Who Thinks The Nba Is Fixed???

[THE NAKED ONE]

After seeing the under ruined by Reggie Miller in the first HIGH PROFILE ESPN game, and after seeing the under 2h (on which it seemed like the world bet, since the line crashed from 99 to 96 at some places) in the Lakers/Kings game go into the gutter with 15 points in the final 2 minutes of play......

I am beginning to wonder if things are being tweaked a little bit here and there at the end of games, especially at the end of KEY GAMES on which much money is bet. The 2 games tonight with the most action HAD TO BE the Spurs/Pacers game and Lakers/Kings game, both on ESPN and watched by the world.

I've seen a LOT of strange endings (in terms of the total) in Pistons games this season and last season, but usually when they are playing at home IN DETROIT. I'm originally from Michigan, and a friend of mine told me that years ago the clock operators in Detroit would either speed things up or slow things down to fix the total.

Has anyone heard of this?

I think for the most part things are on the square. But there are times (like tonight) when I see things that make me wonder.

On December 3, the Jazz played the Rockets, and I remember I had bet the Rockets -7. The line had moved from -6.5 all the way to -8 for the Rockets pregame. The game wound up going into overtime. The Rockets were up 107-101 and they grabbed a rebound with maybe 16 seconds left or so. They got the ball to Steve Francis near the top of the key, and it looked like Kirilenko was about to foul him. HE SHOULD HAVE FOULED HIM. There were 12 seconds left on the clock. The old Jazz announcer even said out loud, "And now Francis will go to the line to shoo--" And magically (for Jazz bettors and I assume the bookies of the world who obviously had a lot of money bet by clients on the Rockets that day), Kirilenko backs away and lets Francis dribble it out.

Compare that to tonight's Reggie Miller 3 pointer debacle, and I start to wonder.

The Jazz are not a team that gives up. But that night they just decided to give up with 12 seconds left on the clock, down by 6... in overtime, no less.

I remember last year the Nuggets were going under 2h basically every game. I don't remember the exact date, but there was one night in the halftime thread when it seemed as if the entire planet was in on the secret. EVERYONE bet the under 2h that night (including me). I remember the Nuggets were down by 10 or something with 25-30 seconds left and just kept fouling and fouling and fouling, and my under pushed for the 2h. I had already circled it a winner. I switched back to that channel and couldn't believe it. With 45 seconds left I just assumed the game was finished and the under a winner.

As I said earlier, most games are on the square, but it seems like every now and then SOMEONE, or SOME ENTITY, has a vested interest in the outcome of a game, and some strange stuff starts to come down.

The 15 pts in the last 2 minutes of the Lakers/Kings game wasn't that big of a deal. That happens quite a lot at the end of blowouts. Guys are just shooting and no defense is being played. But the Reggie Miller 3 pointer is another story. I'd like to record all of the REALLY STRANGE endings of NBA games. I wish I had taped certain games for longevity.

Anyone have any insight into possible fixed games in the NBA?

Thanks.

 

[mj82]

imo, reggie put that ball up because he was hot and wanted to see if he could get another to go down... this is not to say i do not feel some sports are fixed. Just think reggie was feeling it and thats why he threw up that shot.

 

[arrow]

how about 23 in the last minute of a game

how about 23 in the last minute of a game

I know it was an all star game but 6or 7 years ago all i needed was b oth teams to score under 22 points for a huge under play. both teams combined for 23 in the last minute of the game. another game i know was fixed was a game pittburgh was playing in college football. I think they were playing west virginia, and with less than 40 seconds to go with pittsburgh leading by six, and favored by 10 pittsburgh coach threw into the end-zone 4 straight plays. I could not believe my eyes as W.V. had no time outs and one running play or kneel down would end the game. You remember these games when your on the wrong side. I had W.V. and could"nt believe my eyes. I was screaming at the t.v. what the hell are they doing. Pitt did not score and the other team got the ball back with around ten seconds left. What do you think the coach would of told the boosters and alumni if W.V. picks the ball off and run for a t.d. the other way.

 

[WHY ASK WHY?]

THE ONLY ONES THAT DON'T......

THE ONLY ONES THAT DON'T......

ARE THE SAME ONES THAT STILL THINK CASINOS DON'T CHEAT, AND THOSE STILL BELIEVING IN SANTA CLAUSE!!!!

JMO....THE ONLY ONE I AM QUALIFIED TO GIVE....

