Wallco NHL GOLD (+453 units in 6 years)

[Wallco99]

Yeah, I understand. Maybe Wallco has this info. What % of losses are on favs and what % on dogs.

I just have the amounts for each series that lost, and they are all listed in post # 2. The teams are listed, go back to the game logs for those teams for that year and it should be very easy for you to find six game losing streaks where the last three didn't cover the spread.

[Wallco99]

Yes, the pucklines are expensive at times. But by not playing the pucklines, ALL six game winning and losing streaks will be system losses, not just the ones that were decided by 2 or more goals every game. Six and nine game streaks happen quite often, by playing the P/L, we pulled victories out of many of these series that would have otherwise been losses. When betting on a team after a three game losing streak, that team would actually have to WIN one of the next three games, outright since no pucks wrere being given. Many of the bad teams go on extensive losing streaks, and we were able to get several wins out of these series, which otherwise would have been numerous losses had we not had the +1 1/2.

[Maxi_EV]

Yes, the pucklines are expensive at times. But by not playing the pucklines, ALL six game winning and losing streaks will be system losses, not just the ones that were decided by 2 or more goals every game. Six and nine game streaks happen quite often, by playing the P/L, we pulled victories out of many of these series that would have otherwise been losses. When betting on a team after a three game losing streak, that team would actually have to WIN one of the next three games, outright since no pucks wrere being given. Many of the bad teams go on extensive losing streaks, and we were able to get several wins out of these series, which otherwise would have been numerous losses had we not had the +1 1/2.

Absolutely.
I'm still here and confident. Until math proves us wrong.

Good Job Wallco

[alexknyc]

Yes, the pucklines are expensive at times. But by not playing the pucklines, ALL six game winning and losing streaks will be system losses, not just the ones that were decided by 2 or more goals every game. Six and nine game streaks happen quite often, by playing the P/L, we pulled victories out of many of these series that would have otherwise been losses. When betting on a team after a three game losing streak, that team would actually have to WIN one of the next three games, outright since no pucks wrere being given. Many of the bad teams go on extensive losing streaks, and we were able to get several wins out of these series, which otherwise would have been numerous losses had we not had the +1 1/2.

Mathematically, it seems like more ML losses (at far lower juice) could still lead to more $$$ won overall. Most of the time, you'd have to lose 2 or 3 ML bets to equal one PL loss. Not to mention, the occasional ML win by an underdog equaling 2 or 3 PL wins. Think I'll start tracking that starting with the next (A) bets.

[Wallco99]

Mathematically, it seems like more ML losses (at far lower juice) could still lead to more $$$ won overall. Most of the time, you'd have to lose 2 or 3 ML bets to equal one PL loss. Not to mention, the occasional ML win by an underdog equaling 2 or 3 PL wins. Think I'll start tracking that starting with the next (A) bets.

That was the system I iniatially started with when I began my backtest, didn't like where it was going.

[alexknyc]

That was the system I iniatially started with when I began my backtest, didn't like where it was going.

How bad did it get?

Right now, we're playing a JM like system (ML on favorites, PL on underdogs) and we're always at minus odds, which means we need something like a dozen wins to offset one loss. We're in the hole early and minus odds bets will take a while to dig us out-- and that's assuming no more losses.

[Wallco99]

I did a quick backtest of last season to see how we would have done playing M/L in all games. I only had a chance to do the losses, there were a ton. I did not get a chance to see how many bets would have won on a +money bet, if I get a chance I will. But I personally don’t think it will make up for these losses.

There were a total of 35 losses, for a total of: -296.25 units (8.46 avg)
The way I laid out, we had 6 losses, for a total of -131.16 units (21.94 avg)

Assuming we had the same amount of plays, that would leave us 218 wins. You would have to average 2.05 units for every win, just to be even with last season (+115 units). Not to mention, many of the wins are favorite M/L for 1 unit, meaning all the dog wins will need to be even higher.

[Wallco99]

I don't know why it printed that way, but I can't fix it now.

