*ATL - BTW for those who took ATL as an "A" bet - it is still you're option to take ATL and a "B" bet.
Does your system properly account for system #5? I only ask bc CHC got swept by MIA in April, there's currently a 23 point diff in RPI, but that woulda been smaller before yesterday. If you look at 2012 results on the betting guide website, it shows yesterday as an A game loss for system 5....either they're wrong or we are...
0
Quote Originally Posted by DegenGamble:
You are right on the money CG
*ATL - BTW for those who took ATL as an "A" bet - it is still you're option to take ATL and a "B" bet.
Does your system properly account for system #5? I only ask bc CHC got swept by MIA in April, there's currently a 23 point diff in RPI, but that woulda been smaller before yesterday. If you look at 2012 results on the betting guide website, it shows yesterday as an A game loss for system 5....either they're wrong or we are...
Does your system properly account for system #5? I only ask bc CHC got swept by MIA in April, there's currently a 23 point diff in RPI, but that woulda been smaller before yesterday. If you look at 2012 results on the betting guide website, it shows yesterday as an A game loss for system 5....either they're wrong or we are...
Yeah CG - not sure if system #5 is properly configured in my spreadsheet - at least it hasn't produced any plays that meet the filters - so either my filters are wrong or the website adjusted their filters - i'm going to double check that.
0
Quote Originally Posted by CannedGoods:
Does your system properly account for system #5? I only ask bc CHC got swept by MIA in April, there's currently a 23 point diff in RPI, but that woulda been smaller before yesterday. If you look at 2012 results on the betting guide website, it shows yesterday as an A game loss for system 5....either they're wrong or we are...
Yeah CG - not sure if system #5 is properly configured in my spreadsheet - at least it hasn't produced any plays that meet the filters - so either my filters are wrong or the website adjusted their filters - i'm going to double check that.
In addition ATL is kinda "optional" again as Vogelsong >>>>>>>> Minor, pitching isn't supposed to matter for System 4 though...
Yup - right again CG. Mattymeach brought up the same thing. Technically, system #4 does not look at pitching matchups like system #1.
I think going forward if a play is listed for any system - at the START of the series that there needs to be a pitching edge or equal matchup or else we skip the game and look at game 2.
What do you think?
0
Quote Originally Posted by CannedGoods:
In addition ATL is kinda "optional" again as Vogelsong >>>>>>>> Minor, pitching isn't supposed to matter for System 4 though...
Yup - right again CG. Mattymeach brought up the same thing. Technically, system #4 does not look at pitching matchups like system #1.
I think going forward if a play is listed for any system - at the START of the series that there needs to be a pitching edge or equal matchup or else we skip the game and look at game 2.
Tbh I dunno. I like betting trends, either "league-wide" or "good team beats bad team". I hate when systems get too subjective bc then it becomes too hard to draw the line. It's why I quit most of cisco's MLB systems. This person thinks we should skip this game, this person doesn't blah blah blah who cares. A system is supposed to be mathematical and straightforward. X, Y, Z happens and you bet.
I also wish the site kept a better track record of this year's records. They did a nice job in 2011 of splitting it up by system but 2012 is just a mumble jumble of crap so it's hard to see what systems are performing good and which one's are shitting the bed.
That being said last year System 4 went something like 16 or 17 and 4 on B games which is a ridiculous 75%+ clip. So I really plan on only playing the B games for most of these systems. Makes it easier on my stress levels haha while affording me the ability to bet a higher % of my bankroll. So yes I agree with skipping shity matchup A games because I'm already doing that. I've decided to only play the A games that I think have a high probability of winning. But bc they only cap at a 55% clip I'll drop only a little on them like 1% of BR. If they hit, cool, if not, 10% drop on game B which I was planning on doing anyways.
Just my .02. I appreciate you asking for my opinion
0
Quote Originally Posted by DegenGamble:
What do you think?
Tbh I dunno. I like betting trends, either "league-wide" or "good team beats bad team". I hate when systems get too subjective bc then it becomes too hard to draw the line. It's why I quit most of cisco's MLB systems. This person thinks we should skip this game, this person doesn't blah blah blah who cares. A system is supposed to be mathematical and straightforward. X, Y, Z happens and you bet.
