MLB


Cincinnatti vs. Pittsburgh
P. Wilson vs D. Williams

**************** This is a battle of two streaky pitchers.** Williams, a new converted starter from Pittsburg will try to aim for only his third win of the season.** This write up is simple.** Wilson has been stone cold since the All-Star break, pitching his team to a 1-9 record in his starts.** He has a horrible 6.31 era away from home against Williams' 2.53 era at home. Although he did not start in many games, Williams comes into the game hot.** Giving up less than 3 runs in each of his last three starts.**

**************** This game will be a pitching duel for most of the game, with Pittsburg having a big inning.** They got embarassed yesterday, so look for them to want to revenge last night's loss.** Take Pittsburg pk -127 as they should easily win this game.** This is baseball, so anything can happen.

Free Pick-Pittsburg to win against Cincinnatti -127
In NCAAF- take Toledo -7
If you guys want a solid handicapper, great picks, and a revolutionary BETTING SYSTEM visit This betting system is not only for sports, it can used in casinos as well.** If you don't win money weekly, you will get refunded 5 times the amount u paid for the system. This can be one of the greatest investment you've ever made..

Best Bets are hitting 78% ytd. 18-5

You can make an avg of $300 off a $1850 bankroll.** E-mail me if you have any questions.

[ This Message was edited by: Moderator 3 on 2004-09-26 19:13 ]

First of all, got no doubt your post will be deleted.

2nd of all, your record of 18-5 doesn't impress me one bit. It could be due to shorterm luck. What is the average price? Anyone could hit 78% by just betting at an average price of -355.

Even if you average price is even money, your 18-5 record is hardly impressive. That's just a 1 in 100 rare event. You need 1 in 1000 (20-3) to have a decent amount of confidence that you are profitable. To be sure you are profitable, you need a 1 in 10000 event (21-2). Again, these records are at even money.

3rd, your website has scamdicapper written all over it. Your system can win on any sport and in the casino as well? Rubbish.

25% per week? Again, rubbish. There is great variance in sports and casino games, and there is no way you will hit a constant 25% going forward. On top of that, to make 25% per week you'd either have to be dealing with a massive edge, or turnover your money an unbelievable number of times each week, still with an advantage. I doubt your system does either.

If this system is so profitable, why sell it? Why not just sit back and watch the money roll in?

Also, you sell your picks one at a time. That doesn't seem to respect that profiting from sports is a longterm investment. It's no uncommon to have a month or more where you have lost money. In fact, most pro's will even have a losing year at some stage in their career.

You say your system is guaranteed to make money? Total ****. In sportsbetting and any other sort of invesment we are dealing with probabilities. NOTHING is EVER 100%, which means nothing can be guaranteed. Not even a fixed game.

You do actually claim sports is a longterm investment, depsite:
1. guaranteeing losses.
2. Claiming 25% growth per week.
3. Selling picks one at a time.

Quote-
"We have no idea why so many fail to understand these concepts. Remember,
Success is measured and accomplished by achieving 55% or better,
managing your bankroll intelligently, and maintaining a long-term
perspective. Are you the type that measures success on a daily basis?
Do you lack patience and/or discipline? If you answered yes to either
of these questions, gambling on sports is simply not for you."

Wow, that actually a good statement. I disagree about the 55%. You can be extremely successful off sports from just applying smaller advantages (say 53-54%) but having massive turnover. I know a number of people who use this approach and they are very successful.

But you have no idea why so many people fail? Because most don't aim to gain an advantage at sports, and most of those who do aren't very professional in their approach.

"This is due to a few
things, but mainly due to mismanagement of money."

Wrong. Most people fail at sports due to not betting with an advantage. To succeed in sports you need:
1. An edge.
2. Money management.
You could throw in dicipline, but I could that as part of money management.

It is possible to win longterm without knowing anything about moneymangement, although it is unlikely. It is basically impossible to win longterm without an edge, no matter how you manage your money.

You claim bookies no longer accept your bets? I highly doubt that. There are plenty of bookies around that accept action, no matter whether you are a profitable bettor not. You might want to check out pinnaclesports.com. They have NEVER booted a winner.