[WSnipez]

omg heart attack on ottawa game. breakaway with empty net 5s to go but missed lol

[knugen]

Oh yes .. Thx ottawa, and some new plays tonight 

[Maxi_EV]

How bad did it get?

Right now, we're playing a JM like system (ML on favorites, PL on underdogs) and we're always at minus odds, which means we need something like a dozen wins to offset one loss. We're in the hole early and minus odds bets will take a while to dig us out-- and that's assuming no more losses.

It is far from over. Each losses has cost us 16 units on average. If we add 5 more series losses to reach 9 (average per season), we add a 80 units loss to our -40 record. That brings us to -120 units in losses. Can we WIN more than 120 series until the end of the season. My answer is YES....

...with good banktoll management of course!

We average 235 wins per season. We have already won 24.

[Wallco99]

Wallco NHL GOLD
2011-12 System to date: 25-4 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: -39.03 units (finished series)
Current open series: 1 (-1.55 units)

(11/9/11):
#29 Ottawa (+1½) (B) - Win

v1 Plays
(A) 12-8
(B) 5-2
(C) 0-2
Losses: OTT (-10.96 u), EDM (-14.96 u)

v2 Plays
(A) 6-4
(B) 1-3
(C) 1-2
Losses: MON (-18.60 u), DET (-19.51 u)


Games for (11/10/11):
#30 Resumes (B) on 11/11/11
#31 Edmonton (+1½) @ Boston (A) (7:05 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.

[alexknyc]

Never said it was over but we will need to win at least 40 more than we lose from here on out just to break even. It's certainly possible but my concern is the likelihood.

I'm going to start tracking the ML bets today with Edmonton.

[Wallco99]

Never said it was over but we will need to win at least 40 more than we lose from here on out just to break even. It's certainly possible but my concern is the likelihood.

I'm going to start tracking the ML bets today with Edmonton.

Start yesterday with what would be an Ottawa loss.

[Wallco99]

Never said it was over but we will need to win at least 40 more than we lose from here on out just to break even. It's certainly possible but my concern is the likelihood.

I'm going to start tracking the ML bets today with Edmonton.

Last year was one of our best seasons, and there would have been 35 losses then. I can't imagine how many more there would be on some of our other seasons. Keep in mind, even though several losses will be three +money bets, many of our losses still involve favorites losing games. So all losses won't be a fixed number of 7 units. Detroit, for example, lost three games as a favorite this season. That amount would still be the same for this theory that you propose. It will be great if it works, but I don't think it will. It's hard enough posting a system with 9 or so losses, I can't imagine the reaction if I posted one with 35+ losses.

[alexknyc]

Start yesterday with what would be an Ottawa loss.

Ok but from what you've said, I can't imagine one unit is going to matter much.

[Wallco99]

Ok but from what you've said, I can't imagine one unit is going to matter much.

It's not one unit, it will be a loss if the Rangers win their, what would be, (C) bet fade. That would be at least -7 units on the tally.

[Wallco99]

Wallco NHL GOLD
2011-12 System to date: 25-4 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: -39.03 units (fin. series)
Current open series: 2 (-3.35 units)

(11/10/11):
#31 Edmonton (+1½) (A) - Loss

v1 Plays
(A) 12-9
(B) 5-2
(C) 0-2
Losses: OTT (-10.96 u), EDM (-14.96 u)

v2 Plays
(A) 6-4
(B) 1-3
(C) 1-2
Losses: MON (-18.60 u), DET (-19.51 u)


Games for (11/11/11):
#30 Dallas @ Pittsburgh (M/L) (B) (7:05 pm EST)
#31 Resumes (B) on 11/12/11
#32 Ottawa (+1½) @ Buffalo (A) (7:35 pm EST) *
#33 Washington (M/L) @ New Jersey (A) (7:05 pm EST) **

* If Buffalo wins tonight, their (B) bet will be against Boston, who is already a play in our system. Play with caution, system will still count series.

** There is a chance New Jersey could face Boston in their respective (C) bets, if both teams should happen to win their (B) bet fades. Play with caution, system will still count series.

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.

