Joining the ‘dog chase series system’ train. Have been tracking personally and it’s ready to share. HOP ON EVERYONE!!
It’s going to be plain and simple. We all know how hard it is to sweep a series. We all know that even the best teams in the MLB rarely win 66% of their games. This system is here to take advantage of this combination. The cherry on top is that my ‘capping identifies the specific DOGS that are most likely to win AT LEAST 1 game of the series.
All picks will be:
(1) GM 1 underdog +110 or higher
(2) Involved in 3 or 4 game series
(3) GM 1 = 1u, GM 2 = 2u, GM 3 = 4u, GM 4 = 8u
If you have questions on how a series chase works, let’s all help each other out and answer one another. I will assume that if you’ve found this forum you already know the deal. Welcome to the forum.
During the season, all emotions will be in check. We could have high high’s and low low’s. It’s the name of the game. GM 4 could be a win, GM 4 could be a loss. We will be dialed in on earning a return on an investment and we have entire season ahead of us.
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Joining the ‘dog chase series system’ train. Have been tracking personally and it’s ready to share. HOP ON EVERYONE!!
It’s going to be plain and simple. We all know how hard it is to sweep a series. We all know that even the best teams in the MLB rarely win 66% of their games. This system is here to take advantage of this combination. The cherry on top is that my ‘capping identifies the specific DOGS that are most likely to win AT LEAST 1 game of the series.
All picks will be:
(1) GM 1 underdog +110 or higher
(2) Involved in 3 or 4 game series
(3) GM 1 = 1u, GM 2 = 2u, GM 3 = 4u, GM 4 = 8u
If you have questions on how a series chase works, let’s all help each other out and answer one another. I will assume that if you’ve found this forum you already know the deal. Welcome to the forum.
During the season, all emotions will be in check. We could have high high’s and low low’s. It’s the name of the game. GM 4 could be a win, GM 4 could be a loss. We will be dialed in on earning a return on an investment and we have entire season ahead of us.
I began running this system today, with both the Braves and Twins. Both teams lost 2-0, but they held their own against 2 of the best pitchers in the game (Scherzer and Verlander). Both series will have to go to game 2 to cash, but I like the chances.
0
I began running this system today, with both the Braves and Twins. Both teams lost 2-0, but they held their own against 2 of the best pitchers in the game (Scherzer and Verlander). Both series will have to go to game 2 to cash, but I like the chances.
Guys FWIW, you can determine a team's historical winning % at an opponents park by doing a SDQL query at:
https://killersports.com/
The query for say... ATL @ WAS would be:
team=Braves and site=away and o:team=Nationals
I'm a rank novice at performing these queries but simple ones like this are not too hard to figure out. A lot of info at the site. This is a nice stat to have for determining what dogs to chase.
0
Guys FWIW, you can determine a team's historical winning % at an opponents park by doing a SDQL query at:
https://killersports.com/
The query for say... ATL @ WAS would be:
team=Braves and site=away and o:team=Nationals
I'm a rank novice at performing these queries but simple ones like this are not too hard to figure out. A lot of info at the site. This is a nice stat to have for determining what dogs to chase.
Don't want to rain on your parade but before you sink yourself and a few others with you let me give you the losing stats for this system for last year, because I was going to run a similar system like this but mine was more capped on the team having at least 50% or better wins at the opp park and it's loser bro any way you look at it. Even with mine having tighter parameters than yours but I'll give you the #s for yours anyway. If you were to bet all dogs starting a 3 or 4 game series and first game as a dog . (All stats pulled usings SDQL)
your 1st chase stats would be: (SGS>2 and SG=1 and D and season=2017)
297-401 (-$1291)
your 2nd chase on those 401 loses would be: (SGS>2 and SG=2 and p:DL and season=2017)
160-241 ($-4755) x 2 since you double up -$9510
your 3rd chase on those 241 loses would be: (SGS>2 and SG=3 and pp:DL and p:L and season=2017)
115-126 (+$2129) x 4 = since you are doubling your double $8516
so the tally is:
-1291-9510+8516=$-2285
if you chase to 4th game on 4 game series it's also loser 11-18 -$238 x 8...
as you can see the 2nd chase kills you. The better way to do this would be just to chase the 3rd game to avoid the sweep since it's the only chase that really makes money seems like. It's up to you what you want to do with this info but before you make people chase you on a system have someone that knows sdql run the #s for you like I did.
