All Forums | MLB Betting Forum

Friday Manipulated Games System

Participants:
Search
Views: 4997
Posts: 110
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #76
Quote Originally Posted by VincentVega349:

sabotage? im asking you guys what you did, thats all. But nobody especially 1515, i mean Jags wants to say, its just wait til later so you can cherry pick the winners

I'll give the plays and then wait until you invent a reason to put everything down. You sound so innocent, lol! But you always look for the negative and try to hammer it as long as possible. I found you in my thesaurus under antonyms for "productive."
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #77
If you seriously think you're not trying to sabotage the thread, and all those times where even the mod was chiding your condescension, if you're really that blind, then I think I actually feel sorry for you, because there's no way you function in normal society. I think the big word is "solipsism." ;)
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2017
Posts: 740
Posted: #78
no 1515 ive only asked what others did.....what did YOU guys play??? real easy the next morning saying this or that didnt qualify, like the blue jays now that they are getting pounded. See what I mean? But if you say Mets and Twins were your plays and his or mickey mouses then fine, those are your two plays. 

And no jags for the last time, i dont care abt sabotaging anything. My words will never prevent someone from doing or not doing something. Clarity, that was all. And so far its just been well here are 4 plays but we wont tell anyone what we did or what shoulda been bet. 

But whatever...im the ahole, i know. Youre the man 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #79
" And so far its just been well here are 4 plays but we wont tell anyone what we did or what shoulda been bet. "

Wrong. Twins were an early lock-in. And I just got hold of him and found out that Mets were a play as well." 

So yeah, you are. Glad you realize it by now. But nope, you'll continue to say wrong things as long as it expresses condescension. You're the man.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2017
Posts: 740
Posted: #80
well we can agree on one thing, and that is we dont agree. You have your thinking of me and i have mine of you and your guys. hope you guys at least get a split from the night. GL
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #81
You could have just looked at the closing number, but for you it was worth the effort to make us out to be cheats and liars. And that's why you're sick according to my medical expertise. Btw, I confirmed Mets were a play when they were down 6-0.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #82
This is not my way of thinking. This is my buddy's system. But i'm glad you're rotating into your respectful mode. I can't wait to see how many minutes it'll last. Good luck to you too, sir, and i'm sure i'll see you in another thread putting some poor user down. Geez, I even have to dumb my vocabulary down lest you deride me for that as well. lol
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2017
Posts: 740
Posted: #83
see, now whos being mean and condescending and hurtful. 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #84
Aww i'm sorry, did I hurt the bully's feelings, by telling him how mean he always is?   

You really do have two personalities lol?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2008
Posts: 2332
Posted: #85
Is OAK a play at +110? I assume yes.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #86
As if now no.  They've gotta be 114. They're 118
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #87
So just Twins and Mets tonight
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2017
Posts: 10646
Posted: #88
Bro, doesn't it seem shady? Have you seen this guys colossal write ups that have been losers? He chalks up his fair share of losses with no discrepency.. I think you're missing the entirety of this system and mistaking it for him wanting to build a record. I think it's fair to say by now he has proved that's not what he is here to do. The way I see it, if it isn't a system
Play which is clearly defined in the first page, it is called a lean, no? And I think the point of this is to help people make money, not pad numbers... by the way thanks for the help on the twins pick. Jesus man. Give the keyboard a breather
No team is as good as it looks when winning nor are they as bad as they look when losing
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #89
Wtf do my articles have to do with it? As i've explained, I have to choose which plays I will cover on Sunday and then I try to give as much info about the game with a logical opinion. I'm so sick of people putting me down for the length of my articles. As if I were using the length to bait people into following a loser. I never claim to give guaranteed winners, only solid information (which is why the write-ups are so long: they include both pros and cons for the pick and if the pick loses, the reasons for it losing will already be in the article--that's how deep my info and detail is) about the game and a pick that's worth standing by, and I don't ask money for it. I owe you nothing and if you don't like my picks, then you will learn a lot about the game by reading my info. Like the one guy who restated my point about Bridwell being due for regression and it turned out he was due last night. But you can see my documented history with my articles and it's a good record overall. Follow me every time I post or be quiet about it. Don't cherry pick my losers. So is Key shady too because he loses? Yeah I was off yesterday, but I also gave Rays yesterday, too, which was a big underdog winner.  And what, do you win 100% of the time? Basically nobody wins more than 55% of the time, so we all have our fair share of losses. 

You can backtrack the system to see it's long-term success. This is not my system nor did I ever claim it was. People can make money if they just make the effort to do some line-watching.


