John Morrison 2010 NBA

[krzychu78]

Odds for tomorrow games are already available at pinnacle
Indiana +9, Portland -5, San Antonio +1.5.

[jmjj]

We've got also:
11/28/2010 San Antonio @ New Orleans - V3, A bet

hey somebody tell me if these are the accurate plays and results from NBA v2.0 2010? thanks


October 2010
1. Portland (A) vs Clippers 10/27/10 (A Bet Win)
2. Kings (A) vs Timberwolves 10/27/10 (A Bet Win)
3. Timberwolves (A) vs Memphis 10/30/10 (A Bet Loss/B Bet Loss/C Bet Loss)







November 2010
1. Nuggets (A) vs Mavs 11/6/10 (A Bet Win)
2. Celtics (A) vs Thunder 11/7/10 (A Bet Win)
3. 76ers (A) vs Knicks 11/7/10 (A Bet Win)
4. Lakers (A) vs Bucks 11/16/10 (A Bet Win)
5. Cavs (A) vs Hornets 11/19/10 (A Bet Win)

[Wilba]

You are talking about straight betting, of course you lose betting like that for a system, but people here bets labby or a more risky martingale.

JW Cash explained it well, you don't take the whole loss onto the next A-bet (Line A) , you divide it so the A-Line:s values is is 50% less then the BC-Line:s values (40-60). If you say win next 3 series on B, then the A-bet would be bigger if you didn't recalculate it, so do that to remain the 40-60 correlation.

In my response I said that after a c-loss an A-bet(labby) gains more profit then an A-bet(Martingale), I didn't say it were bigger then the B-C-bets...

Not playing JM but have had experience with it, and Labby is more like investment and Martingale pure gambling

I am well aware of all that you mention above. If you read my post more carefully you will see that I say "if you use a labby strictly. in the strictest def'n this means one line simple labby tack loss on the end win wipes two numbers etc. I was also careful to say that I think the labby is a good, profitable, way of doing things. I at no point suggested it was not a great tool when used right. I was simply pointing out that there are other as good tools also.

IMO if you know for a fact that B's hit 66.08% and C's hit 80.49%, then flat betting these two if/when they are available for ~7%, and ~18% of your roll, respectively, is a foolproof method. Doing it like this there is 0 risk of bet levels ever reaching uncomfortable proportions in the event of 5/6 series going to a C bet (which actually happened 2 years ago). So I actually think that this is an even more conservative approach than labby, and yields equal/more profit. In my mind I do not really see how the fact that if the last A and B bets lost makes it more likely that the next A or B bet will win - the two series are completely unrelated. It would only make sense to me to put more on one A/B/C bet if I had evidence that it had a higher chance of winning than the last A/B/C bet I placed, or if I had increased my roll.

JM sys martingale is definitely not gambling too IMO, it has 20 years of profits to back up its worth, however I think (as you do) that there are much better methods than straight series martingales, which make much better money with less risk. As I posted earlier JW's implementation of labby seems to be one of the better ones.

[krzychu78]

hey somebody tell me if these are the accurate plays and results from NBA v2.0 2010? thanks
October 2010
1. Portland (A) vs Clippers 10/27/10 (A Bet Win)
2. Kings (A) vs Timberwolves 10/27/10 (A Bet Win)
3. Timberwolves (A) vs Memphis 10/30/10 (A Bet Loss/B Bet Loss/C Bet Loss)
November 2010
1. Nuggets (A) vs Mavs 11/6/10 (A Bet Win)
2. Celtics (A) vs Thunder 11/7/10 (A Bet Win)
3. 76ers (A) vs Knicks 11/7/10 (A Bet Win)
4. Lakers (A) vs Bucks 11/16/10 (A Bet Win)
5. Cavs (A) vs Hornets 11/19/10 (A Bet Win)

All games listed above are correct V2 plays.

[jmjj]

All games listed above are correct V2 plays.

thanks krz I hear that John didnt send out the MN game as a v2.0 but as a f ucked up accident email problem for a v1.0 subsribers then he later renigged on the v1.0 people saying he goofed up isnt that correct?

last yr v2.0 was pretty damn good we didnt lose once but whatever it seems we have this yr hopefully we can finish strong -)

[ghislaine]

ghislaine just make sure that you don't over extend yourself. If you're sticking with the JM NBA system then just stick to that. That's how bankrolls easily get killed when you start looking for action because the system has a few nights off.

You are absolutely right, and someone here stated we have 160 games with all versions, so yup, I try to remember that standing aside is a position !!!

[ghislaine]

So You guys play the NFL with JM system ?? I understand there is a NHL system as well...

and of course the MLB wich did poorly this last season.

If someone knows and uses these I am more than interested to hear about these, I am guessing the NHL and NFL are playing right now, how are they doing ???

Oh, three games tonight

[knugen]

Have still not received any mail from mr...

