• Forums
  • Best Betting Sites
  • Sportsbook Promos
  • Best Sports Betting Apps
  • NFL Betting Forum
  • NBA Betting Forum
  • MLB Betting Forum
  • NHL Betting Forum
  • NCAAF Betting Forum
  • NCAAB Betting Forum
  • Soccer Betting Forum
  • Tennis Betting Forum
  • General Discussion
  • Help Forum
  • Guidelines
  • FAQ
  • Forum Updates
    Covers Logo
    Covers App
    Faster picks. Smarter bets.
    All in the NEW Covers App
    Download on the App Store Download on the Google Play Store
    • Sports
      • NFL
        • Back
        • NFL
        • NFL Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NFL Picks
        • Weather
        • Injuries
      • NCAAF
        • Back
        • NCAAF
        • NCAAF Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NCAAF Picks
        • Weather
        • Injuries
      • NBA
        • Back
        • NBA
        • NBA Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NBA Picks
        • Injuries
      • NCAAB
        • Back
        • NCAAB
        • NCAAB Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • NCAAB Picks
        • Injuries
      • MLB
        • Back
        • MLB
        • MLB Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • MLB Picks
        • Weather
        • Injuries
      • NHL
        • Back
        • NHL
        • NHL Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NHL Picks
        • Injuries
      • Soccer
      • UFC
      • WNBA
        • Back
        • WNBA
        • WNBA Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • WNBA Picks
        • Injuries
      • CFL
        • Back
        • CFL
        • CFL Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • CFL Picks
      • Golf
        • Back
        • Golf
        • Golf Home
        • Golf Odds
        • Masters Odds
        • PGA Championship Odds
        • US Open Odds
        • British Open Odds
        • Ryder Cup Odds
        • Golf Picks
    • Odds
      • All Odds
      • NFL
      • NCAAF
      • NBA
      • NCAAB
      • MLB
      • NHL
      • Golf
      • Soccer Odds
        • Back
        • Soccer Odds
        • MLS Odds
        • Champions League Odds
        • Premier League Odds
      • UFC
      • WNBA
      • CFL
      • Election Odds
      • Futures
        • Back
        • Futures
        • NFL
        • NBA
        • MLB
        • NHL
        • NCAAB
        • NCAAF
      • Sports Odds History
    • Picks
      • All Picks
      • NFL
      • NBA
      • NHL
      • MLB
      • NCAAF
      • NCAAB
      • Golf
      • WNBA
      • CFL
      • User Picks
      • Team User Picks
      • Consensus Picks
        • Back
        • Consensus Picks
        • All Consensus Picks
        • NFL
        • NBA
        • NHL
        • MLB
        • NCAAF
        • NCAAB
        • CFL
        • WNBA
        • Consensus FAQ
        • Public Money
    • Prop Projections
      • NFL
      • NBA
      • MLB
      • NHL
    • Betting
      • US Betting Sites
      • Canada Betting Sites
      • Sportsbook Reviews
      • States
        • Back
        • States
        • US Legal Tracker
        • Revenue Tracker
        • Arizona
        • Arkansas
        • California
        • Colorado
        • Connecticut
        • DC
        • Florida
        • Georgia
        • Illinois
        • Indiana
        • Iowa
        • Kansas
        • Kentucky
        • Louisiana
        • Maine
        • Maryland
        • Massachusetts
        • Michigan
        • Mississippi
        • Missouri
        • Nevada
        • New Hampshire
        • New Jersey
        • New York
        • North Carolina
        • Ohio
        • Oregon
        • Pennsylvania
        • Tennessee
        • Texas
        • Vermont
        • Virginia
        • West Virginia
        • Wyoming
      • Provinces
        • Back
        • Provinces
        • Alberta
        • British Columbia
        • Manitoba
        • New Brunswick
        • Newfoundland and Labrador
        • Northwest Territories
        • Nova Scotia
        • Nunavut
        • Ontario
        • Prince Edward Island
        • Quebec (English)
        • Quebec (francais)
        • Saskatchewan
        • Yukon
      • By Sport
        • Back
        • By Sport
        • Baseball
        • Basketball
        • Boxing
        • College Football
        • F1
        • Football
        • Super Bowl
        • Golf
        • Hockey
        • Horse Racing
        • March Madness
        • Soccer
        • UFC
        • World Cup
      • Betting Apps
        • Back
        • Betting Apps
        • Best Sports Betting Apps USA
        • Ontario Sports Betting Apps
      • Rest of World
        • Back
        • Rest of World
        • UK Betting Offers
          • Back
          • UK Betting Offers
          • UK Betting Sites
          • bet365 Bonus Code UK
          • 888Sport Promo Code UK