0
Don't want to rain on your parade but before you sink yourself and a few others with you let me give you the losing stats for this system for last year, because I was going to run a similar system like this but mine was more capped on the team having at least 50% or better wins at the opp park and it's loser bro any way you look at it. Even with mine having tighter parameters than yours but I'll give you the #s for yours anyway. If you were to bet all dogs starting a 3 or 4 game series and first game as a dog . (All stats pulled usings SDQL)
your 1st chase stats would be: (SGS>2 and SG=1 and D and season=2017)
297-401 (-$1291)
your 2nd chase on those 401 loses would be: (SGS>2 and SG=2 and p:DL and season=2017)
160-241 ($-4755) x 2 since you double up -$9510
your 3rd chase on those 241 loses would be: (SGS>2 and SG=3 and pp:DL and p:L and season=2017)
115-126 (+$2129) x 4 = since you are doubling your double $8516
so the tally is:
-1291-9510+8516=$-2285
if you chase to 4th game on 4 game series it's also loser 11-18 -$238 x 8...
as you can see the 2nd chase kills you. The better way to do this would be just to chase the 3rd game to avoid the sweep since it's the only chase that really makes money seems like. It's up to you what you want to do with this info but before you make people chase you on a system have someone that knows sdql run the #s for you like I did.
Don't want to rain on your parade but before you sink yourself and a few others with you let me give you the losing stats for this system for last year, because I was going to run a similar system like this but mine was more capped on the team having at least 50% or better wins at the opp park and it's loser bro any way you look at it. Even with mine having tighter parameters than yours but I'll give you the #s for yours anyway. If you were to bet all dogs starting a 3 or 4 game series and first game as a dog . (All stats pulled usings SDQL)
your 1st chase stats would be: (SGS>2 and SG=1 and D and season=2017)
297-401 (-$1291)
your 2nd chase on those 401 loses would be: (SGS>2 and SG=2 and p:DL and season=2017)
160-241 ($-4755) x 2 since you double up -$9510
your 3rd chase on those 241 loses would be: (SGS>2 and SG=3 and pp:DL and p:L and season=2017)
115-126 (+$2129) x 4 = since you are doubling your double $8516
so the tally is:
-1291-9510+8516=$-2285
if you chase to 4th game on 4 game series it's also loser 11-18 -$238 x 8...
as you can see the 2nd chase kills you. The better way to do this would be just to chase the 3rd game to avoid the sweep since it's the only chase that really makes money seems like. It's up to you what you want to do with this info but before you make people chase you on a system have someone that knows sdql run the #s for you like I did.
0
Quote Originally Posted by The_Extremist:
Don't want to rain on your parade but before you sink yourself and a few others with you let me give you the losing stats for this system for last year, because I was going to run a similar system like this but mine was more capped on the team having at least 50% or better wins at the opp park and it's loser bro any way you look at it. Even with mine having tighter parameters than yours but I'll give you the #s for yours anyway. If you were to bet all dogs starting a 3 or 4 game series and first game as a dog . (All stats pulled usings SDQL)
your 1st chase stats would be: (SGS>2 and SG=1 and D and season=2017)
297-401 (-$1291)
your 2nd chase on those 401 loses would be: (SGS>2 and SG=2 and p:DL and season=2017)
160-241 ($-4755) x 2 since you double up -$9510
your 3rd chase on those 241 loses would be: (SGS>2 and SG=3 and pp:DL and p:L and season=2017)
115-126 (+$2129) x 4 = since you are doubling your double $8516
so the tally is:
-1291-9510+8516=$-2285
if you chase to 4th game on 4 game series it's also loser 11-18 -$238 x 8...
as you can see the 2nd chase kills you. The better way to do this would be just to chase the 3rd game to avoid the sweep since it's the only chase that really makes money seems like. It's up to you what you want to do with this info but before you make people chase you on a system have someone that knows sdql run the #s for you like I did.
@The_Extremist thanks for visiting the forum! i’m going to have to stop you in your tracks, however. In your very first sentence you state, “let me give you the losing stats for ‘this’ system for last year.” The things is, you don’t know ‘this’ system. This is my system. What you know is the infrastructure of this system. You understand the concept of this system. Nothing more. Next, you state, “even with mine having tighter parameters than yours.” How would you know my parameters? How would you know yours are tighter? The thing is, you don’t know. Third, you state, “if you were to bet ‘all’ dogs starting a 3 or 4 game series. Well, you certainly didn’t read my first post of the forum. I’m not picking ‘all’ dogs. That would be insane. That insanity is proven by your numbers you have provided. You must have missed the part where I say, “my ‘capping identifies the specific DOGS.” Thus, it would be impossible for you to conduct an SDQL that matches my system. Your fancy numbers are entirely extreme and false information. Next, you state, “before you make people chase.” I am not making anyone doing anything they don’t want to. Perhaps you’re a 15 year old teenager that listens to everything your mom says but this isn’t a childcare center. Individuals in this forum are expected to be adults who can have their own opinions and make their own decisions. No one has to do anything here. Lastly, I want to say that it’s great that you know how to execute an SDQL. However, just because you know how to doesn’t mean it’s right. Listen, your effort to making this big of a post is understandable but before you post something with such a large accusation, check yourself before you do it.
0
@The_Extremist thanks for visiting the forum! i’m going to have to stop you in your tracks, however. In your very first sentence you state, “let me give you the losing stats for ‘this’ system for last year.” The things is, you don’t know ‘this’ system. This is my system. What you know is the infrastructure of this system. You understand the concept of this system. Nothing more. Next, you state, “even with mine having tighter parameters than yours.” How would you know my parameters? How would you know yours are tighter? The thing is, you don’t know. Third, you state, “if you were to bet ‘all’ dogs starting a 3 or 4 game series. Well, you certainly didn’t read my first post of the forum. I’m not picking ‘all’ dogs. That would be insane. That insanity is proven by your numbers you have provided. You must have missed the part where I say, “my ‘capping identifies the specific DOGS.” Thus, it would be impossible for you to conduct an SDQL that matches my system. Your fancy numbers are entirely extreme and false information. Next, you state, “before you make people chase.” I am not making anyone doing anything they don’t want to. Perhaps you’re a 15 year old teenager that listens to everything your mom says but this isn’t a childcare center. Individuals in this forum are expected to be adults who can have their own opinions and make their own decisions. No one has to do anything here. Lastly, I want to say that it’s great that you know how to execute an SDQL. However, just because you know how to doesn’t mean it’s right. Listen, your effort to making this big of a post is understandable but before you post something with such a large accusation, check yourself before you do it.
@chaser15 if you feel it necessary to take the time to add a light bulb to @the_extremists post, I won't be the only one to recommend to you to not to believe everything you read on the internet.
0
@chaser15 if you feel it necessary to take the time to add a light bulb to @the_extremists post, I won't be the only one to recommend to you to not to believe everything you read on the internet.
If anyone wants to talk to me about my system… let’s have constructive conversations in this forum. I am open to opinions, adjustments, tips, and advice but I am not open to false accusations. If you have a questions or want to have a real conversation about anything then ask me and we can talk about it!
0
If anyone wants to talk to me about my system… let’s have constructive conversations in this forum. I am open to opinions, adjustments, tips, and advice but I am not open to false accusations. If you have a questions or want to have a real conversation about anything then ask me and we can talk about it!
@The_Extremist thanks for visiting the forum! i’m going to have to stop you in your tracks, however. In your very first sentence you state, “let me give you the losing stats for ‘this’ system for last year.” The things is, you don’t know ‘this’ system. This is my system. What you know is the infrastructure of this system. You understand the concept of this system. Nothing more. Next, you state, “even with mine having tighter parameters than yours.” How would you know my parameters? How would you know yours are tighter? The thing is, you don’t know. Third, you state, “if you were to bet ‘all’ dogs starting a 3 or 4 game series. Well, you certainly didn’t read my first post of the forum. I’m not picking ‘all’ dogs. That would be insane. That insanity is proven by your numbers you have provided. You must have missed the part where I say, “my ‘capping identifies the specific DOGS.” Thus, it would be impossible for you to conduct an SDQL that matches my system. Your fancy numbers are entirely extreme and false information. Next, you state, “before you make people chase.” I am not making anyone doing anything they don’t want to. Perhaps you’re a 15 year old teenager that listens to everything your mom says but this isn’t a childcare center. Individuals in this forum are expected to be adults who can have their own opinions and make their own decisions. No one has to do anything here. Lastly, I want to say that it’s great that you know how to execute an SDQL. However, just because you know how to doesn’t mean it’s right. Listen, your effort to making this big of a post is understandable but before you post something with such a large accusation, check yourself before you do it.
