Posted:
#276
What does Jimmy do for a living? Just curious? Looks like there's gonna be cock to be sucked in the parking lot this weekend to make for the rent. 
0
Freak Pics!!! (Week 4)
Posted:
#277
Quote Originally Posted by eddothebook:
What does Jimmy do for a living? Just curious? Looks like there's gonna be cock to be sucked in the parking lot this weekend to make for the rent.
What does Jimmy do for a living? Just curious? Looks like there's gonna be cock to be sucked in the parking lot this weekend to make for the rent.
Coming from the guy that went 0-5 sat and 1-6 overall!!!!
Plus, you have already said that you didn't tail him(even though I'd bet that you did) and yet you want to bash someone over picks you weren't even following, but was dumb enough to admit you had made some of the same ones????
And YOU are talking shit? Seriously bro, get a fuckin life.
0
Posted:
#278
Quote Originally Posted by SqueaksUofA:
Coming from the guy that went 0-5 sat and 1-6 overall!!!!
Plus, you have already said that you didn't tail him(even though I'd bet that you did) and yet you want to bash someone over picks you weren't even following, but was dumb enough to admit you had made some of the same ones????
And YOU are talking shit? Seriously bro, get a fuckin life.
The only difference is I have a JOB. A well paying one too. I understand what gambling is. It's fun, it's a drug, a rush. I have income coming to me every week no matter how the games turn out. And the difference between zero and the big win is greater than the difference between zero and losing. The highs are worth the lows.
Unlike this douche, I don't come in here touting plays as if they were God sent and that Vegas was giving money away.
I'm still waiting for Jimmy (or one of his throat-deeps) to tell me what he does for a living. And by God if the answer is sports handicapping, I will launch into orbit laughing.
0
Posted:
#281
Quote Originally Posted by eddothebook:
The only difference is I have a JOB. A well paying one too. I understand what gambling is. It's fun, it's a drug, a rush. I have income coming to me every week no matter how the games turn out. And the difference between zero and the big win is greater than the difference between zero and losing. The highs are worth the lows.
Unlike this douche, I don't come in here touting plays as if they were God sent and that Vegas was giving money away.
I'm still waiting for Jimmy (or one of his throat-deeps) to tell me what he does for a living. And by God if the answer is sports handicapping, I will launch into orbit laughing.
The only difference is I have a JOB. A well paying one too. I understand what gambling is. It's fun, it's a drug, a rush. I have income coming to me every week no matter how the games turn out. And the difference between zero and the big win is greater than the difference between zero and losing. The highs are worth the lows.
Unlike this douche, I don't come in here touting plays as if they were God sent and that Vegas was giving money away.
I'm still waiting for Jimmy (or one of his throat-deeps) to tell me what he does for a living. And by God if the answer is sports handicapping, I will launch into orbit laughing.
Your job wouldn't be cock sucking in the parking lot would it? Seems it fits your description with all that regular weekly income and all.
0
Posted:
#282
Not only are the bashers sorry bastards but anyone who can't see how college ball is played doesn't understand what they are betting on.... LSU doesn't smash Auburn, Wash St loses SU to the worst team in CFB, Arky loses again to a very beatable Rutgers, UCLA... On and on.. The aforementioned teams were the "right" side, but it didn't play out that way. If you bet within your bankroll, you are still alive and well. If you played more than you normally do hoping to cash in big, well shame on you!!
Anyway, thanks for your efforts Jiimmy, win or lose I enjoy and respect your input!!! 
0
Posted:
#284
Quote Originally Posted by damonte:
Let's all move on. But can believe we all agree that this can be a very humbling business.
Let's all move on. But can believe we all agree that this can be a very humbling business.
AGREE
totally with this!!
Jimmy look forward to seeing week 5
Im actually taking the 5th week off heading to disney world with the family so F*** gambling this week good luck!!!
0
Posted:
#286
JIMMY IGNORE THE HATERS
FIRST WEEK CHASING YOU AND I LOST. IT WAS MY DECISION!!!
