I will be glad to ahve this conversation with you as long as you use your real username.
Not an alias set up to stalk / troll me.
I take it as a compliment, but come on. Be big about it. Calling me out while hiding this way is lame.
Go do some research on my posts here for 10 years, and come back to me. Repeating this stuff gets old. And I dont owe you anything.
Why do you seem to think I am an alias?
I was a lurker for a long time before I decided to sign up because I couldn't take your flawed gambling theories anymore. I do not want the squares at covers to be fooled by you and lose money to the books.
Sure, you don't owe me anything. I did not even force you to reply me. It's of your own accord.
Repeating this stuff gets old? Then don't. No one's putting a gun to your head.
0
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
I will be glad to ahve this conversation with you as long as you use your real username.
Not an alias set up to stalk / troll me.
I take it as a compliment, but come on. Be big about it. Calling me out while hiding this way is lame.
Go do some research on my posts here for 10 years, and come back to me. Repeating this stuff gets old. And I dont owe you anything.
Why do you seem to think I am an alias?
I was a lurker for a long time before I decided to sign up because I couldn't take your flawed gambling theories anymore. I do not want the squares at covers to be fooled by you and lose money to the books.
Sure, you don't owe me anything. I did not even force you to reply me. It's of your own accord.
Repeating this stuff gets old? Then don't. No one's putting a gun to your head.
I don't post much I'm not big on forums b/c of the drama.I will say about 3 years ago I sent vanzack a friend request or PM and asked him if it would be OK if I asked him some general questions on gambling.I sent about 10-12 questions and he took the time to answer them thoroughly and politely.If he did that for me someone who is not even active on the forum, i'm sure he has helped plenty of others in the past.
One of the main things he told me was to concentrate on beating the closing number, he said the same thing that he said above (probably copied it from the thread) pinnacle profiles you by how often you beat the number, that is more or less how you get on their radar and it is the only way to be a long term winner.They care more if you win while beating the number, than they do if you win and don't beat the number. He had a lot of other useful bits of info, but my point is he has been preaching that forever.Another good thread that he made was that gets referenced a lot is the one on flat betting baseball.
If you don't agree w/ him that there wasn't any value on the game b/c of QB variance that's fine, but you can't use the argument "your dumb van, what if i could get +10!!!", because that line isn't available anywhere you are going to get paid neither is the 3.5 +140 from your example.You think you are clever, but you keep going back to an argument that doesn't exist and it is making you look ignorant.
You are also ignoring anything he says so you can paint a general picture of him that fits your profile b/c of your grudge.
1) believes in jinxes (i doubt he does it is something we all say) 2) watches and sweats the games (who doesn't, are you telling me you have never been frustrated by a coaching move, venting is one of the main reasons the forum exists, what sets the pros apart is that they don't let it effect there next play or cry fix) 3) pays no attention to the price and juice(like he has shown w/ links to other threads this is untrue, I've never seen someone preach this more than him) 5) no mathematical model (mentioned one several times in the past)
You probably tailed him during a negative streak and you are mad.We all have bad streaks unlike several on here you won't see him claiming 60% picks or how easy picking games is b/c is it not.He just tells it like it is.
So either you tailed him during a downswing or you are hating on him b/c of his goofy white avatar(van, buddy, this gets you most of your enemies).He is also not afraid to call an idiot an idiot.It is one of those 3 things b/c the posts he has on the actual process of sports betting are correct and valuable, and wouldn't offend anyone who wanted to win long term.Covers needs people like him around if people want to go from recreational players to people who make money.
0
I don't post much I'm not big on forums b/c of the drama.I will say about 3 years ago I sent vanzack a friend request or PM and asked him if it would be OK if I asked him some general questions on gambling.I sent about 10-12 questions and he took the time to answer them thoroughly and politely.If he did that for me someone who is not even active on the forum, i'm sure he has helped plenty of others in the past.
