Posted:
#151
Quote Originally Posted by BWS77:
But he wins all the games he doesn't cry and b!tch about! He said so himself!!!!!
u want proof of last 5?
5-0
0
GIANTS @ REDSKINS: It's rare that I say I'm not worried about a cover at all but...I'm not worried.
Posted:
#153
Quote Originally Posted by WilliamMunny:
When you post picks that's fine but when you
When you post picks that's fine but when you
Come out saying how great the pick is and it turns into a lemon as this one looks then you deserve to get bashed
Maybe his style or attitude is annoying for some (personally I find it entertaining) but this has nothing to do with capping. He's one of the few who offer a thought process and arguments but those people instead of arguing or offering their insight just wait for the outcome to come and bash or remain silent if he wins.
The outcome! Really?? This is how we determine if a pick was good or a lemon as u say??
Take an hypothetical excellent bettor with let's say a 6000-4000 record. Did he make 4000 bad, -ev bets?
0
Posted:
#159
I don't understand why guys come in here and bash. This game isn't even over yet. scal provides excellent insight. Whether he comes off arrogant or not to some of you it has no bearing on the bottom line. Even a few guys I respect make comments. I might not no the history between those posters but start your own thread. Why bash a winning capper?
0
Posted:
#161
There's no reason to debate with the original poster. He ad hominem insults anyone who offers insight.
The original poster is 44% over a sample size of just 11.
I finished with 57% winners in the Supercontest this year, all plays viewable on this very forum over 85 total plays. I will fully admit I didn't have the greatest year. I try to listen to those who offer real debate here.
But at 44% one should probably just slink off quietly.
0
Posted:
#163
Quote Originally Posted by ActionMagnet:
What is Scal'S NFL record? about .500? Dude should
What is Scal'S NFL record? about .500? Dude should
Change his board name to "Coin flip" .. his plays are no different.
0.500 based on what?? A ten game sample?? LOL
Wouldn't mean much even if it was 0.700 or 0.300
This is laughable as of course was Scal claiming a 70% with a <40 overall sample
0
Posted:
#164
Scalabrine's 2016 Regular Season NFL Record: 4-5-2, 44%
1. Giants -1 v. Dallas Week One: Push
2. Bills +4 v. Patriots, Week Four: Win
3. Ravens over Giants: Loss
4. Jets over Ravens: Win
5. Dolphins -4 v. the Jets: Push
6. Bills over Bengals: Win
7. Rams over Jets: Win
8. Browns +7 over Giants: Loss
9. Bills +3 against the Steelers: Loss
10. Bills Season Total O 8: Loss
11. Washington -7.5 against the Giants: Loss
44%.
0
Posted:
#167
Quote Originally Posted by porcelainfist:
There's no reason to debate with the original poster. He ad hominem insults anyone who offers insight.
There's no reason to debate with the original poster. He ad hominem insults anyone who offers insight.
The original poster is 44% over a sample size of just 11.
I finished with 57% winners in the Supercontest this year, all plays viewable on this very forum over 85 total plays. I will fully admit I didn't have the greatest year. I try to listen to those who offer real debate here.
But at 44% one should probably just slink off quietly.
That's why I said you are clueless. Let's say you can hit at 57% rate. What is the chance you go 50 or 44% or below in 11 games??
During your 85 picks of this contest, you went 57% by being 6-5 or better every other 11?
It would be great if you could offer arguments on why those scal picks were good or bad. Posting idiotic conclusions out of idiotic samples and just bashing losing picks is pathetic
0
Hot Forum Topics
