~2010-2011 NBA Plays~

[Sambooka]

2 locals....(had 3 and 1 got raided and hes still mia)....1 of the 2 has an online site set up.

one of my guys even takes a text from me if i am not at my pc..lol

hey Dex...
I wonder if we're using the same guy? since we're both from the same neighborhood. Do you know Eugene or Vince?
my online setup is ABCwagering.

[Dexter]

hey Dex...
I wonder if we're using the same guy? since we're both from the same neighborhood. Do you know Eugene or Vince?
my online setup is ABCwagering.

pm sent

[JR007]

Playoffs 5/2-5/8: 8-4 (+7.1u)

YTD: 311-313 (-73.25u)

Respect the honest record...but playing this many games ..the juice will kill you...

[Dexter]

Respect the honest record...but playing this many games ..the juice will kill you...

you're such a jerkoff.....i play 3 games per day.



go cut and paste some more articles cause you have no clue how to form you're own opinions.

or better yet, why dont you go fight one of your other battles in cyberspace old man.

you're a pathetic lonely man..(its pretty easy to see)..

would love to see you have the balls to post your plays and keep an annual record....fukin cyberspace coward.

[Dexter]

thread is up for you JR. time to start posting your plays big shot. you've trolled around here too long.

[Anthonyg7]

On Chi and under. Gl dex

[Dexter]

wow...according to JR i am an attention whore. you nailed it JR. i am always seeking attention telling people to tail me, how great i am, endzone dancing after wins. wow...

[JR007]

i have recieved" promotonal infractions" for posting sources in the past......this is free info posted...for everyone to see......i respect the forum rules.......pretty easy to find.....when you bet a lot of plays ...the juice is going to get you......common sense......need to hit roughly 52.4 %...to overcome the theoretical hold

[Dexter]

i have recieved" promotonal infractions" for posting sources in the past......this is free info posted...for everyone to see......i respect the forum rules.......pretty easy to find.....

listen dude....im not into this whole cyberspace drama that you love. i dont bother anyone (except touts or soon to be touts) and i am an honest member of this site. the fact that you chose to kick me when im down from your keyboard shows how much of a coward you are. in the real world, you can never get away with acting like that.

go fight with someone else....

[Anthonyg7]

Tuesday 5/10: (10u) bulls -8.5

Cash this bad boy

Also cashed my under

[suicidekings]

i have recieved" promotonal infractions" for posting sources in the past......this is free info posted...for everyone to see......i respect the forum rules.......pretty easy to find.....when you bet a lot of plays ...the juice is going to get you......common sense......need to hit roughly 52.4 %...to overcome the theoretical hold

This makes absolutely no sense... Longterm, Dexter is a +EV capper. One of the very few.

[suicidekings]

Wed 5/11:
(3u) heat -7
(3u) thunder -6

I've got a feeling that Miami is going to be very kind to your hometown lean tomorrow.

[terpkeg]

Respect the honest record...but playing this many games ..the juice will kill you...

So if you play 700 games in a year, the juice will kill you? What if you play 700 games in 2 years? 5 years? 100 years? Juice going to kill you then? I think it is a flaw that people think more games is inherently bad. I suppose many gamblers find an edge in fewer games than they actually bet (not saying that is the case here)

You need to play games to win dollars, the more you play the more you win, if you are a winning player of course.

[JR007]

This makes absolutely no sense... Longterm, Dexter is a +EV capper. One of the very few.

another one who knows everything.... +ev(.is that a opinion ??.).....just take a visit to the think tank...and read
start with Ganchow, Justin.......read Sharp betting, (Wong).Conquering Risk(....Bookstore.).....one poster here has the right idea...one play per day...60%...(.+ev) is only good for the long term.....put your egos in your back pocket.....and come back when you do some research.................you need......to do better than 52.4 % to overcome the vig.......refute that ....with some "facts"

[JR007]

So if you play 700 games in a year, the juice will kill you? What if you play 700 games in 2 years? 5 years? 100 years? Juice going to kill you then? I think it is a flaw that people think more games is inherently bad. I suppose many gamblers find an edge in fewer games than they actually bet (not saying that is the case here)

You need to play games to win dollars, the more you play the more you win, if you are a winning player of course.

think.... that the more games you play the more chance to lose...everything that I have read is that most games are priced 'correctly.......and there are only a few that provide a edge...again further reading indicates to me that sharps only bet where they see a game(s) that gives them the edge that they are looking for

[suicidekings]

another one who knows everything.... +ev(.is that a opinion ??.).....just take a visit to the think tank...and read
start with Ganchow, Justin.......read Sharp betting, (Wong).Conquering Risk(....Bookstore.).....one poster here has the right idea...one play per day...60%...(.+ev) is only good for the long term.....put your egos in your back pocket.....and come back when you do some research.................you need......to do better than 52.4 % to overcome the vig.......refute that ....with some "facts"

I don't want to clutter up Dex's thread with nonsense, so I'll just settle for this:

Welcome to the ignore list.

