smdio

Veteran

Posts: 1094

Member Since: October 2010

Status: Offline

About me:

Signature:

Filter Posts by:

Entries	Thread Author	Posts	Activity
replied to September 11, 2001 (long read) in General Discussion Someone should archive this thread btw View Post \| View Thread	smdio	1555	December 18, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to September 11, 2001 (long read) in General Discussion I've made my point. Anyone who wants to debate with me any specific event from 9/11/2001, I'd be more than willing to do so. Either here on covers, or any other forum you would like me to join. I'll continue to check this thread every couple days for questions or debate challenges that you may have. But for now, it's clear that I've raised enough questions that some of you now doubt many, many parts of the official government story. Soon enough, you'll be seeing a lawsuit on the national news stations. When you do, think of me View Post \| View Thread	smdio	1555	December 18, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to The Falcon's Nest (Sports Betting Program) in Systems & Strategies ROFL. View Post \| View Thread	TheThinker	28	December 18, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to Power Rating System ($1000 to $100,000 in 36 months) in Systems & Strategies Or maybe you could learn how to correct quote a post on covers when replying to someone? There's an idea! View Post \| View Thread	TheThinker	1514	December 18, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to The Falcon's 10% Project in Systems & Strategies Anyone tailing this jackass needs to have their head examined. Period. View Post \| View Thread	TheThinker	90	December 18, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to Power Rating System ($1000 to $100,000 in 36 months) in Systems & Strategies heh When adversity and Thinker collide, Thinker folds like a chair Just goes to show that we were following a loser the entire time. He's failed in the past under different nick names, and he's failed once again. No, his systems didn't fail, Thinker failed. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Thanks for yet again proving the true person you are Thinker. I'll be sure to provide every future tailer of yours on these forums a link to this thread, just so they know they true type of person you are. Better stick to convenient stores, jackass View Post \| View Thread	TheThinker	1514	December 18, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to Power Rating System ($1000 to $100,000 in 36 months) in Systems & Strategies Quote Originally Posted by TheThinker: smdio: your confusing what im doing.. my wagers are being reduced for my Overall Bankroll... i said it over and over again, play 1% and adjust daily... cannot be any more clear than that.. the only thing that im against reducing, are the wagers for the project bankroll... LSU2: appreciate the comments... im not ditching the program, just the project... if i drop from $2297 back down to $1000, then my Program needs to be re-evaluated and worked on... that is what i intend to do then.. i also want to do a few other things... who knows, maybe things turn around for the better, im still in there swinging.. Falcon Falcon, are you this dense? You're overall bankroll has nothing to do with this thread or this project. No one in here cares if you're reducing your wager amounts by a substantial amount or not at all in another thread or on another project. All we care about is "$1000 to $100k". You can win $50,000 in another project or lose $500,000, and it would not make a difference to this project. What matters to us is this bankroll and this project. You have seemingly connected this project to others, and this bankroll to your overall bankroll. That connection should have never been made. Why do we care that you've wrongly connected those dots? Because if this project fails, many many tailers of you are going to lose not just 1% of their bankroll like you, but likely the whole thing. Have you seen many people posting lately? Like the Vietnam vet, the female, or some of the other obviously excited and anxious tailers that you've seen earlier? No. Do you know why? Because they were likely playing with a $1000-$3000 bankroll and following your wagers to a T. No, you didn't advise to do it that way. But did you really expect people to listen to your every move? How could they get to $100k without making the same wagers as you, starting this late in the thread? You shamefully disgraced yourself in this thread. The project would have made it to $100k if you just had half a brain. MLB season would have increased our bankrolls by 10-fold. But instead, you've now focused on the 10% project, and left this one behind completely because you saw a "lull" in the winnings. That is despicable and I would advise you to no longer post picks on covers, if that is how you handle yourself with so many people following you're every move. View Post \| View