John Morrison 2011-12 NBA Thread

[Maxi_EV]

I'm not interfering with what you are doing. Continue your serious backtest and publish them. The points will be there!

[Nino7]

I did my calculations assuming a 3pts buy @ -185

1 loss = -46 units

My numbers are accurate.

ok but then if u use 1% = 1 unit and have two losses your busted...so basically u cant run this system buying points...OR you make your unit = 0,5% but then its no more 7/5...

[Wilba]

Thanks Kev....this is fantastic. Exactly what I was looking for. It does seem risky just going on C bets given the overall sample size. I am going to mess around with these records and see how the different variations look. I assume it has all been done before but will help me see the light one way or the other ...as far as to bet the A or not to bet the A.

I think the real win here and deciding factor would be the overall records without buying points ..so everything ATS @ -110. If the records are close to similar...there may be a very good argument to bet the A as the vig is very low and you wouldn't need a large win % to justify the bet.

Really appreciate the assist !

The records are not similar with no points. PLEASE do not make that mistake - the 3 points make a considerable % difference on each level, else they would never have been in the system in the first place!

As a general rule, if the win % with points is 58% for and 42% against, the win % without points will be exactly 50/50. That's a 16% combined swing, so most def not insignificant

[1gamer]

After last weeks "Blood Bath" on the Pistons and Bobcats, I'm suspending the Chase -110 (D) bet on the Hornets, and reinstating the play on the JM (B) bet on Dallas tomorrow (Disclaimer: This should not be attempted at home) This could prove to be a big mistake on my part, but I just can't stomach wagering a (D) bet on another inept team again, let alone versus the Bulls.

BOL

[shipsn2010]

chase

Ye of little faith. The win percent grows as the chase gets deeper.

[casdio]

So recap
All I'm saying is that IF KEV NUMBERS ARE CORRECT AND ARE ALL BASED ON BUYING 3PTS, THEN BC-7/5 WOULD HAVE GENERATE A TOTAL OF 883 UNITS WITH BUYING 3 PTS.

I don't know how much is your unit, but mine is 1.5% of my bankroll.

If I lose 1 chase, I'll lose 46 (by your numbers) units. That's 69% of my bankroll!

That's why the_limit says 7/5 is a bad method when buying points. You just take too long to win your bankroll again...

I was using the 7/5 with points bought, but I will stop. I had luck with that Bobcats victory, I don't want to risk it again

@the_limit: what's the system you suggest untill you release the numbers? 1-1-1? 1-3-5?

[1gamer]

Ye of little faith. The win percent grows as the chase gets deeper.

The beauty about it though, is that I can suspend the JM play and reinstate it back to Chase, if the value is there; at a moments notice.
With no Hornet opening lines, and Jack and Gordon out, it could be a GTD.

[J.M. Disciple]

Please let limit and wallco back test it properly and stop wasting your time. You are going to confuse everyone with inproper back testing.

Thanks
JMD

No more discussion until it has been properly back tested and posted.

[1gamer]

I don't care where you put it, I just don't like the amount your (B) bet has to be, meaning your C and D will also be much higher. If the bet does lose, it will be for a much larger amount.

Wallco has autorized these posts, until he cancels my authorization.

[Wallco99]

Why would a 7/5 approach not be suitable for buying points?
I ran the numbers and it is a killer.

Yes, your ten minute backtest is probably waaaay more accurate than our weeks of testing the same data, the proper way. WE have a hard time selling an 18 unit loss, good luck with the firestorm of a 46 unit loss.

[Wallco99]

You do not know the true numbers however. You can not say from that document how many series would have lost without the 3 points. You do not know how many series may have won on B officially, but went to C without 3 points. Not to mention you don't know the amount of B plays that would have been no plays based on the most efficient way-to-play criteria, either. Those results you have are off. Trust me, I'm the guy with 9 years of backtested data.

Don't pay any attention to it. Let's just keep doing what we are doing, when we are done with tests, we'll share the info., until then, ignore the 7/5 posts, I am.

[jwhedgepeth]

Ye of little faith. The win percent grows as the chase gets deeper.

You would think so Ships, but according to Wallco's records in Post 3916: http://forum.sbrforum.com/nba-basket...-nba-p112.html

The win percentages are quite similar across the board:

A = 61%
B = 52%
C = 58%
D = 58%

Now, these percentages were taken from when the system was first introduced last year, so there's been 60+ plays since then...but I'll bet a dollar that there hasn't been much change, especially since there was just a loss...if the D bets have gone 4-1 since, they're still only at 61%, which is equal to the A bet win rate.

Point I'm trying to make is, absolutely have faith in the system...there's no doubt it's been profitable...but make sure your risks are calculated...especially when there's that much money on the line.