Just a thought. I see a lot of your picks triple whammy one game, like washington first half, washington over on score, washington game, etc.
Isnt it better to just whack one part of that, which probably has the highest chance of winning since we are paying a percentage for every bet.
BTW i love how you have your best bet. Good stuff
0
Posted:
#287
Give the BAMMER fan A break!! Bammers are ignorant about sports!! They claim twice as many Championships as they really have!!! Bammers claim National titles when the finish third in there own conference and ranked 20th in the country!! COME ON MAN!!! You expect those types to know sports??? GEEZ!!!
0
Posted:
#288
Quote Originally Posted by eddothebook:
What does Jimmy do for a living? Just curious? Looks like there's gonna be cock to be sucked in the parking lot this weekend to make for the rent.
...Guess what?Its none of your fucking business what he does for a living..who gives a fuck?Oh,if he s a doctor Im suppost to respect his picks more..eddothebook,go get your shoeshine box..aint none of ur business if he snorts a nickle a day and bets a dime a game...or coaches tball.or fucking 2 diff chics a night...The guy picks WINNERS..why dont u put 1000 on his reg bets and 2000 max bets and I promise u could buy a new car with the profit..just bc u cant pick ur nose u dont have to be a total prick bc u tailed his picks and lost..and FYI,Jimmy is such a NON DEGENERATE he doesnt even bet Pro Football or baskets which is a shame bc he knows his shz..Do I think he is one of best cappers Ive ever seen?not by a longshot,but if u want winners college football sides and total u are gonna win more than u lose.He is a lil confident about the school that claims National Titles from Golf Magazine..btw 2004 Auburn 24 2oo9 bama 14 ...2010 Auburn 24 2011 bammers 18.IF THEY PLAYED..He is lil cocky all but the guy wants everybody to win..except prob u bc bookie is prob beating on ur door if u lose tonight.Why do u have to be a hater..this country feeds off confident ppl..Its ppl like u that pout and get left behind.If u dont like the guy get off the court man..go take a xanax and chill..ur posts stress me out...this a forum where we share ideas so we can beat the book and smoke cigars aft victories...fyi,if u can get into Troy & Jacksonville st u can go to Bama..Auburn,hell we hanging out w Vandy & GaTech academically....colledgeWhat does Jimmy do for a living? Just curious? Looks like there's gonna be cock to be sucked in the parking lot this weekend to make for the rent.
0
Posted:
#289
As I said in my opening post, going 11 & 0 on "Best
Bets" is pace that is not sustainable long-term. In gambling you always
have to able to make peace with the worst possible outcome, and
Saturday was one of those times.
I entered the weekend pretty hot going 3 & 0 (5 & 0 if I count my two 2nd half bets) on my weekday plays, but once toe met football on Saturday, those winnings quickly evaporated. I actually would have had a winning day Saturday if I could have gotten one more touchdown out of that Maryland/West Virginia game. Of all the games on Saturday, that one hurt the worst.
I post plays on 2 websites, and somehow I left off the Central Michigan +14.5 on this one. Anyhow, with Central Michigan winning straight up, and the Ole Miss 1st half under hitting, I only needed three 2nd half TDs in the Maryland/West Virginia game to cover the over 58.5 I had in a 3-teamer. Unfortunately it was not be.
Ok, so here we go with the weekly addition of "Monday Morning Quarterback" where I look back and grade the bets that didn't cash.
As always, intelligent comments and discussion are welcome and encouraged.
I entered the weekend pretty hot going 3 & 0 (5 & 0 if I count my two 2nd half bets) on my weekday plays, but once toe met football on Saturday, those winnings quickly evaporated. I actually would have had a winning day Saturday if I could have gotten one more touchdown out of that Maryland/West Virginia game. Of all the games on Saturday, that one hurt the worst.
I post plays on 2 websites, and somehow I left off the Central Michigan +14.5 on this one. Anyhow, with Central Michigan winning straight up, and the Ole Miss 1st half under hitting, I only needed three 2nd half TDs in the Maryland/West Virginia game to cover the over 58.5 I had in a 3-teamer. Unfortunately it was not be.