Thread	TheThinker	1514	December 15, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to Power Rating System ($1000 to $100,000 in 36 months) in Systems & Strategies jimmyrikards and Kreatture could not have said it any better than posts #1454 and #1455 And yes, I do sometimes flip flop. But it's almost always justified by new information that surfaced. In this case, I was a huge proponent of this system and the project, as you can see from posts such as #1333 and #1143. At that point, I was 100% behind Thinker and this system, regardless of the winning or losing nights. Thinker's obsession to essentially "throw everyone the finger" (meaning his tailers) and continue his money-mismanagement has completely turned me against him. This thread should have never been started if you truly believe that those tailing it do not matter. View Post \| View Thread	TheThinker	1514	December 15, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to Power Rating System ($1000 to $100,000 in 36 months) in Systems & Strategies Quote Originally Posted by TheThinker: update for tuesday dec 14 Beginning balance on sept 5 2010: $1000 Current balance on dec 14 2010: $1430 Computer Program Plays: 214-246 (+$430) 46.5% winning selections... over 460 plays.... posted for 100 straight days, today is 101.... i wanted better numbers but taken as a whole, those numbers aint bad.... im sure the only thread here in this section that has ran 100 consecutive days... how many things have you done for 100 straight days? this thread will run, until i drop below $1000 or i do not meet the Jan 1 goal of $1750.... the program has not and will not be altered in any way... i will not work on it, ill simply move on to my next project... plays for tuesday dec 14 461. Penguins (+1.10) $45 to win $50 462. Leafs (+1.00) $45 to win $45 463. Raptors (+1.70) $45 to win $77 464. Sacremento (+4.00) $45 to win $180 465. Nuggets (+1.00) $45 to win $45 a win by sacrmento would sure help this dying project... back wednesday Falcon Head down, ears closed, ignorant as any I've ever met, and still $45 wagers This will be the last time I post in this thread. Regardless of how many smart, intelligent gamblers give Thinker advice in this thread, he continues to go about his ways without regard to outside opinion. GL to all, I'll stick with dj_destroyer and advise you all do the same. At least he's good at accepting criticism and changing what is good/bad about his capping skills View Post \| View Thread	TheThinker	1514	December 14, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to September 11, 2001 (long read) in General Discussion Quote Originally Posted by Hugh_Jorgan: smdio … perhaps if you spent less time here accomplishing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, you could be more productive in your attempt to prove that which never was. I'm very productive Hugh But keep in mind. It's just as important to inform people of this black-flag operation than it is to get in contact with our government officials along with move this thing to the supreme court View Post \| View Thread	smdio	1555	December 14, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to September 11, 2001 (long read) in General Discussion Quote Originally Posted by kaponofor3: BTW I like how smdio never answered my question about what happened to Flight 77 then? Unless he can provide a valid answer OTHER than "it crashed into the Pentagon", his theory is worthless. Even if you accept his theory that it came from a different approach, OK then -- so what? The import that he doesn't like to focus on is that something else damaged the Pentagon. Again, leading to the question of what happened to Flight 77? Without a plausible, legitimate answer to that question -- because that's really the question that needs to be answered by these conspiracy theorists -- smdio's theory is worthless. You know what else I like? That smdio refuses to use or accept as credible government findings or evidence because it comes from the party that is pushing a certain story/agenda in his mind. So what's the difference between the gov't and CIT? There is none -- both rely on eyewitness testimony to push their agenda and their version of the story. Oh, except that you can trust and rely on CIT and not the government, right smdio? A theory is no longer a theory once it is collaborated by numerous eye-witness accounts. In this case, over 2 dozen people would have had to make the mistake of "did you see the plane on your right hand side, or your left hand side?". When every person says they saw the plane on their right hand side, they are all either mass-hallucinating, or they are telling the truth. I have no theories at all. I am simply telling you that whatever plane these witnesses saw on 9/11/2001 could not have hit the Pentagon because of the Northern path that it took. That is no longer a theory, it is fact. I do not know what happened to Flight 77. It could have landed safely at Reagan