WHY?

 

[ViGoR]

There is no doubt many games are fixed, especailly when dealing with point spread!!! If you know how to watch a NBA game, you should know they're fixed, it's too obvious every fking time!! Players know when to miss free throws by not let the game cover. Players know how to shooting to the rim by not letting the game go over, they're just another version of WWF, ALL FAKE!

 

[TORONTO-VIGILANTE]

I remember last year the Nuggets were going under 2h basically every game. I don't remember the exact date, but there was one night in the halftime thread when it seemed as if the entire planet was in on the secret. EVERYONE bet the under 2h that night (including me). I remember the Nuggets were down by 10 or something with 25-30 seconds left and just kept fouling and fouling and fouling, and my under pushed for the 2h. I had already circled it a winner. I switched back to that channel and couldn't believe it. With 45 seconds left I just assumed the game was finished and the under a winner.

yes, this was happening for about 2 years and most of us here figured it out early....this year's a different story, new players, a new energy to win....throw that angle out.

 

[TORONTO-VIGILANTE]

The Jazz are not a team that gives up. But that night they just decided to give up with 12 seconds left on the clock, down by 6... in overtime, no less.

yeah that one's a tricky one.....it's still about a 2 possession game with plenty of time on the clock......

reminds me when i thought my KNICKS -3 side play was fawked when they were playing Dallas IN NY.

Lo and Behold, the knicks come back to tie the damn game with 2 three pointers in the last 10 seconds on the game to force overtime....and then they don't show up in overtime.

some nites REALLY make you wonder.:shrug:

 

[Scoop Mackenzie]

Absoultey ...hands down...the most ridiculous thoughst ever...

It's called bad beats people...i

t's ironic that in the NBA you will get someone crying fixed every two weeks or so but the NFL, NHL,MLB college, hell ping pong for that matter no says a peep....

so let me guess these players who are making more money than they need get approached to fix games and as a team they all agree to fix a total or a side???




s c OO p

 

[bej0101]

it sure seems that way BUT no i don't believe any of the major college or pro sports are fixed..way to much money being made by the participants and way too much investigative media to keep something like that quiet

 

[Howie]

imo, reggie put that ball up because he was hot and wanted to see if he could get another to go down... this is not to say i do not feel some sports are fixed. Just think reggie was feeling it and thats why he threw up that shot.

AGRD. I watched that entire game. There was nothing about Reggie shooting that three that made me think the game was fixed. He was hot from beyond the arc. His teammate set him up for the shot, and he took it. It was an exclamation mark on a great night.

 

[Howie]

And one more thing...

Most of these players in the NBA couldn't count to 200 if you held a gun to their head. What in the heck makes you guys think that, during the course of a game, the players are sitting around trying to figure out if they need to speed up or slow down their scoring because the total is fixed???

Let's be realistic here.

Maybe that's what the coach is doing for them when they all gather around him. He isn't diagramming a play for the team to run on that whiteboard, he is actually trying to do the math on whether or not they need to score zero, one, two, three or even four points at that juncture of the game.

-Howie

 

[THE NAKED ONE]

Here's a link to an article about fixing college basketball games.

http://sports.espn.go.com/page2/tvlistings/show105transcript.html

Just a note, in their last 15 games, the University of Minnesota basketball team has covered ONE TIME.

Now I am no genius handicapper (in fact I'm awful), BUT I have read a little bit on sports betting. I see people on here (mostly kids, and you can tell by their tone when posting) who blindly follow others' picks. Some even go so far as to provide pay services for their picks.

The following should be of of some interest. In chapter seven of Stanford Wong's book "Sharp Sports Betting," he talks about testing W/L Records for Significance. On page 132, there is a table that includes RARITY OF GOOD W-L RECORDS. The first column is the SAMPLE SIZE, followed by 3 more columns labeled 1:100, 1:1000, and 1:10,000.

For a given sample size, he shows us the chance of that W/L record being a statistical fluke (a.k.a. PURE LUCK). He advises "If you are testing a system against games already played, my suggestion is to hold out for 1:1000 chance of a win-loss record being achieved by chance alone. Even with a standard that high you will occasionally find false positives, methods that you at first think find good bets but later prove to be worthless."

