Morrison Results & Profit/Loss Statement For the Season so Far: 11/1 - 2/8
"
"
-
Comment -
Thanks kev!Comment -
Ive been following and betting via live betting on the NBA - not watching on tv- and Im thinking these guys just give up if theyre behind and it looks like they cant win as in the heat game last night with utah. I have seen this a few times now, am i wrong here? thanksComment -
Hey Kev have you been getting the emails from the sortsbetting champ a.k.a. John Morrison a.k.a. Tony Chau concerning his new "Exterminator" system?Comment -
Would that be the one where he describes himself "As a self made statistician whose savviness in math has been well documented since childhood, I rarely had to check my work to verify its accuracy." ???Originally posted by hagball52
What happened to the "PHD" he used to have???
I forgot - I also received this one:
"If you are located outside of the U.S., please click on the link below in this email to be added to my lifetime picks mailing list for international members.
Very important: Please only click on the link in this email if you are located outside of the United States. If you are located in the U.S., please ignore and delete this email completely.
By clicking on the link in this email, you are confirming that you're located outside of the U.S."
Hmmmmm .....Comment -
Ty Lawson get hurt?Originally posted by knugenComment -
Yes, I have, but I'm not about to change my life and jump on his bandwagon. It might cost me a few dollars to find out what it is.Originally posted by hagball52Comment -
So, without having to read through 1,300 posts, I hope this question is ok to ask:
On the John Morrison systems... do people play only the A & B bets on either the 1-7-5 System or 1-7-5 Filtered System? Is there a benefit to playing the C bets that is not obvious, given the massive losses sustained on those bet in total?
Just trying to understand where the system works and where it doesn't. Thanks!Comment -
Wallco NBA Chase 110
2013-14 System to Date: 52-3 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: -5.65 units (fin. series)
Current open series: 0
v1 Plays
(A) 31-23
(B) 12-11
(C) 4-7
(D) 4-3
Losses: NYK (-18.45 u), MIL (-20.76 u), ORL (-18.45 u)
Games for (2/10/14):
#56 Philadelphia (**) @ Golden State (A) (10:35 pm EST)
** Denotes line not available at time of post.
We will ALWAYS play the M/L on favorites and the point spread (-110) on dogs. The team underlined and highlighted blue is the play. There is no point buying in this system, with one exception, if your team is the favorite, and buying down to a (-½) 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 do change. However, it is the individual bettor’s responsibility to get the appropriate line if it differs from the line in my post.
System rules and backtest can be found in posts #44 & #45.
Note: The lines I have listed were the current lines at the time of my post and may not reflect the final lines used to determine wins & losses.Comment -
Did anyone look into this actually being true this season with the .500 filter? 115 units is hard to believe when you cancel out so many series for teams being under .500. Can't just look at the series losses then subtract those losses from the total units earned. Also would have to look at teams record during their current stretch for being sub .500 or not. Denver for instance is right on the nose so would you cancel them out as well? I am currently down 11.6u on the season playing 1-3-5 strategy. I know we ruled out the .500 filter in the past because w/L record does not always advocate a below .500 record ATS. Really should only apply this filter to MLB and NHL. Just wondering if anyone looked into it or not for this current season. I dont expect anyone to do a 10 year back test on it.Originally posted by akell09
For the three games tomorrow are we still playing DEN with Ty Lawson out with a broken rib; hes doubtful to play and MEP of the team.Comment -
The 1-7-5 systems are designed to bet all the way through to the C Bet. Post #624 has the rules.Originally posted by tonywayne
The system has proved, through substantial back testing, to work but it currently needs a lot more B & C Bet wins. It can be a roller coaster ride but hopefully it will up at the end of the season.Comment -
Hi JMD, I agree with you that a .500 filter, cannot be back tested. The only way to test it out is to actually track the filter's effect as it happens and record the results over a number of years. So, akell09 should have kept his records. I also agree that a .500 ATS filter will significantly reduce selection.Originally posted by J.M. Disciple
I expect to receive an e-mail from "Morrison" with Denver as a no play. Even if he doesn't send it out, I will post Denver with a warning anyway.
