[70kgman]

Do you mind me asking where or how your came up with your system/model? or how long you have been using it? Im very impressed... from what ive seen, you have a great thing going. Have most years been as successful as this year and last yr? hitting consistent 60% is unreal, and you deserve all the credit in the world. BOL man and thanks for everything

I don't necessarily like the word "system" for these plays. "Angle" might be a better word. While my capping is mathematical based and does start in a conceptual model, it still ends up coming down to a series of judgement calls on my part, nothing really is black and white about it. My capping methods for this stuff is 100% original, doubt there is anyone else who caps games like I do. I approach capping as a creative process.

Years ago, I spent a lot of time experimenting with lots of different angles, systems, trends, ect...Back-testing and/or forward-testing every idea my mind could come up with. I would end up with 50 failed experiments for every successful one. The basketball totals are where I felt I found my biggest edge, which is where I have focused most of my capping on. This is my third year doing hoops totals, started with just NBA full game totals a few years ago, and it has evolved from there, I have made countless tweaks on the go and are still making slight adjustments as I see fit, I branched off and added NBA 1st halves last year, this is my first year with NCAA 1st halves, got into capping 2nd halves (unrelated to the other stuff) last year as well. I have only been gambling seriously for the past 2-3 years.

I my opinion, the key to finding successful angles in gambling comes down to learning how to read and analyze the post game numbers. And once you have something that looks like it has potential, you can use that same concept of reading the numbers during it's testing phase to make the necessary tweaks and adjustments to improve it, learn from your mistakes, and essentially make your capping "smarter" through repetition. After every play I make, I try to analyze the box score to figure out if it was a good or bad pick, regardless of how many points it won or lost by. All the math nerds in the think tank are always preaching nothing is legit until you have x amount of plays as a sample size, or until you back-test your system back to 1994, blah blah blah. That is completely ignorant in my opinion, if you learn how to read the numbers you can tell if you have garbage or something worth pursuing over a very small sample size. I also see a lot of people saying stuff like "even though it lost by x points, I still beat the closing line by x amount of points, so it was a good play". I disagree. Beating the closer is certainly something every capper should thrive for and will likely lead to success if you can do it on a regular basis, but just because you beat the closer doesn't make it a good play. Figuring out why it lost by x points in hindsight will determine whether or not it was a good pick. If you are simply calling it a good/bad play based on the number you got vs. the closer, I don't see your capping evolving into something better over time.