[allabout the $$$]

Not confident, eh? You lost the bet and that's what counts.

then why didnt you accept my bet?

[Gaze73]

then why didnt you accept my bet?

Because I'd have to make high juice bets to maximize the winrate and make absolutely sure I win the bet. But I try to stay around 1.91/-110 and anything can go wrong within 50 games at those odds. Plus I don't know how such bets work here.

Day 1-1 -0.75

38-20 +72.65

[NavsPicks]

Someone check this kids math.. I'm tired of correcting his shit. +72 units on 65% hit rate combined with the juice he's laying is absurd .

[Martinr]

Someone check this kids math.. I'm tired of correcting his shit. +72 units on 65% hit rate combined with the juice he's laying is absurd .

Those of us bound by common laws of mathematics are at a disadvantage against Gaze. Guy's on another level.
He seems to be using some sort of Alchemy combined with the skills of Illusion to make money out of sports picks.
I just end up with a headache whenever I try and figure out his record keeping.

[Gaze73]

Someone check this kids math.. I'm tired of correcting his shit. +72 units on 65% hit rate combined with the juice he's laying is absurd .

Those of us bound by common laws of mathematics are at a disadvantage against Gaze. Guy's on another level.
He seems to be using some sort of Alchemy combined with the skills of Illusion to make money out of sports picks.
I just end up with a headache whenever I try and figure out his record keeping.

You thick fukks still don't get how decimal odds work do you?

Here, let me explain the previous day's results.

1 loss, -5 units
1 win @1.85 means profit of 5x0.85 = 4,25

Now 5 - 4.25 = - 0.75 units for the day. Not exactly rocket science, is it? I've been tracking the results in this way EVERY SINGLE DAY since 01-06-2016, and in all that time you still couldn't manage wrap your head around it.

[swordsandtequila]

You're doing well so congrats. The quibble with your record is your total units are misleading. If every bet is 5 units, then in reality this should be your unit size. For example, starting @ $100 per bet with the occasional $500 wager is one thing. One unit = $100. But every bet @ $500? One unit = $500. In reality you're up 14.53 units. Still impressive, just not as impressive as an exaggerated 72.65u.

[Gaze73]

You're doing well so congrats. The quibble with your record is your total units are misleading. If every bet is 5 units, then in reality this should be your unit size. For example, starting @ $100 per bet with the occasional $500 wager is one thing. One unit = $100. But every bet @ $500? One unit = $500. In reality you're up 14.53 units. Still impressive, just not as impressive as an exaggerated 72.65u.

No. You seem to be confined to a world where the only possible staking plan is 1% of the bankroll per bet - but that is either for people with a lower strike rate, low risk tolerance, or really huge bankrolls. But me, with strike rate above 60% at average odds around 1.91/-110, and longest losing run of 3 - I am confident in betting 5% instead, with an almost non-existent risk of ruin.

In real world numbers, with a $100k bankroll I'd have won $72.65k in 20 days (hence the thread title), instead of puny $14.53k.

[swordsandtequila]

No. You seem to be confined to a world where the only possible staking plan is 1% of the bankroll per bet - but that is either for people with a lower strike rate, low risk tolerance, or really huge bankrolls. But me, with strike rate above 60% at average odds around 1.91/-110, and longest losing run of 3 - I am confident in betting 5% instead, with an almost non-existent risk of ruin.

In real world numbers, with a $100k bankroll I'd have won $72.65k in 20 days (hence the thread title), instead of puny $14.53k.

No. Let's try this again. Nothing in my post mentions % of bankroll for unit size, unit size is fluid, based on one's tolerance. I don't care if you use 50%. But as you say, if you're comfortable betting 5% then that is your unit size. Using your example of 100K bankroll, @ 5% one unit = $5000. Profit of $72.65k divided by 5000 = 14.53 units won. Units, not dollars.

It's no different than "those posters who shall go unnamed" making 50 unit bets. Sure, if you call a $50 bet with a $1 unit size "50 units". Sounds good, but it's bullshit. Your unit size is whatever your base bet is, period. Not hating, just stating the facts.

[Gaze73]

The standard unit size is generally 1 unit = 1% of the starting bankroll unless specified otherwise. I increased the starting bankroll by 72.6%, calling that 14.5 units is weird.

[swordsandtequila]

There is no "standard" unit size, it varies person to person. You stated yourself, you changed the unit size early in the thread. Number of units bet signifies confidence level. A gambler who normally wagers 1 unit might go 3, 4, 5 units on a bet he's extremely confident will hit. This is why you're getting hammered for your math, it's misleading to those who stumble across this thread. I'm just offering an explanation for the hammering you're taking over your math. To each his own.

[Ballerholic]

I understand the math perfectly in this thread. If people are gonna hate then I guess they're gonna hate. IDK, seems pretty simple to me. Well done Gaze

[Gaze73]

There is no "standard" unit size, it varies person to person. You stated yourself, you changed the unit size early in the thread. Number of units bet signifies confidence level. A gambler who normally wagers 1 unit might go 3, 4, 5 units on a bet he's extremely confident will hit. This is why you're getting hammered for your math, it's misleading to those who stumble across this thread. I'm just offering an explanation for the hammering you're taking over your math. To each his own.

