All Forums | Systems & Strategies

Critique My Method

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 14207
Posts: 299
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 284
Posted: #201
CWS over TOR @ 140
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2002
Posts: 497
Posted: #202
I meant no disrespect

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2008
Posts: 54
Posted: #203
I dont believe that is the case open bahr historically more dogs actually cover in September
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 284
Posted: #204
Quote Originally Posted by openbahr:

I meant no disrespect



None taken!  I try to be as precise in my responses as possible and explain my motivations thoroughly and sometimes it sounds like I am an ass, which I guess I am, but the thread is called 'Critique My Method' for a reason, so keep the ideas coming.
 
Covers Rehab
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2008
Posts: 167
Posted: #205
I think you'll have a great Sepetember....all the data I have shows September and July are the best months for dogs....the late season call ups and unpredicatbility of some of the teams who are out of it create a great climate for the dog. 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2002
Posts: 497
Posted: #206
another good call...

thanks
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 346
Posted: #207
I think your on too something here.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 284
Posted: #208
TEX over OAK @ 125
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 346
Posted: #209
Question with formula 1 I come up with OAK favored by .4 ppg? So how do you compare and calculate that to the ML to decide if it has value?
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 284
Posted: #210
Quote Originally Posted by Stake24:

Question with formula 1 I come up with OAK favored by .4 ppg? So how do you compare and calculate that to the ML to decide if it has value?


I'm looking for both formula 1 and 2 to agree (both positive or both negative) or for there to be very little opposition between the two.  Games that have this characteristic make it to the 2nd step, where I evaluate the ML relative to those figures.  For example, two dogs with similar results from the formulas, but one is a 140 and the other is a 120, I will probably go with the 140.

If you read through my posts above I think you'll see I've tried to explain my approach in detail.  Keep in mind the ML is as much about the book balancing public betting as it is a measure of win probability.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 346
Posted: #211
Thank you I ran your formulas again and now it all clicks.

Thanks for all this info I'm following you to the end of the season.

.91 units on Texas at +110 Red Rock casino Las Vegas
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2008
Posts: 73
Posted: #212
Thanks for great picks. Starting to get the hang of your formula too.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 346
Posted: #213
so today should be
1. Mil +183
2.Tor +137

Sorry I'm trying to see if I'm doing this right.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 284
Posted: #214
WAS over FLA @ 180
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 284
Posted: #215
Quote Originally Posted by Stake24:

Thank you I ran your formulas again and now it all clicks.

Thanks for all this info I'm following you to the end of the season.

.91 units on Texas at +110 Red Rock casino Las Vegas


The bet on 9/10 was a win, so you would have bet 1 unit on 9/11.  You only modify the bet size after a loss.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2008
Posts: 3
Posted: #216
Sdiinc,

I got TEX over OAK yesterday with my formulas, but just by a hair. Today I have FLA over WAS in every way I look at it except one, in which I think the stats are skewed. Might you and I email to iron this out. I'm not saying your pick's wrong and I like your system, but I'd like to put our minds together.

Thanks,

Phil
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 284
Posted: #217
Quote Originally Posted by skiliftman:

Sdiinc,

I got TEX over OAK yesterday with my formulas, but just by a hair. Today I have FLA over WAS in every way I look at it except one, in which I think the stats are skewed. Might you and I email to iron this out. I'm not saying your pick's wrong and I like your system, but I'd like to put our minds together.

Thanks,

Phil


Phil, you're more than welcome to email me, but I'm getting an awful lot of email about my formulas so I try to keep things on the forum for public consumption. 

One disclaimer; I am operating off a db that was created for me in 2007, and from feedback I've gotten from others it's obvious there are some minor differences between my DB and public data.  I'm still working on getting a Excel version of my PHP programming.

BTW, the only other game that looked good to me today was STL over PIT @ 120.  What do your numbers show?
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 346
Posted: #218
I guess I'm betting a little different then I bet to win 1 unit. You are betting 1 unit?

With WAS I got a positive and a negative number how is this a play?
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 284
Posted: #219
Quote Originally Posted by Stake24:

I guess I'm betting a little different then I bet to win 1 unit. You are betting 1 unit?

With WAS I got a positive and a negative number how is this a play?


We always bet one unit unless we are chasing a loss.  In that scenario we bet enough to offset the cumulative loss.

WAS was a play because formula one produced a result that was substantially in favor of the dog and formula two produced a result that was marginally positive.  That plus a substantial value in the ML made it a better statistical opportunity than the next best opportunity, STL, which was also a loser today.

Please go back and read the thread for detailed discussion on both subjects.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2002
Posts: 497
Posted: #220
it was a very close game given the moneyline
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 284
Posted: #221
No game for today.  I think this is the first day in a few months where we didn't have a play.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 2628
Posted: #222
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 284
Posted: #223
SFO over SDO @ 110
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2008
Posts: 3
Posted: #224
sdiinc: "BTW, the only other game that looked good to me today was STL over PIT @ 120.  What do your numbers show?"

For 9/12, I had STL over PIT, but they changed the starter later in the day and the numbers shifted to PIT. My numbers liked TEX over OAK that day for the underdog.

Today I have no underdogs to win, but TEX over OAK is a close one.

Phil


 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 228
Posted: #225
sdiinc, thx for posting. Is there any growth stocks you really like right now. I have some solar stock - FSLR (First Solar) and BEZ (Baldor Electric). 
Just curious if you don't mind. I am following your plays.
All Forums | Systems & Strategies
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
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
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2025 CS Media Limited 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.