Originally posted by bgilic
EDIT: NVM 5:3 lol
-
4:3 8 min. left, you have just cursed the whole thread. Never call a game over till it's over.
EDIT: NVM 5:3 lolComment -
So true. I apologize for misstepOriginally posted by TheDongerComment -
They ended as a favorite, M/L is the official play.Originally posted by knugenComment -
Winner Winner Turkey DinnerComment -
wonder what hole kennym10 is hiding in?Comment -
Well that was highly successful day. Although I missed on #73 series due to time zone differences so I will have to skip rest of that play and will continue on #74 series. Thanks for all your hard work it is much appreciated and I love learning and analyzing new systems.Comment -
Darn I pulled back on the c games like wallco and others suggested and lost because of the -320 loss on St louis. I understand how it works now if the team wins you played the max. If if loses u told everyone to pull back, great stuff walfoldComment -
U are welcome thank you.
Originally posted by bgilicComment -
That you have no idea how to bet systems, handicap games or manage your bankroll and then whine whether you win or lose, tells everyone else that you're just a whiny bitch who can't take responsibility for his own actions.Originally posted by KennyM10
STOP BETTING ON SPORTS!!!!! STOP GAMBLING ALL TOGETHER!!!! YOU SUCK AT IT AND NO ONE WANTS TO HEAR YOUR WHINING!!!!
You're welcome.Comment -
Alex u do not sound like a guy winning.
Originally posted by alexknycComment -
Nice day wallcoComment -
what a night !!
San jose! Washington! ad Buffalo
Comment -
Comment -
Really nice night. Cleared some heavy numbers on my labbylinesComment -
I'm doing just fine, thanks.Originally posted by KennyM10
But I am tired of your bullshit.Comment -
Was wondering, is there a specific/mathematical reason for the "chase" part of the system ? Why not just grind every game like its an A game, it should show a similar profit long term (if you adjust your unit size accordingly) and decrease the variance. Id like to know your thoughts on this. Basically, Im thinking of doubling my unit size and just play every bet to win 1 unit, A,B or C. Do you feel your edge is even bigger on the C-games ? Ty and weeeeee San Jose
Comment -
Show me the numbers, don't ask me them. I am sure you've done an extensive 8-10 year backtest using the actual M/L and puck line data for every game before making these claims. Can you please post those results as I did in post #2446. Thanks for doing that, very interested to see your findings. If your way is more lucrative we will definitely switch format today.Originally posted by Greg29Was wondering, is there a specific/mathematical reason for the "chase" part of the system ? Why not just grind every game like its an A game, it should show a similar profit long term (if you adjust your unit size accordingly) and decrease the variance. Id like to know your thoughts on this. Basically, Im thinking of doubling my unit size and just play every bet to win 1 unit, A,B or C. Do you feel your edge is even bigger on the C-games ? Ty and weeeeee San JoseComment -
Wallco NHL GOLD
2013-14 System to date: 71-1 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: +58.19 units (fin. series)
Current open series: 1 (-2.59 units)
(11/29/13):
#65 Buffalo (+1½) v2 (C) - Win
#67 San Jose (M/L) v1 (C) - Win
#69 Washington (M/L) v1 (B) - Win
#73 St. Louis (+1½) v1 (A) - Loss
v1 Fades
(A) 42-12
(B) 9-2
(C) 2-0
Losses: None
v2 Plays
(A) 10-9
(B) 3-6
(C) 5-1
Losses: DET (-12.81 u)
Games for (11/30/13):
#73 Anaheim (+1½) @ San Jose v1 (B) (10:35 pm EST)
#74 Washington @ N.Y. Islanders (+1½) v2 (A) (7:05 pm EST)
#75 Minnesota (+1½) @ Colorado v2 (A) (9:05 pm EST)
Do not place any wagers on teams unless you are sure your team is the dog or favorite. The team underlined and highlighted blue is the team we are betting on, regardless of v1 or v2. If you play the closer line games too early, 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 games when the line is (-110/-110) or (-105/-105), 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 and backtest can be found in posts #2446 & #2447.Comment -
Does anyboby know if odds generally go up or down the closer the game gets? I know it will vary from game to game but I wan't to know if there is any strategy to get the best odds for a game? How do you guys go about it?Comment -
Greg. You would be breaking even with grind it out betting. WHICH would put you in the top 5% of all sports wagerers. I think even Wallco will agree that the "A" bets in v1 is over achieving this year.
the avg win% is 63% and average line is -190 which is break even.