Let's say a new guru on the block comes to madjacks and he magically goes 13-2 on his first 15 college hoops plays. I can see the fan club already forming, with machine gun and big-eyed emoticons cluttering the thread, 30-pt font, fireworks, etc. etc.. This person claims he has "A FOOL-PROOF SYSTEM." And many are hooked. Many blindly coattail this mastermind of the sports betting community, betting the money set aside for pencils and pocket protectors on the new poster's favorite plays.

So you continue to coattail this guy whose face and name are unknown to you, and after 100 events, he has witchified the odds and gone 62-38, hitting a whopping 62% of his plays.

He's gotten you rich, and the next thing you know, he posts that he is sorry but he has to leave and start a service to sell his plays, since he doesn't make enough money from his spectacular plays and feels the need to charge others for them.

Should you join?

The statistical answer is no. With a sample size of 100, a 62-38 record (62% success) has a 1 in 100 chance of being achieved by chance alone.

62% of 100 games seems awesome when someone does it on madjacks, but it COULD just be a fluke. So now let's say this poster continues to post and after 250 plays, his record stands at 144-106, a "remarkable" 57.6%. Since the break-even point for juice at -110 is just under 52.4%, this guy seems like the second-coming.

Now he goes pay. Should you join?

The answer is NO, since after 250 trials, a 144-106 record also has a 1 in 100 chance of being a fluke.

Now here's a system... it's very simple. Fade the University of Minnesota. Hypothetically, let's say that all you know is that THIS SEASON, Minnesota has failed to cover 12 of their 13 games, going 1-12 ATS.

What are the chances this is simply random?

The answer is 1 in 1000.

Wong recommends that when devising a system to beat sports, you should go for AT LEAST 1 in 1000 chance of it being a fluke. And even then you should tread lightly. Most likely, the University of Minnesota players are not shaving points. Maybe they are just bad. And maybe the ODDSMAKERS, who supposedly know more about pretty much every team than 99.9% of the public, are fumbling around blindly when it comes to setting a line for the University of Minnesota basketball program this season. There's a 1 in 1000 chance that this 1-12 ATS record is due to chance alone. To put some perspective on this, there is a 1 in 1000 chance that, after 1000 events, a record of 549-451 (54.9% -- a "WINNING" SYSTEM) is due to chance alone.

You'd think that after a poster posts 1000 of his plays and hits just under 55% that he is FOR SURE a winning bettor, but there is STILL a 1 in 1000 chance that he just got lucky and is no better than I am at capping a game.

Now for the 1 in 10,000 chance of flukes. If Minnesota were to have gone 0-13 ATS in their first 13 games this season, there is only a 1 in 10,000 chance that this is random. If I were to have players on a team shave points, I would know these odds and would allow 1 or 2 games here and there to cover so as not to arouse statistical suspicion.

After 13 events, an 11-2 record is 1 in 100 chance, a 12-1 record is 1 in 1,000 chance, and a 13-0 record is 1 in 10,000 chance.

If our glamorous poster posts 100 plays and hits 69-31 (69%), then there is a 1 in 10,000 chance that this is random luck. I would personally purchase a package by this poster, but I would STILL be careful, since there is still a 1 in 10,000 chance that it is just luck.

After 1000 plays, a record of 559-441 (55.9%) gives us a 1 in 10,000 chance of being a fluke. So if someone can show me that they have hit 55.9% after 1000 posted plays, then I will listen to them.

It's amusing to read all of these fan club posts by people. Some guy has a good run and there are 30 replies and 2000 views. Viewing GOOD LUCK... whoopee dooooo.

I've played professional blackjack since 1997, and I've heard it all and seen it all. I've had people tell me that they have a SYSTEM to beat the game, and I just smile at them and say, "Wow I wish I could do that, but it would probably be too hard." I know they are playing a losing game, but why should I tell them that?

I'm just trying to figure out how to play a winning game of sports betting. It's much more difficult than blackjack. I think VERY FEW people can beat the juice. I know I can't.

Over the last year or so, I've watched more sports than I have watched since I was a kid. But now I am looking at it from a new perspective... THE LINE. And although it's pretty rare and quite possibly random, occasionally I see things in games, particularly at the end of games, that just don't jive. It's similar to me observing a blackjack table. I can spot a winning blackjack player faster than most. I see things that just don't jive, because I am also a jiver. It's funny to watch people play for a few hours in the casino, and I can't figure out how the casino can be so stupid to not bar this person immediately. A real winner generally stands out (in strange, subtle ways unknown to civilians) to another winning player like a sore thumb.