[MrSink]

nice call with bulls

[MrSink]

favs lookin' good today

[Love The Action]

another one who knows everything.... +ev(.is that a opinion ??.).....just take a visit to the think tank...and read
start with Ganchow, Justin.......read Sharp betting, (Wong).Conquering Risk(....Bookstore.).....one poster here has the right idea...one play per day...60%...(.+ev) is only good for the long term.....put your egos in your back pocket.....and come back when you do some research.................you need......to do better than 52.4 % to overcome the vig.......refute that ....with some "facts"

Ridiculous... First, SK is probably one of the few on this board that has the intelligence and capping experience to back up all of his statements. Furthermore, to question Dexter's capping strategy and processes after years of success over a large sample size is nothing more than ignorant.

Try reading the books written by Bob McCune and others who have discussed this issue (i.e. whether you are better off playing more games resulting in a lower win percentage or fewer games with a higher win percentage). The answer always depends on your capping abilities. If you know what you are doing, then you should be playing every single game that presents a +ev edge. Otherwise, you are throwing money down the drain by not playing such games. The idea is to turn over your BR as much as possible, in order to hit on as much profit as possible. If you are only playing one play per day, it becomes extremely difficult to turn your BR over and you will be missing out on profit. Don't you hate when 5 of your leans "hit," but the one game you play is a loser? If you are a solid capper with a solid capping technique, then you should play every game where you believe there to be an edge. You should believe in yourself and your abilities to hit at a profitable rate, regardless of the total number of plays. The total number of plays should never factor into decision making -- every play should be based on your edge for that particular play and should not be cast aside because you already feel good about another play. Why anyone would not play a game where they think they have the edge, to me, is just stupid.

If you do not have much confidence in your abilities and play scared, that is when you should limit your plays. However, such a capper would never be successful anyway so it doesn't matter. You can't win unless you believe in yourself and your capping techniques.

Dexter has proven himself to be a winning capper with winning techniques over a large sample size. To question Dexter's style after years of success, is just ignorant...and stupid.

[Dexter]

Guys - i appreciate the back up, but lets drop it. JR is pissed at me b/c i backed up Goat a few times and we had it out over PM.

I actually kind of appreciate his words of advice (though he could have written it a bit nicer). There definitely were times this season where i played more then the 3 games per day i intended, but i was down a whole bunch and tried getting some of it back with more games. My style would never to be chasing on 1 huge $4k/$5k play.

I am fully committed to stay disciplined with less plays and am practicing that now in baseball. There are nights where i make just 1 play. With me playing all sports (NBA, NCAAF, NFL, NCAAB and MLB) there is no reason for me to even force 3 games per day in 1 sport. Its something i have to work on, but deep down i am still a gamblor.

[JR007]

Last post....to have a decent +ev....you need around 54%..win rate.....if i was employing a chase system ,or betting on line
(not intending to pull my money) anytime soon.......maybe i would look to play as many + ev plays as possible.....not the case
I prefer to pay or get paid weekly....money management comes into play...i bet three games this week...I won 200.00 and am pulling my money....start again Friday.....if you bother to read any of Nicky Santoro's posts......it is all about Math.....handicappinjg means nothing..you cannot predict the outcome of future events ........

Thanks SK i am flattered.....Dexter your posted record is below 50%....that is -ev.....you went in to another person's thread to attack me............that was wrong........certain posters here(know) that I have their back..... that's the loyalty I returned to them for their knowledge......I also gave you ,Sk and a few other posters here credit for my learning curve....review my posts.....re-assess your 'edge'
juice, again, will kill you.....as i recall Dexter..you were all over goatmilk for calling you a line movement guy ..remember ??....plays are secondary.......winning money is the first priority....+ev ...sounds great... in textbooks......hit quick get out.....pay bills..just like the Ocean....always going to be there( games to bet, that is) most in these forums do not have the resources.....to do it any other way

[Dexter]

Last post....to have a decent +ev....you need around 54%..win rate.....if i was employing a chase system ,or betting on line
(not intending to pull my money) anytime soon.......maybe i would look to play as many + ev plays as possible.....not the case
I prefer to pay or get paid weekly....money management comes into play...i bet three games this week...I won 200.00 and am pulling my money....start again Friday.....if you bother to read any of Nicky Santoro's posts......it is all about Math.....handicappinjg means nothing..you cannot predict the outcome of future events ........

Thanks SK i am flattered.....Dexter your posted record is below 50%....that is -ev.....you went in to another person's thread to attack me............that was wrong........certain posters here(know) that I have their back..... that's the loyalty I returned to them for their knowledge......I also gave you ,Sk and a few other posters here credit for my learning curve....review my posts.....re-assess your 'edge'
juice, again, will kill you.....as i recall Dexter..you were all over goatmilk for calling you a line movement guy ..remember ??....plays are secondary.......winning money is the first priority....+ev ...sounds great... in textbooks......hit quick get out.....pay bills..just like the Ocean....always going to be there( games to bet, that is) most in these forums do not have the resources.....to do it any other way

you're all over the place....some posts i have read you comment on how people care too much about win/loss record, now here you keep hammering home my win %. im not going to ever hit a high % and i dont care about that nonsense. its all about hitting the big plays, and the guy you sweat the most on SBR feels the same way.

no one wants to here about your non-posted success. if you're so good, then prove it with a thread of documented plays.

every post of yours a few months ago was attacking Goat Milk over some beef from a long time ago. 2 wrongs dont make a right.

now get the hell out of here...

