Profile | Entries | Thread Author | Posts | Activity |
---|---|---|---|---|
I'm on Purdue and Temple also. Good Luck my man
|
StraightBallin7 | 2 |
|
|
Gotta go Cabrera because he has 3B eligibility. 1B and OF are very deep positions where you can add talent in the middle rounds. On the way back I would personally go with the best SP available and the best hitter available regardless of position. Even if the best hitter remaining is a 3B I would draft him because Miggy can play 1B as well. Don't try to get too cute early. The best player available strategy is usually the best. Even if you are stacked at 1 position it just gives you flexibility and leverage on trades later on. Good Lu
|
Bomboclatt | 2 |
|
|
Pitt is the absolute worst. Can't wait to bet against them in the first round of the tournament. Never seen a lazier team in all my life.
|
8k0 | 27 |
|
|
Good Luck Brother
|
badlands | 81 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by JayBiz:
To add to what Thomas is saying- some of the games might have 4-500 people picking them in the consensus. That's a relatively small sample too when you consider that 20 random people could read a convincing thread on why CoC +17 is a good play- they click the box and in a matter of an hour it goes from 50/50 to 54/46. I agree with this for sure. Unfortunately the only way to really handle this problem is to wait closer to game time to make your play once most people have already made their selection on the game. This might end up hurting us on lines though since we are betting all favorites and will likely get worse lines if we wait. This may be another reason to tweek the system and only bet against the dogs that are 55% and higher since the likelihood of them dropping that significantly is lower than a team that is at 53%. P.S. Nice avatar JayBiz, if thats your girl then you should def hang on to her. |
dynamicwinners | 27 |
|
|
Hey guys, sorry I wasn't able to post yesterday. I wasn't around a computer most of the day. Since I would imagine nobody is tailing this system yet it shouldn't matter but there were 3 picks and they all happened to win, so I guess that is good for the system. Here is the update from the last 2 days. I should be able to update on a daily basis from now on. Day 2 Penn St - 8.5 (53% against) Day 3 Long Beach St -2 (54% against) Oral Roberts -14 (58% against) Beth Cookman -2 (60% against) Updated Record YTD 5-3 +1.7 Units Todays Plays 2 plays so far, will update if there are anymore Louisville -26 (54% against) Dayton -18 (56% against) Good Luck |
dynamicwinners | 27 |
|
|
We now have 1 official play for today Penn State -8.5 (53% against) Good Luck |
dynamicwinners | 27 |
|
|
Day 1 Results 2-2 -.2 units Arizona -9 (56% against) Gonzaga -13 (59% against) St Bonaventure -1.5 (53% against) Louisville -18 (54% against) After day 1 we split our plays going 2-2. Interesting to note that both public dogs that had over 55% consensus ended up going 0-2 while the under 55% went 2-0. We may be on to something here with the over 55% plays but it is still much to soon to make that determination. For today there are no plays that fit the system as of now. If those numbers change I will be back to update later on. |
dynamicwinners | 27 |
|
|
Good Luck Odds
|
oddsbuster | 94 |
|
|
Charleston has now gone to 54% so Louisville -18 becomes an official play. To recap, todays plays are now Arizona -9 (56% against) Gonzaga -13 (59% against) St Bonaventure -1.5 (53% against) Louisville -18 (54% against) Good Luck Everyone |
dynamicwinners | 27 |
|
|
I love the way that Oakland plays. Think they got a shot to be a Cinderella in the tourney for sure. With that said, really like AZ tonight. It's down to -8.5 @ 5dimes. I'm on it. Good Luck Brother
|
dmoore916 | 10 |
|
|
Good Luck today
|
badlands | 47 |
|
|
That's a good point JayBiz. I think what I will do is track the % in groups. Maybe something like 53-55, 56-58, 58 and above. That way we can track which group is most successful and tweak the system after a few weeks.
