All Forums | Systems & Strategies

Chaser's SCP dog chase

Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 16755
Posts: 173
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #51

***CORRECTION*** Predator's loss of  1unit from 5/12 (post# 31) was never accounted for, thus the adjusted YTD is as follows: .

YTD: +54.06units

 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #52

5/23 MONDAY PLAY:

(A) Sharks +115       Risking 1unit

 

 YTD: +54.06units

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #53

5/23 MONDAY RESULT:

(A) Sharks +115       Risking 1unit won+1.15u

 YTD: +55.21units

 

5/24 TUESDAY PLAY/RESULT:

(A) Bolts +123           risking 1 unit loss-1u

YTD: +54.21units

 

5/25 WEDNESDAY PLAY:

(A) Blues +130       Risking 1unit

 

 YTD: +54.21units

 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #54

5/25 WEDNESDAY RESULT:

(A) Blues +130       Risked 1unit     loss-1u

YTD: +53.21units

 

 

5/26 THURSDAY PLAY:

(B) Bolts +180           risking 2 units

 

 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #55

5/26 THURSDAY RESULT:

(B) Bolts +180           risked 2 units  LOSS -2u

 

I WILL continue playing this system thru at least one dog win in the Finals. Here's an update on the numbers:

 

Wins: 46 (0 losses)

Yield: +51.21 units (102% increase on 50u BR)

Win allocation:  A games: 22

                           B games: 14

                           C games:   7

                           D games:   3

                           E games: Thankfully, none!

*** I will be carrying into the Final series an "A" wager loss from the Sharks/Blues series, and a "B" wager loss from the Bolts/Pens series. That total loss (4units) plus the 1unit I seek to gain will be played on the dog as a "to win" 5unit wager initially, and I will only chase it through three games ( a "C" bet).  If you have been tailing this system for the last month-and-a-half,  I would advise you to follow no further and enjoy the "rare" 100% gain on your BR (or at least re-set your chase to an "A" bet with an initial risk of 1unit for this series) as a lot of units can be lost very quickly here. Personally, Im not adverse to losing the units since they were all "house money" to begin with. Once the dog wins (or the "C" bet is lost), the SCP Dog Chase officially ends. As a kicker though, if the dog wins in the final series BEFORE the series favourite wins, I will add a chase on the series favourite for 1 win.

Questions? Comments?

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #56

5/30 MONDAY PLAY:

(A) Sharks +125       Risking 4units (to win 5units)

YTD: +51.21units

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #57

5/30 MONDAY RESULT:

(A) Sharks +125       LOSS -4units

YTD: +47.21units

 

6/1 WEDNESDAY PLAY:

(B) Sharks +105      8.57u (to win 9units)

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #58
6/4 Saturday play: (FINAL PLAY)
(C) Penguins ML +125. Risking14.86u (to win18.57units)
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #59

Not the way I wanted it to end, but will take pleasure in the fact that the test-run still exceeded the goal of clearing 15 units chasing the dogs throughout each of the Playoff series. Final tally for the system's inaugural run is a respectable +23.78units, which IMO, warrants another attempt for profit next year. Til then...

Enjoy the Finals, (and pound the "UNDER") Cheers!

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #60
...almost that time again...
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2017
Posts: 211
Posted: #61
Quote Originally Posted by chaser15:

...almost that time again...

I read through the thread and Im loving the system. I have no idea why no one has commented on this thread, your system is so simple and yet so amazingly profitable that it just screams moneyyyyyyyyyyy!

I might backtest something for you, just to see if I would join in on this too. Do post the plays, I will surely be following. Good luck!
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2017
Posts: 211
Posted: #62
Ok, backtesting a random season and just the first round of the playoffs and just the A, B, C, D, E wins and losses and the lines for wins, not the actual amounts won or lost, as my brain is already worn out from today.