          • William Hill Sign up Offer
          • Betway Sign up Offer
          • BetVictor Bonus Code UK
      • Betting Guides
        • Back
        • Betting Guides
        • All Guides
        • Glossary
        • Betting Calculators
          • Back
          • Betting Calculators
          • Odds Converter
          • Parlay Calculator
        • Futures Betting Guide
        • Moneyline Betting Guide
        • Over/Under Betting Guide
        • Parlay Betting Guide
        • Point Spread Betting Guide
        • Prop Betting Guide
        • Sports Betting Guides
          • Back
          • Sports Betting Guides
          • How To Bet On Sports Guide
          • NFL Betting Guide
          • NHL Betting Guide
          • NBA Betting Guide
          • MLB Betting Guide
          • NCAAB Betting Guide
          • NCAAF Betting Guide
          • Golf Betting Guide
          • Tennis Betting Guide
        • Teaser Betting Guide
      • Betting News
        • Back
        • Betting News
        • All News
        • Industry News
        • Podcasts
        • Covers Videos
        • Covers Writers
        • Offers & Boosts
    • Promos
      • Sportsbook Promos
      • Canada Sportsbook Promos
      • Bonuses By Sportsbook
        • Back
        • Bonuses By Sportsbook
        • bet365 Bonus Code
        • BET99 Promo Code
        • BetMGM Bonus Code
        • BetRivers Bonus Code
        • Caesars Sportsbook Promo
        • DraftKings Promo Code
        • Fanatics Sportsbook Promo
        • FanDuel Promo Code
        • Hard Rock Bet Promo Code
        • Sports Interaction Promo
        • Stake Promo Code
        • theScore Bet Promo Code
        • TonyBet Promo Code
      • Bonuses By Region
        • Back
        • Bonuses By Region
        • Arkansas Promos
        • Arizona Promos
        • Colorado Promos
        • Connecticut Promos
        • DC Promos
        • Illinois Promos
        • Indiana Promos
        • Iowa Promos
        • Kansas Promos
        • Kentucky Promos
        • Louisiana Promos
        • Maine Promos
        • Maryland Promos
        • Massachusetts Promos
        • Michigan Promos
        • Missouri Promos
        • New Jersey Promos
        • New York Promos
        • North Carolina Promos
        • Ohio Promos
        • Pennsylvania Promos
        • Tennessee Promos
        • Vermont Promos
        • Virginia Promos
        • West Virginia Promos
        • Wyoming Promos
    • Forum & Contests
      • All Forums
      • NFL Betting Forum
      • MLB Betting Forum
      • NCAAB Betting Forum
      • NCAAF Betting Forum
      • NBA Betting Forum
      • NHL Betting Forum
      • Soccer Betting Forum
      • Contests
        • Back
        • Contests
        • Contests Home
        • Streak Survivor
        • King of Covers
        • My Contests
    • Casino
      • Sweepstakes Casino
        • Back
        • Sweepstakes Casino
        • Sweepstakes Casino
        • Sweepstakes No-Deposit Bonuses
        • Sweepstakes Promos
          • Back
          • Sweepstakes Promos
          • Card Crush
          • Casino.click
          • Chanced Casino
          • Crown Coins Casino
          • FreeSpin Casino
          • LoneStar
          • McLuck
          • Mega Bonanza Casino
          • PlayFame
          • Pulsz
          • Stake.us
      • US Casinos
        • Back
        • US Casinos
        • US Online Casinos
        • US Online Casino Bonuses
        • Casino Promos
          • Back
          • Casino Promos
          • bet365 Casino Promo Code
          • BetRivers Casino Promo
          • Borgata Casino Bonus Code
          • Caesars Casino Bonus Code
          • DraftKings Casino Promo
          • Fanatics Casino Promo
          • FanDuel Casino Promo Code
          • Golden Nugget Casino Promo
          • Hard Rock Bet Casino Promo
          • Hollywood Casino Promo Code
      • Canada Casinos
        • Back
        • Canada Casinos
        • Canada Online Casinos
        • Provinces
          • Back
          • Provinces
          • Alberta Online Casino
          • BC Online Casino
          • Ontario Online Casinos
        • Casino Promos
          • Back
          • Casino Promos
          • BC.GAME Bonus Code
          • Cloudbet Promo Code
          • RainBet Promo Code
          • Roobet Promo Code
          • Shuffle Promo Code
          • Thrill Promo Code
    • Prediction Markets
      • Prediction Markets
      • Prediction Market Apps
      • Prediction Market Promos
      • Kalshi Promo Code
      • Polymarket Promo Code
      • DraftKings Predictions Promo Code
      • Novig Promo Code
      • ProphetX Promo Code
      • Underdog Promo Code
      • OG Promo Code
      • Fanatics Markets Promo Code
      • Plus500 Promo Code
    Covers Account
    Log in Create account
    Join free Log in
    All Forums | Systems & Strategies

