John Morrison 2011-12 NBA Thread

**stevex** · 02-11-12, 10:01 PM

Exactly. This whole idea of skipping the A bets is just ridiculous. People try to do all of this research about what methods work the best. Please. The fact of the matter is, you bet all 3 bets. A,B,C. When the A bets hit you make money. When you don't bet the A bets and they hit, you don't make money. I'm not saying I don't appreciate the work that some of the people do in this thread, but I'll always bet the A bets. Why? Because when they hit, I make money.

Simple.

**alexknyc** · 02-11-12, 10:11 PM

Originally posted by stevex

Exactly. This whole idea of skipping the A bets is just ridiculous. People try to do all of this research about what methods work the best. Please. The fact of the matter is, you bet all 3 bets. A,B,C. When the A bets hit you make money. When you don't bet the A bets and they hit, you don't make money. I'm not saying I don't appreciate the work that some of the people do in this thread, but I'll always bet the A bets. Why? Because when they hit, I make money. Simple.

You can do as you please but betting 7/5 on the B/C bets after the A loses seems to have been shown in the backtest to make you MORE money than betting the A bets the JM way. So, yes, when the A bet hits, you make money but, apparently, not as much as you'd have made betting 7/5.

Maybe you could look into whether betting the A and then going 7/5 if it loses works even better than just 7/5 itself. Or whether 8/6 works better after losing the A bet.

There's a whole host of possibilities but, if you're satisfied with the A bets, then keep doing what you're doing.

**1gamer** · 02-11-12, 10:21 PM

Originally posted by alexknyc

Well, that's part of the problem right there. You can tell NOTHING about profitability by a straight W-L record. I can go 1-5 but show a profit depending on how much I bet on which bet. Conversely, I can go 5-1 and be down for the night.

Rephrase: All things being equal, I consider a 30-20 a winning record. For the sake of this discussion, we're assuming people are +units going 30-20 on (A) bets.

**alexknyc** · 02-11-12, 10:24 PM

Originally posted by 1gamer

Rephrase: All things being equal, I consider a 30-20 a winning record.

Again, not necessarily true. If your 30 wins are at -110 and your 20 losses are at -170, you're in the red.

If you're betting the same amount at the same odds, you're correct. But is that what the A bets have been?

**Wallco99** · 02-11-12, 10:25 PM

Originally posted by ClevelandNextYr

Wallco are you playing this method with any of the other systems?

I am trying out that "under 80 points system" with the 7/5, been working there also. Can't really do it with NHL, since odds are usually too high for each bet. Not with Chase 110 either, since it is a 4 game chase with a high A bet win percentage, and still several bets going to D. But I have been working on other bet strategies recently for Chase 110, and hopefully I can satisfactorily come up with a better method.

**Wallco99** · 02-11-12, 10:27 PM

Originally posted by stevex

Hey Wallco..

I will gladly take the money I won with the philly A bet tonight

hahaha. such a joke.

As I will with my 7 units from Miami last night, and three other 7 unit hits this week. How's that for a punch line!!!!!

**1gamer** · 02-11-12, 10:31 PM

I love the 5/7 idea, and thank you for your findings. However, I just see no tangible connection between (A) losses of 4 or > and 5/7 on the (B) (C), especially with the (A) bets winning record of 30-19.

Again: ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL

**dlunc3** · 02-11-12, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by Wallco99

I am trying out that "under 80 points system" with the 7/5, been working there also. Can't really do it with NHL, since odds are usually too high for each bet. Not with Chase 110 either, since it is a 4 game chase with a high A bet win percentage, and still several bets going to D. But I have been working on other bet strategies recently for Chase 110, and hopefully I can satisfactorily come up with a better method.

Surprised to see you playing that system... every time I see that thread show up I cant figure out how it is still going with the lack of someone actually running it correctly. I am surprised you are playing it without a thorough backtest more then just one year back, for this kind of money (7+5)? It is a 4 game chase right? Which games are you doing the 7 + 5 on if you dont mind sharing?

**Wallco99** · 02-11-12, 10:37 PM

Originally posted by dlunc3

Surprised to see you playing that system... every time I see that thread show up I cant figure out how it is still going with the lack of someone actually running it correctly. I am surprised you are playing it without a thorough backtest more then just one year back, for this kind of money (7+5)? It is a 4 game chase right? Which games are you doing the 7 + 5 on if you dont mind sharing?