Intl. It could have landed at another nearby airport. The answer to this question will not be found until the government comes clean with what they're currently lying to us about. "You know what else I like? That smdio refuses to use or accept as credible government findings or evidence because it comes from the party that is pushing a certain story/agenda in his mind. So what's the difference between the gov't and CIT? There is none -- both rely on eyewitness testimony to push their agenda and their version of the story. Oh, except that you can trust and rely on CIT and not the government, right smdio?" This is the most idiotic statement you've made so far in this thread, Kaponofor. You're now stooping to a level that makes you semi-retarded and even more ignorant to the facts than any conspiracy theorist that you'll ever come in contact with. The information I have provided to you has mostly come directly from our own government and/or their agencies. I have given you Flight Data Records. Why don't you want to talk about them, Kap? I have given you eye witness testimony from firefighters at the WTC complex, from those less than 1/4 mile away from the impact point at the Pentagon, and from people who have seen an aircraft fly directly over the Pentagon after the explosion. Why don't you answer any of my questions in regards to those? I've answered all of your questions. You're becoming just like HutchEmAll now, Kap. It's embarrassing, really. View Post \| View Thread	smdio	1555	December 14, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to September 11, 2001 (long read) in General Discussion Quote Originally Posted by SurfApe: Pissed off muslims- planes- hijacking- crashes- lots of death and jet fuel burning = 911. This guy is a disgrace to Duke and our nation. Run your moronic steel not melting shit by the structural engineers in the research triangle and they will punch you in the throat if they don't die from laughter first. If your father really died on that day, you dishonor his memory with your conspiritorial claptrap. Either way, you have my sympathy- please shut up- you disgrace the heros and victims who died that day with your horseshit. In this thread, I have shown you possibilities based on the facts that we were given by our government in hopes that you make an educated decision for yourself as to what happened on 9/11/2001. My goal is to call for a new, unimpeded, adequately financed, and truly non-partisan independent investigation into the attacks of that fateful day. A *real investigation* this time. Myself and my team hold the victims and those directly affected in this tragedy in the highest regard. As mentioned previously, I've also lost my father and essentially my mother on that day. May they rest in peace, and may Americans better understand the irrational surrendering of our freedoms in the name of "national security", as our fellow American soldiers, my friends and family included (and I'm sure yours too), fight overseas and put themselves in the position to make the ultimate sacrifice in the name of preserving those very same freedoms. I have never disrespected any of the victims of the 9/11 tragedy, and instead my fight against this government is *for* the victims and their suffering families. If you cannot see that by the passion I have in the posts I make, then you are missing my entire point. This is not a game to me, and I feel offended that you've placed me in that type of category. View Post \| View Thread	smdio	1555	December 14, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to September 11, 2001 (long read) in General Discussion So in one thread we have: 1.) smdio calling the Library of Congress a Congressional Committee and more importantly 2.) tillyo admitting that "everyone knows" Flight 77 took a Northern Approach to the Pentagon, which would deem it impossible for the plane to have hit the building. Good stuff !!! View Post \| View Thread	smdio	1555	December 13, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to Kelly Criterion put to the test. in Systems & Strategies Just busting your ass. Thought it would be good humor considering the back-and-forth between you and mtp View Post \| View Thread	mtp104	484	December 13, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to Kelly Criterion put to the test. in Systems & Strategies Quote Originally Posted by dj_destroyer: Are you kidding me? I was asking if you made plays on the computer because you could easily be making plays with a local and therefore your reasoning would stand. But you make your plays on the internet so it literally takes 90 extra seconds to post what you played. If that's too hard, don't post! No one likes people posting after the fact or deceiving records/plays. You don't have to explain yourself but like I said, a website where credibility/reputation is all you have, it's best to safeguard it. By the way, calling me brutal and then conceding 3 sentences later that