SHIRLEY'S TOURNEY LINES FOR ALL TO SEE (AND COMMENTS).

I want to summarize the plays off of the "raw numbers", and the plays of a professional player, and the thought process that he goes through in relation to yesterdays selections.

The Plays by the 4/3 method for Friday were the following:

Duke up to -23 This was no problem as this line was readily available for many many hours before gametime. I did not play this game. No surprise to all of you. It was too risky for me. They won by 45.

Michigan +1.5 (dog play) You had to bet a little early on this one, but if you were really a wagering savant, like my partner, you could have gotten +2 on this game. I played this game, which I'm sure is no surprise, as it was an asterisk game AND the big 10 had a positive adjustment prior to game time, and the SEC had a negative adjustment. This was an easy selection, a dog, a positive variant (conference vs conference adjustment). It was the perfect storm. They won by 30!

Illinois +2.5 I tossed this game out, looking to throw out every game possible, because of tighter lines, my conservatism, and the tournament being its own gorilla. Also, the WAC adjustment vs the Big 10 adjustment, knocked it out, as it was no longer a 3 point dog advantage.

PAY ATTENTION HERE: Since we are constantly updating our stats and rankings, within this dynamic environment, the following occurred:

Michigan won their game by 30! 

My partner made the necessary adjustments. Now Illinois was a play, a dog, underrated, and my type of wager. 

Purdue was winning big. More good news.

My partner extrapolated a hypothetical final score, and this even further raised the value of the Big 10 in this game. Now, it became another almost perfect storm. I played this game, because my partner made all of the appropriate LOGICAL moves, that we can all see right before our eyes. My raw numbers pegged it, but it was thrown out, then added back in. This is the type of adjustments that must be made in the tourney to get an edge using my methods. Even with this jumping through hoops process, I believe the edge is much smaller for the tourney than during regular season conference events. Illinois won by 11.

North Carolina-LIU over 75.5 1H.

I gave all of my subjective reasons for this play up above, and combined with the math, this was no doubt my most confident play of this tourney. I stopped posting totals on this site, but I thought this was a unique situation that I wished to share. Entropy is the key word here.               

THEY SCORED 95 IN THE 1H.

Georgia +5.5,+6 This was a personal subjective selection with an edge as a dog

I have been against Washington and on Georgia for most of the year with generally good performances. We were completely salivating over this game, and were going to make this our 2nd largest play, (next to UNC over 1H). However, catch 22 happened. We won our Michigan wager by 30 points vs Tenn. Well after the adjustment for the SEC, my partner had to knock this game out. When I came home and saw the score, I thought we had played GA, and not ILL, when the opposite was in fact what really happened. Go figure! I DID NOT PLAY THIS GAME.

So, if you bet my raw numbers and suggestions, you would be 4-0 and better than me, yesterday. Combined with day 1 of the tourney this leaves you sitting at a comfortable 10-3. This is better than I could have ever hoped for. Personally, I'm 5-0, with at most 2 to 5 wagers left in tourney for me. I'm too conservative to play favorites in general, so my wagers will be limited. I will also never force a play. What's the point? If I want action, I'll go to the local casino and play a table game with a break even expectation in the long run.

If time permits I will post the Saturday lines.

Shirley

Westi819

Remember, this is NOT the best time of the year to make money with my methods. that time has come and gone, unfortunately.

JetBoy

Thank you for the kind words. I think that looking back on this year and my postings on this site, I hope that I have "assisted" some folks with their decisions in the college BB arena.

I am conservative in nature, or I would be advising people to wager 8% of their bankrolls to maximize wealth. I'm so conservative that I didn't want people rushing to wager on my plays in this tourney, even though I had a tourney history of 58% (now at 60%). I'm not even counting these results in my covers record!  It's not that important, but I will I believe I have gained the respect and confidence of my peers and my somewhat unique approach to wagering.

Fishscale

The age of a female is something that is PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL. However, the next time one of my limbs falls off, I'll count the rings and forward this information to you in an email. I believe it's somewhere between 21 and 99.

Shirley

CuteBrute

SHIRLEY

I am hoping to get my lines up by 11AM EDT.

If you arelooking for a couple of good handicappers on this site, that are here almost on a daily basis:

TRAIN69 and VEGASVANDAL have got it going on. Both are excellent.

Shirley

I have a couple of comments on all of Saturday's games, before posting the lines.

For me, I find this a difficult time of the year to get a significant edge on games. I have stated that the lines are tighter (by about .60 points) than they were earlier in the year. Additionally more games will fall within a smaller window of results (smaller standard deviation by about .60 points), so you are getting squeezed by the tighter lines and the extra value of each possession.  This is an undeniable mathematical fact. I can actually "feel" this when watching games this time of the year, and I know you probably also feel the same way.

If you are wagering on 6 of 8 games, and you think you have an edge, you are a great handicapper, and much better than I am. I have to pull all stops out to hit 59% in this tournament, and really feel uncomfortable making almost any wager, so I am EXTREMELY selective, all the while knowing that the books are very good from here on out.

Can we still win? Of course, but don't think you have an edge wagering on evey game  or 75% of the games. You're just fooling yourself, unless you are really, really, really, really good. Enough said.

Keeping all of the above in mind, and making all of my adjustments for conference vs conference, we come up with the following UNEXCITING numbers:

BC 4.10

Ky 2.60

Fla 5.60

Rich 3.40

Pitt 8.20

Gonzaga 1.30

Wisc 3.20

Uconn 6.40

Cl St 4.40

W Mich 0.70

Hawaii 2.30

There are no games that qualify as wagers, and this is not surprising. Unfortunatley the books numbers and my own seem to be converging. This doesn't bode well for the rest of the tourney using my methods.

If you were to ask me to pick a game, I might say USF. However, I am in no way saying to wager on this game. It just appears to offer more value than any other game.

A possible idea I would suggest is to take advantage of the tighter lines and smaller standard deviation, by making a money line play. If you have a strong opinion on a game, and you like my number, go with the ML. This way you are "capturing the value of the tighter line, in addition to the value of the smaller standard deviation of game results. Best of luck

Shirley

BOOMTWO

My conservative nature may seem like a money management system, but no money management will work unless you have an overall positive expectation (a winning method).

Optimal betting maximizing wealth can be applied, but I am too conservative even to use his application when making picks that other people will follow. So, I never suggest wagering more than 1% of your gambling bankroll on any game. I feel quite comfortable that if you follow this suggestion, along with my selections, your bankroll will grow steadily like a slow turtle.

Shirley

Blue_Chips,

I have no special plays on totals today, sorry.

I left out 1 game by mistake. My apologies.

SDS 6.40 over Temple, another no play for me.

Shirley