking. I know you did present all your numbers and everyone agreed that one bad season wasn't that important. I think that the importance of the 2006 season was underestimated by everyone.

Here's an example of the ride a 10K roll would have taken:

Playing it at 0.5% of roll for 1 unit

Starting roll : $10,000

2005: +74 units =$3,700

New roll: $13,700

2006: -147 units = -$10,069.50

New roll: $3,630.50

2007: +78 units = $1,415.90

New roll: $5,046.40

2008: +201 units = $5,298.72

New roll: $10,345.12

2009: +174 units = $9,000.25

New roll: $19,345.37

2010: +151 units = $14,605.76

New roll: $33,951.13

2011: ??? Let's say even ?!?!?

New roll: $33,951.13


239.5% profit of original roll in 7 years. COOL. If 2011 went even.

Same result can be achieved with a smooth system that produces no more than 38 units per season on average, playing also at 0.5% of roll. Or 19 units at 1%. A lot less volatility...

It's just THAT that I wanted to point out.
2 paths, 1 same result.
Heavy vs smooth ride.

Again, thanks for your great work!

[Maxi_EV]

Quote from post #8541 of MLB 2011 thread:

"I guess MLB Plu$$$ wasn't that much clutter after all, now was it."


Were you talking about V2 only?

(no offense)

[Wallco99]

Quote from post #8541 of MLB 2011 thread:

"I guess MLB Plu$$$ wasn't that much clutter after all, now was it."


Were you talking about V2 only?

(no offense)

What do you mean?

[Wallco99]

I never change my unit size, so I would have made a hell of a lot more. +534 units is +534 units, no matter how you break it down. System is very productive, and I stand behind it.

[Maxi_EV]

I never change my unit size, so I would have made a hell of a lot more. +534 units is +534 units, no matter how you break it down. System is very productive, and I stand behind it.

What is your unit size for that system?

[Maxi_EV]

What do you mean?

Your disappointment.

[Wallco99]

Your disappointment.

It wasn't disappointment, people called a new system clutter, and I was basically saying it wasn't. Don't know what the hell you read out of that.

[Wallco99]

What is your unit size for that system?

$100 on everything right now. Really strong games are $200

[Maxi_EV]

$100 on everything right now. Really strong games are $200

And what was your roll at the beginning of the season?

[Maxi_EV]

It wasn't disappointment, people called a new system clutter, and I was basically saying it wasn't. Don't know what the hell you read out of that.

"Clutter"

Sorry. My misunderstanding.
French Canadian here!

[Nino7]

oh tu parles francais maxi ev?

[Maxi_EV]

Ben oui!

[Kev the Brit]

Maxi_EV:
The last MLB PLU$$$ posts from Wallco in 2011 MLB season at http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/baseball-b...-mlb-p243.html

Not shown, but #300 and #301 were to become series losses:

Wallco MLB PLU$$$
2011 System to date: 279-25 (v2:75-9)
System profit/loss: -23.08 units(finished series)
Since my first post: -43.35 units (264-25) (fin. series)
Current open series: 6 (-18.95 units)

(9/10/11):
#300 Boston (M/L) v2 (C) - Loss
#301 Milwaukee (M/L) (C) - Loss
#307 N.Y. Yankees (-1½) v2 (A) - Loss
#308 Arizona (-1½) v2 (A) - Loss
#309 Detroit (-1½) v2 (A) - Loss
#310 Philadelphia (-1½) v2 (A) - Loss

(A) 148-162
(B) 79-79
(C) 34-45
(D) 18-25


Games for (9/11/11):
#300 Boston (M/L) @ Tampa Bay v2 (D) *Official* (1:40 pm EDT)
#301 Philadelphia (M/L) @ Milwaukee (D) *Official* (2:10 pm EDT)
#307 N.Y. Yankees (M/L) @ L.A. Angels v2 *Official* (B) (3:35 pm EDT)
#308 San Diego @ Arizona (-1½) v2 (B) *Official* (4:10 pm EDT)
#309 Minnesota @ Detroit (-1½) v2 (B) *Official* (1:05 pm EDT)
#310 Philadelphia (M/L) @ Milwaukee v2 (B) *Official* (2:10 pm EDT)
#311 Philadelphia (M/L) @ Milwaukee v2 (A) *Official* (2:10 pm EDT)