One of the main things he told me was to concentrate on beating the closing number, he said the same thing that he said above (probably copied it from the thread) pinnacle profiles you by how often you beat the number, that is more or less how you get on their radar and it is the only way to be a long term winner.They care more if you win while beating the number, than they do if you win and don't beat the number. He had a lot of other useful bits of info, but my point is he has been preaching that forever.Another good thread that he made was that gets referenced a lot is the one on flat betting baseball.
If you don't agree w/ him that there wasn't any value on the game b/c of QB variance that's fine, but you can't use the argument "your dumb van, what if i could get +10!!!", because that line isn't available anywhere you are going to get paid neither is the 3.5 +140 from your example.You think you are clever, but you keep going back to an argument that doesn't exist and it is making you look ignorant.
You are also ignoring anything he says so you can paint a general picture of him that fits your profile b/c of your grudge.
1) believes in jinxes (i doubt he does it is something we all say) 2) watches and sweats the games (who doesn't, are you telling me you have never been frustrated by a coaching move, venting is one of the main reasons the forum exists, what sets the pros apart is that they don't let it effect there next play or cry fix) 3) pays no attention to the price and juice(like he has shown w/ links to other threads this is untrue, I've never seen someone preach this more than him) 5) no mathematical model (mentioned one several times in the past)
You probably tailed him during a negative streak and you are mad.We all have bad streaks unlike several on here you won't see him claiming 60% picks or how easy picking games is b/c is it not.He just tells it like it is.
So either you tailed him during a downswing or you are hating on him b/c of his goofy white avatar(van, buddy, this gets you most of your enemies).He is also not afraid to call an idiot an idiot.It is one of those 3 things b/c the posts he has on the actual process of sports betting are correct and valuable, and wouldn't offend anyone who wanted to win long term.Covers needs people like him around if people want to go from recreational players to people who make money.
Does it still baffel u? It wasnt that hard to see. Cambell has done one thing before this game tonite, thats hold the clipboard{besides the fact he has thrown 50 interceptions already in his carreer,Then u had the young upcomng KAPP who has been involved in the offense from week 1,even getting into the game in some tebow type situationsI think the people that had this game a tos up are the Cutler haters who dont realize how good he really s and the Bears are terrible without him .It was proved last year and agin last nite .As posted easy SF win (true I had them winning 17-10 or 21-10 as posted)
0
Does it still baffel u? It wasnt that hard to see. Cambell has done one thing before this game tonite, thats hold the clipboard{besides the fact he has thrown 50 interceptions already in his carreer,Then u had the young upcomng KAPP who has been involved in the offense from week 1,even getting into the game in some tebow type situationsI think the people that had this game a tos up are the Cutler haters who dont realize how good he really s and the Bears are terrible without him .It was proved last year and agin last nite .As posted easy SF win (true I had them winning 17-10 or 21-10 as posted)
I don't post much I'm not big on forums b/c of the drama.I will say about 3 years ago I sent vanzack a friend request or PM and asked him if it would be OK if I asked him some general questions on gambling.I sent about 10-12 questions and he took the time to answer them thoroughly and politely.If he did that for me someone who is not even active on the forum, i'm sure he has helped plenty of others in the past.
One of the main things he told me was to concentrate on beating the closing number, he said the same thing that he said above (probably copied it from the thread) pinnacle profiles you by how often you beat the number, that is more or less how you get on their radar and it is the only way to be a long term winner.They care more if you win while beating the number, than they do if you win and don't beat the number. He had a lot of other useful bits of info, but my point is he has been preaching that forever.Another good thread that he made was that gets referenced a lot is the one on flat betting baseball.
If you don't agree w/ him that there wasn't any value on the game b/c of QB variance that's fine, but you can't use the argument "your dumb van, what if i could get +10!!!", because that line isn't available anywhere you are going to get paid neither is the 3.5 +140 from your example.You think you are clever, but you keep going back to an argument that doesn't exist and it is making you look ignorant.
You are also ignoring anything he says so you can paint a general picture of him that fits your profile b/c of your grudge.
