John Morrison 2010 NBA

[Wilba]

I hear ya Dude......

The same argument could be made with all the " reverse JM " bs
that has been going on also...............


...just sayin.........................

oh please! the big difference being that with reverse, only the past record and performance was discussed because it was relevant to jordanfreak and was requested. You have actually been posting your 'plays', and not only that been sending out a JM like 'look at my lambo, life is good' post after every series win. seems like a big difference to me between discussion and play posting

[lilb999]

What sportsbooks is everyone using?
I have an account already on sportsbetting.com from last summer and dont feel like really opening a new one.

[Wilba]

Wilba, I really don’t know why do you think that it doesn’t matter if you play A, B, C series or just B, C.

Stats from last year are something like this:
V1: 53-2
[A] 31-24
[b] 18-6
[C] 4-2

V2: 28-0
[A] 17-11
[b] 8-3
[C] 3-0

So there was 83 (81-2) series played from A bet. Let’s assume that the average odds are 1.588. It means that if one series loses we lose 18,68u (more or less). Our profit from last year is: 43,64u (81-2*18,68).

Now we don’t play A bets. It means we have 35 (33-2) series to play. One lost series (B and C bets only) is loss of 6,29u. We won 33 series and lost 2 series so profit is 20,42u (33-2*6,29).

Again:
-we play A, B, C series, we gain 43,64u,
-we play B, C series, we gain 20,42u.
Why would you say we should skip all A bets?

I never said you should skip A bets. I stated a fact that, in the long run, you will neither win or lose from placing A bets, you will break even. Since the JM sys started A bets hit 62.9 % of the time (that is backtested not a guess) and if you cant see that winning 62.9% of the time at odds of 1.588 is not profitable then there is not much I can say. If you use a calculator its very easy to calculate long term profitability when you have the statistics.

Your flaw with the calculations above is that you have posted that if you sat out the A bet, then you would only bet to win 1 unit on the B bet. Obviously, if you sat out the A bet, you can afford to bet to win 3 units (not 1) on the B and C bets while still only risking the ~18.5 units that you would have risked playing to win 100 from the A bet. Does this make sense? you risk the same amount on the series if playing from B, not risk 1/3 as much. I think you will find if you redo your above calculations like this then then 'playing from B' winnings are tripled for a profit of +61.26 units, while still only risking the same ~18.5 units on each series. 61.26 units > 43.64 units so your post has actually confirmed what I was saying about it being a little more profitable if you play from B.

NOONE SHOULD MESS WITH THE SYSTEM, play it as prescribed, I was never suggesting otherwise. I was simply providing properly backtested information to others here so they knew the facts. I know if I was reading through the thread I would appreciate this info and use it to my advantage but thats just me.

NOONE SHOULD MESS WITH THE SYSTEM, always play it as prescribed, and it will win.

[COYLO]

Hey what the hell guys, there was a request made for information on the past record of the reverse system and I provided information on the record of the reverse system. I did not go out there posting 'reverse' plays as JW has been doing with his plays, nor do I have any intention of posting any plays, I was simply doing whoever asked (i dont recall) a favour by posting last years record for the reverse system. Apart from responding to his request and follow up questions I have only ever discussed proper JM plays. And when people have talked about going against the system and capping it (as has happened a few times) I have always said 'don't go against the system, play it and it will win'

I dont appreciate you making out like I had some other agenda other than to do whoever was asking a favour by providing them info on the reverse record that I happened to have. I never suggested that people play it or suggested that I would be posting plays for it. I thought this forum was about helping each other out and sharing info and thats all I was doing.

And bugger you stevo, with your 'It's funny because as soon as an [A] bet loses, that's when people come in here and start with the 'reverse system,' stuff.' The reason reverse was bought up was coz Jordanfreak was getting dealt bogus lines at betus, and chili told him that if he wana stop being dealt bogus lines by betus then he has to reverse the system for a couple plays then they will start giving him normal lines again. Then someone asks what the reverse record was, and I was nice enough to provide it. I didnt bring any of this crap up so if your bashing me for helping a mate with info then stick it up your ***

it was me who asked for it so bash me not wilba. i personally welcome any help in winning bets.

[JW Cash]

Damn !

A night without a JM basketball play is sick.....such an empty feelin.......

There has to be a " rigged " game or something going on tonight.........

[COYLO]

yeah jw i feel ya

[venture]

is anyone getting his buffet picks for nba/ncaa b ball?

[krzychu78]

Your flaw with the calculations above is that you have posted that if you sat out the A bet, then you would only bet to win 1 unit on the B bet. Obviously, if you sat out the A bet, you can afford to bet to win 3 units (not 1) on the B and C bets while still only risking the ~18.5 units that you would have risked playing to win 100 from the A bet. Does this make sense? you risk the same amount on the series if playing from B, not risk 1/3 as much. I think you will find if you redo your above calculations like this then then 'playing from B' winnings are tripled for a profit of +61.26 units, while still only risking the same ~18.5 units on each series. 61.26 units > 43.64 units so your post has actually confirmed what I was saying about it being a little more profitable if you play from B.