"My guarantee is simply this. If you don't make 3
times the amount you paid for my weekly picks and system, I will
send you 10x money back through paypal"

Ouch. Guaranteeing 300% or a massive money back? Big red flag for a scamdicapper. Alarm bells for sure.

"If you are looking for 80% winners,
you are a sucker. No one is hitting 80% winners or even 70% winners"

Ok, then why claim you are hitting 78%? Why not just state your record and say you expect to hit a longterm 55%?

"Ask any professional gambler if he would take 55% winners
and the answer would be an enthusiastic YES."

Hell yeh. Guaranteed 55% winners and you'll be rich within a few years (you'd bet full kelly).

"With my 67% winning ratio, you will make money. The best part about
this system is that all you need to hit is 50% and you will make money!"

67%, are those the picks that have now gone 18-5? Man, your sample is too small to draw any conclusions to whether you are likely to be profitable or not.

"they are the best games on the board and will hit more
than 60% of the time."

Ok, you say 14-18 plays a week and claim they are all 60%+ bets? Get the F out of here. You will NOT find that many 60% bets in a week betting on just a couple of US sports.

"*If you combine my picks with my
system, you will be guaranteed to make AT LEAST $500 dollars every
week from a $2000 bankroll. That's at least 25% every week!"

Yeh, sure. Even if you do understand that 55% is very profitable, the fact that you are guaranteeing results makes you a ******** artist.

That's enough from me.

Longest post ever?

What is the average price you go for when looking for a 53%-55% success rate. Also what types of bet do you take, do you mix it looking for the right odds or stay static with the one option.

I think it's pretty fair to assume he means at a price of -110, or $1.91 in decimal odds.

Don't beat around the bush Mr J, tell us what you really think.

By the way, please use decimal odds on here. Those ridiculous American odds make absolutely no sense at all to the average Aussie punter. :smile:

[ This Message was edited by: sportznut on 2004-09-28 08:11 ]

Lets say you have a $500 bank roll betting 1% units. $5 bets, and you are winning at this "good" percentage of 55% with a average price of $1.91

55 wins = net profit $250.25
45 loss = total loss $225.00
+$25.25

with 100 bets you would win 5% of your bank roll.
This is a good return?
or do you use a higher unit price say 2% increasing your return to 10% with half the number of bets.

Where do you find the $1.91 price aswel, point starts?

This is basic i know, im learning to crawl

"with 100 bets you would win 5% of your bank roll.
This is a good return?"

For most pro's this is a very good return. Definately enough to make ALOT of money from. Remember most pro's make quite alot of bets. I know guys who make 100+ a week. During the busier parts of the year I might make 60-80 bets per week.

The idea behind an advantage of 5% is to just have massive turnover. A lower advantage but at a much higher turnover will make more than a high advantage with low turnover.

"Lets say you have a $500 bank roll betting 1% units."

Pro's will base their bet size on:
1. How aggressive they are.
2. How large their advantage is.
3. How many bets they place.
4. How much variance they can deal with.

Most pro's bet 0.5% to 2%, but they usually underbet by quite a bit (ie bet quite a bit less than the optimum amount). Most pro's are conservative, deal with advantages from 2% to 5%, place alot of bets and can't live with large variance. This is why they have what seems a small bet size.

"Where do you find the $1.91 price aswel, point starts?"

Yep. In the US, most betting is 'against the spread'. This is point/line/handicap betting in Aus. Bets are usually at $1.91
(-110). If the average bet is at 1.91, you need to win 52.4% to breakeven.

A more reasonable example might be a pro with a bankroll of 100k. He risks 1% per play (1k). He makes 1500 bets per year, hitting 55% and so goes 825-675 for +75 units. Ie he profits 75k. If you factor in things like middles, bonuses and low vig (average bet of better than 1.91) then he
will make much more.

It can be much MUCH more profitable than in the example, your only limit is to how well informed you are.

"Pro's will base their bet size on:
2. How large their advantage is. "

Is this advantage the 5%(or so) return or the advantage they believe the bet will win.

It's impossible to know exactly what your exact edge is. The 5% is usually an estimate based on past performance. If you are betting only your own picks then it's always a good idea to start off betting no more than 1-2%.