1) believes in jinxes (i doubt he does it is something we all say) 2) watches and sweats the games (who doesn't, are you telling me you have never been frustrated by a coaching move, venting is one of the main reasons the forum exists, what sets the pros apart is that they don't let it effect there next play or cry fix) 3) pays no attention to the price and juice(like he has shown w/ links to other threads this is untrue, I've never seen someone preach this more than him) 5) no mathematical model (mentioned one several times in the past)
You probably tailed him during a negative streak and you are mad.We all have bad streaks unlike several on here you won't see him claiming 60% picks or how easy picking games is b/c is it not.He just tells it like it is.
So either you tailed him during a downswing or you are hating on him b/c of his goofy white avatar(van, buddy, this gets you most of your enemies).He is also not afraid to call an idiot an idiot.It is one of those 3 things b/c the posts he has on the actual process of sports betting are correct and valuable, and wouldn't offend anyone who wanted to win long term.Covers needs people like him around if people want to go from recreational players to people who make money.
This.
Thanks Hizay.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Hizay:
I don't post much I'm not big on forums b/c of the drama.I will say about 3 years ago I sent vanzack a friend request or PM and asked him if it would be OK if I asked him some general questions on gambling.I sent about 10-12 questions and he took the time to answer them thoroughly and politely.If he did that for me someone who is not even active on the forum, i'm sure he has helped plenty of others in the past.
One of the main things he told me was to concentrate on beating the closing number, he said the same thing that he said above (probably copied it from the thread) pinnacle profiles you by how often you beat the number, that is more or less how you get on their radar and it is the only way to be a long term winner.They care more if you win while beating the number, than they do if you win and don't beat the number. He had a lot of other useful bits of info, but my point is he has been preaching that forever.Another good thread that he made was that gets referenced a lot is the one on flat betting baseball.
If you don't agree w/ him that there wasn't any value on the game b/c of QB variance that's fine, but you can't use the argument "your dumb van, what if i could get +10!!!", because that line isn't available anywhere you are going to get paid neither is the 3.5 +140 from your example.You think you are clever, but you keep going back to an argument that doesn't exist and it is making you look ignorant.
You are also ignoring anything he says so you can paint a general picture of him that fits your profile b/c of your grudge.
1) believes in jinxes (i doubt he does it is something we all say) 2) watches and sweats the games (who doesn't, are you telling me you have never been frustrated by a coaching move, venting is one of the main reasons the forum exists, what sets the pros apart is that they don't let it effect there next play or cry fix) 3) pays no attention to the price and juice(like he has shown w/ links to other threads this is untrue, I've never seen someone preach this more than him) 5) no mathematical model (mentioned one several times in the past)
You probably tailed him during a negative streak and you are mad.We all have bad streaks unlike several on here you won't see him claiming 60% picks or how easy picking games is b/c is it not.He just tells it like it is.
So either you tailed him during a downswing or you are hating on him b/c of his goofy white avatar(van, buddy, this gets you most of your enemies).He is also not afraid to call an idiot an idiot.It is one of those 3 things b/c the posts he has on the actual process of sports betting are correct and valuable, and wouldn't offend anyone who wanted to win long term.Covers needs people like him around if people want to go from recreational players to people who make money.
I was a lurker for a long time before I decided to sign up because I couldn't take your flawed gambling theories anymore. I do not want the squares at covers to be fooled by you and lose money to the books.
Sure, you don't owe me anything. I did not even force you to reply me. It's of your own accord.
Repeating this stuff gets old? Then don't. No one's putting a gun to your head.
Your mission is to save the masses at covers from nonsense and losing money. Thats funny.
Good Luck. I will be watching this system closely.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Irish_Tim:
Why do you seem to think I am an alias?
I was a lurker for a long time before I decided to sign up because I couldn't take your flawed gambling theories anymore. I do not want the squares at covers to be fooled by you and lose money to the books.
Sure, you don't owe me anything. I did not even force you to reply me. It's of your own accord.
Repeating this stuff gets old? Then don't. No one's putting a gun to your head.
Your mission is to save the masses at covers from nonsense and losing money. Thats funny.
Good Luck. I will be watching this system closely.