Regards
KevComment -
Morrison 2/9 Results & 2/10 Plays
"Comment -
The "Champ" already sent the email on Saturday after Denver's loss disqualifying the (C) bet.Originally posted by Kev the Brit
Also the reason I asked about his "Exterminator" system was maybe to do a group purchase and then someone could post all the plays but I'm so fed up with that douchebag I don't ever want to send him another penny.Comment -
I always get a chuckle out of his rants and his self righteous promotions.Originally posted by TwoCatsWould that be the one where he describes himself "As a self made statistician whose savviness in math has been well documented since childhood, I rarely had to check my work to verify its accuracy." ???
What happened to the "PHD" he used to have???
I forgot - I also received this one:
"If you are located outside of the U.S., please click on the link below in this email to be added to my lifetime picks mailing list for international members.
Very important: Please only click on the link in this email if you are located outside of the United States. If you are located in the U.S., please ignore and delete this email completely.
By clicking on the link in this email, you are confirming that you're located outside of the U.S."
Hmmmmm .....Comment -
Damn system is really going down the toilet these past two months. Going to have to research some tonight on best way to continue this. System was up close to 50 units at one point right? This is a 100 unit swing! Pelicans and Nugs are done for tonight, lets hope PHI can recovery some of this... last three days assuming den and NOp dont cover we are 1-8 ATS. Should of waiting for some live bets get a better line.Comment -
denver is 30 down! this system is shit!Comment -
That is why we cautioned against most efficient player being out (ty lawson). Let me know if you know any systems are performed well over 10 years though. This is one system that has done well. No system is a gold mine, but some are lucrative when invested in properly. Short term is always small potatoes.Originally posted by play4win
push on pelicans better then losing I guess. We remake the B bet on the 3rd game to win 7 units, so it will just be a shortened series?Comment -
Yeah this aktuella suck. Lucky i got in early and got +8 on the Pelicans. 76ers throw this away alsoComment -
I was testing this year trying to fade a road team, but end up with 17 losses which is worse then following. So if you follow you lose and if you fade you lose. Freakin bookies are unbeatable it seems.Comment -
lol, these bookies sponsor these betting forums!Originally posted by J.M. Disciple
Comment -
.500 filter 2014
TEAMS .500 OR BETTER
A: 29-23
B: 14-9
C: 5-5
PROFIT: +19.40 UNITS
TEAMS BELOW SUB .500
A: 20-29
B: 10-18
C: 8-8
PROFIT: -82.16 UNITS
SUB .500 SERIES PENDING
SAC: C BET
NOP: B BET
PHI: C BET
1-7-5 STRATEGY
A: 1.1 TO WIN 1
B: 8.91 TO WIN 8.1
C: 16.51 TO WIN 15.01
This is only a small back test and I am not going to go through a ten year back test, but instead of being spoon fed I wanted to see if there was any truth to the .500 filter this year. The 115 units of profit as stated previously was a little far fetched but using the filter you would be in the positive. I am surprised by the record. Again just a small back test, but something for some of you to consider based on these numbers and how you want to proceed into the future with this system. I am not sure how I will proceed as I like the action, but hard to turn a cheek when it comes to profit. I have quite a bit of profit to make up for this past week or so over 20 units lost with these sub .500 teams. There are some C bets coming up by I am considering just taking the loss from A and B and moving on. Thoughts are appreciated.