Trust me. Lots of people have looked for less variance/stress. LOLComment -
Most annoying member in this thread two years in a row. Don't know if you posted just as bad in years past prior to when I started posting.Originally posted by KennyM10Comment -
Wallco: i have Minnesota as a V2 play today, they've lost the last 3 by two goals or more. Do you see it also? As well as the Islanders have lost 5 straight, i thought you only waited until a team had lost either 3 or 6 or 9 in a row to potentially qualify for your system. Maybe i misunderstood?Comment -
Minnesota have lost 3ats in a row, didn't they should be a play ?Comment -
Hi everyone,
I'm fairly new to this thread. Been following for a couple weeks and must say I'm very impressed with the system. Thanks Wallco for posting it!
Just checking, am I missing something or is Minnesota (v2) also a play today?
TIA
Good luck to everyoneComment -
Originally posted by HowardRoarkOriginally posted by igziabeherYou are all correct. I double checked my spreadsheet and the start date wasn't automatically highlighted for today because I had 1/30/13 listed instead of 11/30/13. I guess I missed one of the 1's in the month. Thanks guys, will correct shortly.Originally posted by avsfan1Comment -
Islanders are a play, there streak is currently 3.Originally posted by HowardRoarkComment -
Originally posted by Wallco99
Lol basically that answer confirms you're a clueless clown. If you can't give me an answer as to why the system involves martingale, you have no clue about how simple math and variance works. The way your system is built, you guys have just run hotter than the sun and you dont understand that being up 450 units with anything that involve 3 degrees of martingaling is just nothing, you could bust all these units in like any 1 month of real bad stretch.
I could backtest and come up with a system up 5000 units in the last 5 years, just martingale the shit out of every game ... If your system is actually EV+ (which you havent really convinced me either), there is absolutely no point in the chase/martingale part of the system.
Cliffs: backtesting a winning system that involves martingale is super easy and by no way means it is solid. Just be careful people who are following this system, it's way more dangerous than it looks like and you could easily lose a few hundred units quickly. Google variance simulator for more info on variance and sample size.Comment -
Nice having you, thanks for stopping by, and as I figured, you did no legwork. My numbers are posted, and as I said genius, I will gladly compare them to yours when your theories turn to facts. Not to mention, it is up significantly more than the 450 units which was posted in the first LIVE season of play. I really do not believe flat betting all games, when most lines range from -200 to -300 will outperform the system as it is laid out without having some sort of loss recovery method in place for the games that lose on (A). Congratulations on learing a few new gambling terms while playing with your Google search bar, however, you apparently don't understand the concept of chase betting.Originally posted by Greg29Comment -
I guess since you don't want to spend 10 minutes running the numbers before coming in here and shooting your mouth off, I will do it for you.
Counting the current season, the overall individual games record of NHL Gold is 1820-993. Just the (A) bet portion of these totals is 1204-683.
The way my system is currently designed, our overall profits since 2005-06 is +584 units, which includes this current season, and can be found in post #2446. Provided everyone bet every game on the proper line (M/L or +1 1/2), the whole way through, this is the actual amount they would be up (+/- a few units based on their actual odds they got with their book vs. the backtested odds. These differences would only be present in (C) bet losses, since all wins are +1 unit and (A) and (B) loss amounts are recouped with later wins). These are accurate, regardless of what your Google search told you about chase system backtest results not being real, that is assanine.
The way you are suggesting to play it is to flat bet all plays. We will assume average odds in this system to be -190 (a figure Grinder came up with a few weeks back, and this may even be a little generous).
1820 wins = +1820 units
993 losses @ -190 = -1886 units
Total: -66 units
Had you jast flat bet the (A) bets then moved on to next series:
1204 wins = +1204 units
683 losses @ -190 = -1297 units
Total: -93 units
I am using the -190 because I am not going back and retesting 9 years of data to prove a point I already know. As I said, prior to you being offended for some unknown reason, feel free to pinpoint the actual lines and let us know your findings. It takes a lot of balls to challenge somebody with no data to back them up, then call that person names when he challenges you back to prove your point. I guess you are not familiar with my track record of backtesting since you've only been around here for a couple weeks, so I know you didn't think that data would be spit in your face so fast. Have a nice day.Comment -
Greg29 does not even know what a a real martingale is. But I do understand where he is coming from. Here is the thing though. If you have followed the system for the last 2.2 years like I have you would be up about 160 units.