Vanzack, I haven't followed your American football picks, but you are the man w/ Soccer. You tore shit up in the Euros the past summer. Keep up the good work.
Looking foward to seeing who you like this afternoon in CL action.
BTW, your initial post was logical and of course you're gonna catch shit when one team routes the other. I bet the 49ers before I knew Smith was officially out. It ultimately ended up working out for me but I'd probably would have laid off if I didn't get it in on Saturday.
BOL in today's action.
0
Vanzack, I haven't followed your American football picks, but you are the man w/ Soccer. You tore shit up in the Euros the past summer. Keep up the good work.
Looking foward to seeing who you like this afternoon in CL action.
BTW, your initial post was logical and of course you're gonna catch shit when one team routes the other. I bet the 49ers before I knew Smith was officially out. It ultimately ended up working out for me but I'd probably would have laid off if I didn't get it in on Saturday.
Hizay is pretty much right on. It's sad, but not surprising, that many people see someone that is better than them at something and try to tear them down rather than trying to improve themselves.
If you actually take the time to read many of Van's posts you will find some of the most useful information on this website. I'm not saying this for Irish Tim, because I know he won't listen, but hopefully it will impact others.
I have probably missed some important posts here and there, but I have tried as much advice as I can from him. The stuff he has written about shopping for the best line, setting goals, flat betting etc. has helped me go from someone that thought chase systems were a good idea 7 years ago to someone that is about to cap off their first year of profitable online sports betting. I have no doubt there are many others that have benefitted in similar ways from seeing what someone like Van has to say.
It's truly a shame that there are assholes like Irish Tim that make someone who could potentially be so valuable to the forum not want to post. As Slobbasaurus said, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on CL today Van, but certainly don't blame you if you don't want to share.
0
Hizay is pretty much right on. It's sad, but not surprising, that many people see someone that is better than them at something and try to tear them down rather than trying to improve themselves.
If you actually take the time to read many of Van's posts you will find some of the most useful information on this website. I'm not saying this for Irish Tim, because I know he won't listen, but hopefully it will impact others.
I have probably missed some important posts here and there, but I have tried as much advice as I can from him. The stuff he has written about shopping for the best line, setting goals, flat betting etc. has helped me go from someone that thought chase systems were a good idea 7 years ago to someone that is about to cap off their first year of profitable online sports betting. I have no doubt there are many others that have benefitted in similar ways from seeing what someone like Van has to say.
It's truly a shame that there are assholes like Irish Tim that make someone who could potentially be so valuable to the forum not want to post. As Slobbasaurus said, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on CL today Van, but certainly don't blame you if you don't want to share.
I am a crazy degenerate because I looked in on your thread and knowing nothing about soccer I tailed you. Such kind words spoken on your skills and I was sold.
Now I'm asking myself why I tailed a teenager who is into numb chucks and rolls of twenties?
Lesson learned...GL the rest of the way
0
I am a crazy degenerate because I looked in on your thread and knowing nothing about soccer I tailed you. Such kind words spoken on your skills and I was sold.
Now I'm asking myself why I tailed a teenager who is into numb chucks and rolls of twenties?
No need to apologize. Anyone that made those plays is responsible for themselves. Despite what TimeLucky thinks, just because you had a bad day it doesn't mean you're not a knowledgeable soccer capper. I'm sure you didn't get all the bills you are holding in your avatar by accident. It must have been due to some solid analysis.
Get it back tomorrow. Hope to see you posting again.
0
No need to apologize. Anyone that made those plays is responsible for themselves. Despite what TimeLucky thinks, just because you had a bad day it doesn't mean you're not a knowledgeable soccer capper. I'm sure you didn't get all the bills you are holding in your avatar by accident. It must have been due to some solid analysis.
Get it back tomorrow. Hope to see you posting again.
No need to apologize. Anyone that made those plays is responsible for themselves. Despite what TimeLucky thinks, just because you had a bad day it doesn't mean you're not a knowledgeable soccer capper. I'm sure you didn't get all the bills you are holding in your avatar by accident. It must have been due to some solid analysis.