Well, in observing sports in relation to the spread, I've seen some sore thumbs. Not tons, but enough to make me ponder possible fixing. I agree that the chances of professional basketball being fixed at all are very slim. The players make a fortune. I assume the referees also make a fortune? I do not know.

College kids, however, do NOT make a fortune. And most never will. They are stooges for the NCAA fortune-makers. The coaches get paid a lot at the big schools (I would assume), but I'm not sure how much the coach of Wofford or Samford or Furman or Long Beach State makes.

I just cannot imagine (especially now, when gambling on the internet makes it SO EASY to place huge wagers at college sports and go unnoticed), that some of these kids are not making a killing on the side. How hard would it be for 4 guys on a college team (who all know they have NO CHANCE of going to the NBA and getting paid millions) to simply get together, get a bankroll of 20k, and each bet $5,000 on every game. That's only $20,000 a game for a team to be betting. You get 50 of your closest friends (12.5 friends per athlete) and have them each bet $400. It would NEVER SHOW UP anywhere. It's so easy it's silly.

But heck, 4 kids each making $5,000 a game. Fix just 20 games in a season, that's $100,000 profit per kid. Start as freshman and do it for 4 years. That's $400,000 profit per kid. Invest that properly and you won't have to work anymore.

Now take some poor kids from wherever... and tell them, "Hey why don't you just win $5,000 a game for yourselves. Betting online is EASY." It's not like the old days when you either bet in Vegas or you went through a private bookie. Think about all of the online books. I could easily get 20 sportsbooks and bet $250 on a game at each of the 20 books. I would assume that somewhere in cyberspace (or Kentucky, or Ohio, or Canada, or wherever) someone else is betting $250 on the other team at that same book. You could just use more books and then also bet $100 on the OTHER TEAM at each book, to help them balance the action at their place. So you have $250 coming in on Central Michigan (or whoever), and you have $100 coming in on the other team. You're paying some juice but WHO CARES. We call it "cover" in blackjack. Sometimes you do something wrong at the table to keep them off of your scent. Or get 100 books and bet $250 on your team and $200 on the other team, so in effect you have bet $50 on your team. do that at 100 sportsbooks. Now you have $5000 in action. Do that 4 times using multiple accounts. It's THAT EASY.

So, let's just assume that college hoops is fixed to a certain extent. Take ALL OF THESE SMALL SCHOOLS that we all love to bet on (and most of us have never even seen these damn kids play on tv, we're just looking at numbers), what are the chances that 4 kids on at least 1 of these teams is doing a little shaving, not altering who wins a game, but just making a bad pass here and there in the 2nd half to win by 10 instead of 14? I say they are pretty darn good.

 

[THE NAKED ONE]

Since the rest didn't fit, here is something else that you may find interesting...

A friend of mine who now owns a nail salon got to know one of his customers pretty well, and her husband came by one day and gave him some NFL plays. This was back in 2001. Back then I had just moved to Vegas and had never bet on a game before. I had no idea. I didn't even watch the NFL. He told me that there was a referee strike or something. Actually I just looked it up.

http://www.nfl.com/news/2001/officials_091001.html

Says here that the replacement refs were getting paid $2000 a game.

Well anyway, my friend (who had never bet on sports either at that time, only blackjack) told me that his client's husband told him to bet a few "sure things" in the NFL. He gave him several games, and they all won. My friend actually did bet the games. He told me about it over the phone, and I wasn't interested. Anyway (and believe me, I wouldn't believe this stuff if it weren't coming from this particular friend whom I trust), this guy told him that he knew some NFL games were being fixed by these replacement refs, and that to get any more games from him he would have to give him $10,000 for the info.

When I look back on it, I think to myself that it could have easily just been a scam by this random jerk to make $10,000. But when you talk with my friend, he doesn't come across as an idiot. He doesn't seem like a likely candidate to be the random target of a scam of this sort.

But I still wonder if any of that stuff could be true. If it was, it's very scary. Who were these refs? They were getting only $2000 a game? That's nothing. Think about how much money is bet on NFL games every week. It's astronomical.

I need to give him a call and discuss it with him. I haven't talked to him in quite some time. I just want to know if he still does this woman's nails, and if he has ever seen her husband again.

By the way, GMAN2 (since you live in Cleveland, right?), my friend lives in Cleveland. I'd actually like to investigate this thing a bit more.