[JR007]

Good luck with your next 600 plays "juiceman"......it is all about ROI (return of investment)

[Dexter]

Good luck with your next 600 plays "juiceman"......it is all about ROI (return of investment)

you're so transparent. cheer up JR.

[Dexter]

PS JR: you didnt cut and paste that thought propely. Its Return ON Investment....

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/returnoninvestment.asp

[necro]

i know jr007 from bettingadvice and imo he is not a person i want to be friend with him. and he is belgian

imo dexter is good capper, i you don't like his sytle, than skip this thread.

[JR007]

here you go "JUICYFRUIT"

This article addresses the Return on Investment (ROI) a player can expect at various winning percentages. Ever wonder how to calculate your return on investment? What can you realistically expect at various winning percentages? Read on...
The “investment” we are speaking of is the money laid to win a bet (for example $110 to win $100) and, if applicable, the cost of a sports service. The “return” is the net winnings or losses based on that investment. We can look at historical average returns for common stocks as a reasonable benchmark. Over the past 75 years stocks have returned around 10% per year.
Now what about sports betting? ROI is calculated simply by taking the net winnings or losses and dividing by the amount risked (invested). So, if you put up $110 to win $100 and win the bet, your ROI on that single bet is 90.9% ($100 / $110). So, if you have 100% win rate, your ROI is 90.9% - not too shabby!
But, as we know, a more realistic expected win rate over the course of a season is probably in the 50%-60% range. With a 10% vigorish, you need to hit 52.38% to break exactly even – an ROI of 0%. Here’s the ROI at various win rates assuming a 110 risk to win 100:

Win %
ROI %
50%
-4.55%
52%
-0.73%
54%
3.09%
56%
6.91%
58%
10.73%
60%
14.55%
62%
18.36%
64%
22.18%
66%
26.00%
68%
29.82%
70%
33.64%

[Dexter]

wow, he just cut and pasted another article.

still waiting for your plays in a documented thread to prove how sharp you are....

[Dexter]

Last post

yeah, figured that wasnt gonna be the case....

cyberspace troll.

[JR007]

Smaller numbers = higher variance
It is extremely important to note that thanks to the "law of large numbers", the fewer games bet, the higher the variance. What does this mean? It means that the chances of winning a lot or losing a lot increases as the number of bets decrease. It also means that over the short run, my picks (and all sports betting in general) has a much higher variance than do other investments (like the stock market). The stock market tends to change very little on a daily basis (usually less than 1%). Meanwhile, your sports betting bankroll will see much larger daily swings (sometimes more than 10%).
Think of it this way. If we flip a coin, we expect to see heads 50% of the time and tails 50% of the time. If we flip a coin 3500 times, we would expect to be very close to 1750 heads and 1750 tails. It would be extremely rare, with 3500 "trials" to vary far from that. But if we flip it 200 times, we are much more likely to vary from the expected 100 heads and 100 tails. It would not be unreasonable to see 60% heads on 200 trials.
Another way to think about this is to compare it to diversification in the stock market. If you index (buy every stock in the market), your yearly return will be relatively stable. But if you load everything you have into just a few stocks, your returns will be much more variable (you can win or lose a lot).

[hawley]

JR you are the biggest troll on this forum

[Hoopster17]

Much respect Dex, keep up the good work buddy...

[fly fisher]

Dex. Is it Atlanta or Chicago tommorow? I want to take Chicago at -3.5, I am thinking that they end it tomorrow that way the NBA can get the Heat and Bulls series going. What do you think? You have been taking the home team, but do you think Atl can keep it close? I can be swayed to take Atl Looking at this series, none of the games have been close, the winner wins by more than 8 each time. I just think that Chicago is the better team. My thought are that Atl wins the 1st qtr and maybe the first half, but then loses the game by more than 3.5. So my lean is Chicago.

The spread is at a -3.5 but not one game has been close
G1 Chicago loses at home by 8 spread is -8.5, no cover
G2 Chicago wins at home by 13 spread is -8.5, cover
G3 Chicago wins on the road by 17 spread is -2.5, cover
G4 Chicago loses on the road by 12 spread is -3.5, no cover
G5 Chicago wins at home by 12 spread is -8.5, cover

[JR007]

standard deviation,regression to the mean,probability and statistics,.......that is what it is all about....old saying from a 57 year old punk
( as you refer to me)..".the bookie will take you to the cleaners a pair of pants at a time"...the next 600 plays will have the same result give or take...coin flips,dart throwing..all the same.....live and learn...I did

[Hoopster17]