John Morrison 2013-14 NBA Thread

[imotiv8]

Hi guys, Wallco published a 10 year back test at Post #625. The back test clearly indicates that the 1-7-5 (without filters) has out-performed the other betting variants. Therefore, with regard to his outstanding efforts I have decided, with immediate effect, to replace the filtered 1-7-5 strategy with the unfiltered 1-7-5 strategy. In addition to being more lucrative, which is what gambling strives for, the unfiltered strategy is very simple to operate.

This coming Sunday I will update the season so far (to Saturday 11/30) with the 1-7-5 unfiltered data.

Regards
Kev

WTF- With respect to the people that have been following the filtered strategy with REAL money I don't think you should just put the unfiltered in with positive units that maybe only Wallco has because he's been playing it from the beginning. You should either do both or start your unit count from 0.

[Andy3568]

I think Kev should track the following systems: JM ABC as published, buying 3 points, 2 points, 1 point and no points, JM B&C buying 3 points, 2 points, 1 point and no points, JM C only buying 3 points, 2 points, 1 point and no points, 1-3-5 with and without filters, 1-7-5 with and without filters, 7-5, and all of those with and without the injury filter, and all of those with and without the worst road team filter. And if someone comes up with another variation, he should track that one too. Additionally, he should keep a spreadsheet for every person here playing with "REAL money" since they are all incapable of tracking their own wins and losses.

[bonhammer]

I think Kev should track the following systems: JM ABC as published, buying 3 points, 2 points, 1 point and no points, JM B&C buying 3 points, 2 points, 1 point and no points, JM C only buying 3 points, 2 points, 1 point and no points, 1-3-5 with and without filters, 1-7-5 with and without filters, 7-5, and all of those with and without the injury filter, and all of those with and without the worst road team filter. And if someone comes up with another variation, he should track that one too. Additionally, he should keep a spreadsheet for every person here playing with "REAL money" since they are all incapable of tracking their own wins and losses.

Don't forget buying .5, 1.5 and 2.5 points. If you going to do might as be complete. LOL

[Kev the Brit]

WTF- With respect to the people that have been following the filtered strategy with REAL money I don't think you should just put the unfiltered in with positive units that maybe only Wallco has because he's been playing it from the beginning. You should either do both or start your unit count from 0.

I expected to be questioned over my decision before posting it. The reason is this: we all know that many different strategies for playing Morrison have emerged in the last 2 or 3 years. I have always believed that this thread, "John Morrison 2013-14 NBA" should at least post the plays in accordance with the official currently published pdf, which I am now doing. However, it has to be useful to the thread contributors to see how the published system compares with the more lucrative systems as they evolve and emerge from thorough back testing. Wallco has now created the most lucrative method to date and consequently I will now compare it against the Morrison pdf.

I believe it is up to individuals to decide how they want to gamble with their money. You will note that not one of my posts to date has included a personal comment. The posts are purely comparative. My personal view is that the published pdf requires a unit size of approx 1% BR. Both of the 1-7-5 strategies require probably a max of 0.5% BR to cater for the greater series loss value and the greater percentage of series losses. It is on this basis that bettors decide how much to risk.

Overall, in my experience, although the Knicks will probably prove me wrong tonight, the best return on investment (income divided by investment) is 3-point buys on V1 only. Played confidently, the original version of Morrison can return a unit for every series played (approx. 70 per season). It requires confidence in the bettor to recover losses during the long periods while it wins. There can be no such confidence when not point-buying (greater regularity of series losses) so the bettor has no option but to target a single unit in every series.

Finally, imotiv8 and others of a similar view: given that I started with the filtered version, I will accede and continue to post it alongside the unfiltered version. Please do not use the term, "WTF" when addressing me in the future, thank you.

Regards
Kev

[imotiv8]

I expected to be questioned over my decision before posting it. The reason is this: we all know that many different strategies for playing Morrison have emerged in the last 2 or 3 years. I have always believed that this thread, "John Morrison 2013-14 NBA" should at least post the plays in accordance with the official currently published pdf, which I am now doing. However, it has to be useful to the thread contributors to see how the published system compares with the more lucrative systems as they evolve and emerge from thorough back testing. Wallco has now created the most lucrative method to date and consequently I will now compare it against the Morrison pdf.

I believe it is up to individuals to decide how they want to gamble with their money. You will note that not one of my posts to date has included a personal comment. The posts are purely comparative. My personal view is that the published pdf requires a unit size of approx 1% BR. Both of the 1-7-5 strategies require probably a max of 0.5% BR to cater for the greater series loss value and the greater percentage of series losses. It is on this basis that bettors decide how much to risk.

Overall, in my experience, although the Knicks will probably prove me wrong tonight, the best return on investment (income divided by investment) is 3-point buys on V1 only. Played confidently, the original version of Morrison can return a unit for every series played (approx. 70 per season). It requires confidence in the bettor to recover losses during the long periods while it wins. There can be no such confidence when not point-buying (greater regularity of series losses) so the bettor has no option but to target a single unit in every series.

Finally, imotiv8 and others of a similar view: given that I started with the filtered version, I will accede and continue to post it alongside the unfiltered version. Please do not use the term, "WTF" when addressing me in the future, thank you.

Regards
Kev

You are right, that was uncalled for. I apologize and I won't use it again.

[Wallco99]

Wallco NBA Chase 110
2013-14 System to Date: 9-2 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: -30.21 units (fin. series)
Current open series: 0


v1 Plays
(A) 5-6
(B) 3-3
(C) 0-3
(D) 1-2
Losses: None


Games for (11/29/13):
#12 Dallas @ Atlanta (+1) (A) (7:35 pm EST)
#13 Milwaukee (+5½) @ Charlotte (A) (7:05 pm EST)
#14 N.Y. Knicks (+9) @ Denver (A) (9:05 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.

[thelimit0310]

Kev, I hope you do continue to post the filtered version of 1-7/5. Even though I can follow plays on my own, many people here who still play filtered look to your posts and it would be silly leaving them hanging. Also, consider that the unfiltered results were only published days ago, and no one at the start of the season was doing it. Really the difference between the two is not hard to track. If the team doesn't cover an additional 3.5 points to their spread on the A bet, it doesn't follow through on filtered but will on unfiltered, everything else is exactly the same, even the October filter. So really posting both should not be a problem and I hope you continue to do so!

[play4win]

Wallco NBA Chase 110

#13 Milwaukee (+5½) @ Charlotte (A) (7:05 pm EST)
#14 N.Y. Knicks (+9) @ Denver (A) (9:05 pm EST)

should milwaukee and ny knicks haven't had a new serie when they both had a D bet?
they both have 4 losing strike both S/U and ATS so it should be both B?

[Wallco99]

should milwaukee and ny knicks haven't had a new serie when they both had a D bet?
they both have 4 losing strike both S/U and ATS so it should be both B?

In this system, I never start a new series until the current one has concluded. So for losing streaks, we would start series when losing streaks are 3, 7, 11 games...etc.

[Kev the Brit]

Hi guys, just completed some research on ATS stats. The Knicks are now by far the worst team ATS with only 21% success. Ordinarily (ie, if they weren't coming off a lost Chase110 series), I would not play them in this series. However, they have now lost 7 games consecutively and I don't believe that they will lose the next 4 ATS. We had a team in a similar situation last year (Charlotte?) and they came through for Chase110 on their second run.

[adidas-b 88]

Yeah Melo should try to do some damage against his old team tonight. Hopefully they can pull it through.

[KennyM10]

When is the E game for milwaukee? Like wallco I luv to wager play money. Where are we at boys 60 units to win one?

[ken23lau]

When is the E game for milwaukee? Like wallco I luv to wager play money. Where are we at boys 60 units to win one?

Shut up.

[Kev the Brit]

Morrison 11/29 Results & 11/30 Plays

"

[hagball52]

Wallco, do you know if you've ever had a back to back series lose with your chase 110 ? I mean what Milwaukee and the the Knicks are involved in. I don't recall you ever having lost 2 series in a row on the same team. I've tracked all of your series and I think I've seen a team never go past 9 su and ats losses except for Charlotte one year and they went to 10. Mind you this is all coming from memory and no kept records. Just wondered if you knew off the top of your head. I'm loading up on the Bucks no matter what. They should cover one of the next 2.

[Kev the Brit]

You are right, that was uncalled for. I apologize and I won't use it again.

Thanks, I appreciate your post. Lets move on....

[Wallco99]

Wallco NBA Chase 110
2013-14 System to Date: 11-2 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: -28.21 units (fin. series)
Current open series: 1 (-1.10 units)

(11/29/13):
#12 Atlanta (+1) (A) - Win
#13 Milwaukee (+5½) (A) - Loss
#14 N.Y. Knicks (+9) (A) - Win


v1 Plays
(A) 7-7
(B) 3-3
(C) 0-3
(D) 1-2
Losses: None



Games for (11/30/13):
#13 Boston @ Milwaukee (+2½) (B) (9:05 pm EST)
#15 Minnesota (M/L) @ Dallas (A) (8:35 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.

[Wallco99]

Kevin, the unfiltered version is currently +16.44 units on finished series, not -21.88 as posted. And the filtered version should be -18.06 units, also not -21.88. I totally re-ran the numbers for all versions yesterday to double check to make sure my spreadsheet was automatically calculating it correctly, and it was.

[Kev the Brit]

Kevin, the unfiltered version is currently +16.44 units on finished series, not -21.88 as posted. And the filtered version should be -18.06 units, also not -21.88. I totally re-ran the numbers for all versions yesterday to double check to make sure my spreadsheet was automatically calculating it correctly, and it was.

Yes, I certainly accept the unfiltered total is way out. I didn't take into account the earlier results. However, I'm surprised that the filtered results differ from yours. I will check and adjust as necessary.

[Wallco99]

Wallco, do you know if you've ever had a back to back series lose with your chase 110 ? I mean what Milwaukee and the the Knicks are involved in. I don't recall you ever having lost 2 series in a row on the same team. I've tracked all of your series and I think I've seen a team never go past 9 su and ats losses except for Charlotte one year and they went to 10. Mind you this is all coming from memory and no kept records. Just wondered if you knew off the top of your head. I'm loading up on the Bucks no matter what. They should cover one of the next 2.

I am currently writing new backtest spreadsheet to check several new criteria for chase 110 plays, I can add that very easily as well. Off the top of my head, I am pretty sure it didn't the way I am doing it, by not starting new series til other one is complete, which is after loss 3, 7, 11...etc. I believe had we played a new series on every third game of the losing streak as mentioned by someone yesterday, then we would have taken a few extra losses along the way. I will let you know when I am 100% positive.

[Wallco99]

Yes, I certainly accept the unfiltered total is way out. I didn't take into account the earlier results. However, I'm surprised that the filtered results differ from yours. I will check and adjust as necessary.

I think you only credited 1 unit to the system for the Knicks win yesterday, should have been 5 units since it was a C bet win. Previous day you had system at -22.88 and today you have -21.88. We were a fraction of a unit different before yesterday, you had -22.88 and I had -23.06, now it is several units off. My spreadsheets now track all of this automatically, including A,B,C wins/losses and profits +/-, so I am pretty sure mine is correct. But definitely let me know if it isn't. Thanks.

[Kev the Brit]

I think you only credited 1 unit to the system for the Knicks win yesterday, should have been 5 units since it was a C bet win. Previous day you had system at -22.88 and today you have -21.88. We were a fraction of a unit different before yesterday, you had -22.88 and I had -23.06, now it is several units off. My spreadsheets now track all of this automatically, including A,B,C wins/losses and profits +/-, so I am pretty sure mine is correct. But definitely let me know if it isn't. Thanks.

OK, I have the answer to the discrepancy with the filtered system stats. Firstly, I posted a typo error +1.64 on post#597 when it should have been +1.46. My following weekly post, #598, was correct. Then, your post #624 confirmed that +1.46 was correct. However, I then forgot to adjust the following daily posts and the +0.18 error remains up to now. I will be editing today's post to remove the 0.18 error. That leaves 5 units discrepancy.

As you are the creator of 1-7-5, I will take your guidance on the next point: I believed, up to now, that 1-7-5 doesn't recognise the different Versions and that if a V2 is started, it then stands as the only series to be played while that team is on the road, and the V1 does not commence in any circumstance, because if it did, it would recognise the different versions. For that reason you will see that I have not recorded the Knicks V1 series under the 1-7-5 stats. That then explains why we have a 5 unit discrepancy. However, if you have a published rule that I should have recognised, I will be more than happy to reflect the Knicks win last night under the 1-7-5 systems. In the meantime I shall adjust the stats by -0.18

[Wallco99]

OK, I have the answer to the discrepancy with the filtered system stats. Firstly, I posted a typo error +1.64 on post#597 when it should have been +1.46. My following weekly post, #598, was correct. Then, your post #624 confirmed that +1.46 was correct. However, I then forgot to adjust the following daily posts and the +0.18 error remains up to now. I will be editing today's post to remove the 0.18 error. That leaves 5 units discrepancy.