    MLB system releases...

    «First Previous 868788 ... 888990 Next Last»
    BattyBatty
    MeMyselfandEye
    kreatture
    MontanaMax
    tallguyindc
    ...
    Participants:
    Search model icon
    Views: 238798
    Posts: 2245
    «First Previous 868788 ... 888990 Next Last»
     
    BattyBatty
    BattyBatty
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Jul, 2009
    Posts: 7
    Posted: Oct. 10, 2009 - 6:42 PM ET #2126

    Tallguyindc,

    Thank you! I was booted off this thread earlier in the year because I questioned the methods of this thread. I was insulted and made to feel that my valid questions were ungrateful and petty.

    It would be great if some of your valid questions were addressed in a succinct explanation, instead of the vague answers and links that some on this thread direct your way.

    I agree with your assessment that there is something to the Sabermetric study of baseball, but until the validity of this thread's methods can be replicated (or even explained), I too will dismiss it as hogwash.

    Your cake analogy is perfect as well, kudos.


    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Tallguyindc,

    Thank you! I was booted off this thread earlier in the year because I questioned the methods of this thread. I was insulted and made to feel that my valid questions were ungrateful and petty.

    It would be great if some of your valid questions were addressed in a succinct explanation, instead of the vague answers and links that some on this thread direct your way.

    I agree with your assessment that there is something to the Sabermetric study of baseball, but until the validity of this thread's methods can be replicated (or even explained), I too will dismiss it as hogwash.

    Your cake analogy is perfect as well, kudos.


     
    MeMyselfandEye
    MeMyselfandEye
    Rookie
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Jul, 2009
    Posts: 691
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 12:36 AM ET #2127

    Tallguy and Batty..

    We could debate many things...but the fact remains SN won 70% of his plays as posted.  Most of them Dogs and Runlines. That is fact.

    I was sincere in my posting, which was a FUCKING ROAD MAP, to how this works. I am not sure why you choose to enter an arena, demand to know what is going on, get upset when you do not get want you want..then proceed to post as you do. Much like a child would do.

    Tallguy has a career as a creative writer...maybe not so much as a baseball handicpper. BOTH of you have now posted a total of 7 times each.......so you now both have the attention you wanted. Please post something that contributes to this thread...
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Tallguy and Batty..

    We could debate many things...but the fact remains SN won 70% of his plays as posted.  Most of them Dogs and Runlines. That is fact.

    I was sincere in my posting, which was a FUCKING ROAD MAP, to how this works. I am not sure why you choose to enter an arena, demand to know what is going on, get upset when you do not get want you want..then proceed to post as you do. Much like a child would do.

    Tallguy has a career as a creative writer...maybe not so much as a baseball handicpper. BOTH of you have now posted a total of 7 times each.......so you now both have the attention you wanted. Please post something that contributes to this thread...
     
    kreatture
    kreatture
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: May, 2009
    Posts: 2312
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 2:42 AM ET #2128

    You know.. when I 1st started on here, and began this wonderful life of Sports Handicapping, I followed this thread from beginning to end and had no problem whatsoever in following the methodology and ideas discussed.

    But then again, I love sports and understand every stat imaginable. I get what RBI, R, S, D, T, HR, R, SB, BB, K and all the other abbreviated stats stand for. I also understand baseball and know all the teams, players, stadiums, etc. And I am capable of reading and understanding trends and sorting out which ones are applicable to this season's analysis. Maybe the problem isn't in lack of ability to understand the mathematical formula so much, but it is the inability to decipher the individual baseball stat abbreviations, and a lack of knowledge on baseball itself..? I know I probably couldn't jump right onto Wall Street and figure out everything I need to know by reading a few pages of information..

    A number of people successfully joined into the discussion of ideas and performed their own calculations, based on the information throughout this thread. The fact that over +400 Units were gained in MLB 2009 gives this thread enough merit to stand on it's own, no matter what anyone has to say about it.

    The cake analogy was funny, I had a nice little "HaHa" when I read it, simply due to the creativity of it. However, it was way off-base and out of line. When you really step back and look at it, it just breeds ignorance, case-in-point by the following post immediately after.


    I am going to go all the way back to Page 1 of this thread, and re-work my way through it. Since my understanding of baseball is greater than my understanding of crying and complaining, I'm sure I won't have any trouble with it. If for some reason I do tho, I'll post my thoughts..

    But it won't be for a few days.. since tomorrow is another slice of heaven day, for it's NFL Sunday!  

    Cheers 
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    You know.. when I 1st started on here, and began this wonderful life of Sports Handicapping, I followed this thread from beginning to end and had no problem whatsoever in following the methodology and ideas discussed.

    But then again, I love sports and understand every stat imaginable. I get what RBI, R, S, D, T, HR, R, SB, BB, K and all the other abbreviated stats stand for. I also understand baseball and know all the teams, players, stadiums, etc. And I am capable of reading and understanding trends and sorting out which ones are applicable to this season's analysis. Maybe the problem isn't in lack of ability to understand the mathematical formula so much, but it is the inability to decipher the individual baseball stat abbreviations, and a lack of knowledge on baseball itself..? I know I probably couldn't jump right onto Wall Street and figure out everything I need to know by reading a few pages of information..

    A number of people successfully joined into the discussion of ideas and performed their own calculations, based on the information throughout this thread. The fact that over +400 Units were gained in MLB 2009 gives this thread enough merit to stand on it's own, no matter what anyone has to say about it.

    The cake analogy was funny, I had a nice little "HaHa" when I read it, simply due to the creativity of it. However, it was way off-base and out of line. When you really step back and look at it, it just breeds ignorance, case-in-point by the following post immediately after.


    I am going to go all the way back to Page 1 of this thread, and re-work my way through it. Since my understanding of baseball is greater than my understanding of crying and complaining, I'm sure I won't have any trouble with it. If for some reason I do tho, I'll post my thoughts..

    But it won't be for a few days.. since tomorrow is another slice of heaven day, for it's NFL Sunday!  

    Cheers 
     
    MontanaMax
    MontanaMax
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Nov, 2008
    Posts: 473
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 9:56 AM ET #2129

      
    Quality Kreature............