|
dynamicwinners | 27 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by oddsbuster:
I have a close friend that plays this system. However he only plays against the Public dogs when the spreads are in-between -4 & -10. And a reported 55% consensus is needed by more than just one sight for him to play. By him reducing the system to a bit more disciplined approach helps keep the number of games wagered on to lessor amount and it has seemed to raise his variance on winning as well... Good Info, I think after we try it for a little while we could certainly tweak the system a little to see help give us the best possible results. Arizona -9 fits this tonight... |
dynamicwinners | 27 |
|
|
Good catch Allbees I missed that one. 3rd play for today is Gonzaga -13. |
dynamicwinners | 27 |
|
|
Hey guys, I have decided to try this system out that I have followed over various sports throughout the years. Before you jump all over me I just want to make it clear that this is a TEST RUN for this system and it has not previously been tracked by me for extended periods of time. The system however is quite easy to follow and if it works out it is certainly has a shot at being profitable. How it works: Its actually extremely simple. We all know that betting on dogs is typically the way for most gamblers to suceed long term. However with this system we will do things differently and will only be betting on select favorites that are going against the public. To simplify things even further we will use the Covers consenus percentages to determine our picks. If the covers consensus percentage is 53% or more on an underdog, we will go the opposite way and bet the favorite minus the points. Why 53% you ask? Well because anything below that number is almost a coin flip as far as the amount of people on each side which would not really make the play a true public dog. If we went any higher that 53% we would rarely even have any plays whatsoever which wouldn't really make it a system that could produce a lot of profits. With all that said based on my experience there still are not going to be a ton of plays on a daily basis and some days we may have no plays at all. However over time there will be enough plays that qualify that we could end up making some cash over the lenth of an entire season. Why this COULD work Essentially this system could work for the following reason. You are betting against the public on every game which is usually good, AND you are betting on favorites which means your backing the better team in every situation. So basically you get the better team against the public in every situation. Im not trying to act like I reinvented the wheel hear but as a gambler it seems like a favorable position to be in on a regular basis. So there is the system. Very simple. Feel free to bash me or tell me it won't work. I have no alliance to this system whatsoever but I though it would be something fun to track over time and see if it could produce a favorable result. If you are gonna tail the system then please whine and bitch if it fails because you have been warned multiple times that it hasn't been pretested. As always I recommend that you still cap all the games yourself before wagering any of your hard earned money on any of these teams that most of us no very little about. I will try to post the plays around mid morning every day so that we can get the best lines possible. Today there are 2 plays that qualify. Arizona -9 St Bonaventure -1.5 Also if Charleston moves to 53%, Louisville would qualify as a play as well. I am very interested to see how this plays out. Stay tuned and GL to all. |
dynamicwinners | 27 |
|
|
Oh and if you're not even confident that a team can cover a 6 point spread, how the hell can this possibly be considered a POY for you? Ridiculous
|
jameswashington | 78 |
|
|
If SDSU is "easily winning this game" why not just lay the 6 points and get -110 juice instead of -200 on the ML. If a team is going to win a game easily, you figure they can at least win by a touchdown. Right?
|
jameswashington | 78 |
|
|
GL Bad |
badlands | 38 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by CalifDreamin:
5dimes is totally legit. This guy just losg his ass playing poker and now wants to lie so he can get his money back and theyre not buying it. I wouldnt even be surprised if he doctored the chat log here as well. You rarely get the full truth when people post stories like this. Sorry op but I doubt tony at 5dimes just all of a sudden decided he needed to steal your $400. Get real Agree.... some people just aren't built for gambling. They lose more then they can afford and throw tantrums like children and blame everyone but themselves. If you want to play poker go to a casino. Online poker is a joke and anyone that risks any money playing it deserves to lose. 5dimes couldn't care less about your $450. They make millions every year from idiots that have no ability to handicap games, self control or money management skills. Sorry man, I feel your pain on losing money and I do agree that 5dimes customer service reps are below average at best but take a few deep breaths and regroup before you go on some tirade blasting one of the few good online books that is left out there. Clearly you had a tough night, lost your money and now are trying to get a free refund. It happens to the best of us. Take a few days off and you will feel much better. |
Geo21 | 47 |
|
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.