My question is, how much do college hoops officials make who regularly do MAC games or other "lesser" conferences? Anything is possible, if the price is right.

That story keeps ringing in my ears. I have NO IDEA whether any fixing was going on with those refs, and I am accusing no one of any wrongdoing whatsoever. But I KNOW for a fact that my friend was approached by a guy who told him games were fixed, gave him some plays that all won, and then was going to charge him $10,000 if he wanted any more plays. It could easily have been a scam. But I would like to investigate more. I'm trying to remember if this guy told my friend that the games were being fixed BEFORE my friend bet the first group of games, or if he waited until after the games all won before he now said, "Okay, here's why the games won... now you start paying." If he told him initially that the games were fixed, and THEN gave my friend the plays, this would be MUCH MUCH more believable. If he just said, "These are sure things, let me know how they go..." then that is a different story.

I will call my friend and find out for sure.

Just some food for thought.

 

[THE NAKED ONE]

I just thought of something else...

I've noticed many college games I've bet on this season looking very good (in terms of the spread) at halftime, and then in the next 20 minutes the entire lead is blown and the team fails to cover. Many times it seems to approach the spread for the entire game.

It is almost surely random.

BUT (haha, there's always a but)... I'd like to know what the odds are of a college team being up by 20 at the half, and the pregame line was -3.5, and they wind up winning by 2. I'd like to know (and have no idea how to figure out how to come up with the percentages) how rare it SHOULD be for a team to give up 10 points, 11 points, 12 points, 13 points, 14 points, 15 points, 16 points, etc etc etc in the final 20 minutes of a college hoops game. And then I would like to compare these percentages with the percentage of the time that the team very much in the lead at the half fails to cover the entire game. I see teams that are +14 up by 4 at the half and 10 minutes later they are losing by 16. I see other teams that are -4.5 for the game up at the half by 26 and win by 3.

It just seems to happen an awful lot in college. It's probably due to the fact that they are just kids, and that talent prevails in the 2nd half once the steroid rush is over with for the scrub teams, and that subs blow big leads when a team is cruising along and winning the game by 26.

BUT (haha) what if.....

AND BY THE WAY, WHO WINS AT COLLEGE HOOPS ON THIS SITE? Show me someone who fits into the 1 in 10,000 range, too, please, on the chart. Here's what I need as proof...

100 plays = 69-31 (69%)
150 plays = 98-52 (65.33%)
200 plays = 127-73 (63.5%)
250 plays = 155-95 (62%)
300 plays = 183-117 (61%)
350 plays = 210-140 (60%)
400 plays = 238-162 (59.5%)
450 plays = 265-185 (58.89%)
500 plays = 292-208 (58.4%)
600 plays = 346-254 (57.67%)
700 plays = 400-300 (57.14%)
800 plays = 453-347 (56.63%)
900 plays = 506-394 (56.22%)
1000 plays = 559-441 (55.9%)

So, to all of you "services".... please provide us with proof before we hit the atm machines in search of 20 dollar bills to send you. I'm personally sick of fan club posts, I'm sick of people who claim to be good (and apparently in search of praise) posting and not including a record. I'm sick of a lot of crap.

I just want proof. I want proof that things are fixed in college hoops, that's for sure. But I REALLY WANT PROOF that anyone can actually beat the f#$^$%&$^%#@ing sport. SHOW ME THE MONEY, and better yet.... SHOW ME THE PROOF. Then I will listen to you.

Until then, why even bother posting random plays with no explanations at all? Why even bother getting all of your buddies to come along and cheer you on? Without an explanation, a bare play is basically meaningless.

I rarely post because frankly, I DON'T KNOW PEACH FUZZ ABOUT WINNING. Sometimes I just post for something to do. Just for fun. I have no clue. I'm hooked on sports. I bet everything. I've bet everything from Porto soccer to rugby to naked women's volleyball. I'll bet a coin flip.

But I also know that there is hardly anyone on this site who posts who knows much more than my silly bottom does. Post all of your plays (AND PLEASE USE ALL CAPS WHEN YOU POST YOUR PLAYS, AND PLEASE FEEL FREE TO SPELL CARIB AS CRAIB WITH EVERY POST AND PLEASE FEEL FREE TO USE BROKEN ENGLISH AND LONG RUN-ON SENTENCES IN YOUR POSTS BECAUSE THAT WAY EVERYONE WILL KNOW THAT YOU ARE VERY BRIGHT AND OBVIOUSLY THE BEST CAPPER IN THE WORLD)...