    Look both ways before you cross the street
    Oh yeah.................
    And try it with out anyone holding your hand

    There is no problem with not understanding something politely and seeking clarification from the community
    That's all..........

    So Julia Childs
    If you can bake a better cake
    We're all for it.......

    All the info is documented for the research and methods needed
    This was new to me too - I never bitched about it
    The only ingredient missing is common sense on how to apply it to the picks and wager amounts
    That's up to us..........
    They don't teach that in cooking class



    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
      
    Quality Kreature............

    Look both ways before you cross the street
    Oh yeah.................
    And try it with out anyone holding your hand

    There is no problem with not understanding something politely and seeking clarification from the community
    That's all..........

    So Julia Childs
    If you can bake a better cake
    We're all for it.......

    All the info is documented for the research and methods needed
    This was new to me too - I never bitched about it
    The only ingredient missing is common sense on how to apply it to the picks and wager amounts
    That's up to us..........
    They don't teach that in cooking class



     
    tallguyindc
    tallguyindc
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2009
    Posts: 482
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 1:34 PM ET #2130

    But then again, I love sports and understand every stat imaginable. I get what RBI, R, S, D, T, HR, R, SB, BB, K and all the other abbreviated stats stand for. I also understand baseball and know all the teams, players, stadiums, etc. And I am capable of reading and understanding trends and sorting out which ones are applicable to this season's analysis. Maybe the problem isn't in lack of ability to understand the mathematical formula so much, but it is the inability to decipher the individual baseball stat abbreviations, and a lack of knowledge on baseball itself..?
     
     
    I get it.  There is a formula posted somewhere.  I can find it and read it.  It has a lot of fancy math like logarithms, base-n numbers, exponentials, etc.  I have no problem with that, but it all falls apart because I've never actually watched a baseball game and I have no idea what an RBI is.   I think that a strike has something to do with labor strife and that a ball is just what they use to play with.  Why exactly is their a stat for "outs" but no stat for "ins"?
     
    To put it mildly, you're wrong. I've been studying baseball and sabermetrics for years.  I'm sure there are stats I've never heard of (TFFBRS - Triples Following Foul Balls to the Right Side????) but I have a pretty firm grip on the basic stats and new stats are just recalculations of the old basic ones.
     
     
    All the info is documented for the research and methods needed
     
    This is becoming really comical.  Every time that somebody says that nothing is documented, somebody else comes in and says "No...No...It really is" and leaves it at that.   If it is really documented, provide a link to the documentation.  Somewhere, somebody must have explained the process in detail.   Right????
     
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    But then again, I love sports and understand every stat imaginable. I get what RBI, R, S, D, T, HR, R, SB, BB, K and all the other abbreviated stats stand for. I also understand baseball and know all the teams, players, stadiums, etc. And I am capable of reading and understanding trends and sorting out which ones are applicable to this season's analysis. Maybe the problem isn't in lack of ability to understand the mathematical formula so much, but it is the inability to decipher the individual baseball stat abbreviations, and a lack of knowledge on baseball itself..?
     
     
    I get it.  There is a formula posted somewhere.  I can find it and read it.  It has a lot of fancy math like logarithms, base-n numbers, exponentials, etc.  I have no problem with that, but it all falls apart because I've never actually watched a baseball game and I have no idea what an RBI is.   I think that a strike has something to do with labor strife and that a ball is just what they use to play with.  Why exactly is their a stat for "outs" but no stat for "ins"?
     
    To put it mildly, you're wrong. I've been studying baseball and sabermetrics for years.  I'm sure there are stats I've never heard of (TFFBRS - Triples Following Foul Balls to the Right Side????) but I have a pretty firm grip on the basic stats and new stats are just recalculations of the old basic ones.
     
     
    All the info is documented for the research and methods needed
     
    This is becoming really comical.  Every time that somebody says that nothing is documented, somebody else comes in and says "No...No...It really is" and leaves it at that.   If it is really documented, provide a link to the documentation.  Somewhere, somebody must have explained the process in detail.   Right????
     
     
    snyder9
    snyder9
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Jun, 2009
    Posts: 71
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 2:22 PM ET #2131

    You are getting quite tedious now. Your witty little retorts are fading in quality as well. I give the last one a D+

    Please, do try again.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    You are getting quite tedious now. Your witty little retorts are fading in quality as well. I give the last one a D+

    Please, do try again.
     
    tallguyindc
    tallguyindc
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2009
    Posts: 482
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 6:21 PM ET #2132

    I'm sorry to hear you disapprove.  The bottom line is I'm not here to entertain you. 
     
    I came here initially to get more information on a new system that sounded intriguing.  Now that I see that there is no system, I guess I'm staying to expose what I view as a fraud. 
     
    I hope I'm wrong and that there really is a system, but I can think of no logical reason why the system's promoters would choose to obfuscate instead of explain if this was legitimate.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    I'm sorry to hear you disapprove.  The bottom line is I'm not here to entertain you. 
     
    I came here initially to get more information on a new system that sounded intriguing.  Now that I see that there is no system, I guess I'm staying to expose what I view as a fraud. 
     