Ok, so here we go with the weekly addition of "Monday Morning Quarterback" where I look back and grade the bets that didn't cash.
As always, intelligent comments and discussion are welcome and encouraged.
0
Posted:
#290
Maryland @ West Virginia OVER
I haven't had a chance to watch this game, but I felt very good about my bet when the teams combined for 38 1st half points. As carefully as I monitored the weather reports leading up to the game, some people are telling me that wind and rain may have been a factor in keeping the 2nd half scoring down. May be somebody can fill me in.
Overall, based on the data I had to work with prior to kickoff, I actually think this was a very solid bet, and one that I would probably make again. I thought Maryland would score in the 20s, which they did, but that wasn't enough to take this game over the number like I thought it would be. West Virginia's scoring, however, fell well short of the expected 45-55 point production. One factor that I probably underestimated coming into the game was Randy Edsall's ball-control philosophy.
One thing I did well on this game was staying away from laying the 25 points. While I thought West Virginia would probably cover, ultimately I felt over the total and team total were the better bets, and I still think that today.
Grade for this Play: B
0
Posted:
#291
Miami @ Georgia Tech
I knew Georgia Tech was entering the game having lost 3 straight to the Hurricanes, but I felt like being at home with triple revenge facing a depleted Miami defense was an ideal spot to back the Yellow Jackets.
Things were looking pretty good for a Georgia Tech cover as they took a 14-point lead into the 4th quarter, and the 4th quarter is usually where options teams do the most of their damage. But it wasn't to be. Not only did Georgia Tech manage to piss away the cover, they also managed to piss away the game entirely.
I absolutely hate betting on Georgia Tech because they are so schizophrenic. You never know what to expect from this team from week-to-week, and I'm 0 & 2 betting on them already this season. Every year I tell myself never again, but just like a bad car crash, I just can't look the other way. So even had this bet won, I give myself a resounding F just for having Georgia Tech on my card.
Grade for this Play: F
0
Posted:
#292
Colorado @ Washington State
Successful betting is often times is having the ability to be slightly ahead of the curve. Much like the Georgia Tech play, I thought the timing was right to bet on Wazzu. Mike Leach wants a blowout so bad he can taste it, and what better time to put on a show for the home crowd than with a directionless Colorado team coming to town???
That's all well and good, but the problem with this theory is that the odds makers already factored all of this into the line, so I wasn't ahead of the curve, I was behind it.
This is another game that looked for for three quarters like it may cash, that is until Mike Leach's team pulled a Georgia Tech in the 4th quarter.
Overall I don't have a huge problem with the play itself. My problem was with making this a "Best Bet," which it clearly wasn't. The problem here was that I decided this would be a "Best Bet" early on (before the halftime lines came out), and just never got off of it.
Initially I wanted to play Alabama for the 1st half, but changed my mind when I saw -32 instead of the expected -25. That made me flip my play to UNDER 35 (1st Half), and that was a play that was truly worthy of "Best Bet" status. I really liked that play a lot, and actually hit it pretty hard before I walked into the stadium. For granting Wazzu the coveted "Best Bet" status over the 1st half under in the Alabama game, I give myself a D for this play.
Grade for this Play: D
Successful betting is often times is having the ability to be slightly ahead of the curve. Much like the Georgia Tech play, I thought the timing was right to bet on Wazzu. Mike Leach wants a blowout so bad he can taste it, and what better time to put on a show for the home crowd than with a directionless Colorado team coming to town???
That's all well and good, but the problem with this theory is that the odds makers already factored all of this into the line, so I wasn't ahead of the curve, I was behind it.
This is another game that looked for for three quarters like it may cash, that is until Mike Leach's team pulled a Georgia Tech in the 4th quarter.
Overall I don't have a huge problem with the play itself. My problem was with making this a "Best Bet," which it clearly wasn't. The problem here was that I decided this would be a "Best Bet" early on (before the halftime lines came out), and just never got off of it.