BUT (haha, there's always a but), the smart people who sift through all of the doo-doo in search of someone who can actually provide detailed explanations and rational reasoning behind their plays.... will not be fooled. It's just sad to see that others are.

I obviously love to rant and rave, but I don't like seeing people get ripped off either. A long time ago the casinos ripped me off, and I got PEE-ISSED, so I learned blackjack and never looked back. I'm looking to make some dough at sports because I'm barred everywhere and I'm too lazy to travel around and grind it out.

So someone prove to me that you can win. You just have to provide explanations for your plays, and then you have to show me the 1:10,000 column. After that I will kneel before thee and kiss your toes, one by one, until they smell like Listerine.

So get naked...


:moon: :moon: :moon: :moon: :moon:

 

[THE NAKED ONE]

Oh, I almost forgot.

I will continue posting as long as it is fun. So do not wrong me or fail to defend my greatness. Do not question my genius. Do not ruffle my feathers, or you will feel the naked wrath.

You will no longer be able to read my delightfully insane posts.

I'll even put 5% (or maybe 6% 7% or even 8%) of my brain on future posts. But I need to build the strength of my neurons and dendrites first, then I'll pump up the brain release to 25% on a truly great one. Once I lose 47% of my grey matter, I'll whallop them with a true 86.32% guru post.

I just LOVE the %%%%%%%%%%%%%% I want to see one in every post. I'm sure it always includes the orange juice, too.

Wong recommends that for a MinEdge of 5 percent, you should bet NO MORE than 1.5 percent to 2.5 percent of your TOTAL bankroll.

SO THAT MEANS, if you have $10,000 to invest solely in sports betting, you should bet only around $200 per game, which is 2 percent of your total stake. But this assumes that you actually have an edge of 5% on each game. That's pretty tough to figure out.

In blackjack, edge is very simple to calculate. If you play 1 spot, and your edge is 5 percent (pretty damn rare, believe me), you'd bet approximately 76% of your total bankroll times your edge. So you'd bet 0.76 x 10,000 x 0.05 = $380 on that hand. But we'd be very safe and take 20% of that "optimal" mathematical bet, so in real life we'd bet only $76 in that spot. Of course our roll was much larger than that, but I think everyone should incorporate the Kelly Criterion into their sports betting routine/addiction.

Check this out... at blackjack, if you bet double the optimal amount (2 x 0.76 x 10,000 x 0.05), EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE A LONG-TERM MATHEMATICAL EDGE OVER THE HOUSE, YOU WILL BREAK EVEN IN THE LONG RUN. IF YOU BET MORE THAN DOUBLE THE OPTIMAL MATHEMATICAL BET, YOU WILL GO BROKE. BELIEVE IT. THIS IS NOT PROPAGANDA, THIS IS A WARNING.

So if you think you have a 5% edge and Wong recommends a $200 bet (2% of your CURRENT ROLL) with a $10,000 bankroll, if you bet $400 in that spot you will break even in the long run if you continue to bet double the optimal amount. With $20,000 you should bet $400. If you bet $1000 in that spot (MORE THAN DOUBLE THE OPTIMAL MATH BET), you will lose money in the long run, even though you have an edge.

Since my edge is negative at sports, I tend to look for AT LEAST a negative 5% edge before I start firing the big bucks. Occasionally I will post a negative 25% lock, but those are few and far between.

So just get naked please...

:moon: :moon: :moon: :moon: :moon:

 

[yyz]

You will probably get bashed by the talking heads in here for your sentiment that "sports betting is a losing proposition". I know I always do!

You will be accused of being a loser, and that's why you can't believe others can win at this. I, on the other hand, back you very strongly on that thought. (I wouldn't take too much stock in Wong though......he's just selling books.)

Now, folks in here will say, "Why do I need to have a write up for my plays, if they win for you?" I guess that's all well and good, but reasoning is always nice. I used to give nice detailed descriptions of my plays, but my days of actually thinking I have some "superior knowledge" over anyone else, are far behind me. I ask the "cappers" this: Why is it that most games have no clear cut bettors' favorite? I mean, if we all "study" the same shit, how can there be so many people on each side? Shouldn't there be a huge differential, and shouldn't that team win far more often than not? But, that doesn't happen.