    I hope I'm wrong and that there really is a system, but I can think of no logical reason why the system's promoters would choose to obfuscate instead of explain if this was legitimate.
     
    tallguyindc
    tallguyindc
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2009
    Posts: 482
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 6:21 PM ET #2133

    I'm sorry to hear you disapprove.  The bottom line is I'm not here to entertain you. 
     
    I came here initially to get more information on a new system that sounded intriguing.  Now that I see that there is no system, I guess I'm staying to expose what I view as a fraud. 
     
    I hope I'm wrong and that there really is a system, but I can think of no logical reason why the system's promoters would choose to obfuscate instead of explain if this was legitimate.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    I'm sorry to hear you disapprove.  The bottom line is I'm not here to entertain you. 
     
    I came here initially to get more information on a new system that sounded intriguing.  Now that I see that there is no system, I guess I'm staying to expose what I view as a fraud. 
     
    I hope I'm wrong and that there really is a system, but I can think of no logical reason why the system's promoters would choose to obfuscate instead of explain if this was legitimate.
     
    tallguyindc
    tallguyindc
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2009
    Posts: 482
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 6:21 PM ET #2134

    I'm sorry to hear you disapprove.  The bottom line is I'm not here to entertain you. 
     
    I came here initially to get more information on a new system that sounded intriguing.  Now that I see that there is no system, I guess I'm staying to expose what I view as a fraud. 
     
    I hope I'm wrong and that there really is a system, but I can think of no logical reason why the system's promoters would choose to obfuscate instead of explain if this was legitimate.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    I'm sorry to hear you disapprove.  The bottom line is I'm not here to entertain you. 
     
    I came here initially to get more information on a new system that sounded intriguing.  Now that I see that there is no system, I guess I'm staying to expose what I view as a fraud. 
     
    I hope I'm wrong and that there really is a system, but I can think of no logical reason why the system's promoters would choose to obfuscate instead of explain if this was legitimate.
     
    tallguyindc
    tallguyindc
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2009
    Posts: 482
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 6:22 PM ET #2135

    Sorry about the multiple postings.  Technical difficulty...
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Sorry about the multiple postings.  Technical difficulty...
     
    Leprechaun
    Leprechaun
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Mar, 2009
    Posts: 324
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 6:57 PM ET #2136

    I've followed this thread along with many others since it's inception.  I belong to many forums but almost never post...people like tallguy are 20% of the reason, and people like Batty are the other 80%.  Tallguy...you seem like you possess the skills to express yourself AND the ability to understand what is contained in this thread.  People like Batty shouldn't even try.  That's the beauty though.  The Darwinian effect of this thread is what makes it one of the best all time posts on any forum...it's length and complexity quickly scares off the idiots and allows the rest of us the chance to actually get something constructive done.

    Tallguy...you started off with the right intentions...attempting to read through the thread and understanding.  You even asked some great questions.  You just ran out of patience before you could get through it and you shut down.  You asked a question...the answer was "read the thread" and some assorted links.  You didn't do either of those and then ask the same question again.  When you got the same reply, "read the thread", you say the answer is not there and demand summary of the thread.  You get your summary but you get angry that you don't understand even though you were already told that reading the thread would give you understanding.  Hmmmmm.  This has happened about 20 times in this thread.  Memyselfandeye is trying to help you and I applaud his efforts.  You are NOT listening!  Sounds to me like you don't want to read the whole thread.  I hate to break it to you, but that's the only way you're going to understand what is going on here.  

    Listen to what Kreature said (one of the great contributors to this forum and this thread)...you can't turn up on Wall Street and expect to understand everything after reading a few hundred pages of material.  To follow your own analogy...even Emeril Lagasse didn't learn how to bake a cake from merely following a recipe.  Kreature tried to explain that to you...this thread contains something much more organic than a plug and play formula.  It's about using formulas and applying them in a situational manner.  In order to do that...there are some things you have to understand about the game.  It seems from your posts that this part isn't the problem for you.

    You want a protocol.  Memyselfandeye gave it to you in post #2124.  If you truly want to understand this thread, print out that post, read it 5 or 6 times and then go back through this thread from the beginning.  You can do us all a favor...don't post in the thread again until you have read the ENTIRE thread.  Read it twice if you have too.  Then reread post #2124 AGAIN and you will see it was right there in front of you the entire time.  Nobody is hiding anything from you and we are not being cryptic by saying the information you seek is in this thread.  The reason you keep getting that answer is because it IS contained in the thread.  Nobody is trying to make a fool of you.  If you read the whole thread, I think you'll find that there were many contributors that started out a little confused as well...but they did not let their patience get the better of them.