2009-2010 playoffs, first round:

Detroit-Phoenix:
A: Win +110
A: Loss
B: Win +170
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Win +191

Flyers-Devils:
A: Win +147
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
D: Win +170

Senators-Penguins:
A: Win +196
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
D: Win +280
A: Loss
(B wouldve been a Win +261 if this continued with Pens to the second round)

Colorado-SJ:
A: Win +201
A: Loss
B: Win +120
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
(D would have been a Loss if this continued with SJ to the second round)
(E would have been a Loss)

Boston-Buffalo:
A: Loss
B: Win +145
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
D: Loss
(E would have been a Loss if this continued with Boston to the second round)

Kings-Canucks:
A: Loss
B: Win +165
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
D: Loss
(E would have been a Win +144 if this continued with Canucks to the second round)

Canadiens-Capitals:
A: Win +252
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
D: Win +319
A: Win +179
A: Win +267

Nashville-Chicago:
A: Win +214
A: Loss
B: Win +130
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
(D would have been a Win +144 if this continued with Chicago to the second round)

Win allocation with ending with the first round (and losses if the last game was a Loss): 

A games: 8 (1 Loss to end the series)

B games: 5

C games:   1

D games:   4

E games: None

Win allocation with continuing to the second round:

A games: 8

B games: 6

C games:   1

D games:   3

E games: 1

2 Losses in the E-games.


Chaser15, hopefully those numbers are enough to calculate if the first round or finishing the series in the second round would have made the system profitable or not.

My brain can not function properly anymore to calculate it. Im not sure if you would need the lines for the Losses too.. I think you would.. Let me know if so and I will dig them too.

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2017
Posts: 211
Posted: #63
Correcting minor mistakes in the two last tables:

quote#62
Posted: 3/29/2017 2:23:49 PM
Ok, backtesting a random season and just the first round of the playoffs and just the A, B, C, D, E wins and losses and the lines for wins, not the actual amounts won or lost, as my brain is already worn out from today.

2009-2010 playoffs, first round:

Detroit-Phoenix:
A: Win +110
A: Loss
B: Win +170
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Win +191

Flyers-Devils:
A: Win +147
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
D: Win +170

Senators-Penguins:
A: Win +196
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
D: Win +280
A: Loss
(B wouldve been a Win +261 if this continued with Pens to the second round)

Colorado-SJ:
A: Win +201
A: Loss
B: Win +120
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
(D would have been a Loss if this continued with SJ to the second round)
(E would have been a Loss)

Boston-Buffalo:
A: Loss
B: Win +145
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
D: Loss
(E would have been a Loss if this continued with Boston to the second round)

Kings-Canucks:
A: Loss
B: Win +165
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
D: Loss
(E would have been a Win +144 if this continued with Canucks to the second round)

Canadiens-Capitals:
A: Win +252
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
D: Win +319
A: Win +179
A: Win +267

Nashville-Chicago:
A: Win +214
A: Loss
B: Win +130
A: Loss
B: Loss
C: Loss
(D would have been a Win +144 if this continued with Chicago to the second round)

Win allocation with ending with the first round (and losses if the last game was a Loss): 

A games: 8 (1 Loss to end the series)

B games: 5

C games:   1 (2 Losses to end the series)

D games:   3 (2 losses to end the series)

E games: None

Win allocation with continuing to the second round:

A games: 8

B games: 6

C games:   1

D games:   4

E games: 1

2 Losses in the E-games.

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2017
Posts: 211
Posted: #64
I hope you are doing this system this year. My backtested season was just 1 random one and even in that one it probably ended positive in the end. And I did only the first round.

I would love to tail this one. Of course I could just check the plays myself but its more fun if someone is actually doing the system and follows its progress.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #65
Quote Originally Posted by Scrivero:

I hope you are doing this system this year. My backtested season was just 1 random one and even in that one it probably ended positive in the end. And I did only the first round.

I would love to tail this one. Of course I could just check the plays myself but its more fun if someone is actually doing the system and follows its progress.

Yessir, I will run this again. Tomorrow we begin 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2013
Posts: 279
Posted: #66
Good luck, guys!

