Convince me I can't make 100k/year off sports betting

[ssk13809]

You have embarrassed yourself beyond belief. Most of the posters here think you're a joke, regardless if your small sample size record states otherwise.

Haters gonna hate



And I'm going to keep on winning. That's all that matters to me. And I guess that's not all that matters to the rest. So there are going to be some conflicts. But I'm going to keep winning, because that's what I do best.

[Rod1010]

:Lmao: this idiot again

[BeatTheJerk]

I can imagine your sportsbetting career doesn't consist of double digits in years. Now that's a lock if you will and don't tell me otherwise.

[BeatTheJerk]

Priceless this guy edits his selection posts.

[yurnero]

SSK13809, you BSing dog pos.

since everyone knows you are pulling sh1t out of your ass, i would like to challenge you.

post your plays for the next week. just week. if you can hit 70%, i'll transfer you all my sbr points (i have about 500)

please do it, just hit 70% for the next week, do it

[ssk13809]

I can imagine your sportsbetting career doesn't consist of double digits in years. Now that's a lock if you will and don't tell me otherwise.

Agreed. As I said earlier, I'm a Intelligent Sports Fan 1st, and betting has all come 2nd. After all, I only spend 15min/day on this stuff. Good enough to hit at high rates for me. Besides for having a strong sense of how good each team is, my mathematical intuition helps see the numbers as they really are.

[ssk13809]

Priceless this guy edits his selection posts.

Once again, there is not 1 post in ALL my threads that has been edited AFTER the game started.


At least that I can recall. If there is, then I must have made 2 posts of the same selections and edited one of them, not edited the plays, but edited the post somewhere else. Or something else reasonable.



But yeah, NO EDITS after games have started on 100% of my plays.



So you were saying what?

[BeatTheJerk]

Once again, there is not 1 post in ALL my threads that has been edited AFTER the game started.


At least that I can recall. If there is, then I must have made 2 posts of the same selections and edited one of them, not edited the plays, but edited the post somewhere else. Or something else reasonable.



But yeah, NO EDITS after games have started on 100% of my plays.



So you were saying what?

Oh ok if you say so pal.

[ssk13809]

SSK13809, you BSing dog pos.

since everyone knows you are pulling sh1t out of your ass, i would like to challenge you.

post your plays for the next week. just week. if you can hit 70%, i'll transfer you all my sbr points (i have about 500)

please do it, just hit 70% for the next week, do it

NFL is over. I hit 70% on NFL long-term ATS. I already hit 70% ATS for the 2010-2011 NFL season, not week, but season. It's NBA time now. I hit 65% ATS long-term NBA. So I should finish around that.


My odds for the % I hit in the NBA this year

80+% +350
75+% +250
70+% +150
65+% +100
60+% -150
55+% -200
50+% -300

[ssk13809]

Oh ok if you say pal.

Haters gonna hate

[frizzelli]

It is simple start with a 100k bet and martingale that shyt you are gonna hit a winner eventually.

[BeatTheJerk]

Haters gonna hate

I was actually giving you the benefit of the doubt with that comment. I wasn't hating in that spot.

[Doug]

Well if you can hit 70% reliably your 100k annual goal is very low.....


FEZZIK WROTE THIS ARTICLE BELOW, NOT ME ! I TRUST HIS MATH TO BE ACCURATE !

Do you know what a bettor could make hitting 60 percent of his plays? Let's assume you start with the $1,000 you were planning to buy a couch with. Instead, you decide to take a pot shot with it. You choose to play only one game per day and wager what would normally be an insane 10 percent of your bankroll on each play, laying minus-110.

A little over five years later you wind up with a record of 1,200 wins and 800 losses for a 60 percent record ATS. Guess how much money your $1,000 will have increased? It's not $10,000 and not $50,000. It's an incredible $550 billion. Yes, that’s BILLION. It sounds ridiculous, but believe me, the math completely supports it.

Now, the above analysis doesn’t prove that it cannot be done. However, it surely must place the burden of proof to those claiming they hit 60 percent of their plays. Given the above, how could they not have accumulated a large fortune? You hear the same tired excuses found below.

1) They can hit 60 percent, but are too streaky. In addition, the few bad runs wipe them out. Sorry, I'm not buying it. In the above example, all you need is a record of 1,200 wins and 800 losses. Any order of wins and losses will produce the same final results.

2) They have poor money management. Sorry, again I simply don't accept it. As my numbers show, having an ability to hit at 60 percent is akin to owning a printing press full of money. Even with some lousy money management, you should still make a small fortune (instead of a large fortune).