I did some testing on my own, back 6 years. Playing B&C for 7/5 is where I am at right now. I keep my own spreadsheet. Logging on to that thread will only confuse you.

**COBRA31** · 02-11-12, 10:37 PM

Clippers beat up Bobcats true to form.

Give me back my units !

Hope some of you came along for the ride. Bobcats pathetic play can be a thing of beauty.

**Wallco99** · 02-11-12, 10:38 PM

Originally posted by 1gamer

I love the 5/7 idea, and thank you for your findings. However, I just see no tangible connection between (A) losses of 4 or > and 5/7 on the (B) (C), especially with the (A) bets winning record of 30-19.

Again: ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL

The 5/7 method was not as profitable as the 7/5, unless that is what you meant to type.

**dlunc3** · 02-11-12, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by Wallco99

I did some testing on my own, back 6 years. Playing B&C for 7/5 is where I am at right now. I keep my own spreadsheet. Logging on to that thread will only confuse you.

Oh ok... good stuff. I'll take it from what you said that it's history must be at least decent

**Wallco99** · 02-11-12, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by 1gamer

I love the 5/7 idea, and thank you for your findings. However, I just see no tangible connection between (A) losses of 4 or > and 5/7 on the (B) (C), especially with the (A) bets winning record of 30-19.

Again: ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL

Perhaps you should refer to post # 1809, Item #18, this may help.

**MoneyOnBball** · 02-11-12, 10:54 PM

Originally posted by alexknyc

Again, not necessarily true. If your 30 wins are at -110 and your 20 losses are at -170, you're in the red.

If you're betting the same amount at the same odds, you're correct. But is that what the A bets have been?

Good post.

The A bets going 30-20 so far may look like they are "winning", but they aren't.

Delve deeper.

The 30-20 record is with buying 3 points, so you are playing at - 170. Thirty of these wins means the A bets have won 30 units total. The 20 losses lose you 1.7 each, which means the A bets have lost 34 units total. So A bets are down -4 units.

For the A bets to be truly winning (with buying points), they'd have to beat a 17-10 winning pace aka a winning percentage of 62.9%.

**alexknyc** · 02-11-12, 10:56 PM

Originally posted by MoneyOnBball

Good post. The A bets going 30-20 so far may look like they are "winning", but they aren't. Delve deeper. The 30-20 record is with buying 3 points, so you are playing at - 170. Thirty of these wins means the A bets have won 30 units total. The 20 losses lose you 1.7 each, which means the A bets have lost 34 units total. So A bets are down -4 units. For the A bets to be truly winning (with buying points), they'd have to beat a 17-10 winning pace aka a winning percentage of 62.9%.

It's -170 at BetUS. At 5Dimes, it's -200 (you'd need to win 66.6% or 20-10). Any numbers for other sites?

**Wallco99** · 02-11-12, 10:59 PM

Originally posted by alexknyc

It's -170 at BetUS. At 5Dimes, it's -200 (you'd need to win 66.6% or 20-10). Any numbers for other sites?

I get -170 where I'm at, but I don't buy points anyway.

**1gamer** · 02-11-12, 11:03 PM

Different people play JM different way. Some buy no points, others buy 2, still others 3. If someone is playing this system going 30-19 and losing money, for whatever reason, that person should probabaly take up another hobby, like Chess.

Now excuse me gentlemen, I have an (A) bet two team parlay I must attend too.

**alexknyc** · 02-11-12, 11:07 PM

Originally posted by 1gamer

Different people play JM different way. Some buy no points, others buy 2, still others 3. If someone is playing this system going 30-19 and losing money, for whatever reason, that person should probabaly take up another hobby, like Chess. Now excuse me gentlemen, I have an (A) bet two team parlay I must attend too.

I give up. There's just no teaching math to people who don't want to learn.

Good luck with those parlays.

**Wallco99** · 02-11-12, 11:15 PM

Originally posted by alexknyc

I give up. There's just no teaching math to people who don't want to learn.

Good luck with those parlays.