Initially I wanted to play Alabama for the 1st half, but changed my mind when I saw -32 instead of the expected -25. That made me flip my play to UNDER 35 (1st Half), and that was a play that was truly worthy of "Best Bet" status. I really liked that play a lot, and actually hit it pretty hard before I walked into the stadium. For granting Wazzu the coveted "Best Bet" status over the 1st half under in the Alabama game, I give myself a D for this play.
Grade for this Play: D
0
Posted:
#293
Fresno @ Tulsa
What took this bet down was to pick 6s by Fresno. But I really can't use that as an excuse completely, because Tulsa's QB Cody Green was a dismal 13 for 37 on the night for 202 yards, with 1 TD and 3 interceptions. That tells me Fresno played pretty good defense, and laying 6.5 with Tulsa was simply the wrong side. Not a terrible play, but clearly not the right side.
Grade for this Play: C
0
Posted:
#295
Quote Originally Posted by jackson6:
JIMMY IGNORE THE HATERS
JIMMY IGNORE THE HATERS
FIRST WEEK CHASING YOU AND I LOST. IT WAS MY DECISION!!!
Just a thought. I see a lot of your picks triple whammy one game, like washington first half, washington over on score, washington game, etc.
Isnt it better to just whack one part of that, which probably has the highest chance of winning since we are paying a percentage for every bet.
BTW i love how you have your best bet. Good stuff
I agree with you here, I think that when you make 3 plays out of one game it can be really bad or really good. I still appreciate the fact that Jimmy has this out there for us to choose from. It is up to each individual to decide what he is comfortable with and make that play.
For me when I saw Auburn TT at 14.5 I jumped all over that and didn't care for LSU -20.5.
0
Posted:
#296
LSU @ Auburn
There is so much I can say about this game. First of all I capped half of this game correctly. I knew that Auburn's offense versus LSU defense was a huge mismatch in favor of LSU, and that is exactly how it played out. Auburn's touchdown came on a short field following Mettenberger's second critical fumble of the 1st half.
With Auburn's offense sufficiently neutered, all LSU really had to do to cover was play a clean game and score about 4 touchdowns. They did neither.
The first of Mettenberger's fumbles cost LSU 5 points, and the second gift-wrapped 7 for Auburn. Had it not been for these two costly fumbles, LSU probably goes into the half leading 14-3, instead of losing 10-9. If LSU could have forced Auburn to play with a two touchdown deficit the whole 2nd half, I think this game likely would have played out much differently. Instead LSU kept Auburn in the game which gave Auburn and the crowd confidence, and made Les Miles play even more conservatively than usual.
I said in the first post in this thread that it is usually not wise to to lay this kind of road chalk in the SEC especially when the visiting team's QB is making the first career SEC start.
I was right about Auburn's scoring output, but was wrong about my belief that LSU would score at least in the 30s. There are several reasons that didn't happen. One was that Auburn's defensive line finally played the way most pundits thought they would heading in to the season. Another was Mettenberger's lack of athletic ability. I've been calling him the Pillsbury Throw Boy all summer, and he showed why in this game. He is virtually incapable of making a play if flushed from the pocket, which makes me wonder why LSU's offensive coordinator Greg Studrawa kept rolling him out so much.
Again, my biggest problem with this play is designating this a "Best Bet." Designating the Auburn TT under 14as a fantastic play, and definitely worthy of "Best Bet" status. But laying 20 points of SEC road chalk with a green QB with a team that historically has problems covering big spreads was a bad play.
For essentially getting half of this play right, I won't be too hard on myself. I'll grade this one a C-.
Grade for this Play: C-
0
Posted:
#297
Arizona @ Oregon OVER
I absolutely hate playing over huge totals like we had in this game, which is why I virtually never do it. I have people asking all the time what I think about playing over in games that have 70+ numbers, and I pretty much always recommend staying away. Personally I can't ever recall hitting one of these bets, and Saturday night was no different. For completely eschewing my basic betting principles, I have no choice but to grade this play a failure.