3) They are critical of my example since they doubt that anyone could bet millions on one game without the line moving. It's a good argument, and I concur. However, this only becomes a problem after one has clearly sailed into easy multimillionaire status.

So the next time a guy tells you he is a 60 percent handicapper, you might want to confirm he is a multimillionaire. If he isn’t, it is likely he either cannot hit 60 percent or is one horrific money manager.

It's interesting that several people offer proof of 60 percent-plus records by pointing at one-year performances in monitored contests. What they miss is that during any small sample size like this, routine variance will result in many contestants hitting 60 percent. Some will be good handicappers and some not so good. However, all will regress to the mean going forward in future years. Flip a coin 100 times and ‘heads’ will come up on 64 occasions, provided you flip enough coins along the way.

Hitting 60 percent is simply not obtainable on any large volume of bets against widely available lines. In fact, I personally feel that the better handicappers and bettors are only able to achieve a long-term win rate that is around 55 percent against market lines.

It sounds depressing, but I've got good news. With just a 53 percent win rate you can make a lot of money on your bets provided you utilize reduced vigorish, rogue lines, free half-point promotions and other betting methods.

I would LOVE to be proven wrong here and have any handicapper or bettor step to the plate and show how he is able to hit 58 to 60 percent over an extended period of time with a large volume of plays. I’m rooting for it to happen. I'm already planning my trip to the airport to pick out my personal Leer Jet!
<!-- / message --> <!-- sig --> __________________

[yurnero]

NFL is over. I hit 70% on NFL long-term ATS. I already hit 70% ATS for the 2010-2011 NFL season, not week, but season. It's NBA time now. I hit 65% ATS long-term NBA. So I should finish around that.


My odds for the % I hit in the NBA this year

80+% +350
75+% +250
70+% +150
65+% +100
60+% -150
55+% -200
50+% -300

wow i think this post of yours just proves that you DONT even sports bet.

you are saying that YOU ARE FAVORED TO hit 50%, then 55% in NBA over your self prclaimed 65%.

seriously, you expose yourself and how little knowledge you truly have

[BeatTheJerk]

Well if you can hit 70% reliably your 100k annual goal is very low.....


FEZZIK WROTE THIS ARTICLE BELOW, NOT ME ! I TRUST HIS MATH TO BE ACCURATE !

Do you know what a bettor could make hitting 60 percent of his plays? Let's assume you start with the $1,000 you were planning to buy a couch with. Instead, you decide to take a pot shot with it. You choose to play only one game per day and wager what would normally be an insane 10 percent of your bankroll on each play, laying minus-110.

A little over five years later you wind up with a record of 1,200 wins and 800 losses for a 60 percent record ATS. Guess how much money your $1,000 will have increased? It's not $10,000 and not $50,000. It's an incredible $550 billion. Yes, that’s BILLION. It sounds ridiculous, but believe me, the math completely supports it.

Now, the above analysis doesn’t prove that it cannot be done. However, it surely must place the burden of proof to those claiming they hit 60 percent of their plays. Given the above, how could they not have accumulated a large fortune? You hear the same tired excuses found below.

1) They can hit 60 percent, but are too streaky. In addition, the few bad runs wipe them out. Sorry, I'm not buying it. In the above example, all you need is a record of 1,200 wins and 800 losses. Any order of wins and losses will produce the same final results.

2) They have poor money management. Sorry, again I simply don't accept it. As my numbers show, having an ability to hit at 60 percent is akin to owning a printing press full of money. Even with some lousy money management, you should still make a small fortune (instead of a large fortune).

3) They are critical of my example since they doubt that anyone could bet millions on one game without the line moving. It's a good argument, and I concur. However, this only becomes a problem after one has clearly sailed into easy multimillionaire status.

So the next time a guy tells you he is a 60 percent handicapper, you might want to confirm he is a multimillionaire. If he isn’t, it is likely he either cannot hit 60 percent or is one horrific money manager.

It's interesting that several people offer proof of 60 percent-plus records by pointing at one-year performances in monitored contests. What they miss is that during any small sample size like this, routine variance will result in many contestants hitting 60 percent. Some will be good handicappers and some not so good. However, all will regress to the mean going forward in future years. Flip a coin 100 times and ‘heads’ will come up on 64 occasions, provided you flip enough coins along the way.

Hitting 60 percent is simply not obtainable on any large volume of bets against widely available lines. In fact, I personally feel that the better handicappers and bettors are only able to achieve a long-term win rate that is around 55 percent against market lines.

It sounds depressing, but I've got good news. With just a 53 percent win rate you can make a lot of money on your bets provided you utilize reduced vigorish, rogue lines, free half-point promotions and other betting methods.