Thank You
AustinComment -
Austin -
What if you took it to teams above .400? Given the Eastern Conference's team standings, it seems like maybe .500 is too high a cut-off. I've heard people talk about systems where they keep it to .400 & above, so I thought I'd mention it.Comment -
Very tedious testing stuff like this. I posted the excel file and which teams were above .500 I am not going back and testing .400 because of curiosity. I would even consider making it higher to eliminate 1 or 2 of the losses. Look at the file and which teams lost the series that were above .500 You will see 1 or 2 of them was right at .500 or just above .500 by 1 game. Look through it and see if you can adjust stuff. I did most of the homework already. With that said based on this season I think you would probably have one more loss at least if you took it to .400 which would make it a negative season still. Thats just a guess but you can look at some of the sub .500 teams listed that lost the series and see if they meet the .400 filter you are talking about. Has to be one more loss in there.Originally posted by tonywayneComment -
Yes, we replay the B Bet and if it loses we play the C Bet on the 4th road game. The same total risk would be spread over 4 gamesOriginally posted by J.M. DiscipleComment -
Morrison 2/10 Results & 2/11 Plays
"Comment -
Where did you get the data from?Originally posted by J.M. DiscipleComment -
Wallco NBA Chase 110
2013-14 System to Date: 52-3 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: -5.65 units (fin. series)
Current open series: 1 (-1.10 units)
(2/10/14):
#56 Philadelphia (+15) (A) - Loss
v1 Plays
(A) 32-24
(B) 12-11
(C) 4-7
(D) 4-3
Losses: NYK (-18.45 u), MIL (-20.76 u), ORL (-18.45 u)
Games for (2/11/14):
#57 Atlanta (+2) @ Chicago (A) (8:05 pm EST)
We will ALWAYS play the M/L on favorites and the point spread (-110) on dogs. The team underlined and highlighted blue is the play. There is no point buying in this system, with one exception, if your team is the favorite, and buying down to a (-½) 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 do change. However, it is the individual bettor’s responsibility to get the appropriate line if it differs from the line in my post.
System rules and backtest can be found in posts #44 & #45.
Note: The lines I have listed were the current lines at the time of my post and may not reflect the final lines used to determine wins & losses.Comment -
covers and just tested team by team given the spread sheet on page 3. Just physically count the record. Some teams are .500 to start the season but later drop below .500 so stats are deceiving if you look at the teams that are currently under .500. That is why there is a huge difference between 115 units and 19 units.Originally posted by Kev the BritComment -
Of course it's tedious - that's just the nature of stat mining.Originally posted by J.M. Disciple
The reason I suggested "you" testing .400 teams is because the spreadsheet you posted doesn't contain enough data for anyone else to do such a test. I made the assumption that your data source was something you could recalculate relatively painlessly (why on earth would you do it manually?).
I'll take a look at the .400 data myself later this week if I have time (the All-Star break is a great time for some stat gathering without worrying about any daily betting deadlines). I'm already doing some backtesting of a couple of patterns I saw recently.Comment -
This is true if you are just using numerical data or some program/system to beat the books.Originally posted by J.M. Disciple
You have to balance the objective data with the subjective information you have at hand, and is why you need to actually follow the sport.
For example last night Indiana was off a loss, avenging a loss to Denver earlier in the year, Denver was without their point guard, and the all-star break is coming up (perhaps teams lay off the gas and are on cruise control until the break, we all do this in our jobs, right?)
Or look at Atlanta, yes they have three straight road games, however I prefer to look at it as two road games and then the all star break. (they will go back home before hitting the road for the third game)
We are not robots and it is not as easy and checking off all the boxes to see if they pass the criteria outlined. We need to consider the human factor in all of this and use our own intuition and wit to beat the books. They have more numerical information then we could possibly ever have.
Thank you all for your help in compiling the data however, it is the starting point for making a play, not the end point.Comment -
When I came up with the 115 units I had just assumed that New Orleans was under .500 all season and I was wrong. But they should have only been two losses, not three.
Nov. 10 New Orleans was 3 - 3 (system loss)
Dec. 15 New Orleans was 11-10 (system loss)
Jan. 1 New Orleans was 14-15 (no play under .500)
And Denver just added another loss giving a total of four losses. But that still puts the over .500 filter at 44 units won.Comment -
which loss is in accurate in the spread sheet?Originally posted by akell09Comment -
Your spread sheet is correct, you do have New Orleans's third series as under .500. But your earlier post had:
A) 29-23
B) 14-9
C) 5-5
Your spread sheet only has 4 losses, but your record for 'C' bets show 5. With only 4 losses, the units won would be around 44. My four losses are New Orleans twice, Miami, and Denver. Am I missing one?Comment -
I must of looked at a loss twice and inputted it that way. The errors of doing it manually... I am not sure how to do all the data mining people are talking about. I guess I am old school at a young ageOriginally posted by akell09
Thanks for double checking though, always appreciated. Thats like a 70 unit difference from current season, but only small sample size. ATL not looking good at over .500 tonight. On another guys picks as well. Hes at 69-38 ATS this season called "nothing is for sure..." Hopefully didn't jump in on a bad day. This all star break might be the cause of all this drama.
Comment