I also wish the site kept a better track record of this year's records. They did a nice job in 2011 of splitting it up by system but 2012 is just a mumble jumble of crap so it's hard to see what systems are performing good and which one's are shitting the bed.
That being said last year System 4 went something like 16 or 17 and 4 on B games which is a ridiculous 75%+ clip. So I really plan on only playing the B games for most of these systems. Makes it easier on my stress levels haha while affording me the ability to bet a higher % of my bankroll. So yes I agree with skipping shity matchup A games because I'm already doing that. I've decided to only play the A games that I think have a high probability of winning. But bc they only cap at a 55% clip I'll drop only a little on them like 1% of BR. If they hit, cool, if not, 10% drop on game B which I was planning on doing anyways.
Just my .02. I appreciate you asking for my opinion
Tbh I dunno. I like betting trends, either "league-wide" or "good team beats bad team". I hate when systems get too subjective bc then it becomes too hard to draw the line. It's why I quit most of cisco's MLB systems. This person thinks we should skip this game, this person doesn't blah blah blah who cares. A system is supposed to be mathematical and straightforward. X, Y, Z happens and you bet.
I also wish the site kept a better track record of this year's records. They did a nice job in 2011 of splitting it up by system but 2012 is just a mumble jumble of crap so it's hard to see what systems are performing good and which one's are shitting the bed.
That being said last year System 4 went something like 16 or 17 and 4 on B games which is a ridiculous 75%+ clip. So I really plan on only playing the B games for most of these systems. Makes it easier on my stress levels haha while affording me the ability to bet a higher % of my bankroll. So yes I agree with skipping shity matchup A games because I'm already doing that. I've decided to only play the A games that I think have a high probability of winning. But bc they only cap at a 55% clip I'll drop only a little on them like 1% of BR. If they hit, cool, if not, 10% drop on game B which I was planning on doing anyways.
Just my .02. I appreciate you asking for my opinion
I hear ya - and totally your option on how you want to play it - it's definitely a good line to just bet the "B" games and just increasing your bet size. I personally like it. The unfortunate part of that particular line could be frustrating while you watch a bunch of A games cash - while you have to sit by waiting.
That's why I like a 2 game chase - i'll take a few losses if it eliminates my bankroll risk while producing a really good win%.
As far as including pitching matchup in the other systems - I still think it's a good idea - after all - it's all about adapting, adjusting and improving - even the original author of the PDF - posted revisions to system #1 to include the pitching matchup filter just this season because - it avoided a 10 unit loss.
I just don't know what criteria to use. Should I use the same criteria as system #1? not sure.
And for the record the pitching filter is a hard and fast rule.....if the team you want to bet has the edge per the pitching matchup rules - then it's a play.
Thanks for the input - i'm gonna think about it and update the spreadsheet. I plan to fix whatever is wrong with system #4 logic - and maybe email the original author and get some details on system#7 that is NOT in the original PDF but he posts the play results on his website.
0
Quote Originally Posted by CannedGoods:
Tbh I dunno. I like betting trends, either "league-wide" or "good team beats bad team". I hate when systems get too subjective bc then it becomes too hard to draw the line. It's why I quit most of cisco's MLB systems. This person thinks we should skip this game, this person doesn't blah blah blah who cares. A system is supposed to be mathematical and straightforward. X, Y, Z happens and you bet.
I also wish the site kept a better track record of this year's records. They did a nice job in 2011 of splitting it up by system but 2012 is just a mumble jumble of crap so it's hard to see what systems are performing good and which one's are shitting the bed.
That being said last year System 4 went something like 16 or 17 and 4 on B games which is a ridiculous 75%+ clip. So I really plan on only playing the B games for most of these systems. Makes it easier on my stress levels haha while affording me the ability to bet a higher % of my bankroll. So yes I agree with skipping shity matchup A games because I'm already doing that. I've decided to only play the A games that I think have a high probability of winning. But bc they only cap at a 55% clip I'll drop only a little on them like 1% of BR. If they hit, cool, if not, 10% drop on game B which I was planning on doing anyways.