I would LOVE to be proven wrong here and have any handicapper or bettor step to the plate and show how he is able to hit 58 to 60 percent over an extended period of time with a large volume of plays. I’m rooting for it to happen. I'm already planning my trip to the airport to pick out my personal Leer Jet!
<!-- / message --> <!-- sig --> __________________

If this doesn't humble and shut this 30 year-old man up then nothing will.

[yurnero]

i think he hits 70% ML in the nfl. lol

[ssk13809]

wow i think this post of yours just proves that you DONT even sports bet.

you are saying that YOU ARE FAVORED TO hit 50%, then 55% in NBA over your self prclaimed 65%.

seriously, you expose yourself and how little knowledge you truly have

What? I think you missed the whole post. If someone was to bet I was going to hit over 50% in the NBA this year, they would get that line at -300 odds. Your 2nd sentence didn't even make sense. English isn't your 1st language?

[Doug]

I doubt that there are any math errors in Fezzik's article, since he was an actuary before becoming a gambler/ tout or whatever you want to call him nowadays. A Ganchrow confirmation of the Fezz math would be cool, or Data or any trusted math geek type.

So you only need a $1,000 BR if you can hit 60% and you'll destroy the entire industry ( if there were no limits) You'd surely suck every exchange dry whilst you win everybody's monies and withdraw it !

Can a better math guy than me confirm Fezzik's terms ?

$1,000 BR

60% win rate

-110 lines

2,000 picks for a record of 1200-800

Bet 10% of BR every play.

[ssk13809]

i think he hits 70% ML in the nfl. lol

70% ATS last year in NFL. Long-term is same.

I do very well in MLs as well. Around 55-60% on Avg. Odds of +120.

[ssk13809]

I doubt that there are any math errors in Fezzik's article, since he was an actuary before becoming a gambler/ tout or whatever you want to call him nowadays. A Ganchrow confirmation of the Fezz math would be cool, or Data or any trusted math geek type.

So you only need a $1,000 BR if you can hit 60% and you'll destroy the entire industry ( if there were no limits) You'd surely suck every exchange dry whilst you win everybody's monies and withdraw it !

Can a better math guy than me confirm Fezzik's terms ?

$1,000 BR

60% win rate

-110 lines

2,000 picks for a record of 1200-800

Bet 10% of BR every play.

The article is flawed. It is making the major assumptions you can PLACE bets that often while winning so much. The winners KNOW that this is not the case. Books will blacklist you and make it nearly impossible for you to even place a bet in any sportsbook. Furthermore, good luck seeing yourself get paid 500+ million dollars in cash. You think it's that easy?


^^^

Issues like this are the ones that I'm worried about. Otherwise, this thread would be can I make 100million dollars per year. It's not as easy as winning. I wish it was. But it's not. There are somethings I mentioned I can do to limit some of these affects, but since I only spend 15min/day on this, I'm not trying to make this a big time hassle.

[Doug]

ssk: Why not do it Fezzik style ? Y'all need to bet a high percentage of bank on 60-70% picks ( per Kelly). You should be very wealthy if can bet properly ( money management) since hitting 60% + is child's play for you !

I gave you the way ( from Fezz) to turn your 60-70% into a vast fortune !

[ssk13809]

ssk: Why not do it Fezzik style ? Y'all need to bet a high percentage of bank on 60-70% picks ( per Kelly). You should be very wealthy if can bet properly ( money management) since hitting 60% + is child's play for you !

I gave you the way ( from Fezz) to turn your 60-70% into a vast fortune !

Read my last post. It's not as easy as winning.

[yurnero]

What? I think you missed the whole post. If someone was to bet I was going to hit over 50% in the NBA this year, they would get that line at -300 odds. Your 2nd sentence didn't even make sense. English isn't your 1st language?

yeah i understand that, it means you ARE FAVORED TO HIT 50% you ignorant prick

[ssk13809]

yeah i understand that, it means you ARE FAVORED TO HIT 50% you ignorant prick

Well if my long-term rate is 65%....Then why wouldn't I be FAVORED to hit 50+%?

[FourLengthsClear]

The article is flawed. It is making the major assumptions you can PLACE bets that often while winning so much. The winners KNOW that this is not the case. Books will blacklist you and make it nearly impossible for you to even place a bet in any sportsbook. Furthermore, good luck seeing yourself get paid 500+ million dollars in cash. You think it's that easy?


^^^

Issues like this are the ones that I'm worried about. Otherwise, this thread would be can I make 100million dollars per year. It's not as easy as winning. I wish it was. But it's not. There are somethings I mentioned I can do to limit some of these affects, but since I only spend 15min/day on this, I'm not trying to make this a big time hassle.