Looks like historical data since 2006 has the positive ROI with the playoff favorites, so having a specific profit goal like last season is probably a good idea.

playoffs=1 and D

SU: 345-528 (39.5%)
Avg Line: 138.6 / -150.9
On / Against: -$6,042 / +$1,880
ROI: -6.9% / +1.4%


For comparison, dogs actually had the positive ROI during last season's playoffs:

SU: 39-48 (-0.55, 44.8%)
Avg Line: 129.8 / -143.7
On / Against: +$171 / -$704
ROI: +2.0% / -5.6%

The previous three playoffs weren't as nice to the dogs:

2014: -10.4%
2013: -13.0%
2012: -27.3%
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 5921
Posted: #67
Chaser, do you stop betting on a series once there is a dog win? 
Stay disciplined and manage your bankroll
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #68

Scrivero and NFL_Huskers, Thanks for the "statistical" analysis/input

Danrules, I did not play this as a 1 and done last season, but rather as a continual chase. Once the dog won, I reset the chase to the "A" wager and chased the dog all over again. Not going to play it that way again however, I think 1 and done is the way to go.


Changes for this season:

(1) Reducing the BR to increase the ROI

(2) Implementing a "one and done" chase instead of the "continual chase"


The System:

Chase even-to-plus money dogs in each series for the win. The first three wagers are 1U, 2U, and 4U respectively. Any wagers beyond that are "to win" the units lost plus 1. Once the dog wins, we are finished with that series. Bankroll is 30units, and the goal is to gain 15units (an ROI of 50%). BOL to any and all who tail



4/12 WEDNESDAY PLAYS:


(A) Rangers +130     

(A) CBJ        +145       

(A) Blues      +160      

(A) Sharks    +135       

(A) Sens       +115      


 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2017
Posts: 211
Posted: #69
Quote Originally Posted by nfl_huskers:

Good luck, guys!

Looks like historical data since 2006 has the positive ROI with the playoff favorites, so having a specific profit goal like last season is probably a good idea.

playoffs=1 and D

SU: 345-528 (39.5%)
Avg Line: 138.6 / -150.9
On / Against: -$6,042 / +$1,880
ROI: -6.9% / +1.4%


For comparison, dogs actually had the positive ROI during last season's playoffs:

SU: 39-48 (-0.55, 44.8%)
Avg Line: 129.8 / -143.7
On / Against: +$171 / -$704
ROI: +2.0% / -5.6%

The previous three playoffs weren't as nice to the dogs:

2014: -10.4%
2013: -13.0%
2012: -27.3%

Is there a way to check in an easy way whether Chaser's chase system would have been positive for the previous seasons? The way I did was just manually checking each and every game and its odds. Took me forever even with 1 season and only for the first round.

I dont know if one could do some sort of an SDQL query to get the ROI from last years. Something like team x vs team y and how long the losing streak was for the dog in odds in that series each game before the dog in odds won. Because in Chaser's system the team to play changes within the series based on which one is the dog in odds in that specific game.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2017
Posts: 211
Posted: #70
Quote Originally Posted by chaser15:

Scrivero and NFL_Huskers, Thanks for the "statistical" analysis/input

Danrules, I did not play this as a 1 and done last season, but rather as a continual chase. Once the dog won, I reset the chase to the "A" wager and chased the dog all over again. Not going to play it that way again however, I think 1 and done is the way to go.


Changes for this season:

(1) Reducing the BR to increase the ROI

(2) Implementing a "one and done" chase instead of the "continual chase"


The System:

Chase even-to-plus money dogs in each series for the win. The first three wagers are 1U, 2U, and 4U respectively. Any wagers beyond that are "to win" the units lost plus 1. Once the dog wins, we are finished with that series. Bankroll is 30units, and the goal is to gain 15units (an ROI of 50%). BOL to any and all who tail



4/12 WEDNESDAY PLAYS:


(A) Rangers +130     

(A) CBJ        +145       

(A) Blues      +160      

(A) Sharks    +135       

(A) Sens       +115      



I still love this system. I hope huskers or someone else comes up with a way to backtest it fast. I would love the system even more if I could have more than last year to back it up. Still, I dont see how I can stay away from it! :D Especially now with the 1 and done style as its much less "riskier" and lower in variance as the series start ending basically (hopefully) after each evening. Unlike last year when there were as many series going on as there were playoffs pairings.

Good luck to us all!
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2013
Posts: 279
Posted: #71
Quote Originally Posted by Scrivero:


Is there a way to check in an easy way whether Chaser's chase system would have been positive for the previous seasons? The way I did was just manually checking each and every game and its odds. Took me forever even with 1 season and only for the first round.