I'm with you. I knew this method would just be too complicated for some to grasp, I mean, it couldn't be any easier to understand.

**stevex** · 02-11-12, 11:20 PM

Philly with an A bet win and the Suns up 9 at half, looking at 2 A bet wins tonight!!

Love making that money on these A bets....

LOVE IT

Wallco, where yeh at? "Research this," and "research that" ha tool.

**ChiLLx** · 02-11-12, 11:28 PM

Originally posted by Wallco99

I'm with you. I knew this method would just be to complicated for some to grasp, I mean, it couldn't be any easier to understand.

Don't bother.

**thelimit0310** · 02-11-12, 11:35 PM

Wallco and alexknyc are both correct...

Stevex, 1gamer, your not "making that money on these A bets". The A bets have lost money this season, they are down -4 units so far. This is because the A bets don't win enough at -170 to be profitable, and if you don't buy the 3 points and just play at -110 instead, there would be even more A bet losses! Wilba's tests last year proved that they lose you money, yet some people just don't want to learn. It's a shame really. But all of you can play how you want to play, and if you decide you want to play the most profitable way just check out my post on the last page.

**stevex** · 02-11-12, 11:38 PM

Philly with the A bet win and Suns up in 3rd quarter!!

**kdavis** · 02-11-12, 11:39 PM

Been a long time since I used the ignore option on this forum but stevex and 1gamer was ruining this thread for me so had to do it. Thread looks better already.

**SkivChef** · 02-11-12, 11:42 PM

Originally posted by thelimit0310

Yes Dlunc it's all 3 versions

Sorry if i missed this, about how many plays a year??

**1gamer** · 02-11-12, 11:51 PM

Come on guys, stop trying to blow smoke up my a##. A 63% winning percent in sports betting is a phenominal record, but not at -170 odds. I get the math on that. But not everyone is taking -170 on this Chase system. Get it?

**Wallco99** · 02-12-12, 12:12 AM

Originally posted by stevex

Philly with an A bet win and the Suns up 9 at half, looking at 2 A bet wins tonight!!

Love making that money on these A bets....

LOVE IT

Wallco, where yeh at? "Research this," and "research that" ha tool.

I'll tell you where I'm at....About 20 units ahead of you. You need 5 more just to catch my 1 win from yesterday, and I'm sure there will be some nice juicy B bets before then. Your ignorance is absolutely amazing. You stand alone, so you must be right, tool!!!!!!!!!

**1gamer** · 02-12-12, 12:29 AM

Here backtest this:

JM (A) 2 team parlay PHIL/SUNS CASH IT!

1 to win 2.64
C1 (A) Denver +3 CASH IT!

1.10 to win 1
(System +35.64 Since 2/4) (Open Series 0)

2-3 on parlays for the week

Any questions?

**Wallco99** · 02-12-12, 12:45 AM

Originally posted by 1gamer

Come on guys, stop trying to blow smoke up my a##. A 63% winning percent in sports betting is a phenominal record, but not at -170 odds. I get the math on that. But not everyone is taking -170 on this Chase system. Get it?

Note to Stevex and 1gamer:
WE DON'T CARE HOW YOU PLAY IT!
If you want to make less profit and play with scared money in parlays then do so, who cares. But your stupid comments and lack of mathematical skills sure isn't going to change my mind, or the minds of most people who are here to make money. Enjoy your 1 unit profit, and you need to bet 7 units on a B bet to make up for losses in a parlay that will only net you 1 unit profit when you win. The backtest is done, it was proven successful, and you guys are fools.

Let me clear up some math for Mr 1gamer who seems to have trouble with simple computations. For every B bet I win, you will have to win 6 extra A bets to be even. That means 6 out of 7 games must be won on A bet just to have the same profit. Since you are so fascinated by percentages, that would be 85.7% winning percentage. Please show me any JM NBA season that has performed that well on the A bet. Granted the losses are 1/3 of my way, but with 3 wins I'm back to even, your way takes 8, and you will also suffer losses that I will not because I will be filtering out several of the games you play. Even if all my wins went to C, you would still need to win 4 extra A's for each one of my C's, again for the percentage enthusiast, that is 80%. Hope this helps. If not, I don't care.