Wallco MLB PLU$$$
Open Series Plays

Games for (9/12/11):
#308 Arizona (M/L) @ L.A. Dodgers v2 (C) *Official* (10:10 pm EDT)
#309 Detroit (M/L) @ Chicago White Sox v2 (C) *Official* (8:10 pm EDT)
#310 Philadelphia (-1½) @ Houston v2 (C) *Official* (8:05 pm EDT)
#311 Philadelphia (-1½) @ Houston v2 (B) *Official* (8:05 pm EDT)
There are 7 other plays for 9/12/11 and three for 9/13/11 which won’t be listed.

[Maxi_EV]

I think it was 310 & 311

[Wallco99]

Yeah, the v2 for MLB Plu$$ was definitely a mistake. But, I've stated that many times already. System as a straight v1 is very strong.

[mrginandtonic]

Any plays today Wallco??

[nrok2118]

Buffalos an early v2(B) bet...Also Edmonton is v1(A), but im sure Wallco will be posted up soon

[Wallco99]

Wallco NBA Chase 110
2011-12 System to date: 37-2 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: -0.29 units (fin. series)
Current open series: 2 (-2.20 units)

v1 Plays
(A) 26-15
(B) 4-9
(C) 4-5
(D) 3-2

V2 Plays
In production


Games for (2/19/12):
#40 Milwaukee (M/L) @ New Jersey (B) (7:05 pm EST)
#41 L.A. Lakers @ Phoenix (+3) (B) (8:05 pm EST)


We will ALWAYS play the M/L on favorites and the point spread (-110) on dogs. There is no point buying in this system, with one exception, if your team is the favorite, and buying down to a zero point spread is cheaper than playing the M/L, then by all means, buy the points, otherwise, M/L on all favorites and point spread on dogs. All results will be based on this principle. All lines and standings are based on FINAL lines from ScoresandOdds.com/. If one of the teams we are playing switches from a favorite to a dog, after my initial post, make sure you get the appropriate line if it differs from what I have posted. The wins and losses will be based on who is the dog team, and who is the favorite on ScoresandOdds.com/ final lines. I will try to update my post as often as I can throughout the day, if the lines change, but it is the individual bettor’s responsibility to get the appropriate line if it differs from my post. On occasion, we will have plays that go head-head. The system will grade ALL bets, regardless of opponents, how you wish to play these games is your choice.

[Maxi_EV]

Wallco

Did you revealed the criterias of your MLB Plu$$$ V1 ?
It was a mix of multiple systems, right?

[Wallco99]

Wallco NHL GOLD
2011-12 System to date: 143-6 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: +41.92 units (fin. series)
Current open series: 1 (-1.15 units)

v1 Plays
(A) 60-47
(B) 35-12
(C) 8-4
Losses: OTT (-10.96 u), EDM (-14.96 u), DET (-22.03 u), MIN (-15.02 u)

v2 Plays
(A) 29-14
(B) 4-9
(C) 7-2
Losses: MON (-18.60 u), DET (-19.51 u)


Games for (2/19/12):
#150 Pittsburgh @ Buffalo (+1½) v2 (B) (12:35 pm EST)
#151 Vancouver @ Edmonton (+1½) (A) (9:05 pm EST)


Do not place any wagers on teams unless you are sure your team is the dog or favorite. You may be overpaying for a loss if you play the P/L and should have been on the M/L, or lose a game that you would have won had you been on the (+1½) instead of the M/L. We will always play the M/L on favorites and (-110) games, and always play the (+1½) if the team we are betting on is a dog. ALL results will be based on this principle. If it is a close line game, you may want to wait til closer to game time to place your wager so you know whether or not we are on the (+1½) or the (M/L). All lines and standings are based on FINAL lines from ScoresandOdds.com/. If one of the teams we are playing switches from a favorite to a dog, or vice versa, after my initial post, make sure you get the appropriate line if it differs from what I have posted. The wins and losses will be based on who is the dog team on ScoresandOdds.com/ final lines.
System rules & backtest can be found in posts #1 and #2.