Thanks for explanation, Wilba.
I admit i didn't thik about raising stakes. Now i know your idea and it's really interesting. Sorry for my confusion.

[lilb999]

Would someone please enlighten me on adding +3 points to the line under the JM system. Should you ever not buy points?

Whats the difference from making a teams line -11 to -8 as opposed to -1 to a +2....Also I should always bet for the team thats playing against either (A), (B), or (C).

Sorry if this seems like a silly question, but im still pretty new to the whole sports betting thing

[COYLO]

if your team is the favourite you play the ML you only buy points when your team is the underdog

[COYLO]

Also I should always bet for the team thats playing against either (A), (B), or (C).

your A,B,C bets are on the same team. for example jm give's lakers as a play you bet $$ on lakers for your A bet and if they loose, you double up on your $$ for the B bet on lakers again and if that bet looses you double Up again on the C bet with lakers. most of these bets hit on a and b bets.

[Wilba]

it was me who asked for it so bash me not wilba. i personally welcome any help in winning bets.

Thanks for your support Coylo, I really appreciate it. I was a little annoyed about the previous comments saying I should have kept my info out of the thread as all I was trying to do was to help other people by providing factual information (that was requested, and that I spent a lot of time researching!) that I found very useful. Was never trying to tell people they should bet system one way or another - once they have the facts people can decide for themselves what works best for them.

Good on you for the above post and appreciate your support

[Wilba]

Thanks for explanation, Wilba.
I admit i didn't thik about raising stakes. Now i know your idea and it's really interesting. Sorry for my confusion.

no worries mate, im always happy to back and forward with like minded people who are interested in exploring different options. Spent plenty of time backtesting various things and am more than happy to share info with those who are interested.

[stevex]

Wilba. JM NBA system plays are 15 - 1, nuff said.

[krzychu78]

if your team is the favourite you play the ML you only buy points when your team is the underdog

You play ML only if the spread is bigger than -3 (-3, -3.5, -4 etc). In other case you still buy 3 points.

[dukipl]

JM v1 plays 7-0!
JM v2 3-1 !
Next play on 15.11.2010 with 76-ers

[cmdyrds]

JM v1 plays 7-0!
JM v2 3-1 !
Next play on 15.11.2010 with 76-ers

i think you mean the nets?

[dvb02]

Next Series Bets Are:

11/15/2010 New Jersey - A bet (V1)
11/16/2010 New Yord - A bet (V1)
11/16/2010 Chicago - A bet (V1)
11/16/2010 L.A. Lakers - A bet (V2)

Good luck everyone.

[COYLO]

You play ML only if the spread is bigger than -3 (-3, -3.5, -4 etc). In other case you still buy 3 points.

cheers i didnt know that

[krzychu78]

Kev, this is is the thing with the V1 vs V2 collison.

Is there any historical PROOF that playing a V1 series after a V2 game which was won at the (a) level, resulted in a loss of the V1 series.

There isn't any. I do not know why this criteria was even introduced...?

ToTheHole, you want any proof, check season 2008/2009:

10/29/08 Sacramento@Minnesota - V2 win
10/31/08 Sacramento@Miami - V1 lost
11/01/08 Sacramento@Orlando - V1 lost
11/03/08 Sacramento@Philadelphia - V1 lost

[brettels]

isn't jm a scam?

[Kev the Brit]

isn't jm a scam?

He is a cock. His systems (if they are his) are profitable.
Rgds
Kev

[dvb02]

You play ML only if the spread is bigger than -3 (-3, -3.5, -4 etc). In other case you still buy 3 points.

FYI, for the records I am posting, I do not play the ML (I feel it is a bs filter he put in). I pretty much stick to the original version.

[Kev the Brit]

coylo

2% of the bankroll seems im doing it wrong or at least a hell of lot riskier
i started with $350 bank
($50 A bet)
($100 B bet)
($200 C bet )
so whichever bet wins i just tac the winnings onto whatever is left over then divide by 7 to give me my A,B,C bets for the next game.
any less riskier ways???

Yes, there are many ways. I indicated the % that most experienced chasers use for a robust bankroll. By dividing your bankroll by 7 and playing 1/7th (A bet), then 2/7th (B bet) and finally 4/7ths (C bet) you are effectively planning to go all-in on every series. So far, all of the series have won. You might be able to judge when to avoid a bad looking series, but you cannot forecast when a good looking series will lose and it will happen and you will have nothing left. If you are looking for a short exciting ride, go ahead. But, if you want to increase your wealth over the next few years, you will need to slow down.

