[BuddyBear]

I think the -139 rule is a bit silly and needs to be revisted.

[HedgeHog]

I disagree with about 10 of of the rules, and even the ones I do like are not being followed by the author. For example, I can't argue with using sound money management, but it's not being followed. He's betting a huge 9% of bankroll per game w/o even knowing his edge--if indeed he has one. A claim of a 55% win percentage has been made, but it's worthless w/o knowing the average betting price and also taking into account the very small sample size.

That said, I give the guy a ton of credit for trying to show some discipline, and for posting his plays. But overall I think it's misguided. This is meant as constructive criticism.

[rjt721]

I think the -139 rule is a bit silly and needs to be revisted.

More than a bit silly. However, that pales in comparison to the "Don't bet more than one game in the same time slot'' rule, which is downright comical.

[HedgeHog]

More than a bit silly. However, that pales in comparison to the "Don't bet more than one game in the same time slot'' rule, which is downright comical.

And limit the # of bets to 3 per day. God forbid all three best bets start about the same time. You'd have to choose something else.

[BuddyBear]

yeah, this is a good first effort STA, but none of the rules you've set forth are going to help you becoming a winning gambler. There is a little more to it than setting up some arbitrary rules. All these rules will do is just make you lose your money more slowly.....

[pokernut9999]

You think you have heard it all , and then read this forum.

[St. Andrew]

I'll look forward to seeing which of you are still critiquing my strategy in October. The next 2.5 months are going to be a joy.

[durito]

I'll look forward to seeing which of you are still critiquing my strategy in October. The next 2.5 months are going to be a joy.

Your strategy is ridiculous, regardless of whether or not you hit 60% or 23% for the next 4 months.

The people telling you this know what they are talking about. Learn from them and move on.

[St. Andrew]

A claim of a 55% win percentage has been made, but it's worthless w/o knowing the average betting price and also taking into account the very small sample size.

That said, I give the guy a ton of credit for trying to show some discipline, and for posting his plays. But overall I think it's misguided. This is meant as constructive criticism.

Every single play I've made is linked in this thread. Alot of them were 2-team parlays paying plus money, and the rest were all less than -139 juice except two. On June 13 I cashed-out a little more than $1200. Here's the link:

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/819235-post456.html

And 13 days later I started back with a little more than $500, which is now $1,023.

This isn't alot of money, and I'm no genius, but I can use some common sense to pick some reasonably well-positioned winners. That's better than most idiots who everyday are picking 10-15 stabs in the dark and then wondering why they have no money and why "this is so hard"

[St. Andrew]

Your strategy is ridiculous, regardless of whether or not you hit 60% or 23% for the next 4 months.

The people telling you this know what they are talking about. Learn from them and move on.

It's amazing that I have no idea who you are and you started posting in my thread just a day ago. You must be one of those "special posters" on the other forums that make YouTube videos and talk about how much money it would take for you to suck some guy off. Take your advice? No, thanks

[durito]

Fine by me. Thanks for your future contributions to my business.

[St. Andrew]

Find by me. Thanks for your future contributions to my business.

Ditto. Good luck.

[HedgeHog]

Every single play I've made is linked in this thread. Alot of them were 2-team parlays paying plus money, and the rest were all less than -139 juice except two. On June 13 I cashed-out a little more than $1200. Here's the link:*http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/819235-post456.html*And 13 days later I started back with a little more than $500, which is now $1,023. *This isn't alot of money, and I'm no genius, but I can use some common sense to pick some reasonably well-positioned winners. That's better than most idiots who everyday are picking 10-15 stabs in the dark and then wondering why they have no money and why "this is so hard"

Andy,

I'm not ripping you, but many of your rules were meant to be broken. No total or run line bet is allowed, regardless of the line, is wrong. Betting a game based on the time it starts is the dumbest thing I've read on this forum, and you're somewhat intelligent. Your 15 rules are about 12 too long, seriously.

[St. Andrew]

Andy,

I'm not ripping you, but many of your rules were meant to be broken. No total or run line bet is allowed, regardless of the line, is wrong. Betting a game based on the time it starts is the dumbest thing I've read on this forum, and you're somewhat intelligent. Your 15 rules are about 12 too long, seriously.

Okay. Thanks. I'll change my entire strategy. Thank God you came along.

[HedgeHog]

Okay. Thanks. I'll change my entire strategy. Thank God you came along.

Fuk you prick, I hope you lose every dollar you own.

[The Baron]

yeah, this is a good first effort STA, but none of the rules you've set forth are going to help you becoming a winning gambler. There is a little more to it than setting up some arbitrary rules. All these rules will do is just make you lose your money more slowly.....

Do you even post picks or do you just knock other peoples strategies and systems? I did a quick search and for a guy who claims to be such an amazing capper you have no plays.