Oh, he sans of clothes......I have often stated that "winning" cappers are just a little more lucky than the losers. Out of the thousands of posters at these sites, very few are showing a year in/year out profit. Now, they don't want to believe that they are the "chosen one" on the lucky end of the spectrum, they want to believe their hard work is the sole reason for their winning. My contention is, that with all the information to make an educated wager at your fingertips, why aren't there more winners out there? Don't give me this horseshit that "I work my ass off, so I win". There are tons of guys who work just as hard, and lose. Why? Because there are far too many untangibles that can't accurately be factored in.

How many times does a game pan out the way you handicapped it? I don't mean that you won the bet, so you handicapped it well, I mean you saw the game unfold just as it did! (Not too fuhking many!) IMO, that means the rest of the games came down to you being a shit handicapper, or bad bounces, or both. I find I am just as successful a capper doing 10% of the work now, that I did 5 years ago. (The smart asses out there will say that is an indictment on my skills, but I say it is about the same for all of us.)

If you handicapped your ass off, and then took an equall amount of games and flipped a coin, I think the results would be very similar year after year. Saying that in a forum such as this, is like going into a church and yelling, "There is no God!"

I think a lot of services fail, or at least have shoddy records, because they are "regressing to the mean". They had a year or two of above average success, go pay, and start the downward part of the cycle. That might be a very parochial way of thinking to some, but I feel that it is quite valid.

Very few people will be in the black when they make their final wager.........

 

[TORONTO-VIGILANTE]

this is a great thread, but i think it should be thrown now in the general discussion.

about me:

1) I suck at NFL, quit after 2 years.....too hard....i'm better for it now. Still like that Patriots dynasty!!!

2) For the first time in three years, i made a +10.00 unit profit in NHL and i quit while i was ahead. I think NHL is getting damned harder to cap....especially when the fawking oddmakers start lowering the totals to 4.5.....that's bullshit, but that's gambling for ya.

3) NBA: this is the first time in 3 years i'm posting a profit in NBA, only because i found a system that seems to be working with totals.

4) Soccer, my first season doin this and I'm up over +14.00 units real profit and above +80.00 units on my leans system after 25 weeks of tweeking the system. This should get better with time.

5) Three seasons in a row now, i've generated a profit (last season, albeit small) in MLB. I think i've found a system in that sport as well, and it will be consistent with every season.
YYZ old friend, can't wait to start the FADE LOS TIGRES THREAD again...!!! Goin for 4 straight profit seasons now at MADJACKS!!!
YAY.

6) NCAA FOOTBALL: this upcoming season i'll be going for 3 straight plus side seasons as well.

7) CFL: only bet on calgary stampeders home unders....

8) AFL: arena....forget it, i coattail

9) NCAA HOOPS: last season, i was down -20.00 units and came back when conference play started and posted a small profit.....this season, i went up to +13.00 units and then when conference play started i hit a bad two week stretch and am down -2.00 units....go figure....i don't know how the hell that happened....????

So i'll tend to agree that in some sports, yes, you won't be able to be consistent on a yearly basis, but i'm proud of the fact that at certain sports i CAN consistently generate some type of profit (MLB, soccer, ncaa football).....AND i have a very good winning percentage.....which was always my goal in the first place, none of this fawking one huge play to get you back on the plus side.
Units mean shit unless you hit your large plays at a high rate....and good luck with that.
Me? I'm a small time player now who's trying to get his win %%%%%% up...
_________________________________________

on another note:

I'm sick of people who claim to be good (and apparently in search of praise) posting and not including a record.

this is my GREATEST pet peeve on some wagering sites.
It's not that hard to keep a record...really, it isn't and who the hell has time to sift through alot of random posters that clutter up the forum....post your record and prove that you belong here.

thanks for the vent.

 

[WHY ASK WHY?]

Have heard all reasons why they are not fixed!!!

Have heard all reasons why they are not fixed!!!

many times over and over!!!


It all comes down to what you want to believe!!!

It's still a somewhat free country,..... isn't it?

WHY?

 

[THE HITMAN]

Scoop, XYZ, Bej, Howie.................................& THE HITMAN

 

[UThinkImCrazy]

what can u do if its fixed ?:walk: u think the feds care ?:talk: they cant handle the truth:nutkick :bsflag but if u ask me :wall: and say:iagree: