Posted:
#1576
Falcon Sports (The Grand Challenge)
Starting Bankroll ($1000)
Current Bankroll ($2882.10)
Record (40-23)
(63.49%) Winners
Play #64
Duke Over 44.5 (-110) CFB
$288.21 to win $262
Falcon Sports
3
Falcon Sports (The Grand Challenge)
Posted:
#1577
@MITM
Great run you’ve been on and appreciate the hard work and posting plays here
you probably won’t answer this but for those of us that “cap” these bowl games it’s a damn crapshoot with all the opt outs/transfers/coaching departures. I know you just follow the MATH, but unlike college basketball right now which is pretty consistent how do you come to a pick in these bowl games just following the math with all the variables bc as you’ve said you don’t know any of the players etc
just wanted your take on the math and these “bowl games”
much love
0
Posted:
#1578
Quote Originally Posted by Bettorific:
@dcpark87 you have to tail them all. If you pick and choose you gonna get fucked all or nothing If you jump in jump in with both feet do what he is doing
@dcpark87 you have to tail them all. If you pick and choose you gonna get fucked all or nothing If you jump in jump in with both feet do what he is doing
Gonna get fucked? What? (thou shalt drink the kool aid every time damnit or perish???)
Lighten up people
Proving is hard. Talk is easy.
0
Posted:
#1581
@Last2thirst
Overs (33-21) (61.11%) Winners
Unders (7-2) (77.78%) Winners
My formula picks about 50% Overs/50% Unders overall. Its when u get down to just one play that the discrepancy occurs.
If I were to play the best (3-5), u would get just about an equal split between the two.
But this thread is about The Grand Challenge and that is played one at a time.
Falcon Sports
0
Posted:
#1582
@kimberton
Your exactly right, they are a crap shoot.
But, ill speak just about the last two I've dealt with.
UTSA Over 46.5 (Winner)
My formula had this one at 52pts and it hit right on the nose.
UCF Under 67. My formula had this one at 63, which was very very close to a play. It would have been a Winner.
Let's look at the pending play and I do not handicap but u would have to be a fool not to see who was going to play. I know Riley Leonard isn't there but he missed significant action during the season. I also know the backup was responsible for much of the data that I'm using. I believe Troy's offense is pretty much intact for this game. I believe Duke has a few defensive starters out. I also think (44.5) is relatively low.
But I don't want to bring handicapping into this.
I have the Power Total in this one at (51) and I believe enough of the data that I use is relevant to use in this one.
Perhaps to better answer your question, I guess u should take these bowls on a game by game basis. Perhaps a little homework is required to go along with the statistics that I use.
But let me answer this question also like this. If the Chiefs were sitting Mahomes this week, I'd just throw that game out and not even run it.
Best I can do for an answer.
Falcon Sports
2
Posted:
#1583
Quote Originally Posted by MITM:
@kimberton Your exactly right, they are a crap shoot. But, ill speak just about the last two I've dealt with. UTSA Over 46.5 (Winner) My formula had this one at 52pts and it hit right on the nose. UCF Under 67. My formula had this one at 63, which was very very close to a play. It would have been a Winner. Let's look at the pending play and I do not handicap but u would have to be a fool not to see who was going to play. I know Riley Leonard isn't there but he missed significant action during the season. I also know the backup was responsible for much of the data that I'm using. I believe Troy's offense is pretty much intact for this game. I believe Duke has a few defensive starters out. I also think (44.5) is relatively low. But I don't want to bring handicapping into this. I have the Power Total in this one at (51) and I believe enough of the data that I use is relevant to use in this one. Perhaps to better answer your question, I guess u should take these bowls on a game by game basis. Perhaps a little homework is required to go along with the statistics that I use. But let me answer this question also like this. If the Chiefs were sitting Mahomes this week, I'd just throw that game out and not even run it. Best I can do for an answer. Falcon Sports
@kimberton Your exactly right, they are a crap shoot. But, ill speak just about the last two I've dealt with. UTSA Over 46.5 (Winner) My formula had this one at 52pts and it hit right on the nose. UCF Under 67. My formula had this one at 63, which was very very close to a play. It would have been a Winner. Let's look at the pending play and I do not handicap but u would have to be a fool not to see who was going to play. I know Riley Leonard isn't there but he missed significant action during the season. I also know the backup was responsible for much of the data that I'm using. I believe Troy's offense is pretty much intact for this game. I believe Duke has a few defensive starters out. I also think (44.5) is relatively low. But I don't want to bring handicapping into this. I have the Power Total in this one at (51) and I believe enough of the data that I use is relevant to use in this one. Perhaps to better answer your question, I guess u should take these bowls on a game by game basis. Perhaps a little homework is required to go along with the statistics that I use. But let me answer this question also like this. If the Chiefs were sitting Mahomes this week, I'd just throw that game out and not even run it. Best I can do for an answer. Falcon Sports
great answer friend, and what you stated was as I had assumed. You’re right on the opt outs and both teams with the exception of Leonard are pretty much in tact….defensive players only ones that will be missing otherwise (which is good for us)
thanks and good luck!!
1
Posted:
#1584
Anyone following this for a few more days.
The win percentage is currently (63.49%) Winners, that is not going to last.
The area from 56% to 60% is pulling on it. Its going to win and drag that (63.49%) down to what I think ultimately will be (57.14%).