I'm right doesn't bode well for the whole credibility thing. I may not be and have no intention to be the Cover's police but I most certainly will be the voice of reason. I don't hate for nothing and people know this, I'm objective and back up all my arguments with either logic or empirical evidence. This "fight" between you two is absolutely priceless. I would pay to watch you in a debate, dj. No, really. I would. Also, may I please draw your attention to this thread and posts #159 and #164. Pot. Kettle. Black. View Post \| View Thread	mtp104	484	December 13, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to Rookie Kid - Looking For Some Simple Help in Systems & Strategies To add a little bit to my #2 answer: a.) Never chase. Ever. Don't care what anyone else says. Do. Not. Chase. Not a team, not a series, nothing. Chasing = lost $. Period. b.) Labourchere, Labourchere, Labourchere. It takes some getting used to and a basic understanding of statistics, but once you've gotten the hang of it, it's quite simple. It's also, in my opinion, the best money-management system you can use, bar none. You can read more about the Labourchere method here. Any questions, feel free to ask. I've gotten it down to a T. View Post \| View Thread	reynro03	3	December 13, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to Rookie Kid - Looking For Some Simple Help in Systems & Strategies Quote Originally Posted by reynro03: Hey all, Just getting started with betting, taking it easy trying to soak up as much as I can. But, I would like to ask some pretty simple questions first. I don't know if this is the right place to post this, but it seemed a good place as it is part to do with "strategy." 1) Would there be any point in doing a straight, flat bet on a winning team for every game an entire season? For instance, take the Yankees last year and bet 100$ on them money line every game? Or would the house end up on top? (assume that you have 1000$ to start and they never lose 10 in a row for the first part of the season) 2) For someone with a limited budget ( 1000 or so) what would be the best types of money management? 3) For a beginner, is betting a larger amount on a 'sure thing' (I know there's no such thing) better than betting a little on a lot of things, or simply choosing the best available picks you feel will win and putting a moderate amount on them (1-2% of budget seems to be a good estimate based on some posts) 4) I know this one will probably see some differing answers, but: When you see a team on a winning streak, do you bet on or against them (I guess chase or fade?) and same with a losing streak? 5) Say you know a team is terrible on the road (for instance a team in MLB goes 25-56 on the road previous season, and hasn't improved) would it be profitable to bet against them all 81 games they are on the road the following season? Sorry if these are ridiculous questions, but you gotta start somewhere I guess, Thanks reynro Just my opinions, others will differ I'm sure. 1.) No, it would not make sense. Here's why: When you're betting on a heavy favorite, such as the Yankees in your example, the money line is usually quite inflated. I've seen ML's on the Yankees, Rays, Phillies, and some other big-namers get into the -250 range this past season. Let's say you win 10 bets in a row on the Yankees with the ML being an average of -200 (which it will). Betting $100 per game, you would be +$500 for 10 wins. Then on the 11th game, you lose. This would take you down $100 and your profit would now be $400. 10 wins and 1 loss = $400 profit with $100 being the base bet. See where I'm going? 1 bad losing streak, or even a losing 3-game series, will wipe your profits clear down the drain. Over the course of a season, you'll end up down a significant amount. If all things were equal (meaning $100 wins $100), then sure! I'll take the Yanks every time. But things aren't equal 2.) It's widely accepted that your base wager should be between 1-2% of your bankroll, and never more than 5%. If you have a $1000 starting BR, then $10-20 should be the base-wager amount, with $50 being the absolute max. As your BR increases, so will your wagers. As it decreases, so will your wagers. 3.) There are no 'sure things' in professional sports. The point spread and money-lines almost always make things "fair". You'll consistently see teams covering the spread by .5 or 1 point, and over/under totals going either way by just a run, goal, or basket. Regardless of how strong you think a play may be, it should never compromise more than 5% of your bankroll, as mentioned in #2 4.) There's no clear-cut answer for this. regardless of what anyone tells you. Some cappers will tell you to fade, some will tell you to play. It'd be great to find the team BEFORE they go on a winning streak. Hell, we can all retire in 6 months then 5.) This again goes back to question #1. If a team is good or bad on the road, chances are the lines will be adjusted to compensate for the good/bad road/home record. You might see that the Pittsburgh Pirates were 20-54, 19-55, and 23-51 the last 3 years on the road. But betting against the Pirates will often not prove too profitable. If the line against the Pirates was -200 (which it will be, or even higher for that matter) against the Phillies, you would need to win roughly 70% of your games throughout the course of a season in order to turn a profit. 