I dont know if one could do some sort of an SDQL query to get the ROI from last years. Something like team x vs team y and how long the losing streak was for the dog in odds in that series each game before the dog in odds won. Because in Chaser's system the team to play changes within the series based on which one is the dog in odds in that specific game.


I'll see if I can put something together tomorrow. Busy day today, but I have Friday off, so I can put in some extra time tomorrow night.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 1692
Posted: #72

4/12 WEDNESDAY RESULTS:


(A) Rangers +130     WINNER  +1.3U  *end of series chase

(A) CBJ        +145         LOSS       -1U

(A) Blues      +160     WINNER  +1.6U  *end of series chase

(A) Sharks    +135     WINNER+1.35U  *end of series chase

 (A) Sens       +115        LOSS       -1U



YTD: +2.25 Units 



4/13 THURSDAY PLAYS:

(A) Leafs         +215     

(A) Preds        +155       

(A) Flames      +155      


 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2017
Posts: 211
Posted: #73
Quote Originally Posted by chaser15:

4/12 WEDNESDAY RESULTS:


(A) Rangers +130     WINNER  +1.3U  *end of series chase

(A) CBJ        +145         LOSS       -1U

(A) Blues      +160     WINNER  +1.6U  *end of series chase

(A) Sharks    +135     WINNER+1.35U  *end of series chase

 (A) Sens       +115        LOSS       -1U



YTD: +2.25 Units 



4/13 THURSDAY PLAYS:

(A) Leafs         +215     

(A) Preds        +155       

(A) Flames      +155      



A perfect start for sure.

Just a question, should we still try to start another chase with the series especially now that 3 ended in the first game?

I am asking because the more series we win, the more units we win. Of course its more risk but still.

The season that I backtested had 6 pairs where the first game was a WIN. In all of those series there was also another WIN at latest in the the D series. 3 went to B and 3 to D.

THe other two series that only had a WIN in the second game of the series did not get to a second win in the first round of playoffs.

Of course thats just one season, one would have to backtest more. But, Im feeling like going for the second series with the pairings where the 1st game is a WIN.

What do you guys think?
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2013
Posts: 279
Posted: #74
Quote Originally Posted by Scrivero:


A perfect start for sure.

Just a question, should we still try to start another chase with the series especially now that 3 ended in the first game?

I am asking because the more series we win, the more units we win. Of course its more risk but still.

The season that I backtested had 6 pairs where the first game was a WIN. In all of those series there was also another WIN at latest in the the D series. 3 went to B and 3 to D.

THe other two series that only had a WIN in the second game of the series did not get to a second win in the first round of playoffs.

Of course thats just one season, one would have to backtest more. But, Im feeling like going for the second series with the pairings where the 1st game is a WIN.

What do you guys think?

Hey Scrivero,

Without a backtest, I'll give a statistical opinion.

The average line for playoff underdogs the past five seasons is about +130. Basically, need a win rate of 43% to break even. For simplicity, assume every game is +130 and the dogs actually win 43% of the games.

At that 43% win rate, you can expect 1 "E" game loss for every 17 chases on average. The actual win rate has been 41% across the last five seasons, which would have 1 "E" game loss for every 14 chases on average.

The playoffs have 15 total series, so 15 chases if you limit to one per series. If you start adding extra chases, you will exceed that average 14-17 range for seeing an "E" game loss.

Looking forward to back testing this a bit.
 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 5921
Posted: #75

Quote Originally Posted by Scrivero:


A perfect start for sure.

Just a question, should we still try to start another chase with the series especially now that 3 ended in the first game?

I am asking because the more series we win, the more units we win. Of course its more risk but still.

The season that I backtested had 6 pairs where the first game was a WIN. In all of those series there was also another WIN at latest in the the D series. 3 went to B and 3 to D.

THe other two series that only had a WIN in the second game of the series did not get to a second win in the first round of playoffs.

Of course thats just one season, one would have to backtest more. But, Im feeling like going for the second series with the pairings where the 1st game is a WIN.

What do you guys think?

I'm going to be conservative on this and stop after 1 win. I have no problem taking my money off the table. Also, I think I'm passing on Toronto vs Wash.

Stay disciplined and manage your bankroll
All Forums | Systems & Strategies
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
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright � 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

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.