As you are the creator of 1-7-5, I will take your guidance on the next point: I believed, up to now, that 1-7-5 doesn't recognise the different Versions and that if a V2 is started, it then stands as the only series to be played while that team is on the road, and the V1 does not commence in any circumstance, because if it did, it would recognise the different versions. For that reason you will see that I have not recorded the Knicks V1 series under the 1-7-5 stats. That then explains why we have a 5 unit discrepancy. However, if you have a published rule that I should have recognised, I will be more than happy to reflect the Knicks win last night under the 1-7-5 systems. In the meantime I shall adjust the stats by -0.18

Yes, the JM bonus plays are all added to the original schedule and were accounted for in my backtests. These plays shoud be included because they are PLAYS, not because of v1, v2, v3. As you stated, the version doesn't matter, but v1 is one of the versions included in the 1-7-5, and since these bonus plays are v1 plays, they count, regardless of which version they were derived from. I even made mention of that in my rules post (post # 625).

[Wallco99]

However, if you have a published rule that I should have recognised, I will be more than happy to reflect the Knicks win last night under the 1-7-5 systems.

It is rule #3 in post # 625.

[Wallco99]

****

[Kev the Brit]

It is rule #3 in post # 625.

Yeh, got it thanks. I've now got the filtered strategy total at -17.06, which is 1 unit more than you have. Did you count last night's win by New Orleans in your run through?

[Wallco99]

Yeh, got it thanks. I've now got the filtered strategy total at -17.06, which is 1 unit more than you have. Did you count last night's win by New Orleans in your run through?

Yes I did.

There have been 29 series to date:

There have been 2 (A) bet push = 0
5 (A) bet stopped = -5.5
10 (A) bet wins = +10
6 (B) bet wins = +42
3 (C) bet wins = +15
3 (C) bet losses = -79.56

Total: -18.06

[KennyM10]

Everyone good luck tonight let's see we lost the abcd on milwaukee and now than an a again on milwaukee like an e, good luck everyone wirh the F now this is great let's say 80 units to win 1.
Bet. Boy walfold u r one sharp guy lol.

[Kev the Brit]

Yes I did.

There have been 29 series to date:

There have been 2 (A) bet push = 0
5 (A) bet stopped = -5.5
10 (A) bet wins = +10
6 (B) bet wins = +42
3 (C) bet wins = +15
3 (C) bet losses = -79.56

Total: -18.06

OK, you have recorded 2 A bets pushed, whereas I have only 1. I have 11 A Bet wins and you have 10. Here are my A Bet wins:
using covers.com

#2 11/2 Hou +5
#3 11/3 Pho +5.5
#5 11/4 GSW +13
#11 11/10 Was +7.5
#18 11/15 Por +11.5
#21 11/20 Uta +4
#22 11/20 Sac +12.5
#24 11/22 Pho +10.5
#26 11/26 LAL +0.5
#27 11/26 GSW +2
#28 11/29 NOP +12.5

Your thoughts?
Kev

[Wallco99]

OK, you have recorded 2 A bets pushed, whereas I have only 1. I have 11 A Bet wins and you have 10. Here are my A Bet wins:
using covers.com

#2 11/2 Hou +5
#3 11/3 Pho +5.5
#5 11/4 GSW +13
#11 11/10 Was +7.5
#18 11/15 Por +11.5
#21 11/20 Uta +4
#22 11/20 Sac +12.5
#24 11/22 Pho +10.5
#26 11/26 LAL +0.5
#27 11/26 GSW +2 (Not sure where you got +2)?
#28 11/29 NOP +12.5

Your thoughts?
Kev

There were 2 (A) bet pushes (Covers.com):

#17 Memphis -3 (Final score: Memphis 89 - L.A. Lakers 86)
#27 Golden State -1 (Final score: Golden State 102 - New Orleans 101)

[BCC585]

Pretty happy about minny tonight because their schedule was about to be brutal.

[Andy3568]

I just noticed something. With all the discussion about the Morrison bets, I missed it: Shouldn't Cleveland have been a bet tonight?

[Andy3568]

Pretty happy about minny tonight because their schedule was about to be brutal.

I thought the same thing, though the spread should take that into account.

[Wallco99]

I just noticed something. With all the discussion about the Morrison bets, I missed it: Shouldn't Cleveland have been a bet tonight?

Yep, Forgot to transfer that one from my paper to the spreadsheet.

[Kev the Brit]

There were 2 (A) bet pushes (Covers.com):


#27 Golden State -1 (Final score: Golden State 102 - New Orleans 101)

Covers.com has Golden State at +1 and therefore covered by +2.