Warm Regards,
John

[1gamer]

I've never claimed to have backtested anything. I wouldn't even know where to begin on backtesting (A) (B) parlays (How do you account for if you hit the parlay and how many times, and at what odds?); to (C) (D) SU chase wagers.

[Wallco99]

I've never claimed to have backtested anything. I wouldn't even know where to begin on backtesting (A) (B) parlays (How do you account for if you hit the parlay and how many times, and at what odds?); to (C) (D) SU chase wagers.

Who said you did?

[1gamer]

Please let limit and wallco back test it properly and stop wasting your time. You are going to confuse everyone with inproper back testing. Thanks JMD No more discussion until it has been properly back tested and posted.

My mistake.

[Maxi_EV]

ok but then if u use 1% = 1 unit and have two losses your busted...so basically u cant run this system buying points...OR you make your unit = 0,5% but then its no more 7/5...

Why is it no more!?!???!?

[J.M. Disciple]

My mistake.

Wasn't referring to you

I think it was maxi that was posting 176 units a season and buying 3 points etc...

[1gamer]

Wasn't referring to you I think it was maxi that was posting 176 units a season and buying 3 points etc...

Likewise, my mistake.

[Maxi_EV]

Yes, your ten minute backtest is probably waaaay more accurate than our weeks of testing the same data, the proper way. WE have a hard time selling an 18 unit loss, good luck with the firestorm of a 46 unit loss.

Wow...

Guys, you feel so attacked by what I did. What's the matter? I never said that running quick numbers was "waaaay more accurate than your weeks of testing". I know what you guys are doing right now, backtesting seriously every angle of it! I know the hard work it represents. I have my own backtests going on, some of them for 1 year!

So, why all this defensive manners?

Again, I took Kev's post and QUICKLY calculated that by applying a BC 7/5, one would have won x units and the losses would have cost him y units. THIS IS ALL I DID.

I DID NOT SAID THAT I FOUND SOMETHING. I DIDN'T TRIED TO SELL ANYTHING. I NEVER REFERED TO "THE 7/5 METHOD". I SIMPLY APPLIED A 7/5 BETTING STRUCTURE TO KEV'S NUMBERS.

If in the discussion you tell me that a 46 unit loss is too much @ 1% units, I UNDERSTAND. I am personnaly @ 0.5%. Everybody can manage their roll like they want.


So please guys, don't feel attacked by me. I am not interfering with "THE" 7/5 method. I am just juggling with "A" 7/5 betting structure applied to different systems.

[Wallco99]

Wow...

Guys, you feel so attacked by what I did. What's the matter? I never said that running quick numbers was "waaaay more accurate than your weeks of testing". I know what you guys are doing right now, backtesting seriously every angle of it! I know the hard work it represents. I have my own backtests going on, some of them for 1 year!

So, why all this defensive manners?

Again, I took Kev's post and QUICKLY calculated that by applying a BC 7/5, one would have won x units and the losses would have cost him y units. THIS IS ALL I DID.

I DID NOT SAID THAT I FOUND SOMETHING. I DIDN'T TRIED TO SELL ANYTHING. I NEVER REFERED TO "THE 7/5 METHOD". I SIMPLY APPLIED A 7/5 BETTING STRUCTURE TO KEV'S NUMBERS.

If in the discussion you tell me that a 46 unit loss is too much @ 1% units, I UNDERSTAND. I am personnaly @ 0.5%. Everybody can manage their roll like they want.


So please guys, don't feel attacked by me. I am not interfering with "THE" 7/5 method. I am just juggling with "A" 7/5 betting structure applied to different systems.

Sorry, just knew that a barage of questions about 7/5 would be inevitable after that post, and I really don't want to discuss it until we are done with the tests we are performing. But on a serious note, are you really going to implement a bet strategy where ALL losses are 46 units?

[Maxi_EV]

Sorry, just knew that a barage of questions about 7/5 would be inevitable after that post, and I really don't want to discuss it until we are done with the tests we are performing. But on a serious note, are you really going to implement a bet strategy where ALL losses are 46 units?

No problem.

At 0.25% of roll per unit, it becomes really interesting.
Risking 11.5% of roll on each series is not that bad and ending a season with a 44% growth in your roll is excellent.

[burchfield]

Are yall making money or losing it?

[Wallco99]

No problem.

At 0.25% of roll per unit, it becomes really interesting.
Risking 11.5% of roll on each series is not that bad and ending a season with a 44% growth in your roll is excellent.

There is one thing that you are missing that isn't reflected in Kevin's spreadsheet. The 2005-06 season was the worst one ever, and the two seasons before that were bad as well. Our tests are showing losses in those seasons, and honestly, your method may get crushed. You better research back a little further before making any rash judgements based on someone else's backtest results that are only 5 years deep. This is one of the reasons our testing is taking so long, we are trying to make the negative seasons positive, or at least minimize them without sacrificing too much of the profit in the winning seasons. One thing to note, it seems that the bet strategies that produce more profit in the winning years, also suffer more substantial losses in the losing years. This was the basis for my earlier comment about the "ten minute backtest", and declaring a strategy a winner before knowing ALL the details.