Get it back tomorrow. Hope to see you posting again.
No doubt. He still looks fresh and hip for a dude who's been betting for over 20 years.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Livan33:
No need to apologize. Anyone that made those plays is responsible for themselves. Despite what TimeLucky thinks, just because you had a bad day it doesn't mean you're not a knowledgeable soccer capper. I'm sure you didn't get all the bills you are holding in your avatar by accident. It must have been due to some solid analysis.
Get it back tomorrow. Hope to see you posting again.
No doubt. He still looks fresh and hip for a dude who's been betting for over 20 years.
Last night I took the Steelers. Had the option of +3 +105, or +3.5 -115. So, risk 100 for 105 first way, and risk 100 for 87 the 2nd way. I opted for the +3 +105, and of course I pushed.
My belief is that in the long run taking the +105 will be more profitable. To make up for the lost 87, I'd need to win 5 times with the same scenario(5x18=90, which makes up for the lost 87). So, 1/6 of the time(16.666%) a push instead of win would still be profitable for me in the long run, as the 5 wins would give me an extra $3.
Does anyone have historical data for the outcomes on games where the closing line was between 2.5-3.5? How many of these games ended with the exact difference of 3?
Even if it's 25%(which seems high), taking the +105 would seem correct, as probability dictates that the team I wagered on would win half of the time, thus rendering only 12.5% of the time I would push instead of win.
If I was making a major, one time wager, then I'd definitely buy the extra half off the 3, But, grinding with a normal play, I think the +105 is the correct move.
Any help, backed by facts would be greatly appreciated.
I read and plagarized a great post on this. It stated you were always correct buying the points because three happens so often. The problem is for me on 5dimes to buy the points off three is not just a dime to the juice but 20-30 cents. The theory I read did not look at this much juice and I have to believe it is in the books interest to get more juice almost all the time.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Snake30:
Can you answer this Van?
Can anyone answer this question with pure stats?
Last night I took the Steelers. Had the option of +3 +105, or +3.5 -115. So, risk 100 for 105 first way, and risk 100 for 87 the 2nd way. I opted for the +3 +105, and of course I pushed.
My belief is that in the long run taking the +105 will be more profitable. To make up for the lost 87, I'd need to win 5 times with the same scenario(5x18=90, which makes up for the lost 87). So, 1/6 of the time(16.666%) a push instead of win would still be profitable for me in the long run, as the 5 wins would give me an extra $3.
Does anyone have historical data for the outcomes on games where the closing line was between 2.5-3.5? How many of these games ended with the exact difference of 3?
Even if it's 25%(which seems high), taking the +105 would seem correct, as probability dictates that the team I wagered on would win half of the time, thus rendering only 12.5% of the time I would push instead of win.
If I was making a major, one time wager, then I'd definitely buy the extra half off the 3, But, grinding with a normal play, I think the +105 is the correct move.
Any help, backed by facts would be greatly appreciated.
I read and plagarized a great post on this. It stated you were always correct buying the points because three happens so often. The problem is for me on 5dimes to buy the points off three is not just a dime to the juice but 20-30 cents. The theory I read did not look at this much juice and I have to believe it is in the books interest to get more juice almost all the time.
Meaning to buy points is probably not in your best interest. For me , again of 5 dimes, to go from nickel juice up would seem ludicrous over time. That said, I see people do it all the time
0
Meaning to buy points is probably not in your best interest. For me , again of 5 dimes, to go from nickel juice up would seem ludicrous over time. That said, I see people do it all the time
I knew the concept of beating the closing line for the last 10 years here. Here is one example from this thread in 2010 (post #8).
The only way to define sharp is someone who consistently beats the line (square would be the opposite).
So if sharps are on one side, by definition they have already beaten the line because the line has moved. So now in order to side with those sharps, you have to take a bad line, thus NOT beating the line, making you a square. So you are on the same side on the same game, but you are the square and they are the sharp because of line.