[BuddyBear]

Listen man, there is no need to be wholly ignorant. There are some sharp guys on this board and some not so sharp guys. By and large, the guys who agree with you and have told you these rules are good (or mainly good) are pretty stupid and should be ignored. Don't listen to them....these are not good rules at all any way you look at them. If you hit 70% it's not b/c these rules led you be a better gambler. However, if you hit 30%, it's safe to say it's because of these rules.

However, there are some things to take away like your desire to win and be a better gambler. Those are things to build on. The foundatin is there, but the strategy is poor. You have to rethink this entire thing over again. Everything from where you are placing your bets (The Greek is a no-no for bases) to the rules restricting when you bet and how often.

Good luck STA

[BuddyBear]

Do you even post picks or do you just knock other peoples strategies and systems? I did a quick search and for a guy who claims to be such an amazing capper you have no plays.

Every now and then I post plays. I played FLA today.....

[topgame85]

Hey let him use whatever strategy works for him even though most of us disagree this may fit his play style well

[BuddyBear]

Hey let him use whatever strategy works for him even though most of us disagree this may fit his play style well

You agreed with him on everything except totals?

These strategies won't work for anyone at all, at least for a sustained period of time.....

[donjuan]

I'd love to hear the logic behind never playing anything over -139 in anything but a parlay. Has the potential for comedic gold.

[ertl09]

Hey let him use whatever strategy works for him even though most of us disagree this may fit his play style well

well said, leave him alone, he isn't asking people what they feel about his style so let him do his thing obviously he's better than more than of the people in here

GL today saint

[donjuan]

well said, leave him alone, he isn't asking people what they feel about his style so let him do his thing obviously he's better than more than of the people in here

What was the point of posting this then? For self reference? Get a blog.

[BuddyBear]

well said, leave him alone, he isn't asking people what they feel about his style so let him do his thing obviously he's better than more than of the people in here

GL today saint

It's a public forum, and therefore he should be prepared for public scrutiny. A lot of guys here are trying to help him, but he does not want any of it.

[pokernut9999]

Your parlay violates all your rules and theories.

Arizona has home edge and Angels are over -139 , so where do you get parlay of Angels/Cubs ?

[St. Andrew]

Your parlay violates all your rules and theories.

Arizona has home edge and Angels are over -139 , so where do you get parlay of Angels/Cubs ?

Pokernut, the Angels play does not violate the rules because it is parlayed with another play to make +159, not -200. Arizona has home advantage, however that angle is outweighed by the pitching and offense mismatch.

[topgame85]

It's a public forum, and therefore he should be prepared for public scrutiny. A lot of guys here are trying to help him, but he does not want any of it.

You have become very antagonistic as of late is everything ok with you BB? seems like your taking out some frustrations on posters, like calling my Balt sunday trend the most meaningless thread ever.... well the fact is they did play like hell on sunday again and thus lost 15th in a row..... anyways hope evrythings alright with you

[St. Andrew]

Pokernut, the Angels play does not violate the rules because it is parlayed with another play to make +159, not -200. Arizona has home advantage, however that angle is outweighed by the pitching and offense mismatch.

And it's a weekday, home field advantage means less.

[St. Andrew]

Man, WTF! Why is this thread in "Players Talk"?

[donjuan]

View Post
Pokernut, the Angels play does not violate the rules because it is parlayed with another play to make +159, not -200. Arizona has home advantage, however that angle is outweighed by the pitching and offense mismatch.

Math is for losers.

[BuddyBear]

You have become very antagonistic as of late is everything ok with you BB? seems like your taking out some frustrations on posters, like calling my Balt sunday trend the most meaningless thread ever.... well the fact is they did play like hell on sunday again and thus lost 15th in a row..... anyways hope evrythings alright with you

Everything is fine (other than being unemployed and out of shape)...but the Sunday trend is meaningless, I stand by that. There was no other way to phrase it. I couldn't be gentle there. You seem pretty sharp so it was a surprise that you not only said it but continued to believe it. The fact that BAL lost had nothing to do with the day of the week. It's just pure randomness and that is the only possible explanation to it. Sorry to tell you that. When i first started betting, "days of the week" records and other trivial variables were important to my capping.....needless to say, I learned the hard way.

Good luck tonight. How about a 10-0 FLA victory?

[rjt721]

Not trying to bash the guy. However, it's just ridiculous that he gets defensive when offered constructive criticism. Some people just don't want to learn. That's fine, but when you post something like this on a public forum, you open yourself up to all types of responses. If you can't handle that, don't start threads such as this.

[St. Andrew]

Not trying to bash the guy. However, it's just ridiculous that he gets defensive when offered constructive criticism. Some people just don't want to learn. That's fine, but when you post something like this on a public forum, you open yourself up to all types of responses. If you can't handle that, don't start threads such as this.

I have no problems with criticism RJ. I'm 32, not 16....and this is a message board for god's sake. What difference does any of this make. Good luck tonight.

[ryanXL977]

nobody seriously thinks playing on a certain day means anything do you guys
come on

[smitch124]

I definitely believe that home field advantage can be greater on weedend days for some teams...