Just my .02. I appreciate you asking for my opinion
I hear ya - and totally your option on how you want to play it - it's definitely a good line to just bet the "B" games and just increasing your bet size. I personally like it. The unfortunate part of that particular line could be frustrating while you watch a bunch of A games cash - while you have to sit by waiting.
That's why I like a 2 game chase - i'll take a few losses if it eliminates my bankroll risk while producing a really good win%.
As far as including pitching matchup in the other systems - I still think it's a good idea - after all - it's all about adapting, adjusting and improving - even the original author of the PDF - posted revisions to system #1 to include the pitching matchup filter just this season because - it avoided a 10 unit loss.
I just don't know what criteria to use. Should I use the same criteria as system #1? not sure.
And for the record the pitching filter is a hard and fast rule.....if the team you want to bet has the edge per the pitching matchup rules - then it's a play.
Thanks for the input - i'm gonna think about it and update the spreadsheet. I plan to fix whatever is wrong with system #4 logic - and maybe email the original author and get some details on system#7 that is NOT in the original PDF but he posts the play results on his website.
I just can't bring myself to lay ANY amount of money on the Cubs. Even a measly dollar. I'll be passing this chase.
That's a foolish analogy. They're a double system play. Even the worst MLB teams still win 60+ games a year. To each his own though.
Analogy? What in the world does an analogy have anything to do with what I posted? Anyway, my wallet will, wholeheartedly, disagree with you. The Books have enough of my "Cub" money. They're not getting any more. Any time I bet any game involving the Cubs, side or total, it's almost an automatic loss.
0
Quote Originally Posted by CannedGoods:
Yes.
Quote Originally Posted by bruin95:
I just can't bring myself to lay ANY amount of money on the Cubs. Even a measly dollar. I'll be passing this chase.
That's a foolish analogy. They're a double system play. Even the worst MLB teams still win 60+ games a year. To each his own though.
Analogy? What in the world does an analogy have anything to do with what I posted? Anyway, my wallet will, wholeheartedly, disagree with you. The Books have enough of my "Cub" money. They're not getting any more. Any time I bet any game involving the Cubs, side or total, it's almost an automatic loss.
Two B game losses back to back doesn't sit too well with me...
Adjustments need to be made.
Yeah - tough loss yesterday with ATL. Could have easily went our way. Tied bottom of the 9th with man on 2nd and 3rd - with ONLY 1 out - we just needed a SAC fly or any HIT - and we were butter!. Then they could have went ahead in the 10th when they tied it up. But a loss is a loss.
As far as adjustments - I agree. I actually got an email back from the original author of the PDF - he did say he made adjustments to the systems that are NOT reflected on his e-book revision section of his website. So we are on our own to figure out what additional filters / rules he implemented to avoid losses.
So with that new information - I am going to implement the same pitcher edge criteria as system #1 to all systems - it makes sense to avoid needless losses - and if we used that filter - we wouldn't have avoided 1 loss on BAL and the ATL series all together.
I will still list the plays - but I will only highlight if the team has a pitcher edge.
0
Quote Originally Posted by CannedGoods:
Two B game losses back to back doesn't sit too well with me...
Adjustments need to be made.
Yeah - tough loss yesterday with ATL. Could have easily went our way. Tied bottom of the 9th with man on 2nd and 3rd - with ONLY 1 out - we just needed a SAC fly or any HIT - and we were butter!. Then they could have went ahead in the 10th when they tied it up. But a loss is a loss.
As far as adjustments - I agree. I actually got an email back from the original author of the PDF - he did say he made adjustments to the systems that are NOT reflected on his e-book revision section of his website. So we are on our own to figure out what additional filters / rules he implemented to avoid losses.
So with that new information - I am going to implement the same pitcher edge criteria as system #1 to all systems - it makes sense to avoid needless losses - and if we used that filter - we wouldn't have avoided 1 loss on BAL and the ATL series all together.
I will still list the plays - but I will only highlight if the team has a pitcher edge.
So that's it for this series guys - I am including ATL in the record even though it was an optional play. So for the series we went 6-2 and from a unit perspective we won 1 unit if you played ATL - if you didn't it then you would have won 5 units.