You travel extensively but can't work out how to get bets on at Betfair or Pinnacle?
You hire handicappers but cannot hire runners/beards?
LOL

[ssk13809]

You travel extensively but can't work out how to get bets on at Betfair or Pinnacle?
You hire handicappers but cannot hire runners/beards?
LOL

Read my 1st post, it talked about using betting exchanges. So I know of those. And no I'm not going to live "internationally" to use Betfair or something. I spend 15min/day on this, why would I move for this?


And though I have mentioned this before, I have not been betting sports very long. I've always been an intelligent sports fan for a while, but don't have much experience with sports betting. So I might not know that much in depth about this topic, as in which books to use, and what runners/beards are. And besides, I don't want to do something that would require a lot of time committment. Hiring runners/beards might. My teams you say? Well most of them I am friends with already. So it's usually a quick call and so on.

[MartinBlank]

That's what I was confused by.

The guy has "Teams" working for him, but can't figure a way to get a bet in at Pinny.

[Doug]

The article is flawed. It is making the major assumptions you can PLACE bets that often while winning so much. The winners KNOW that this is not the case. Books will blacklist you and make it nearly impossible for you to even place a bet in any sportsbook. Furthermore, good luck seeing yourself get paid 500+ million dollars in cash. You think it's that easy?


^^^

Issues like this are the ones that I'm worried about. Otherwise, this thread would be can I make 100million dollars per year. It's not as easy as winning. I wish it was. But it's not. There are somethings I mentioned I can do to limit some of these affects, but since I only spend 15min/day on this, I'm not trying to make this a big time hassle.

It's not flawed, Fezz stated you'd never get that far ( implying 60% is impossible), but a guy that could pick 60% could at least get to maybe 10 million instead of 550 Billion before being cut off everywhere !

A 70% capper starting with a $1,000 roll would have how much after a 70-30 run betting 10% ( probably well below what Kelly says to bet, BTW ! ) of BR after each bet ?

SOME MATH GEEK, PLEASE RUN THAT DATA !

[ssk13809]

That's what I was confused by.

The guy has "Teams" working for him, but can't figure a way to get a bet in at Pinny.

Maybe I need to hire a "Place Bets" Team that takes care of things like this. Because as of now, me and my teams only do what they know to do. No one really has much knowledge of these sportsbooks and so on.

[yurnero]

Well if my long-term rate is 65%....Then why wouldn't I be FAVORED to hit 50+%?

ask yourself that question, you obviously dont even understand wtf you are talking about.

[Doug]

Read my last post. It's not as easy as winning.

You can get at least a few million easily with 60% + winners being a breeze, and not wanting to spend more than 15 minutes a day on it, or move to the UK or something !

Story doesn't add up on so many levels, dude ! Of course the 1st one being able to pick 60%, yet you claim 70% !

Your original question was like can I make 100k hitting 70 %.....

HELL YES !

[losturmarbles]

wow i think this post of yours just proves that you DONT even sports bet.

you are saying that YOU ARE FAVORED TO hit 50%, then 55% in NBA over your self prclaimed 65%.

seriously, you expose yourself and how little knowledge you truly have

^ this ^

close thread.

[FourLengthsClear]

It's not flawed, Fezz stated you'd never get that far ( implying 60% is impossible), but a guy that could pick 60% could at least get to maybe 10 million instead of 550 Billion before being cut off everywhere !

A 70% capper starting with a $1,000 roll would have how much after a 70-30 run betting 10% ( probably well below what Kelly says to bet, BTW ! ) of BR after each bet ?

SOME MATH GEEK, PLEASE RUN THAT DATA !

It is sound in a mathematical sense. Expected growth is 1.0113% per play which would mean a bankroll of $543 billion after 2000 plays, yes.

It does ignore the fact that the 2000th wager would be for in excess of $50 billion however!!!!

[ssk13809]

You can get at least a few million easily with 60% + winners being a breeze, and not wanting to spend more than 15 minutes a day on it, or move to the UK or something !

Story doesn't add up on so many levels, dude ! Of course the 1st one being able to pick 60%, yet you claim 70% !

Your original question was like can I make 100k hitting 70 %.....

HELL YES !

Isn't there a way to get some steady income though? I mean, instead of win winning 10 million and then your career is over, isn't there a way to get some long-term winnings?


There is no doubt I think I can at least hit 60%

[ssk13809]

ask yourself that question, you obviously dont even understand wtf you are talking about.

Um, I don't think you get it, like the Packers are favorites to do something, they have a "minus" sign in from of their number. Just like that, I have a "minus" sign in front of my number, and because I'm favorite to do it.