70% is almost an impossible number to reach. It's been done before, but very few and far between. Hope this helped and welcome to covers! View Post \| View Thread	reynro03	3	December 13, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to September 11, 2001 (long read) in General Discussion Quote Originally Posted by tillyo: Reilly Hutch and Kapo all answered your questions and provided you with links and you act like they dont exist. Add me to that list of people who didnt see the plane hit the pentagon. Except the same video that you seen which is def not a missle. I was just playing about the southern approach everybody knows it was a northern approach as you seen in kapos link he provided which was awesome. An aircraft taking a Northern Approach to the Pentagon had 0% chance of hitting light poles 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 (essentially any of them), as well as causing the very specific damage to the building itself. Tillyo, you just indirectly admitted that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. Welcome aboard You'll like it on this side! View Post \| View Thread	smdio	1555	December 13, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to Power Rating System ($1000 to $100,000 in 36 months) in Systems & Strategies Quote Originally Posted by dj_destroyer: JimmyRickards smdio Not only do I agree with what you're saying, I also appreciate the proper grammar/spelling/punctuation. It's not that hard but it makes all the difference when reading. I pride myself on that kind of thing! So thanks View Post \| View Thread	TheThinker	1514	December 13, 2010 View Post \| View Thread
replied to Power Rating System ($1000 to $100,000 in 36 months) in Systems & Strategies Quote Originally Posted by jimmyrickards: Thinker, you said the project has taken a nosedive over the last 11 days, which it has, but take a look at the league trends for the NHL and NBA over the past week. In the NHL, on the season, dogs are hitting at a 43% rate, which is just about in line with last season's trends. But, if you look at just the last 7 days, dogs are only winning 37% of the time. Same thing in the NBA. On the season, dogs are winning almost 33% of the time, but over the past week, only 22% (and only 38% ATS). So it's not like your program is suddenly unable to pick winners. Anyone playing NBA and NHL dogs over the past 11 days has probably had a rough go of it. Dogs and favs aren't going to win at a consistent rate over a season. You keep saying how its a journey, a marathon not a sprint, so why worry about 11 days out of 36 months? Keep at it. Even if you miss a monthly goal, I say stick it out for another month to see if it turns around. That being said, I do have to agree with most saying the money management could use some work. I like to use a daily percentage myself, but that's just me. But don't give up yet. You've worked too hard to throw it all away now. GL. This is exactly what I was referring to in posts #1427 and #1440. It will turn around, mark my words. Had we reduced the wagers once we fell below +$750, we would have another $215 in our accounts right now. Added to the $475 that we're currently up, and it doesn't seem too bad, does it? I also think that quiting once we hit the $1000 starting point is wrong. Whenever you start a system or tailing a capper, you start with what you intend to lose. In this case, we intended to take the $1000 investment and turn it into $100,000. If we fail, we lose $1000. But what Thinker is referring to will have us stop when we hit $1000 again, essentially losing nothing. That's just not how it's supposed to be. Everyone has their own way of thinking, I guess. I'm just trying to point out the faults that we've made thus far to try and "right the ship" before it's too late. View Post \| View Thread	TheThinker	1514	December 13, 2010 View Post \| View Thread

About Us

Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials

Betting Guides

Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming

Sports Betting

US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps

Contests

Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools

The Covers community has

618,670

lifetime members worldwide

Join our community today

Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.

Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service

Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo

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.

smdio Follow Follow Unfollow

smdio