How many times must I say that there is no one or no thing and I mean no handicapper, no system, no model, no formula and not even the old computer guys with a super computer that can hit 60% Winners over 1000 plays against a (-110) line. It does not exist.
Can u have short runs at 60%, of course and u might possibly be great and do it over 200-300 plays but u will never see 60% Winners over 1000 plays.
Its all just regression to the "mean" and its just a matter of time before I reach the 57.14% area. Its inevitable but I can fight it and prolong it but like death its coming.
In saying all that, I do project to be (400-300) after 700 plays. I have that written on my board in my home office.
(400-300) by Thanksgiving 2024
Have a good day guys
Falcon Sports
4
Posted:
#1585
Guys ill be leaving Tunica for home in an hour or so.
Ill be driving but when I get home I've got something that immediately needs my attention, I've been gone a week.
I have Play #64 pending
Duke Over 44.5
Here is Play #65
Air Force Over 40.5
Get your bet amounts correct, if your recalculating after each play.
Ill return after the Air Force game ends to update everything and release Play #66
Good luck guys
Falcon Sports
1
Posted:
#1586
Quote Originally Posted by MITM:
@Last2thirst Overs (33-21) (61.11%) Winners Unders (7-2) (77.78%) Winners My formula picks about 50% Overs/50% Unders overall. Its when u get down to just one play that the discrepancy occurs. If I were to play the best (3-5), u would get just about an equal split between the two. But this thread is about The Grand Challenge and that is played one at a time. Falcon Sports
@Last2thirst Overs (33-21) (61.11%) Winners Unders (7-2) (77.78%) Winners My formula picks about 50% Overs/50% Unders overall. Its when u get down to just one play that the discrepancy occurs. If I were to play the best (3-5), u would get just about an equal split between the two. But this thread is about The Grand Challenge and that is played one at a time. Falcon Sports
Thanks man.... I definitely see an OVER trend as hot this year in NCAAB and NBA, defense is lacking but later in the year, these high totals will switch I bet.
Proving is hard. Talk is easy.
0
Posted:
#1587
Just a comment....
I went back and analyzed your success..... you went 7 - 0 building confidence using the UNDER (first 7 plays in GRAND CHALLENGE) .......and specifically, using 5 CBB games and 1 NBA UNDER....the only OVER was a CFB game that covered
since this time......you have only done 3-4 UNDER plays in your next 53 plays????? (basing this on the total analysis you provided a few posts above)
I will now do an analysis of the OVER PLAYS and trend you get on with CBB and NBA ....but mostly report on the CBB result. I believe I am seeing a pattern here and would suggest you might have a higher success rate, IF you focused on using your UNDER plays more........
So in other words, if given a handle of options in a day, you are STILL MOSTLY CHOOSING OVER PLAYS to put into your thread.
It is my theory therefore, you are TESTING Over plays with your math to use later on, and are having success....BUT THE REAL SUCCESS for laying down your larger bets, will come with using the UNDER and your math.
Am I onto something here?? YES!
Keep this thing going Falcon 
..... will update the OVER analysis soon and how its fairing against biases...(I have complete OVER/UNDER stats that I compile for all CBB teams for instance and pace of play....just curious to see if my suspicion you are testing biases on CBB plays since you have said its your bread + butter earlier in the fall)
Proving is hard. Talk is easy.
2
Posted:
#1588
I keep reading all these comments but sometimes you can see games unfolding in the opposite direction of the pick and highly doubtful now that Troy gave it up again that this game gets to 30. Thanks for all the winners but I'm wondering what went into this over play? Troy looks lost.
1
Posted:
#1591
@frankbullitt
MITM/Falcon has said over and over. He doesn't cap games. He doesn't look at stats, injuries, weather etc. etc. He uses a system (math) that he has created that spits out a number. That number is compared to the line. If it hits his requirements he makes the play. He is hitting a very nice percentage of his plays. He expects to lose here and there as he is actually hitting better than his expectation. If you read back through the posts you can see his explanation for everything. It's all right in these pages.
0
Posted:
#1596
[Quote: Originall
@Last2thirst
y Posted by Last2thirst]Just a comment.... I went back and analyzed your success..... you went 7 - 0 building confidence using the UNDER (first 7 plays in GRAND CHALLENGE) .......and specifically, using 5 CBB games and 1 NBA UNDER....the only OVER was a CFB game that covered since this time......you have only done 3-4 UNDER plays in your next 53 plays????? (basing this on the total analysis you provided a few posts above) I will now do an analysis of the OVER PLAYS and trend you get on with CBB and NBA ....but mostly report on the CBB result. I believe I am seeing a pattern here and would suggest you might have a higher success rate, IF you focused on using your UNDER plays more........ So in other words, if given a handle of options in a day, you are STILL MOSTLY CHOOSING OVER PLAYS to put into your thread. It is my theory therefore, you are TESTING Over plays with your math to use later on, and are having success....BUT THE REAL SUCCESS for laying down your larger bets, will come with using the UNDER and your math. Am I onto something here?? YES! Keep this thing going Falcon ..... will update the OVER analysis soon and how its fairing against biases...(I have complete OVER/UNDER stats that I compile for all CBB teams for instance and pace of play....just curious to see if my suspicion you are testing biases on CBB plays since you have said its your bread + butter earlier in the fall)[/Quote]
I'll be curious what you come up with on this. I appreciate you doing it! 
0
Hot Forum Topics
