Shirl, do you have any lines for the west coast games tonight.
Yes, of course I do.
However, they are not worth playing in my opinion. The games and the lines I quoted on page 1 are the only ones you should consider wagering on tonight. The "delta" is just too small on the other games to risk your money.
Shirley
0
Quote Originally Posted by SonnySixKill:
Shirl, do you have any lines for the west coast games tonight.
Yes, of course I do.
However, they are not worth playing in my opinion. The games and the lines I quoted on page 1 are the only ones you should consider wagering on tonight. The "delta" is just too small on the other games to risk your money.
Nothing jumps out at me. I have Mass., St. Joes, and Northwestern 1H in a big parlay with St. Johns, Purdue, Xavier, NC State, and Marquette but that's about it. I may take a look at Duke later on. I am a Duke fan though so I try not to play them. But if I have a big day, I may just have to so that the game is even more fun to watch.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Kings55dez:
No plays for the 3:30 & 4:00 games Zoopdog?>?
Nothing jumps out at me. I have Mass., St. Joes, and Northwestern 1H in a big parlay with St. Johns, Purdue, Xavier, NC State, and Marquette but that's about it. I may take a look at Duke later on. I am a Duke fan though so I try not to play them. But if I have a big day, I may just have to so that the game is even more fun to watch.
Thank You so much Shirley for putting so much time and effort into what u do. We appreciate it. To all the bashers and negative people..... may u have continuous bad luck and lose everything u own or haven't finished paying for!!!
0
Thank You so much Shirley for putting so much time and effort into what u do. We appreciate it. To all the bashers and negative people..... may u have continuous bad luck and lose everything u own or haven't finished paying for!!!
Not that I really care...but the posters stated yesterday that their totals have been subpar.
" We still believe the best wagers are with totals. It's a connundrum why we are having so much difficulty this year with them, because mathematically speaking, if you are able to predict the difference of 2 variables (the spread) with a relatively high accuracy, then you should be able to predict the sum of the same 2 variables (the total) with a similar high accuracy. There is a correlation between these predicted variables, but this year we are stumbling along at 54% (on totals) with over 700 wagers made.Our "dead time" theory plays are still hitting close to 68%, but there just aren't enough of those plays per week. We were lucky to have one on Thursday, but the problem is that they get jumped on by the sharps, and in 1/2 hour, your edge has disappeared. If my college BB partner is not betting at an offshore book at 9:30 AM EST, he will have missed the boat. You know what I'm talking about. Others have the expertise to identify these plays as well. Three (3) games satisfy my "dead time" theory today. If you have an extra few minutes one day, reread that posting, it makes you think about how it's possible for the linesmakers to make a "slight" error in calculating their projected total for a game.
Thanks for paying attention Jmon. FYI and everyone elses our totals wagers this year (college only) are 420 - 349. 54.61%. If you read the above, you will realize our frustration in this area, thjis year.
Every year, for the previous 7 years we won at a rate averaging nearly 10 percentage points higher than this year, with 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 season well above the 7 year average.
This year our "dead time theory" plays are 47-22. Unfortunately this is a subset of the overall picture, and without these plays we would be sitting at 53.2%, pathetic by our lofty history and expectations.
Again, please reread the above posting to try to understand the predictive variables, though highly correlated, seem not to not be acting in a manner which would examplify a highly correlation. Frustration is the key word for our totals this year, although we are making a small profit, it's notthing near what we are used to. Thankfully our sides are doing what we have gone to expect from the totals. Go figure!
Thanks for bringing attention to this statement, and pointing this out.
Shirley
0
Quote Originally Posted by JMon:
Not that I really care...but the posters stated yesterday that their totals have been subpar.
" We still believe the best wagers are with totals. It's a connundrum why we are having so much difficulty this year with them, because mathematically speaking, if you are able to predict the difference of 2 variables (the spread) with a relatively high accuracy, then you should be able to predict the sum of the same 2 variables (the total) with a similar high accuracy. There is a correlation between these predicted variables, but this year we are stumbling along at 54% (on totals) with over 700 wagers made.Our "dead time" theory plays are still hitting close to 68%, but there just aren't enough of those plays per week. We were lucky to have one on Thursday, but the problem is that they get jumped on by the sharps, and in 1/2 hour, your edge has disappeared. If my college BB partner is not betting at an offshore book at 9:30 AM EST, he will have missed the boat. You know what I'm talking about. Others have the expertise to identify these plays as well. Three (3) games satisfy my "dead time" theory today. If you have an extra few minutes one day, reread that posting, it makes you think about how it's possible for the linesmakers to make a "slight" error in calculating their projected total for a game.
Thanks for paying attention Jmon. FYI and everyone elses our totals wagers this year (college only) are 420 - 349. 54.61%. If you read the above, you will realize our frustration in this area, thjis year.
Every year, for the previous 7 years we won at a rate averaging nearly 10 percentage points higher than this year, with 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 season well above the 7 year average.
This year our "dead time theory" plays are 47-22. Unfortunately this is a subset of the overall picture, and without these plays we would be sitting at 53.2%, pathetic by our lofty history and expectations.
Again, please reread the above posting to try to understand the predictive variables, though highly correlated, seem not to not be acting in a manner which would examplify a highly correlation. Frustration is the key word for our totals this year, although we are making a small profit, it's notthing near what we are used to. Thankfully our sides are doing what we have gone to expect from the totals. Go figure!
Thanks for bringing attention to this statement, and pointing this out.
Thanks for all that you do Shirley. Don't worry about the haters. Curious to see what your line is for the Iowa/Minn game? Iowa was a one point favorite earlier and has shifted to a two point dog. Thanks again!!