[GGPLAYER]

Then why waste your time and our thread space by coming in here posting?

You know what cracks me up? people like you coming here all the time to post crap like that. I mean jeez, get a life, seriously. You got way too much time on your hands.

ps jmjj with your earlier post about JM MLB this season you are absolutely right in all that you posted. The season was a shocker and I cant believe that scamming loser weaseled his way out of admitting all but 1 loss. What a turd

First off shut your pie hole. Who the F are you Wilba? Secondly I said that becasue it was posted like 3 times already that GS was a b bet. The only time I waste is making my way thru hundreds of worthless posts like yours. Nobody takes 1 minute to read sh*t around here. So yeah this thread cracks me up! Every other day it's what's a "A" bet, what "do you mean by chasing?" "What are the bets??" Go pull up a schedule and look for yourself people!! It's not rocket science. And again to anybody who thinks they know their sh*t this system loses! JM lies and lies and lies. Last year he straight up lost a series and put a vote to his "followers" to say "well if we applied this new filter that I came up with, we'll just say the series won for recored keeping purposes" What!?!? Good luck to everyone (except Wilba) sersiouly your all going to need.

[SolidDala]

I am well aware of all that you mention above. If you read my post more carefully you will see that I say "if you use a labby strictly. in the strictest def'n this means one line simple labby tack loss on the end win wipes two numbers etc. I was also careful to say that I think the labby is a good, profitable, way of doing things. I at no point suggested it was not a great tool when used right. I was simply pointing out that there are other as good tools also.

IMO if you know for a fact that B's hit 66.08% and C's hit 80.49%, then flat betting these two if/when they are available for ~7%, and ~18% of your roll, respectively, is a foolproof method. Doing it like this there is 0 risk of bet levels ever reaching uncomfortable proportions in the event of 5/6 series going to a C bet (which actually happened 2 years ago). So I actually think that this is an even more conservative approach than labby, and yields equal/more profit. In my mind I do not really see how the fact that if the last A and B bets lost makes it more likely that the next A or B bet will win - the two series are completely unrelated. It would only make sense to me to put more on one A/B/C bet if I had evidence that it had a higher chance of winning than the last A/B/C bet I placed, or if I had increased my roll.

JM sys martingale is definitely not gambling too IMO, it has 20 years of profits to back up its worth, however I think (as you do) that there are much better methods than straight series martingales, which make much better money with less risk. As I posted earlier JW's implementation of labby seems to be one of the better ones.

Yes I read it carefully and understood your point, just wanted you to understand my thinking without an long answer. I follow and agree with your reasoning of not bet more on the next A-bet since %-wise it as not a bigger shoot of winning. But when using Labouchere this is not taken into account.

One could say Labby is chasing over many series with less agressive style while Martingale is chasing over just one series with a very agressive style.

If those numbers from buying 3 points over an 20y period are accurate, then yes flatbetting on -170 lines is a good approach. But betting 7% is not a winning way and I personally would never risk anything near 18% on a flatbet, but we all play differently...

[million2one]

Good luck today, Portland line seems pretty high though, I think his system says to take the ML anyways, right?

[kcDdegenerate]

[soldier1047]

Still good info. I learn a lot. I have done JM for three years.

[stevex]

Official JM e-mail yet?

[mitchp]

I'm showing Portland and Indiana as plays today, but I don't think Indiana is correct. Still waiting for the official email or DVB to chime in.

[krzychu78]

I'm showing Portland and Indiana as plays today, but I don't think Indiana is correct. Still waiting for the official email or DVB to chime in.

Why do you think Indiana is incorrect?

[stevex]

I don't think he even sent out an official NFL system e-mail either before the games started....

[dukipl]

Official V1 PLAYS:
11/28/2010 Indiana [a bet] +12,5 (after buying points) vs. LAL
11/28/2010 Portland [a bet] (ML play) vs. NYN
gl all

[scarface2738]

Yah John Morrison is the man!

[stevex]

dukipl or anyone get the e-mail?

[mitchp]

I went back and double checked thing, Portland and Indiana are the V1 plays, sorry for the error

[jphil]

i didn't receive e-mail either.

[stevex]

Interesting. I guess we will wait and see....

[jphil]

WILBA: I'm all for the 2 gm. series theory (haven't quite nailed down the labby yet).

So w/ the B & C gms., is it a must to buy all 3 pts.? or is 1 or 2 pts. OK?

What is your opinion on playin A & B's only if they win more often? with or without pts.?

[lilb999]

I dont see how the Spurs werent favored in this one...

In either case, congrats to those who bet!

[Wilba]

Yes I read it carefully and understood your point, just wanted you to understand my thinking without an long answer. I follow and agree with your reasoning of not bet more on the next A-bet since %-wise it as not a bigger shoot of winning. But when using Labouchere this is not taken into account.