Grade for this Play: F
0
Posted:
#300
Quote Originally Posted by jimmydafreak:
LSU @ Auburn
There is so much I can say about this game. First of all I capped half of this game correctly. I knew that Auburn's offense versus LSU defense was a huge mismatch in favor of LSU, and that is exactly how it played out. Auburn's touchdown came on a short field following Mettenberger's second critical fumble of the 1st half.
With Auburn's offense sufficiently neutered, all LSU really had to do to cover was play a clean game and score about 4 touchdowns. They did neither.
The first of Mettenberger's fumbles cost LSU 5 points, and the second gift-wrapped 7 for Auburn. Had it not been for these two costly fumbles, LSU probably goes into the half leading 14-3, instead of losing 10-9. If LSU could have forced Auburn to play with a two touchdown deficit the whole 2nd half, I think this game likely would have played out much differently. Instead LSU kept Auburn in the game which gave Auburn and the crowd confidence, and made Les Miles play even more conservatively than usual.
I said in the first post in this thread that it is usually not wise to to lay this kind of road chalk in the SEC especially when the visiting team's QB is making the first career SEC start.
I was right about Auburn's scoring output, but was wrong about my belief that LSU would score at least in the 30s. There are several reasons that didn't happen. One was that Auburn's defensive line finally played the way most pundits thought they would heading in to the season. Another was Mettenberger's lack of athletic ability. I've been calling him the Pillsbury Throw Boy all summer, and he showed why in this game. He is virtually incapable of making a play if flushed from the pocket, which makes me wonder why LSU's offensive coordinator Greg Studrawa kept rolling him out so much.
Again, my biggest problem with this play is designating this a "Best Bet." Designating the Auburn TT under 14as a fantastic play, and definitely worthy of "Best Bet" status. But laying 20 points of SEC road chalk with a green QB with a team that historically has problems covering big spreads was a bad play.
For essentially getting half of this play right, I won't be too hard on myself. I'll grade this one a C-.
Grade for this Play: C-
LSU @ Auburn
There is so much I can say about this game. First of all I capped half of this game correctly. I knew that Auburn's offense versus LSU defense was a huge mismatch in favor of LSU, and that is exactly how it played out. Auburn's touchdown came on a short field following Mettenberger's second critical fumble of the 1st half.
With Auburn's offense sufficiently neutered, all LSU really had to do to cover was play a clean game and score about 4 touchdowns. They did neither.
The first of Mettenberger's fumbles cost LSU 5 points, and the second gift-wrapped 7 for Auburn. Had it not been for these two costly fumbles, LSU probably goes into the half leading 14-3, instead of losing 10-9. If LSU could have forced Auburn to play with a two touchdown deficit the whole 2nd half, I think this game likely would have played out much differently. Instead LSU kept Auburn in the game which gave Auburn and the crowd confidence, and made Les Miles play even more conservatively than usual.
I said in the first post in this thread that it is usually not wise to to lay this kind of road chalk in the SEC especially when the visiting team's QB is making the first career SEC start.
I was right about Auburn's scoring output, but was wrong about my belief that LSU would score at least in the 30s. There are several reasons that didn't happen. One was that Auburn's defensive line finally played the way most pundits thought they would heading in to the season. Another was Mettenberger's lack of athletic ability. I've been calling him the Pillsbury Throw Boy all summer, and he showed why in this game. He is virtually incapable of making a play if flushed from the pocket, which makes me wonder why LSU's offensive coordinator Greg Studrawa kept rolling him out so much.
Again, my biggest problem with this play is designating this a "Best Bet." Designating the Auburn TT under 14as a fantastic play, and definitely worthy of "Best Bet" status. But laying 20 points of SEC road chalk with a green QB with a team that historically has problems covering big spreads was a bad play.
For essentially getting half of this play right, I won't be too hard on myself. I'll grade this one a C-.
Grade for this Play: C-
I'm looking forward to their meeting with ' Bama.
Helping Kama'aina to beat their " Local " since 1994.
0
Hot Forum Topics