The only determinant in long term sports gambling winning or losing is beating the line. It is the only thing that books like Pinnacle use to profile players - they dont care if you win or lose - but they do care if you beat the line - because they know that someone who does that consistently will win consistently (a sharp).
I like this. But you cant argue that many said the books over adjusted for A. Smith. and technically these people who bet SF at 3.5 beat the line. No? I assume you will say no because they did not beat the closing line. But why does that matter they got the best available line period with value on it. Gotta give credit where it is do. Those who said Kaper was gonna be just as good if not better than Smith beat the line in my eyes.
0
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
I knew the concept of beating the closing line for the last 10 years here. Here is one example from this thread in 2010 (post #8).
The only way to define sharp is someone who consistently beats the line (square would be the opposite).
So if sharps are on one side, by definition they have already beaten the line because the line has moved. So now in order to side with those sharps, you have to take a bad line, thus NOT beating the line, making you a square. So you are on the same side on the same game, but you are the square and they are the sharp because of line.
The only determinant in long term sports gambling winning or losing is beating the line. It is the only thing that books like Pinnacle use to profile players - they dont care if you win or lose - but they do care if you beat the line - because they know that someone who does that consistently will win consistently (a sharp).
I like this. But you cant argue that many said the books over adjusted for A. Smith. and technically these people who bet SF at 3.5 beat the line. No? I assume you will say no because they did not beat the closing line. But why does that matter they got the best available line period with value on it. Gotta give credit where it is do. Those who said Kaper was gonna be just as good if not better than Smith beat the line in my eyes.
Sucks cause I really like and understand your concept but I use a local that only gives me lines on day of. Therefore I cannot do this. But I love the theory and will look to use in future when my adventures become more intense. Will take time though. The real world comes first.
0
Sucks cause I really like and understand your concept but I use a local that only gives me lines on day of. Therefore I cannot do this. But I love the theory and will look to use in future when my adventures become more intense. Will take time though. The real world comes first.
van, I had a question regarding betting halftimes in College and Pro Football. I have been putting a lot of stock in Pinnacle's opening numbers for halftimes. I will often sit their refreshing and watching the money fluctuate, or see if they actually move the numbers.
I live in Las Vegas and use William.US on my iPhone, so I don't have any other outlets. I will sometimes see a difference between 1-3 points on the sides and even some of the totals. When I see Pinnacle stand pat on a number, where William Hill will move the line, I have been hammering the side that Pinnacle won't move off of.
My best example of this was the Thursday night game between Clemson and Wake Forest. Pinnacle closed at Clemson -4.5 +101 for the 2nd half, where William Hill had Clemson -6 -130. I sided with Wake Forest +6 at +110. Wake Forest won the 2nd half 7-6.
Sorry for the ramble. My question is do you put any merit into something like this when Pinnacle takes a stand on a number so to speak? Is it just a coincidence? There have been quite a few occasions of games like this, and it hits more often than not. I also understand that WilliamHill seems to be on the square side here which is okay for what I'm trying to do, since I'm always getting the better number.
0
van, I had a question regarding betting halftimes in College and Pro Football. I have been putting a lot of stock in Pinnacle's opening numbers for halftimes. I will often sit their refreshing and watching the money fluctuate, or see if they actually move the numbers.
I live in Las Vegas and use William.US on my iPhone, so I don't have any other outlets. I will sometimes see a difference between 1-3 points on the sides and even some of the totals. When I see Pinnacle stand pat on a number, where William Hill will move the line, I have been hammering the side that Pinnacle won't move off of.
My best example of this was the Thursday night game between Clemson and Wake Forest. Pinnacle closed at Clemson -4.5 +101 for the 2nd half, where William Hill had Clemson -6 -130. I sided with Wake Forest +6 at +110. Wake Forest won the 2nd half 7-6.
Sorry for the ramble. My question is do you put any merit into something like this when Pinnacle takes a stand on a number so to speak? Is it just a coincidence? There have been quite a few occasions of games like this, and it hits more often than not. I also understand that WilliamHill seems to be on the square side here which is okay for what I'm trying to do, since I'm always getting the better number.
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.
Hot Forum Topics