One could say Labby is chasing over many series with less agressive style while Martingale is chasing over just one series with a very agressive style.

If those numbers from buying 3 points over an 20y period are accurate, then yes flatbetting on -170 lines is a good approach. But betting 7% is not a winning way and I personally would never risk anything near 18% on a flatbet, but we all play differently...

Sure, I agree with all of your points above, and yes everyone has different ways that work for them. ps sorry i know some of my posts have been very long!

And yes of course under normal circumstances 18% is a stupidly big amount to risk, however I am confident enough in the system to do this (note again the tried and tested 80% flat bet hit rate), I just worked out that I would have to lose 9.7 (ten) straight B/C bet 'series' to drop into the negative in my use of this system since I started 3.5 years ago. Given that losing 10 straight series is nigh on impossible, and I have made good money each and every year, I am very happy with this method.

I enjoyed this discussion and your point of view. Everyone has different ways of doing things and is always interesting to hear about them. Cheers

[Wilba]

WILBA: I'm all for the 2 gm. series theory (haven't quite nailed down the labby yet).

So w/ the B & C gms., is it a must to buy all 3 pts.? or is 1 or 2 pts. OK?

What is your opinion on playin A & B's only if they win more often? with or without pts.?

you will still definitely make money buying no points with only B/C bet. however you will make slightly more when u do buy the points. For some reason, possibly a statistical anomaly, buying the 3 points on the C's turned out to be particularly important, no idea why. So on C's I would def buy points, but personally I always buy the points regardless of situation.

If you were going to reduce each series to a 2 game series, I have no idea why you would suggest only playing A/B when I pointed out a few posts ago that C's are way more profitable than B's, and B's are way more profitable than A's. At a guess I would say that you would make a small amount each season if you only played the A/B and called series loss if B loses (this is a guess and not based on tested stats). However this makes zero sense to me as the C is the best %, followed by B. So why would u not do B/C if reducing to a 2 game series. Maybe I misunderstood your question?

[Wilba]

First off shut your pie hole. Who the F are you Wilba? Secondly I said that becasue it was posted like 3 times already that GS was a b bet. The only time I waste is making my way thru hundreds of worthless posts like yours. Nobody takes 1 minute to read sh*t around here. So yeah this thread cracks me up! Every other day it's what's a "A" bet, what "do you mean by chasing?" "What are the bets??" Go pull up a schedule and look for yourself people!! It's not rocket science. And again to anybody who thinks they know their sh*t this system loses! JM lies and lies and lies. Last year he straight up lost a series and put a vote to his "followers" to say "well if we applied this new filter that I came up with, we'll just say the series won for recored keeping purposes" What!?!? Good luck to everyone (except Wilba) sersiouly your all going to need.

who am i? I am just some guy who enjoys discussing profitable systems with other like minded people, and exploring money making opportunities through back testing systems. I think maybe I am the sort of person who belongs in a thread like this. You, on the other hand, appear to be a jaded loser who blew his whole bankroll through bad money management, and because you are bitter, keep coming back to bash people who are smart enough to use good money management and make money. Just a guess based on the sorts of things that you post, and the fact that you keep coming back and posting in this thread even though you claim we are all losers ummm then why do you keep coming back for more??

and wow you must be dumb if you think everyone in here does not already know that
i) this system has losing series' (duh.. which system does not ever lose.. what a ridiculous comment..) and
ii) JM is a lying prick who publishes false results.
We all know that. Does that mean that we are not smart enough to make money from a good system which has been profitable every year for 20 years, even when you include the real losses that he filters out? Obviously we are smart enough to do this. Don't come bash us just coz your too silly to work this out for yourself/ believed his crap and risked your whole roll on a losing series and now you are bitter

ps if you use good money management and your brain you do not need 'good luck'. Success in sports betting has zilch to do with luck

best of luck to you and if you do not have no life and way too much time on your hands I assume we will not see you in this thread again

[ToTheHole]

Lock and Load Tuesday

[stevex]

Portland was up by 10 when I checked on my phone, then got back home and saw that they lost . On to the [b] bet on Tuesday though, no worries. Pacers hanging tough with the Lake Show as I type this so will see what happens.

[Wilba]

Yup Port will cover B, if not they will cover C! Never know with teams playing the lakers, if Kobe goes on one of his ridiculous streaks he can put his team up 20 in half a quarter. Pacers lookin good so far though

[lawalahmed]

I'm waiting on the other wing ( Fade) ...Lol

[Wilba]

I'm waiting on the other wing ( Fade) ...Lol

???

[shermanator]

Portland lost looks like pacers are gonna cover.

[stevex]

Pacers end up winning straight up! 1 - 1 on the night. 2 - 1 if you played the Spurs (V.3) so a decent night. Portland [B] bet will be on Tuesday. Night folks.