**1gamer** · 02-12-12, 01:10 AM

Originally posted by Wallco99

Note to Stevex and 1gamer: WE DON'T CARE HOW YOU PLAY IT! If you want to make less profit and play with scared money in parlays then do so, who cares. But your stupid comments and lack of mathematical skills sure isn't going to change my mind, or the minds of most people who are here to make money. Enjoy your 1 unit profit, and you need to bet 7 units on a B bet to make up for losses in a parlay that will only net you 1 unit profit when you win. The backtest is done, it was proven successful, and you guys are fools. Let me clear up some math for Mr 1gamer who seems to have trouble with simple computations. For every B bet I win, you will have to win 6 extra A bets to be even. That means 6 out of 7 games must be won on A bet just to have the same profit. Since you are so fascinated by percentages, that would be 85.7% winning percentage. Please show me any JM NBA season that has performed that well on the A bet. Granted the losses are 1/3 of my way, but with 3 wins I'm back to even, your way takes 8, and you will also suffer losses that I will not because I will be filtering out several of the games you play. Even if all my wins went to C, you would still need to win 4 extra A's for each one of my C's, again for the percentage enthusiast, that is 80%. Hope this helps. If not, I don't care.

That's because I haven't been playing 7/5 (B) (C) betting like you have, Obviously. Now that the 7/5 system has been released, I will begin to implement it using my new system. Let's hope my results are they same as yours.

AND I WILL PLAY THE SYSTEM HOW IT WORKS FOR ME. I DIDN'T ASK YOU TO CARE.

**Wallco99** · 02-12-12, 01:14 AM

Originally posted by 1gamer

That's because I haven't been playing 7/5 (B) (C) betting like you have, Obviously. Now that the 7/5 system has been released, I will begin to implement it using my new system. Let's hope my results are they same as yours.

AND I WILL PLAY THE SYSTEM HOW IT WORKS FOR ME. I DIDN'T ASK YOU TO CARE.

Then stop arguing about it. I want to see you win, the same way i want to see everyone in here win. It's been released and proven to be better, yet you continue to argue that playing from A bet is better, it just isn't. And I noticed that along the way here, several of your "new system" bets were for 19 units profit, risking 29, 4 units profit risking 5, and 3 units risking 4. Where does this logic come from? If I was playing to win 19 units on a series and won, I would be up a ton also, not to mention, you are very lucky you didn't lose that one bet, it would have done you in. Not too hard to get to 35 units when you bet that way, and it's not too hard to lose it either, that's just nuts.

**1gamer** · 02-12-12, 01:24 AM

Consider the matter closed. Good nite.

**COBRA31** · 02-12-12, 01:35 AM

Originally posted by Wallco99

Perhaps you should refer to post # 1809, Item #18, this may help.

#18

**COBRA31** · 02-12-12, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by Wallco99

Losses are much too expensive with 3 points bought or M/L. All -110 is the way to go here.

Wallco...are we safe to assume the 8 year backtest on 7/5 was based on ATS only and not buying 3 pts or M/L? That wasn't real clear to me.

I would like to know if the baseline results pre-filter is buying no points and no m/l.

Do you have the breakdowns (win/loss) of each version as well you can share ? Something similar that Kev the Brit posted in #1661.

Appreciate in advance any further clarification.

**Wallco99** · 02-12-12, 02:05 AM

Originally posted by COBRA31

Wallco...are we safe to assume the 8 year backtest on 7/5 was based on ATS only and not buying 3 pts or M/L? That wasn't real clear to me.

I would like to know if the baseline results pre-filter is buying no points and no m/l.

Do you have the breakdowns (win/loss) of each version as well you can share ? Something similar that Kev the Brit posted in #1661.

Appreciate in advance any further clarification.

The results of Mr. limit's testing were for all games to be played at -110, provided the A bet loses by 4 or more points to the spread. I only have a handfull of season's data, Mr. limit has the whole package. Baseline was also no point buying, at 7/5, buying points would cost a fortune on a loss. This is what took so long. We couldn't just take the already published JM results and apply 7/5 to it, since those results were all based on +3 points. Each series had to be broken down and checked to see if at least one of the games was won ATS, then it had to be determined which bets were most profitable to apply the 7/5 to. The B&C won out here also.