New System That Is Undefeated

Quote Originally Posted by PennCorona:

In school I'm not smart n lazy to do homework n alway copy of my classmate , that y I'm copy of igetmoney , all u people r over reacting     About IRS n suv parking in front the man house , what go up must come down n I hope it don't come down b/c I'm enjoying the money igetmoney giving to us.

Quote Originally Posted by PennCorona:

In school I'm not smart n lazy to do homework n alway copy of my classmate , that y I'm copy of igetmoney , all u people r over reacting     About IRS n suv parking in front the man house , what go up must come down n I hope it don't come down b/c I'm enjoying the money igetmoney giving to us.

Quote Originally Posted by IgetMoney101:

Hey Ed-Collins I understand your doubt but like I mentioned in a previous post I said the system changes year to year. In almost four years it is undefeated. It is just a matter of reading it right and then picking the right team for the following week. If you can give me a system that is undefeated in four years I'll be surprised. Bol to you. I can guarantee that this won't go .500 the rest of the year.

Quote Originally Posted by TomE:



IGM101
First off, let me just say I admire that you "look" for consistencies and patterns to create a "system". My mind works much the same way. I have many "systems" I consider each week, but the bottom line is that I filter everything with logic and critical thinking and awareness of situational factors.
Your last 2 picks were easy picks for me...
Den coming off the bye and N.O. a horrendous road team. Easy pick - no system required.
SF  - a very good team vs a discombobulated team with more questions than answers in a battle for undisputed 1st place in the division. Easy pick - no system required.

Anyway, best of luck on your system. I hope it continues to provide you with winners. For myself, I will continue to use my own mind the very best that I can to continue finding my own winners. In my experience, there is no such thing as 100%. As the Collins poster correctly pointed out, if you search hard enough, you can and will find consistencies from PAST RESULTS. But, as they say, past results are no guarantee of future performance. The only true consistency is that CHANGE is 100% certain over time.

Quote Originally Posted by Ed-Collins:

This forum topic has me in stitches.  It really does.  It's a true example of Covers at its finest.

Let me tell you the reality of it all.  And it sounds like most of you won't like what I have to say.  It appears at least half of you are idiots / gullible / and fools.  But then again, that really doesn't surprise me, because I see far too may posts here involving people who bet parlays, people who hedge, people who talk about "trap" games (no such thing), members who don't even know the rules of football, etc.

This so-called "system", whatever it is, is without a doubt what is known as an "after-the-fact" system.  It was created after the games have been played.

It's not difficult at all, especially using all of the different software available today, to come up with "winning systems" based upon past results.  Without too much trouble at all, I too could come up with a "system" that is 15-0.  Or 14-2. Or 20-0.  Or whatever you want.

That doesn't mean future games are going to continue follow that system.  It doesn't mean that at all.

In no forum at all, on any website, will you find this system mentioned back when it was 5-0... or 6-0... or 7-0... or 12-0... etc.  Because no one was using it or even knew about it back then.  Why?  Again, because it didn't exist.  It's new.  It was created AFTER the results of those games.

Even the original poster mentioned somewhere that he just recently found out about it, and is now tracking it.

Again, an after-the-fact system.

The reason the original poster doesn't give out the system is obvious... it's probably so incredibly stupid, whatever it is, he would lose all respect and get his ass laughed off if he mentioned it at all.   MUCH better to leave it a mystery.

Did I read correctly that part of this system only works based upon the results of prior divisional games?   Give me a break. And I find this quote by the original poster hilarious:

"Ok I just looked at week 9s primetime games. Dal/atl and Phil/n.o. I will likely know a play then for n.o/den after the conclusion of the nyg/dal game.  This system is based on situations and results. I have explained it to others, but it is confusing."

And then: "Since Dallas and N.O. play on primetime next week and Philly and Atlanta also in primetime those two teams play each other.  Here's the deal IF Dallas cover vs NY system says. Saints.  I don't want to push a play on the mnf game because there are so many variables in this system and I would rather not make a play unless I'm 110% sure."

I lost all respect once I read that.  (Actually, that's not true at all... long before then I had no respect left to lose.)

At best, the system from this point forward will be about 50-50.  Given enough data, I can damn well guarantee it.  Check the results of the system again in several months / next year, and you'll see that I'm right.  (This is assuming the original poster keeps giving us the plays.)  The one thing in the OPs favor is that this system doesn't seem to produce very many plays.  He can get lucky for a few weeks and really string this along.

(I also have to laugh at all of those "Oh, please please please won't you be my friend?" requests.  What are we, in grade school?  Who cares?)

Quote Originally Posted by clubtnt:



TomE,

picks are always "easy" with the benefit of hindsight. any easy picks this week?