Since tracking started on 7/2
Record: 27-3
Units: +20 units
Remember guys - you will lose some 2 game chases - but as you can see the wins far outweigh the losses - even with the 2 game chase.
0
So that's it for this series guys - I am including ATL in the record even though it was an optional play. So for the series we went 6-2 and from a unit perspective we won 1 unit if you played ATL - if you didn't it then you would have won 5 units.
Since tracking started on 7/2
Record: 27-3
Units: +20 units
Remember guys - you will lose some 2 game chases - but as you can see the wins far outweigh the losses - even with the 2 game chase.
How does your money management work exactly? If your playing to win 1 unit the 1st loss would be -1.1 u and the 2nd would be -2.2 u (-110 standard odds). Taking big favorites is going to be more than that. I'm just curious how it is 20 units with 3 losses. 3 losses with even the standard -110 would be almost 10 units. Are you adding a unit or something after you lose a series? Just curious because it has me wondering about my FLATS system I use and if it would be better to do what your doing even though mine are +odds. You can PM me to explain it if you would rather do that. I apologize if you have it hear in the thread or on the spreadsheet.
Appreciate it if you could let me know.
0
DG,
How does your money management work exactly? If your playing to win 1 unit the 1st loss would be -1.1 u and the 2nd would be -2.2 u (-110 standard odds). Taking big favorites is going to be more than that. I'm just curious how it is 20 units with 3 losses. 3 losses with even the standard -110 would be almost 10 units. Are you adding a unit or something after you lose a series? Just curious because it has me wondering about my FLATS system I use and if it would be better to do what your doing even though mine are +odds. You can PM me to explain it if you would rather do that. I apologize if you have it hear in the thread or on the spreadsheet.
The record might be somewhat misleading - so let me explain. The record
is series chase W/L record. So if we win the 2 game series chase - then
it's a win.
so we had a total of 30 series chases since 7/2
we won 27 on A or B bets. The way I bet the B game is I bet what I lost
in the A game including the juice plus 1 unit - so the end result if I win my B
game is plus 1 unit.
So we won 27 series on A or B games - which yielded 27 units
We lost 3 series.
7/3 - ATL - but we bet only 1 game (A) - we passed on the 2nd game because of
the pitching matchup - but ATL won anyway
7/16-7/17 BAL – we lost both our A and B bets @ +115 and
-138 – So I count that as a total of 3.6 unit loss.(1 unit from A game, and 2.6 from B game)
7/17-7/18 ATL – we lost both our A and B bets @ -150 and
-125 – so I count that as a total of 4.6 unit loss (1.5 unit from A game and a
little over 3 unit from B game)
So out losses look like it’s 10 units – which should yield a
16.8 unit profit, but we bet a HUGE dog with CWS on 7/17 @ +165 on a B
bet.We bet 200 – and won 330 – which yielded
us 2.3 additional units.
So technically we are 19.1 units profitable.I was rounding thoughout the calculations –
so that threw my unit total off slightly.I will adjust the official unit record
0
Quote Originally Posted by Alldaygambler28:
DG,
How does your money management work exactly?
ADG,
The record might be somewhat misleading - so let me explain. The record
is series chase W/L record. So if we win the 2 game series chase - then
it's a win.
so we had a total of 30 series chases since 7/2
we won 27 on A or B bets. The way I bet the B game is I bet what I lost
in the A game including the juice plus 1 unit - so the end result if I win my B
game is plus 1 unit.
So we won 27 series on A or B games - which yielded 27 units
We lost 3 series.
7/3 - ATL - but we bet only 1 game (A) - we passed on the 2nd game because of
the pitching matchup - but ATL won anyway
7/16-7/17 BAL – we lost both our A and B bets @ +115 and
-138 – So I count that as a total of 3.6 unit loss.(1 unit from A game, and 2.6 from B game)
7/17-7/18 ATL – we lost both our A and B bets @ -150 and
-125 – so I count that as a total of 4.6 unit loss (1.5 unit from A game and a
little over 3 unit from B game)
So out losses look like it’s 10 units – which should yield a
16.8 unit profit, but we bet a HUGE dog with CWS on 7/17 @ +165 on a B
bet.We bet 200 – and won 330 – which yielded
us 2.3 additional units.