All plays are very confident, that's why they're all 5 units obviously. And the guys bothered by the math have been in this thread since page 2.

I understand the math perfectly in this thread. If people are gonna hate then I guess they're gonna hate. IDK, seems pretty simple to me. Well done Gaze

Well, always good to see some common sense, and your profile pic

[Gaze73]

Now on to the picks...I hate it when I get many qualifying plays in one day, but what can I do, can't argue with the numbers.

Portland Trail Blazers -5½ @1.95

Fresno State -7½ @1.93
Georgia +6½ @1.98
Troy -7 @1.98
TCU +11 @1.98
Kent State -5 @1.95

[Martinr]

I understand the math perfectly in this thread. If people are gonna hate then I guess they're gonna hate. IDK, seems pretty simple to me. Well done Gaze

Baller it hasn't got anything to do with "hate" man. That's a strong word and I don't hate the guy at all. He seems like a young guy with plenty of enthusiasm for the game, which is great, but he's got a naive attitude and acts like he's got it all figured. Sometimes it's hard to keep quiet when guys get so cocky.
Gaze has had a few threads the last couple of years and they've been abandoned when he hits a losing run and gets in too deep. A few times in those threads he was making mistakes with his record keeping and when I saw he'd started another one I checked in out of curiosity.

Good on you for sticking up for him, but I felt compelled to say something when I saw the way he's keeping track. I went back to the start of the thread, tried to follow each pick and concile it with his profit and it was confusing, and that profit of +72 is misleading. Maybe not to him, but I'm not the only "dumb fukk" who has read this thread and is sceptical or confused by it.

What's he trying to do here? Is he running a thread with a catchy title that is going to attract people looking for a few good picks, and hopefully make them some money, or is it an ego thing to show us all what a successful gambler he is? Maybe it's a bit of both. Either way I like to read and follow threads like this. It's kind of interesting to look at people trying to win at a game that is stacked against the bettor. If he wins then great. If he can do it consistently over a decent amount of time then maybe he's even one of a small handful of people that actually has an edge.
After seeing his earlier threads though, something comes to mind...
Look at a group of gamblers that have been betting for 20 years. Some of them have 20 years gambling experience, others have 1 year of experience repeated 20 times....


Look, it's fine for people to jump on and blindly follow his picks if they want. Their money and all that.
It seems to me that he wants the attention that this thread creates, otherwise he wouldn't have such an outlandish title. If he was simply tracking for his own benefit he could use an SBR spreadsheet, or just have a bland thread title, so I'm assuming he wants to show everyone what he can do. Great.
But for anyone who follows there are a couple of things at least that he could do to make it easier to track how he's actually going..

1. Show that each pick is to "risk x amount", whether that be unit size or $ amount.
2. Put a "W" or a "L" next to each pick once it's resulted.

Just those 2 things would at least mean anyone could go back and check his record before deciding to follow the picks or fade, and if he did those two things the only thing I'd ever give him grief over would be if he started raising his unit size to recoup losses

[Gaze73]

I do have it all figured, I've been betting every day for years now, you learn a thing or two in that time, unless you're one of those mug punters who just keep doing the same exact thing 20 years straight, despite never having 2 profitable months in a row.

As far as I know only you and Navspicks had problems with the maths, and maybe swordsandtequila who disagrees that the standard is 1 unit = 1%.

The point of this thread is to: 1. Make people some extra cash, 2. Show how profitable betting can be, 3. Prove haters like "allabout the $$$" wrong that I can't make money doing this. Everyone dwells on my ancient threads which summed up lost maybe 30 units, boo hoo.

I didn't do W+L because if you actually followed you would know the outcomes of each game, but I guess I can do that. Risk amount is always 5 units. I'll re-open the thread with a clear OP and more detailed daily results so that no one else can misunderstand anything.

[Gaze73]

Portland Trail Blazers -5½ @1.95 W

Fresno State -7½ @1.93 W
Georgia +6½ @1.98 W
Troy -7 @1.98 L
TCU +11 @1.98 L
Kent State -5 @1.95 W

4-2 +9.05

Total 42-22 = +81.7

[NavsPicks]

You thick fukks still don't get how decimal odds work do you?

Here, let me explain the previous day's results.

1 loss, -5 units
1 win @1.85 means profit of 5x0.85 = 4,25

Now 5 - 4.25 = - 0.75 units for the day. Not exactly rocket science, is it? I've been tracking the results in this way EVERY SINGLE DAY since 01-06-2016, and in all that time you still couldn't manage wrap your head around it.

You're betting games at 1.63 or below as well. Don't just assume it's 1.85 bum.

[Gaze73]

You're betting games at 1.63 or below as well. Don't just assume it's 1.85 bum.

You really are a thick fukk aren't you? The "previous day" literally had two games, with the winner being at 1.85, so why the fukk are you talking about 1.63? And if you take a glance at every day's picks, you will see average odds above 1.9. Maybe 2 in 10 picks are below 1.9.

[TTA_President]

Looks great

[Merkel]

Every single thread Gaze ever started ended in
All of them.