Wally, well said.
It also seems like SDQL is the 'trendy thing' these days, I'm seeing more and more strategies based on it. It has some use but it's not the be all end all. In my opinion ALL PLAYS have to be handicapped before selections finalized.
Good luck
0
Quote Originally Posted by Wally1317:
@The_Extremist thanks for visiting the forum! i’m going to have to stop you in your tracks, however. In your very first sentence you state, “let me give you the losing stats for ‘this’ system for last year.” The things is, you don’t know ‘this’ system. This is my system. What you know is the infrastructure of this system. You understand the concept of this system. Nothing more. Next, you state, “even with mine having tighter parameters than yours.” How would you know my parameters? How would you know yours are tighter? The thing is, you don’t know. Third, you state, “if you were to bet ‘all’ dogs starting a 3 or 4 game series. Well, you certainly didn’t read my first post of the forum. I’m not picking ‘all’ dogs. That would be insane. That insanity is proven by your numbers you have provided. You must have missed the part where I say, “my ‘capping identifies the specific DOGS.” Thus, it would be impossible for you to conduct an SDQL that matches my system. Your fancy numbers are entirely extreme and false information. Next, you state, “before you make people chase.” I am not making anyone doing anything they don’t want to. Perhaps you’re a 15 year old teenager that listens to everything your mom says but this isn’t a childcare center. Individuals in this forum are expected to be adults who can have their own opinions and make their own decisions. No one has to do anything here. Lastly, I want to say that it’s great that you know how to execute an SDQL. However, just because you know how to doesn’t mean it’s right. Listen, your effort to making this big of a post is understandable but before you post something with such a large accusation, check yourself before you do it.
Wally, well said.
It also seems like SDQL is the 'trendy thing' these days, I'm seeing more and more strategies based on it. It has some use but it's not the be all end all. In my opinion ALL PLAYS have to be handicapped before selections finalized.
1st of all dude check yourself before you know who the F I am. Everyone respects me here because I don't blow smoke up anyones azz and I know my sht. I'm not a kid like you Wally I'm a grown azz man so slow your roll homeboy.
2nd of all I can respect you sharing your system with people but you have no data or past record to back it up. It's an experiment unless I missed that somewhere in your post. I understand your hand picking your dogs but you also don't state what your parameters are since I'm not the only who asked you that and you still have not mentioned it yet because if you did I can run those stats for you as well.
SDQL is not a style of betting for those of you who are uneducated. It's a website and a language of pulling data that would take you months or years to gather, where I can pull it for you in a matter of seconds-minutes. To learn it is difficult and to master it takes years and years and long hours of experimenting. I was simply trying to let you know you have to back test a few years worth of data to back us your claim. Not just say "I've been tracking".. what are you stats and what and how much did you win, when and what season? I know the exact article you read about this and how dogs win this much and that much.. cuz I read the same so it's not like you came up with this system on your own.. Slow down partner and breath. Not here bash you simply have your facts straight and run some #s. If you need help you can PM or would like to talk about this in private off the forum thats cool too. don't get your panties in a bunch dude.
Chaser knows me from here for the past few years and he knows I dont' talk sht and I put my money where my mouth is. He has stats to back up his systems and he does well and I have worked with him in the past to help perfct some of his systems as well. Don't get all your feelings hurt bud.
0
1st of all dude check yourself before you know who the F I am. Everyone respects me here because I don't blow smoke up anyones azz and I know my sht. I'm not a kid like you Wally I'm a grown azz man so slow your roll homeboy.
2nd of all I can respect you sharing your system with people but you have no data or past record to back it up. It's an experiment unless I missed that somewhere in your post. I understand your hand picking your dogs but you also don't state what your parameters are since I'm not the only who asked you that and you still have not mentioned it yet because if you did I can run those stats for you as well.
SDQL is not a style of betting for those of you who are uneducated. It's a website and a language of pulling data that would take you months or years to gather, where I can pull it for you in a matter of seconds-minutes. To learn it is difficult and to master it takes years and years and long hours of experimenting. I was simply trying to let you know you have to back test a few years worth of data to back us your claim. Not just say "I've been tracking".. what are you stats and what and how much did you win, when and what season? I know the exact article you read about this and how dogs win this much and that much.. cuz I read the same so it's not like you came up with this system on your own.. Slow down partner and breath. Not here bash you simply have your facts straight and run some #s. If you need help you can PM or would like to talk about this in private off the forum thats cool too. don't get your panties in a bunch dude.