Now you can stamp and cry all you want but . . . I'm up 160 units. Is it luck? Maybe but are you up 160 units? Systems come and go and the trick is jumping on hot systems and off cold ones.
This is is a hot system. You can stand buy and say its stupid all you want. Me? I'm riding it.
BTW, I really do understand what you say Greg. Chases are totally ludicrous and go against all "inside the box" gambling theories. I'm been sports gambling since 1972 and have seen just about every whacko systems out there. Some work, some don't.
Ride the working ones as long as you can.Comment -
Shouldn't NY Islanders be ML and now +1.5 PL?Comment -
I think the limited Martingale works so well here because the C games perform so well. There hasn't been a season where the C games have had a losing record. The large losses are directly dependent on how the C games perform. Is it variance or is there an actual edge here? There's no way to tell but to continue testing.
But like Grinder said, the unit count is hard to argue with. You can get off on having the most perfect theory on paper, but in the end it's the guy that's up 200 units who wins.Comment -
Greg, lets talk about probability here since you walked into my world (Masters in Probability and Random Process w/ an Economic Emphasis.). Martingale as a process is used mostly in a Markov Chain which is a system that used to for transitioning or morphing based off of multiple variables. This system's genius does not look for any transition or variables. Its based off of two constants.Originally posted by Greg29
1.) Gambling lines. (The lines consistently being close to accurate i.e. -110 vs -110 is an even matchup and purely a coin toss)
2.) Teams inability to contradict the the Lines. (The odds a team can essentially beat vegas lines in 6 straight matches.)
This system is set up and designed to run on these two constants and assumes that with the puck line we are either getting even or better odds because we are already taking a -110 at best. Using a coin flip we can test this system out in worse case scenario. The odds of not calling the coin flip right 3 times in a row is 12.5% but if you do it six times in row the odds of you losing all 6 is 1.5%. In this system we watch but don't be the first three and play the final three since our odds are better losing at 1.5%. at minus -195 a loss on a three game chase would be a loss of around 15.01 units. I will do a glass half empty and say we lose 2% here so we would lose 30 units but win 98 and that total comes out to +68 units per 100 chases.
I understand the nervousness and as a statistician it is hard to say vegas will continue to place these 1.5 puck line odds or ML odd correctly thats a lot of faith in an unknown that is assumed a constant for this chase theory to work but 5 years have thus proven. You need to move away from a Stochastic system and use straight probability odds with this system. Any way if you have more questions PM me and we can talk stats all day it is my life and my passion. I don't want to blog down Wallco's thread as his system is been proven and blind following should be profitable.Comment -
Let's get it!Comment -
Thank you KC great post, finally someone coming up with something non retarded. I am an actuary myself, so the math part of the system is what interests me the most. I understand where you think the system gains this edge, but I am still not convinced that this edge actually exists.
What the system does is bet only favorites and with the chase part, makes sure that he books a lot more wins than losses. With this way, you will be up a lot more often than not, but that doesnt mean that you will make money in the long run (and by long run I mean a real sample size, something like 20 seasons).
As an analogy (not speaking to KC here, he obviously understands that, but the others on this forum might not), suppose you go to the casino every night and play the roulette. You bet 1 unit on more than half the numbers. If you lose, you double your bet and might even add some numbers (PL games). Lose again, you double the bet once more. And then you leave. What will happen ? For the very very large majority of the nights, you will win. For the vast majority of the weeks/months, you will be a winner. Does this mean that you are making money in the long run ? Absolutely not, you're losing everytime because the casino has the edge in this game. Eventually, you will hit a bad stretch and you will lose. Its inevitable.
This system might very well be the same. You might very well just be riding the heater of hitting one of your numbers everytime. One thing is for sure, you guys have run incredible on C bets and this system relies heavily on it. But that absolutely does not mean that this is sustainable.
Btw, I have played this system for over a month and I have made money doing it. Im just trying to make absolutely sure that we are not only riding the heater here.Comment