[alexknyc]

I'm actually not going to start with Ottawa since it was a B bet and I don't want to start testing in the middle of a series. How do I know when a play is tailing a team or fading a team?

I found it-- v1 is a fade and v2 is a tail.

[Maxi_EV]

Should be:
Games for 11/11/11

[Wallco99]

I'm actually not going to start with Ottawa since it was a B bet and I don't want to start testing in the middle of a series. How do I know when a play is tailing a team or fading a team?

I found it-- v1 is a fade and v2 is a tail.

No, you should actually start from the beginning of the season if you data is to have any accuracy at all. What is the point in doing it from now? What is that going to tell you. We may have had 25 wins up to this point, or for all we know, we may have 12 losses. What will it mean if data is good from here out? To play the system this way, but only start doing that in mid November each year. It's all or nothing with backtests. Small samples are bad enough, but partial samples are even worse.

[alexknyc]

No, you should actually start from the beginning of the season if you data is to have any accuracy at all.

That's true so it makes even less difference whether I count Ottawa right now.

Where would I get the information on odds going back to the beginning of the year?

[Wallco99]

"

[Wallco99]

No need to test last season, it was a dissapointment when I did my quick scan with the 35 losses, but maybe it was the only bad year, I don't know. However, I didn't do the +money wins, even though a lot of the wins will still be favorites and 1 unit profit, but I don't think it will offset the losses that were generated by playing M/L on dog teams.

[Wallco99]

Make sure when you are qualifying teams for a v2 play, that they lost three straight P/L as well as M/L and not just three consecutive losses. Even though your wagers won't include P/L, the qualifying rules to make a team an official play will still count that during their losing streak. So favorites only have to lose by 1, and dogs must lose by 2 or more, or the losing streak stops and you start over at 0.

[Wallco99]

Here is the link for Cappersmall.com, it is a hard one to navigate to so save it somewhere.

http://www.cappersmall.com/pages/NHL/gamelogs.html

[alexknyc]

First backtest done using Scoresandodds.com: Using the plays listed, if I accept the loss on the ML and end the series, I'd be almost 7.5 units behind so far. Now, I'll backtest chasing the series out.

[Wallco99]

First backtest done using Scoresandodds.com: Using the plays listed, if I accept the loss on the ML and end the series, I'd be almost 7.5 units behind so far. Now, I'll backtest chasing the series out.

Try above link, you can save yourself a lot of time. You are just looking for generic numbers, so that should be sufficient. One thing you have to watch on there though, in the closer line games, sometimes the wrong team is listed as the favorite. I always coss check those games with Scoresandodds.com.

[Wallco99]

****

[alexknyc]

Playing out the series wins me another 1.5 units so I'd still be 6 units behind. I'm going to keep tracking this and see where it goes.

[Wallco99]

I ran the backtest your way. So far this season playing all M/L at this point we would be -39.80 units on finished series, and three current open series instead of 2. There was one extra loss, and one of our four original losses was slightly cheaper. This is roughly the same as my way, but many more losses will eventually occur. I am sticking with original until you can show me whole seasons performances in the past. I don't know where you got the -6 units from, it is actually -39.80.

[alexknyc]

I ran the backtest your way. So far this season playing all M/L at this point we would be -39.80 units on finished series, and three current open series instead of 2. There was one extra loss, and one of our four original losses was slightly cheaper. This is roughly the same as my way, but many more losses will eventually occur. I am sticking with original until you can show me whole seasons performances in the past. I don't know where you got the -6 units from, it is actually -39.80.

Because I only ran the test using ML on your PL plays. I'd be -6 units on the ML to your results on the PL. The actual ML plays would be the same results anyway.

[Wallco99]

I got ya. Well, you actually did a little better than you thought, but as the season goes on, the puck line will come into play quite often.

[alexknyc]

I got ya. Well, you actually did a little better than you thought, but as the season goes on, the puck line will come into play quite often.

I'm planning on keeping track for the whole season... or until the ref stops the fight.

[Wallco99]

If you don't mind, give me an update every few weeks.