0
Thanks for all that you do Shirley. Don't worry about the haters. Curious to see what your line is for the Iowa/Minn game? Iowa was a one point favorite earlier and has shifted to a two point dog. Thanks again!!
Look Sparty, I' m not here to teach you math. Assumme I am a 40% handicapper, and apply the binomial distributution for events yielding a superior result.
My numbers are correct. Your assumption is for a 50% handicapper, and for only 20, not 21 games. You're in over your head a bit here, but if you read my arguement, you get the idea.
I see that Purdue covered as well It is my pleasure to add $ to your bank accout so far today, Sparty.
Gotta run
Shirley
0
Quote Originally Posted by sparty444:
I have to win 20 straight games at 1 in 1,048,576
Where are you getting this 1 in 7 million stuff?
Look Sparty, I' m not here to teach you math. Assumme I am a 40% handicapper, and apply the binomial distributution for events yielding a superior result.
My numbers are correct. Your assumption is for a 50% handicapper, and for only 20, not 21 games. You're in over your head a bit here, but if you read my arguement, you get the idea.
I see that Purdue covered as well It is my pleasure to add $ to your bank accout so far today, Sparty.
Problem has nothing to do with your capping... it has to do with the constant distortion of the truth.
You cannot claim to be math person and then say that this 19-2 run is a 1 in 7 million phenomenon.... thats just pure wreckless nonsense
SPARTY44 DUDE..YOU HAVE ALMOST 7000 POSTS..WHAT'S WITH THIS OBSESSION.?.GET OVER IT
YOU SOUND ALMOST AS HYSTERICAL AS YOUR AVATAR HAS LOOKED ON THE COURT LATELY
IF YOU WANT TO GET UP SOMEONE'S ASS..HOW ABOUT YOUR UNDERACHIEVING MICHIGAN ST TEAM THAT I WAS STUPID ENOUGH TO PICK AS ONE OF MY PRESEASON NCAA 2011 CHAMPS..
WHETHER SHIRLEY IS ON A LUCKY STREAK OR ON TO SOMETHING GOOD..WHAT'S IT TO YOU.."WATER WILL FIND IT'S LEVEL"..IT ALWAYS DOES
CONTINUED SUCCESS SHIRLEY
0
Quote Originally Posted by sparty444:
Problem has nothing to do with your capping... it has to do with the constant distortion of the truth.
You cannot claim to be math person and then say that this 19-2 run is a 1 in 7 million phenomenon.... thats just pure wreckless nonsense
SPARTY44 DUDE..YOU HAVE ALMOST 7000 POSTS..WHAT'S WITH THIS OBSESSION.?.GET OVER IT
YOU SOUND ALMOST AS HYSTERICAL AS YOUR AVATAR HAS LOOKED ON THE COURT LATELY
IF YOU WANT TO GET UP SOMEONE'S ASS..HOW ABOUT YOUR UNDERACHIEVING MICHIGAN ST TEAM THAT I WAS STUPID ENOUGH TO PICK AS ONE OF MY PRESEASON NCAA 2011 CHAMPS..
WHETHER SHIRLEY IS ON A LUCKY STREAK OR ON TO SOMETHING GOOD..WHAT'S IT TO YOU.."WATER WILL FIND IT'S LEVEL"..IT ALWAYS DOES
Shirley as long as you are posting winners sparty444 will continue to cloud your thread with negativity. If you read the threads of other winners you will find sparty444 in their threads with the same ole BS daily. He can't help himself, he gets off by aggravating others.
0
Shirley as long as you are posting winners sparty444 will continue to cloud your thread with negativity. If you read the threads of other winners you will find sparty444 in their threads with the same ole BS daily. He can't help himself, he gets off by aggravating others.
Look Sparty, I' m not here to teach you math. Assumme I am a 40% handicapper, and apply the binomial distributution for events yielding a superior result.
My numbers are correct. Your assumption is for a 50% handicapper, and for only 20, not 21 games. You're in over your head a bit here, but if you read my arguement, you get the idea.
I see that Purdue covered as well It is my pleasure to add $ to your bank accout so far today, Sparty.
Gotta run
Shirley
C'Mon, Shirley....Sparty faded the Purdue play....he lost on the over-rated Illini....
0
Quote Originally Posted by shirley-jester:
Look Sparty, I' m not here to teach you math. Assumme I am a 40% handicapper, and apply the binomial distributution for events yielding a superior result.
My numbers are correct. Your assumption is for a 50% handicapper, and for only 20, not 21 games. You're in over your head a bit here, but if you read my arguement, you get the idea.
I see that Purdue covered as well It is my pleasure to add $ to your bank accout so far today, Sparty.
Gotta run
Shirley
C'Mon, Shirley....Sparty faded the Purdue play....he lost on the over-rated Illini....
Thanks for all that you do Shirley. Don't worry about the haters. Curious to see what your line is for the Iowa/Minn game? Iowa was a one point favorite earlier and has shifted to a two point dog. Thanks again!!
MY line is Minn 1.80
Stay away from this game. There is no "advantage" betting on this game, unless you have really low juice, -101 +100.
Shirley
0
Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye1027:
Thanks for all that you do Shirley. Don't worry about the haters. Curious to see what your line is for the Iowa/Minn game? Iowa was a one point favorite earlier and has shifted to a two point dog. Thanks again!!
MY line is Minn 1.80
Stay away from this game. There is no "advantage" betting on this game, unless you have really low juice, -101 +100.
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.
It is my pleasure to add $ to your bank accout so far today, Sparty.
.you are beginning to appear STALKER-LIKE....take a deep breath, count to 10 (if you can) and move on with your day.....
Hot Forum Topics
