I agree with you but playing a Monday morning QB is part of adjusting the system. Obviously we all believe that there is something to this system but we have to continue to make a better. There is always room for corrections for this to hit at a higher rate.
i fully agree with you...if you check out the other thread started by porky you will see i have some suggestions to tweak it and the numbers prove that the win rate spikes up
i tried to explain to porky but he got very defensive of his system and wanted to hear nothing about tweaking it...so i would be weary of suggesting to make it better around here
also im wondering where is the data to prove the middle doesn't hit?
0
Quote Originally Posted by HeaVin-Cent:
I agree with you but playing a Monday morning QB is part of adjusting the system. Obviously we all believe that there is something to this system but we have to continue to make a better. There is always room for corrections for this to hit at a higher rate.
i fully agree with you...if you check out the other thread started by porky you will see i have some suggestions to tweak it and the numbers prove that the win rate spikes up
i tried to explain to porky but he got very defensive of his system and wanted to hear nothing about tweaking it...so i would be weary of suggesting to make it better around here
also im wondering where is the data to prove the middle doesn't hit?
Rounders550, I did read the other thread and it might have just been one of those days. I thought you had some good thoughts and Porky may be on to something here. The bottom line is we all need to get that green paper and if you have an idea to put the odds in our favor then by all means I'll listen.
0
Rounders550, I did read the other thread and it might have just been one of those days. I thought you had some good thoughts and Porky may be on to something here. The bottom line is we all need to get that green paper and if you have an idea to put the odds in our favor then by all means I'll listen.
Improvements are always welcome by me... I would just warn against trying to "over-tweak" based on a small sample of data. (Like just 1 or 2 weeks.)
Once a system gets too complicated, it can get very difficult to manage. If a simple system hits 60% over a long period of time, that's better to me than a complicated system that takes forever to manage and hits 65% of the time. Just a thought.
I'll keep posting the old way, but if anybody has ideas for tweaking, I'll be listening and watching closely.
4:00 games coming up soon!
0
Improvements are always welcome by me... I would just warn against trying to "over-tweak" based on a small sample of data. (Like just 1 or 2 weeks.)
Once a system gets too complicated, it can get very difficult to manage. If a simple system hits 60% over a long period of time, that's better to me than a complicated system that takes forever to manage and hits 65% of the time. Just a thought.
I'll keep posting the old way, but if anybody has ideas for tweaking, I'll be listening and watching closely.
Bigdawg, any truth to playing the over when the middle is over 10? Also, does the larger the middle have any more impact on the outcome? I'm asking becasue I damn sure don't know.
0
Bigdawg, any truth to playing the over when the middle is over 10? Also, does the larger the middle have any more impact on the outcome? I'm asking becasue I damn sure don't know.
Rak, the over isn't automatically the play... just whichever side will miss the middle. Unders have won as plays, too. From what I've seen so far, a larger middle doesn't necessarily favor one side or the other, nor does it necessarily create a higher "confidence" level, as long as it meets the initial criteria for being a play to begin with.
That's just how I see it, though.
0
Rak, the over isn't automatically the play... just whichever side will miss the middle. Unders have won as plays, too. From what I've seen so far, a larger middle doesn't necessarily favor one side or the other, nor does it necessarily create a higher "confidence" level, as long as it meets the initial criteria for being a play to begin with.
Philadelphia @ San Francisco - Line Philly -4.5/41.5 Half Score: PHI 17-16 2H Line: PHI -3/20.5 Middle: 0 spread, 12 total Play: no spread, 2H over 20.5
0
Philadelphia @ San Francisco - Line Philly -4.5/41.5 Half Score: PHI 17-16 2H Line: PHI -3/20.5 Middle: 0 spread, 12 total Play: no spread, 2H over 20.5
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.