So technically we are 19.1 units profitable.I was rounding thoughout the calculations –
so that threw my unit total off slightly.I will adjust the official unit record
I didn't realize your 1st loss was only 1 game and didn't realize you have big dogs sometimes.
I run systems myself as you know so I know what you mean by 27-3.
ADG - sorry for all the detail - I know for you I could have gone more high level - you know you're stuff - but I figured I would explain a detailed review for other who might be new to systems in general.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Alldaygambler28:
Thanks for explaining.
I didn't realize your 1st loss was only 1 game and didn't realize you have big dogs sometimes.
I run systems myself as you know so I know what you mean by 27-3.
ADG - sorry for all the detail - I know for you I could have gone more high level - you know you're stuff - but I figured I would explain a detailed review for other who might be new to systems in general.
NYY could potentially be a system 4 play today. They are 10-2 last 3 years in Oakland and like 27-9 since 2004. It would be unofficial though.
CG - actually if you unhide the columns in the summary tab - you will see that OAKLAND is an unfiltered play - but part of the filters for system #5 is the team needs a better RPI or an RPI within 15 - which OAK does not have.
0
Quote Originally Posted by CannedGoods:
NYY could potentially be a system 4 play today. They are 10-2 last 3 years in Oakland and like 27-9 since 2004. It would be unofficial though.
CG - actually if you unhide the columns in the summary tab - you will see that OAKLAND is an unfiltered play - but part of the filters for system #5 is the team needs a better RPI or an RPI within 15 - which OAK does not have.
Ok guys - I triple checked the filters on my spreadsheet versus what is in the original author's PDF and website (ebook revisions) section. To my knowledge - I am correctly capturing the plays and filters. HOWEVER, I got an email from him saying he made filter revisions that are NOT in the ebook or revisions of the website. SO...it is up to us to figure out any adjustments he may have made to maintain this 90% win - rate.
So I applied the pitcher filter that exists in system#1 to the other systems - and added a system #7 for flat bets that he has listed on his website. I'm not sure if that's his official system #7 - but it's on his site. I figured I would add it since I have all the data needed for it already and see if it tracks well over the next couple of series.
MAKE SURE YOU DOWNLOAD V7 of the spreadsheet if you like using the spreadhseet to see the plays in advance - or if I fall of the planet and stop posting.....
Ok guys - I triple checked the filters on my spreadsheet versus what is in the original author's PDF and website (ebook revisions) section. To my knowledge - I am correctly capturing the plays and filters. HOWEVER, I got an email from him saying he made filter revisions that are NOT in the ebook or revisions of the website. SO...it is up to us to figure out any adjustments he may have made to maintain this 90% win - rate.
So I applied the pitcher filter that exists in system#1 to the other systems - and added a system #7 for flat bets that he has listed on his website. I'm not sure if that's his official system #7 - but it's on his site. I figured I would add it since I have all the data needed for it already and see if it tracks well over the next couple of series.
MAKE SURE YOU DOWNLOAD V7 of the spreadsheet if you like using the spreadhseet to see the plays in advance - or if I fall of the planet and stop posting.....
DG, you do great work. Just wanted to let you know that it's very much appreciated.
BTW, on a side note. If you were to chase these teams, for the entire series, the record would be 30-0. That's what I've been doing. At this point, I'm just nickel and diming it, playing to win just $20 with each series. There are more than enough plays to make some decent money. If i was going for bigger money, I'd probably stop the chase at the "B" game. I'm just trying to build my meager bankroll for the upcoming football season.
Speaking of football, are there any good systems out there for that?
0
DG, you do great work. Just wanted to let you know that it's very much appreciated.
BTW, on a side note. If you were to chase these teams, for the entire series, the record would be 30-0. That's what I've been doing. At this point, I'm just nickel and diming it, playing to win just $20 with each series. There are more than enough plays to make some decent money. If i was going for bigger money, I'd probably stop the chase at the "B" game. I'm just trying to build my meager bankroll for the upcoming football season.
Speaking of football, are there any good systems out there for that?
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.
Hot Forum Topics