Chaser knows me from here for the past few years and he knows I dont' talk sht and I put my money where my mouth is. He has stats to back up his systems and he does well and I have worked with him in the past to help perfct some of his systems as well. Don't get all your feelings hurt bud.
I appreciate the support @oilcountry99! I agree, certainly can use computers but we must go beyond them
@The_Extremist you’re now officially a waste a time. wish you luck with your future. you change your attitude, demeanor, and act like an adult you can be welcomed back. posting an accusatory false post is not asking someone what their parameters are.
0
I appreciate the support @oilcountry99! I agree, certainly can use computers but we must go beyond them
@The_Extremist you’re now officially a waste a time. wish you luck with your future. you change your attitude, demeanor, and act like an adult you can be welcomed back. posting an accusatory false post is not asking someone what their parameters are.
@chaser15 if you feel it necessary to take the time to add a light bulb to @the_extremists post, I won't be the only one to recommend to you to not to believe everything you read on the internet.
Thin skin Wally! I meant no ill will by the light bulb sir, that's not how I roll. Good luck with your system
0
Quote Originally Posted by Wally1317:
@chaser15 if you feel it necessary to take the time to add a light bulb to @the_extremists post, I won't be the only one to recommend to you to not to believe everything you read on the internet.
Thin skin Wally! I meant no ill will by the light bulb sir, that's not how I roll. Good luck with your system
let’s keep working at this system through sunday. will update units at the conclusion of each week. may continue for an additional week, 2 additional, etc. or may end.
i want this to be a fluid collaboration. if we don’t find desirable results let’s make adjustments! does anyone have anything ideas that could improve the system? i’m open to suggestions! we’re here to help each other out. also open if anyone wants to partner/group up. (i would keep monitoring the original system on the side and make available to anyone per request)
CLOSED: Braves, Padres, White Sox, Twins, Pirates, Yankees
SWEPT: Reds, Rangers
April 12th, 2018
D - Tigers +190
A - Reds +135
A - Rockies +165
A - Padres +130
A - White Sox +175
0
let’s keep working at this system through sunday. will update units at the conclusion of each week. may continue for an additional week, 2 additional, etc. or may end.
i want this to be a fluid collaboration. if we don’t find desirable results let’s make adjustments! does anyone have anything ideas that could improve the system? i’m open to suggestions! we’re here to help each other out. also open if anyone wants to partner/group up. (i would keep monitoring the original system on the side and make available to anyone per request)
CLOSED: Braves, Padres, White Sox, Twins, Pirates, Yankees
I'm rendering this version of the system kaput for obvious reasons. This past week I included dogs that were playing worse than their opponent but not SO much worse. There's too much grey area with that thought process. I thought there was value in series that didn't appear at face value to be the Browns vs. Patriots. Especially with being less than a month into the season, these grey area of differences in teams cannot be legitimately extrapolated.
Version 2.0 is going to only play dogs that are playing better than their opponent. No grey area, no crossing our fingers. The teams we play are going to flat out being playing better than their opponent (up to that date).
I back tested this into last week and this system although it did pick the Tigers (who were swept for -15u) it still finished with +10.48u. I am working on way to share this sheet publicly. I'm not trying to hide anything. I could easily lie and say the Tigers didn't qualify and were never a pick in the first place but I am going to do that.
Next post will include picks! BOL to all
0
END OF WEEK 1: -34.13u
I'm rendering this version of the system kaput for obvious reasons. This past week I included dogs that were playing worse than their opponent but not SO much worse. There's too much grey area with that thought process. I thought there was value in series that didn't appear at face value to be the Browns vs. Patriots. Especially with being less than a month into the season, these grey area of differences in teams cannot be legitimately extrapolated.
Version 2.0 is going to only play dogs that are playing better than their opponent. No grey area, no crossing our fingers. The teams we play are going to flat out being playing better than their opponent (up to that date).
I back tested this into last week and this system although it did pick the Tigers (who were swept for -15u) it still finished with +10.48u. I am working on way to share this sheet publicly. I'm not trying to hide anything. I could easily lie and say the Tigers didn't qualify and were never a pick in the first place but I am going to do 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