    Since you seem like a logical person, you can't possibly think this entire thread is BS.  The wins are clearly documented and it was not done by magic.  Because you are frustrated and don't understand it completely yet is not a reason to come here and bash it...nor is it a reason to be angry.  Your posts tell me that you lack understanding but not intelligence.  It is not the "perfect" cake as you put it.  What you don't see is there is no cake...only ingredients.  If you want to make a cake, take these ingredients and add your personal touch.  This thread is not for everyone.  This approach is not for everyone.  If you understand baseruns, then you already have one of the most important ingredients.  If you understand sabermetrics then you have another piece of ammunition.  The next step is finding a way to use that knowledge.  There is no perfect way.  That is the essence of this thread.  Use baseruns...apply sabermetrics, apply situational analysis, apply unit management (the hardest part in my opinion).  That's the message.  Understanding these concepts takes time...the links you are directed to are invaluable in order to gain understanding.  That is why you keep being sent to them.  Many people don't seem to understand the information in this thread or why those links are posted.  To understand the threads contents does not require a Ph. D. in mathematics,but it does require you to actually do some reading!!  Take some time to read and learn and you'll be well on your way.  If you don't want to take the time, then fine, just say nothing and observe because you really are embarrasing yourself.  If you read the entire thread, you'll understand why.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    I've followed this thread along with many others since it's inception.  I belong to many forums but almost never post...people like tallguy are 20% of the reason, and people like Batty are the other 80%.  Tallguy...you seem like you possess the skills to express yourself AND the ability to understand what is contained in this thread.  People like Batty shouldn't even try.  That's the beauty though.  The Darwinian effect of this thread is what makes it one of the best all time posts on any forum...it's length and complexity quickly scares off the idiots and allows the rest of us the chance to actually get something constructive done.

    Tallguy...you started off with the right intentions...attempting to read through the thread and understanding.  You even asked some great questions.  You just ran out of patience before you could get through it and you shut down.  You asked a question...the answer was "read the thread" and some assorted links.  You didn't do either of those and then ask the same question again.  When you got the same reply, "read the thread", you say the answer is not there and demand summary of the thread.  You get your summary but you get angry that you don't understand even though you were already told that reading the thread would give you understanding.  Hmmmmm.  This has happened about 20 times in this thread.  Memyselfandeye is trying to help you and I applaud his efforts.  You are NOT listening!  Sounds to me like you don't want to read the whole thread.  I hate to break it to you, but that's the only way you're going to understand what is going on here.  

    Listen to what Kreature said (one of the great contributors to this forum and this thread)...you can't turn up on Wall Street and expect to understand everything after reading a few hundred pages of material.  To follow your own analogy...even Emeril Lagasse didn't learn how to bake a cake from merely following a recipe.  Kreature tried to explain that to you...this thread contains something much more organic than a plug and play formula.  It's about using formulas and applying them in a situational manner.  In order to do that...there are some things you have to understand about the game.  It seems from your posts that this part isn't the problem for you.

    You want a protocol.  Memyselfandeye gave it to you in post #2124.  If you truly want to understand this thread, print out that post, read it 5 or 6 times and then go back through this thread from the beginning.  You can do us all a favor...don't post in the thread again until you have read the ENTIRE thread.  Read it twice if you have too.  Then reread post #2124 AGAIN and you will see it was right there in front of you the entire time.  Nobody is hiding anything from you and we are not being cryptic by saying the information you seek is in this thread.  The reason you keep getting that answer is because it IS contained in the thread.  Nobody is trying to make a fool of you.  If you read the whole thread, I think you'll find that there were many contributors that started out a little confused as well...but they did not let their patience get the better of them.

    Since you seem like a logical person, you can't possibly think this entire thread is BS.  The wins are clearly documented and it was not done by magic.  Because you are frustrated and don't understand it completely yet is not a reason to come here and bash it...nor is it a reason to be angry.  Your posts tell me that you lack understanding but not intelligence.  It is not the "perfect" cake as you put it.  What you don't see is there is no cake...only ingredients.  If you want to make a cake, take these ingredients and add your personal touch.  This thread is not for everyone.  This approach is not for everyone.  If you understand baseruns, then you already have one of the most important ingredients.  If you understand sabermetrics then you have another piece of ammunition.  The next step is finding a way to use that knowledge.  There is no perfect way.  That is the essence of this thread.  Use baseruns...apply sabermetrics, apply situational analysis, apply unit management (the hardest part in my opinion).  That's the message.  Understanding these concepts takes time...the links you are directed to are invaluable in order to gain understanding.  That is why you keep being sent to them.  Many people don't seem to understand the information in this thread or why those links are posted.  To understand the threads contents does not require a Ph. D. in mathematics,but it does require you to actually do some reading!!  Take some time to read and learn and you'll be well on your way.  If you don't want to take the time, then fine, just say nothing and observe because you really are embarrasing yourself.  If you read the entire thread, you'll understand why.
     
    kreatture
    kreatture
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: May, 2009
    Posts: 2312
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 6:57 PM ET #2137

    Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:

     
    To put it mildly, you're wrong. I've been studying baseball and sabermetrics for years.  I'm sure there are stats I've never heard of (TFFBRS - Triples Following Foul Balls to the Right Side????) but I have a pretty firm grip on the basic stats and new stats are just recalculations of the old basic ones.
     



    Ahh.. well it seems we have found your problem!!

    You are unaware of the new rule changes and new stat categories! No wonder none of this makes sense to you! 

    Don't worry, my friend, I have found the easy solution for you.. and in the spirit of the Halloween season, I will even grant your request in link form, here you go!


    www.sabermetricformulas.net


    Cheers 





    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:

     
    To put it mildly, you're wrong. I've been studying baseball and sabermetrics for years.  I'm sure there are stats I've never heard of (TFFBRS - Triples Following Foul Balls to the Right Side????) but I have a pretty firm grip on the basic stats and new stats are just recalculations of the old basic ones.
     