[Maxi_EV]

There is one thing that you are missing that isn't reflected in Kevin's spreadsheet. The 2005-06 season was the worst one ever, and the two seasons before that were bad as well. Our tests are showing losses in those seasons, and honestly, your method may get crushed. You better research back a little further before making any rash judgements based on someone else's backtest results that are only 5 years deep. This is one of the reasons our testing is taking so long, we are trying to make the negative seasons positive, or at least minimize them without sacrificing too much of the profit in the winning seasons. One thing to note, it seems that the bet strategies that produce more profit in the winning years, also suffer more substantial losses in the losing years. This was the basis for my earlier comment about the "ten minute backtest", and declaring a strategy a winner before knowing ALL the details.

I totally understand.
I didn't create any method.
I didn't declare anything else than : wow kev, applying BC 7-5 to the numbers you provide is really sick.

Nothing further.

[thelimit0310]

There is one thing that you are missing that isn't reflected in Kevin's spreadsheet. The 2005-06 season was the worst one ever, and the two seasons before that were bad as well. Our tests are showing losses in those seasons, and honestly, your method may get crushed. You better research back a little further before making any rash judgements based on someone else's backtest results that are only 5 years deep. This is one of the reasons our testing is taking so long, we are trying to make the negative seasons positive, or at least minimize them without sacrificing too much of the profit in the winning seasons. One thing to note, it seems that the bet strategies that produce more profit in the winning years, also suffer more substantial losses in the losing years. This was the basis for my earlier comment about the "ten minute backtest", and declaring a strategy a winner before knowing ALL the details.

Wallco check your messages, new info concerning this

[Wallco99]

I totally understand.
I didn't create any method.
I didn't declare anything else than : wow kev, applying BC 7-5 to the numbers you provide is really sick.

Nothing further.

Cool, all good, let's just WIN!

[Wallco99]

Wallco check your messages, new info concerning this

Can you send me that message again, for some reason it won't let me open the one you sent.

[Maxi_EV]

Cool, all good, let's just WIN!

[thelimit0310]

Can you send me that message again, for some reason it won't let me open the one you sent.

Just resent. There should be 2 from me now. One of them with some rather important news.

[Swan4brownlow]

I'm sure this problem has been come across before and that there has been an explanation about how to deal with such circumstances, but tomorrow there is a Chase 110 D bet on NOH and a JM A bet on CHI. How are people going to play this situation?

[Bugs Bunny]

from the JM calendar we got Miami as a V3 play tonight.

We also have <style> <!-- BODY,DIV,TABLE,THEAD,TBODY,TFOOT,TR,TH,T D,P ** font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"; font-size:x-small ** --> </style> <table style="width: 356px; height: 32px;" frame="VOID" rules="NONE" border="0" cellspacing="0" cols="1"> <colgroup><col width="341"></colgroup> <tbody> <tr> <td align="LEFT" height="18" width="341">8 Chicago V3 (continued from Jan 29/Feb 2 series)

What does this actually mean?

BOL tonight
</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

[Wallco99]

Wallco NBA Chase 110
2011-12 System to date: 29-1 (fin. series)
System profit/loss: +10.55 units (fin. series)
Current open series: 1 (-8.45 units)

v1 Plays
(A) 22-9
(B) 3-6
(C) 2-4
(D) 2-1

V2 Plays
In production


There are no system plays for (2/8/12):
#30 Chicago @ New Orleans (+10) (D) (8:05 pm EST)
#32 Dallas (+1) @ Denver (A) (9:05 pm EST)
#33 Indiana @ Atlanta (M/L) (A) 7:35 pm EST)
#34 Dallas @ Denver (M/L) (A) (9:05 pm EST)
#35 Milwaukee (M/L) @ Toronto (A) (7:05 pm EST)

** I would suggest skipping the Dallas/Denver (A) bets, and picking up the loser on the (B) bet, for the normal (B) bet amount.


We will ALWAYS play the M/L on favorites and the point spread (-110) on dogs. There is no point buying in this system, with one exception, if your team is the favorite, and buying down to a zero 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 change, but it is the individual bettor’s responsibility to get the appropriate line if it differs from my post. On occasion, we will have plays that go head-head. The system will grade ALL bets, regardless of opponents, how you wish to play these games is your choice.

[casdio]

I'm sure this problem has been come across before and that there has been an explanation about how to deal with such circumstances, but tomorrow there is a Chase 110 D bet on NOH and a JM A bet on CHI. How are people going to play this situation?

I will play the highest bet. In this case, the D bet.

[shipsn2010]

play

Right on..

[manutd19]

Wish you luck on the Hornets D bet.