 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2017
Posts: 10646
Posted: #90
Quote Originally Posted by ProudJagsfan:

Wtf do my articles have to do with it? As i've explained, I have to choose which plays I will cover on Sunday and then I try to give as much info about the game with a logical opinion. I'm so sick of people putting me down for the length of my articles. As if I were using the length to bait people into following a loser. I never claim to give guaranteed winners, only solid information (which is why the write-ups are so long: they include both pros and cons for the pick and if the pick loses, the reasons for it losing will already be in the article--that's how deep my info and detail is) about the game and a pick that's worth standing by, and I don't ask money for it. I owe you nothing and if you don't like my picks, then you will learn a lot about the game by reading my info. Like the one guy who restated my point about Bridwell being due for regression and it turned out he was due last night. But you can see my documented history with my articles and it's a good record overall. Follow me every time I post or be quiet about it. Don't cherry pick my losers. So is Key shady too because he loses? Yeah I was off yesterday, but I also gave Rays yesterday, too, which was a big underdog winner.  And what, do you win 100% of the time? Basically nobody wins more than 55% of the time, so we all have our fair share of losses. 

You can backtrack the system to see it's long-term success. This is not my system nor did I ever claim it was. People can make money if they just make the effort to do some line-watching.


I think you misread my point. I'm on your side and I'm saying you have nothing to hide... and I didn't cherry pick your losers, I thanked you for your help on the winner, (the twins). The only reason I brought up your articles is exactly what you said. You don't hide anything. My whole point was that this thread is to help people make money, not to pick out winners and losers for your personal stats and pull the wool over anyone's eyes. Relax bro. Everyone needs to take a chill pill
No team is as good as it looks when winning nor are they as bad as they look when losing
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2017
Posts: 10646
Posted: #91
Quote Originally Posted by OlDirtyBaztid:

Bro, doesn't it seem shady? Have you seen this guys colossal write ups that have been losers? He chalks up his fair share of losses with no discrepency.. I think you're missing the entirety of this system and mistaking it for him wanting to build a record. I think it's fair to say by now he has proved that's not what he is here to do. The way I see it, if it isn't a system
Play which is clearly defined in the first page, it is called a lean, no? And I think the point of this is to help people make money, not pad numbers... by the way thanks for the help on the twins pick. Jesus man. Give the keyboard a breather
All of the above was directed at vega comment calling you shady...
No team is as good as it looks when winning nor are they as bad as they look when losing
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #92
Yeah no stress, Twins wasn't "my" winner though, it was my buddy's. I just don't like how people the losses that my colossal write-ups incur incite more attention than the winners that I provide. But yeah, thanks, I appreciate that the transparency here is recognized. 

Split tonight. Depending on when you played, probably a dollar profit lol.
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2017
Posts: 10646
Posted: #93
We are good brotha!! I really enjoy your write ups. Didn't mean for you to get offended as that wasn't my intent. And I only took the twins. No way I'm going against the dodgers tonight. Keep them coming. Your insight is welcome and appreciated
No team is as good as it looks when winning nor are they as bad as they look when losing
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #94
Thank you friend. Will make a new thread tomorrow when my buddy e-mails me.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #95
Sorry Vega but my guy is setting a higher threshhold to eliminate the game-time decisions. From now on everything will be as clear as the Twins play was. Guess you won't be able to indulge in your love for trolling.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2017
Posts: 498
Posted: #96
Quote Originally Posted by ProudJagsfan:

1515 says: Feel free to lock in Twins


WIN
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2017
Posts: 498
Posted: #97
Quote Originally Posted by Luckydan:

As of 7:09 Mets are in play at +110 at Pinnacle.

GL

LOSS
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2017
Posts: 498
Posted: #98
Quote Originally Posted by ProudJagsfan:

Well, since you're a bit thick-headed, let my stress that the plays that don't drop 10-15 dollars like the Twins play require waiting until the opening line. Glad you like my vocab! Lots of time being a graduate student. 

Talking with my guy: Jays closed at +142, so did not qualify as a play. Mets were a play. He may set a filter of roi movement to take out the close games.


So, day 1 of running this, you're 0-1?
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2016
Posts: 3869
Posted: #99
Can people stop addressing me as if they were my plays?

He went 1-1 tonight. Twins + Mets.
 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2017
Posts: 498
Posted: #100
well, you're posting them as if they are YOUR plays.  so....
All Forums | MLB Betting Forum
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gambling
Betting Sites
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
810,221
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 30 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
21+
Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER
Help Privacy Terms of Service Cookies Sitemap Forum
Covers is verified safe by:
Evalon Logo Logo GPWA Logo GDPR logo Logo GeoTrust logo Logo PCI DSS logo Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2026 Genius Sports. All Rights Reserved.
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.