Furthermore, your math is not sensible for the odds we play with. If you bet $50 on A Bet you might win an additional $30, which is good news. However, if you lose that $50 on the A bet, your $100 dollar B bet will pay out $60, which is slightly less good news, as you are now only $10 profit. If the B bet loses, your $200 C bet will only pay out $120, which will not cover the A and B bet losses. So, although you should win the C bet, you would be left with less than half your bankroll. Not good money management. Whenever you win a series, it is imperative that you are richer than what you were before playing that series.

[ToTheHole]

ToTheHole, you want any proof, check season 2008/2009:

10/29/08 Sacramento@Minnesota - V2 win
10/31/08 Sacramento@Miami - V1 lost
11/01/08 Sacramento@Orlando - V1 lost
11/03/08 Sacramento@Philadelphia - V1 lost

Yeah that's cool, but that is one occasion. You could then qualify any of his historical losses using any previous game criteria! If it's not a theme you could just as easily put it down to coincidence or had sac lost that first game it might end up been the opposite where you don't bet if a team loses their first non conference road game (instead of wins it no bet). But they happened to win.

[krzychu78]

Yeah that's cool, but that is one occasion. You could then qualify any of his historical losses using any previous game criteria! If it's not a theme you could just as easily put it down to coincidence or had sac lost that first game it might end up been the opposite where you don't bet if a team loses their first non conference road game (instead of wins it no bet). But they happened to win.

You've asked to give You one historical proof, here it is. I've backtested only one season so far but i'm going to go deeper.
Was it coincidence? Maybe. I think all system wins or loses are coincidences. One thing i know for sure: playing that SAC V1 series would cost you nice amount of money.

[krzychu78]

FYI, for the records I am posting, I do not play the ML (I feel it is a bs filter he put in). I pretty much stick to the original version.

OK, i understand. I play the system by myself and watch this thread to have some fun.
Maybe ML filter is bs, maybe not. Last season both system loses would be eliminated by plaing favorites ML.

[cala56]

isn't jm a scam?

tThe Biggest

[thebestthereis]

the person behind the deal is a liar, the system principles are very real and work if you know how to use it correctly. nothing is perfect but the system is pretty solid.

[COYLO]

coylo[/font]

Yes, there are many ways. I indicated the % that most experienced chasers use for a robust bankroll. By dividing your bankroll by 7 and playing 1/7th (A bet), then 2/7th (B bet) and finally 4/7ths (C bet) you are effectively planning to go all-in on every series. So far, all of the series have won. You might be able to judge when to avoid a bad looking series, but you cannot forecast when a good looking series will lose and it will happen and you will have nothing left. If you are looking for a short exciting ride, go ahead. But, if you want to increase your wealth over the next few years, you will need to slow down.

Furthermore, your math is not sensible for the odds we play with. If you bet $50 on A Bet you might win an additional $30, which is good news. However, if you lose that $50 on the A bet, your $100 dollar B bet will pay out $60, which is slightly less good news, as you are now only $10 profit. If the B bet loses, your $200 C bet will only pay out $120, which will not cover the A and B bet losses. So, although you should win the C bet, you would be left with less than half your bankroll. Not good money management. Whenever you win a series, it is imperative that you are richer than what you were before playing that series.

kev any chance you could let me in on different ways to manage my £££££. i would be grateful ive heard of the labby system i just dont understand how to use it.

[ToTheHole]

Yeah I know i lost a couple of grand on it back then haha

[ToTheHole]

You've asked to give You one historical proof, here it is. I've backtested only one season so far but i'm going to go deeper.
Was it coincidence? Maybe. I think all system wins or loses are coincidences. One thing i know for sure: playing that SAC V1 series would cost you nice amount of money.

Yeah I know i lost a couple of grand on it back then haha

[krzychu78]

Yeah that's cool, but that is one occasion. You could then qualify any of his historical losses using any previous game criteria! If it's not a theme you could just as easily put it down to coincidence or had sac lost that first game it might end up been the opposite where you don't bet if a team loses their first non conference road game (instead of wins it no bet). But they happened to win.

And another coincidence for you from season 2007/2008:

01/03/08: Oklahoma City @ Phoenix - V2 win
01/06/08: Oklahoma City @ Washington - V1 lost
01/08/08: Oklahoma City @ Cleveland - V1 lost
01/09/08: Oklahoma City @ New Jersey - V1 push

[jordanfreak]

Either way the system makes money even if there's about 2-3 losses a season. You cant win them all

[doin]

Next Series Bets Are:

11/15/2010 New Jersey - A bet (V1)
11/16/2010 New Yord - A bet (V1)
11/16/2010 Chicago - A bet (V1)
11/16/2010 L.A. Lakers - A bet (V2)

Good luck everyone.

thanks. these your picks or email from the man? and, does a gambler add 3 points to these system lines?