    Ahh.. well it seems we have found your problem!!

    You are unaware of the new rule changes and new stat categories! No wonder none of this makes sense to you! 

    Don't worry, my friend, I have found the easy solution for you.. and in the spirit of the Halloween season, I will even grant your request in link form, here you go!


    www.sabermetricformulas.net


    Cheers 





     
    kreatture
    kreatture
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: May, 2009
    Posts: 2312
    Posted: Oct. 11, 2009 - 7:29 PM ET #2138

    Sorry.. I only have so much patience sometimes..

    Great post Leprechaun, spot on 

    When I said maybe it was due to a lack of understanding baseball, I meant possibly a lack of baseball handicapping knowledge.

    I've been studying baseball and sabermetrics for years

    Just because you have studied something for years, doesn't necessarily mean you understand it, or are good at it..


    Everyone has tried to be nice and provide you with what you asked.. the 4 points of this whole thing have been posted throughout this thread, please go to the websites referenced and actually try to take the try to comprehend their contents.. if you truly understand sabermetrics, you should have no problem understanding everything just in time for MLB 2010..


    I'm bored of this now..

    Cheers 


    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Sorry.. I only have so much patience sometimes..

    Great post Leprechaun, spot on 

    When I said maybe it was due to a lack of understanding baseball, I meant possibly a lack of baseball handicapping knowledge.

    I've been studying baseball and sabermetrics for years

    Just because you have studied something for years, doesn't necessarily mean you understand it, or are good at it..


    Everyone has tried to be nice and provide you with what you asked.. the 4 points of this whole thing have been posted throughout this thread, please go to the websites referenced and actually try to take the try to comprehend their contents.. if you truly understand sabermetrics, you should have no problem understanding everything just in time for MLB 2010..


    I'm bored of this now..

    Cheers 


     
    sports_Network
    sports_Network
    Banned
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Feb, 2009
    Posts: 8426
    Posted: Oct. 12, 2009 - 11:11 AM ET #2139

    [Quote: Originally Posted by sports_Network]
    Base_Runs/Runs_Created experiment is concluded; rated, reliable,consistent ratio of 70% ... Unit Judgement:+428... / exit   ¨[solution]
     
     
    SN
     09'
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    [Quote: Originally Posted by sports_Network]
    Base_Runs/Runs_Created experiment is concluded; rated, reliable,consistent ratio of 70% ... Unit Judgement:+428... / exit   ¨[solution]
     
     
    SN
     09'
     
    elithepunk
    elithepunk
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Apr, 2007
    Posts: 3552
    Posted: Oct. 12, 2009 - 12:31 PM ET #2140

    Leprechaun  - You should post more often.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Leprechaun  - You should post more often.
     
    mistercash
    mistercash
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Dec, 2008
    Posts: 78
    Posted: Oct. 15, 2009 - 1:52 PM ET #2141

    Quote Originally Posted by sports_Network:

    mlb playoff thread will begin Tuesday 13th 2009
     
    sN

    i can't find this thread. has it been posted ?

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Quote Originally Posted by sports_Network:

    mlb playoff thread will begin Tuesday 13th 2009
     
    sN

    i can't find this thread. has it been posted ?

     
    tallguyindc
    tallguyindc
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2009
    Posts: 482
    Posted: Oct. 15, 2009 - 6:19 PM ET #2142

    OK, I appear to have launched an emotional response.  Perhaps, I was tad trite. 
     
    You guys even convinced me that I was a touch dismissive and that I should go back and reanalyze the past posts.  I was suspicious, but as I said before I believe in sabermetrics and I think it can be profitable in sports wagering.  Hell, it has been profitable in sports wagering.  I'm already successful with it.  I use an approach different from the one that you guys use but I'm always open to new things.
     
    Anyway, I did go back and reread the posts.  I don't think you like what I'm going to say.  As a matter of fact, I can pretty much predict the reaction.  I'm a loser.  I'm embarrassing myself.  You aren't really here to help me.  You don't have to respond to bottom feeders like me, etc. etc.  What you won't hear is a direct answer to the legitimate points that I make.
     
    I'm being respectful and logical and directly responding to the issue.  You could try doing the same. 
     
    This "system" is a complete and total fraud. There might be some success in the formula he uses.  There might not be.  Through over 2000 posts, its never directly documented.  Every attempt that anybody makes to ask direct questions is obfuscated. 
     
    He does post games.  He posts 100s of games. Perhaps 1000s. But his true results are never documented.  He never posts the units that he bets.  Only the units that he "won" after the fact.  This allows him to routinely be up +14 units after 6-4 days but only down -2 units after 4-6 days. With the ability to determine bet size after the games are played, its no wonder he is up quite a few units on the year.
     
    When people ask him to explain his unit betting strategy, he directs them to post #508, which can be summed up as "Unit management is really important.  Be sure you do it..."  When people ask him a second time, he says he already did it.  When they point out that #508 doesn't actually say anything useful, he starts to call them names.  He also tells them to do their own work and that he isn't really here to help them, etc.   He tells them he'll send them the units privately.  What exactly is the point of having a public forum?????
     
    Why is he here?
     
    He is here to document his method, of course.  Yet the process of "documentation" seems to always leave out the most important details.

