jaker122

Are they legit? I see they're not cheap but it makes me wonder if they actually know what they're doing unlike other touts. How accurate and up to date are the records? Anyone have experience with these cappers?

The funny thing is we decided to move down to behind the Central bench at halftime, when they were up 18. So maybe we jinxed them, lol. And that player's entire family was in the same section because he is from Illinois. I don't think it was intentional but it was a truly bizarre play, the way DePaul more or less pointed him to the hoop and how badly he missed. I don't know how it got to that point to begin with - covering by 30 at the half is like a 99.9% win probability.

I didn't go bust because of the bet but still, the psychology behind suffering a beat like that is devastating. Makes it tempting to chase the loss even though it's the worst thing you can do. At the very least I need an extended break, haha.

Last night may have been the straw that breaks the camel's back for me as a sports bettor.

Central Michigan (my alma mater) is at DePaul at fancy new Wintrust Arena. I attend the game and take the Chippewas at +12, because let's face it, hard to get excited for November MAC/Big East basketball unless you have money at stake. What ensued was the worst beat in my five years of betting on sports.

CMU starts out on fire, making pretty much every shot they take, goes up by 18 at the half (covering by 30). I also sprinkled a little on the CMU +600 ML before the game, just for kicks. So feeling pretty damn good at this point.

A thousand bricks and turnovers later, the game is tied in the second half. I figure whatever, the moneyline was a stretch from the beginning but the cover is still in good shape. Nope, DePaul continues their run, goes up by 13 on a layup with 20 seconds left (the only time of the game they were up by more than 12). I'm dead inside at this point, but here's the thing, Central has the ball and one last chance to snag the cover. DePaul at this point couldn't give two craps about playing defense and they practically usher the CMU player into the lane for an uncontested layup. BRICK. Game over, DePaul covers.

So yeah, felt the need to vent. It gets to the point where you wonder why you're even doing this. I've had a brutal past couple months and this was the cherry on top. Do I really need this in my life? Nooooooo.

Our play actually would have been Detroit and Arizona (the Dbacks lost on the back end). Seattle wouldn't have qualified under our system as a dog.

I'm actually pulling the plug on this system before losing any more money. It's just been way too difficult to hit on these parlays. I believe that's one hit on 11 attempts. Would rather put my money toward more time-tested systems. Also not sure I can commit to posting these every day of the season. Sorry for the disappointment, everyone!

Thursday loss

Current bankroll: $1,227.10

Starting bankroll: $1,250

Friday's Game 5 play: San Francisco (+106) and Texas (+108); $70 to win $229.90

Boston was -102 at the time of selection, not -120. As I had mentioned in an earlier post, I'm willing to take teams up to -102, because even if I grab a team at those odds the payout for the parlay will still be around 3-to-1 for our betting progression. I usually post plays in the morning because that's what's convenient for me, and because pretty much all of these early season slates include at least a couple of early games. It's not always going to be possible for me to monitor lines up to the first pitch of every game. If anything we got some value on the Sox despite the eventual loss.

Sure, we would have done well to pick Texas at +150, but that's not the system and the whole point of this thread. The idea is to take stronger dogs who are fairly close to even money, avoid streaky teams and avoid opponents with top pitchers.

UPDATE: We're going to have a Thursday play after all, as a couple of lines have shifted in our favor.

Thursday Game 4: Detroit (-101) and Boston (-102); $50 to win $147.10

Wednesday loss. The A's looked like they were going to run away with it and give us our second win, but alas...

Current bankroll: $1,277.10

Starting bankroll: $1,250

No play Thursday. The system isn't giving us two viable games from a limited slate.

Tuesday loss

Current bankroll: $1,307.10

Starting bankroll: $1,250

Wednesday Game 3: Milwaukee (+106) and Oakland (+123); $30 to win $107.80

Bit longer odds, but this will be a nice win if we can pull it off. I'm considering adding a Game 9 to the system since our betting progression is more conservative and with slightly longer odds than say, two -110 teams. Haven't gotten that deep in a chase yet but I'm sure we will.

Monday loss

Current bankroll: $1,327.10

Starting bankroll: $1,250

Tuesday Game 2: Miami (+118) and Arizona (-102); $20 to win $66.30

Thanks everyone! That's our first win of the season.

Current bankroll: $1,337.10

Starting bankroll: $1,250

Monday Game 1: Cincinnati (+100) and Seattle (+100); $10 to win $30

Alright, here we go. For this thread, we are going to bet $10 units and have a starting bankroll of $1,250. That's enough to cover two system losses right out of the gate, although we certainly hope that doesn't happen.

Starting bankroll: $1,250

Current bankroll: $1,250

Thursday's play: Los Angeles Angels (+105) and Chicago White Sox (-101); $10 to win $30.80

I think there's going to be a lot of instances where we come across teams that are -101 or -102. For this system I am going to consider those qualifying underdogs, albeit just barely. We'll stop at -102, though.

Just spitballing: Here's a slightly more conservative progression model that would still reward us for wins late in the chase:

1u, 2u, 3u, 5u, 7u, 10u, 14u, 20u

That's an 8-game chase with a 62-unit total risk, which is down from the 74 units I initially posted. In the later portion of the chase the profit would still be around 2 units multiplied by the number of losses up to that point of the chase.