WEDNESDAY'S PLAYS/PUCKS

TOTALS: 79-57  (58.1%)  & + 54.53 UNITS 

YESTERDAY :   1-0  & +2.21 Units

RECENT  RUN:  8 DAY, 26-15  (63.4%) & +20.79 UNITS

TODAY’S PLAY(s):  (will be playing/posting the other game (s) in the reply section here…)

PITTSBURGH ML @ -140 FOR 5.6 UNITS TO WIN 4 UNITS

YESTERDAY’S PLAY:

Parlay: 

MONTREAL ML @ -190 & ANAHEIM/FLORIDA OVER 5.5 FOR 1 UNIT TO   WIN 2.21 UNITS

I could not disagree with you more Sir.  You don't know me, I don't know you, but I am a living breathing testament over the long, long term that the information you are providing here is not only incorrect, it can potentially cost some unsuspecting 'players' money fairly quickly.  Though few on here truly know me, and my story, I ABSOLUTELY KNOW, as surely as I know I am typing this reply, you are completely wrong to your core.  I am non-confrontational in this Forum, BUT I have gotten to know a few people on here recently, and am concerned that your, seemingly, well laid-out theory will actually convince even one person on here to bet straight dogs--a mistake.

I personally play short dogs, and some heavy Favs, but rarely--though I do at times--play long dogs.  I cap on a season (NHL) basis of 58-63%, the last time I finished outside that realm was well beyond 15 seasons ago, when I began recording and keeping record of my plays/stats.

The truth to the matter is that this 'system' of thought you are laying out here is a 'Lazy man's ideology', pure and simple--effectively cutting out 50% of the potential plays that are, more often than not, winners.  This is no more correct, nor accurate in saying you should ONLY play favorites, you should ONLY play Under on all 6 goal O/Us, Over all 5 goal O/Us, ONLY play a fade when a team lost 4 straight, jump on last years playoff teams each time they win 2 straight.  Sir, I have heard, and seen, them all.  The ONLY correlating similarities in every single one of them is that are present is that it derives from a man's mind that is either too confused to contemplate ALL aspects of the available games and needs to shorten his 'scope', or just too lazy to put real work in to beat the book.  

Take the potential world's greatest pitcher that is told early on that high velocity fast balls are not worth throwing b/c many of them are hit for HR's and lose games--you are automatically eliminating everything over 85 mph, as you are doing in this frail argument.

I thank God that I was taught the ropes correctly early on, and had not been infected by this type of limited thought process, but surely hope that I was ALWAYS smart enough to not of fallen victim to it.

FACT: There are values at any level of line.  Using an actual game I capped, and won recently... I ran the analytics, simulations, research, and I concluded that I had a 74% chance of getting a return on my investment (wining my ticket).  The line was -130.  Given those numbers.  Now the only question is whether or not my calculations are correct.  Given 15 years of statistical data, I know I have up to a 3% statistical variance.  So let’s go with 3% negative sway to my figures, that means I would lose this play (the sport no longer matters, it is now simply a statistical proposition) 29%, and win 71% of the time.  Now, all I care about is that my figures are correct, and no longer concerned if I win, or lose, this particular play.  As long as my figures are correct, there will be swings both ways in my route to say…1,000 plays that fall into this percentile.  So, I play 1,000 (@$130 per for instructional purposes) of these tickets (in a variety of sports) and win 710, and lose 290 of them.  NOTE: I am not concerned about the 10 straight I win in this bracket, nor of the 10 straight I lose.  It will all even out to winning between 710 and 770 of these plays, but we are using the bottom end for instructional purposes (710).  So, I win $100 X 710 (= $71,000), and lose $130 X 290 (=$37,700).  And you are telling me that I should just write these (favorites) off?  Good thing I did not run into you, nor the “Guru” who “knows his stuff” long ago, I surely would have had to of worked a “Real job” throughout my life, lol.

In short, and once more, I am non-confrontational here, and in my life, but you are sprewing untruths that have been spawned, clearly, by someone who knows not what the hell he is talking about, and obviously has you bamboozled into thinking he is a Sharp.  I can only hope you believe me, for your sake, that he is definitely NOT a sharp.  I personally know some of the top handicappers on planet earth, and NOT ONE of them would agree with word one of your post.  It simply makes no sense, but unfortunately, someone is probably going to read it and follow it, to their own peril.  I give people the benefit of the doubt, and will just chalk this up to you being someone who has been shammed, and you mean only to help, but you are not helping Sir.  Most of the people on here, if they are honest about it, they lose more than they win, and bad information will only perpetuate those losses, so I could not sit back idly by and not sound off in hopes that someone who might of bought into this crock will think again. 

No matter what, I wish you luck, and all the best going forward.  Note I will not be back to counter any replies, I spent more time than I have on this reply.  Good day Sir.

7NLN7,

I agree with your philosophy for sure but how do I get the analytics, simulations and research without waiting the next 15 years to obtain data.  Is there a formula or a stat program you came up with?  I want to be in on those plays with a 70 to 79% chance of winning.