    I haven't seen him try to sell anything...yet.  But I suspect the real reason is to eventually sell his picks and say look I earned a zillion dollars in 2009. 

    I've invested way too much time in this already.  But having gone this far, I would like to warn anyone that might possibly stumble across this post.  I have no doubt what the next posts will say:  A bunch of personal insults of me, claims that I haven't tried hard enough, etc. He might even include a threat to ban me from the forum, because what good is negativity like mine.
     
    What they won't include is any attempt to document an actual unit management strategy....
     
    You can be profitable with sabermetrics sports wagering but you won't win anywhere near 70% of your bets.  Anybody telling you otherwise is a con man operating a shell game. 
     
    I had high hopes for this thread but I'm sorely disappointed...
     
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    OK, I appear to have launched an emotional response.  Perhaps, I was tad trite. 
     
    You guys even convinced me that I was a touch dismissive and that I should go back and reanalyze the past posts.  I was suspicious, but as I said before I believe in sabermetrics and I think it can be profitable in sports wagering.  Hell, it has been profitable in sports wagering.  I'm already successful with it.  I use an approach different from the one that you guys use but I'm always open to new things.
     
    Anyway, I did go back and reread the posts.  I don't think you like what I'm going to say.  As a matter of fact, I can pretty much predict the reaction.  I'm a loser.  I'm embarrassing myself.  You aren't really here to help me.  You don't have to respond to bottom feeders like me, etc. etc.  What you won't hear is a direct answer to the legitimate points that I make.
     
    I'm being respectful and logical and directly responding to the issue.  You could try doing the same. 
     
    This "system" is a complete and total fraud. There might be some success in the formula he uses.  There might not be.  Through over 2000 posts, its never directly documented.  Every attempt that anybody makes to ask direct questions is obfuscated. 
     
    He does post games.  He posts 100s of games. Perhaps 1000s. But his true results are never documented.  He never posts the units that he bets.  Only the units that he "won" after the fact.  This allows him to routinely be up +14 units after 6-4 days but only down -2 units after 4-6 days. With the ability to determine bet size after the games are played, its no wonder he is up quite a few units on the year.
     
    When people ask him to explain his unit betting strategy, he directs them to post #508, which can be summed up as "Unit management is really important.  Be sure you do it..."  When people ask him a second time, he says he already did it.  When they point out that #508 doesn't actually say anything useful, he starts to call them names.  He also tells them to do their own work and that he isn't really here to help them, etc.   He tells them he'll send them the units privately.  What exactly is the point of having a public forum?????
     
    Why is he here?
     
    He is here to document his method, of course.  Yet the process of "documentation" seems to always leave out the most important details.

    I haven't seen him try to sell anything...yet.  But I suspect the real reason is to eventually sell his picks and say look I earned a zillion dollars in 2009. 

    I've invested way too much time in this already.  But having gone this far, I would like to warn anyone that might possibly stumble across this post.  I have no doubt what the next posts will say:  A bunch of personal insults of me, claims that I haven't tried hard enough, etc. He might even include a threat to ban me from the forum, because what good is negativity like mine.
     
    What they won't include is any attempt to document an actual unit management strategy....
     
    You can be profitable with sabermetrics sports wagering but you won't win anywhere near 70% of your bets.  Anybody telling you otherwise is a con man operating a shell game. 
     
    I had high hopes for this thread but I'm sorely disappointed...
     
     
    Insane07
    Insane07
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2007
    Posts: 1451
    Posted: Oct. 16, 2009 - 12:26 AM ET #2143

    SN has an NFL wagering thread in which he posts units wagered. Haven't followed this thread but what you say in your post tallguy is fairly reasonable in terms of a documented method of capping. Same issues arose in the NFL thread and we got fairly good answers...nothing that would allow us to do it ourselves, but a rationalle nonetheless. Hope you get what you're looking for.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    SN has an NFL wagering thread in which he posts units wagered. Haven't followed this thread but what you say in your post tallguy is fairly reasonable in terms of a documented method of capping. Same issues arose in the NFL thread and we got fairly good answers...nothing that would allow us to do it ourselves, but a rationalle nonetheless. Hope you get what you're looking for.
     
    MeMyselfandEye
    MeMyselfandEye
    Rookie
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Jul, 2009
    Posts: 691
    Posted: Oct. 16, 2009 - 12:34 AM ET #2144

    Tallguy..

    If you can get past step #1 - which is using the Base_Runs formula to recreate a 9 inning baseball game - the LAA at NYY game- which is tomorrow evening.and post your results...before I do at 4:00 PM on Friday..then I will understand that you actually know what you are talking about and respect your post.

     It is strictly math only following the form set out in this thread...and results vary a bit depending on bullpen pitcher to bullpen pitcher..but you should have a clear lean on tomorrow nights game..forget about step #2, #3, and #4.

    I'll post the result of the Base_Runs tomorrow around 4:00 PM and hope to compare.


    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Tallguy..

    If you can get past step #1 - which is using the Base_Runs formula to recreate a 9 inning baseball game - the LAA at NYY game- which is tomorrow evening.and post your results...before I do at 4:00 PM on Friday..then I will understand that you actually know what you are talking about and respect your post.

     It is strictly math only following the form set out in this thread...and results vary a bit depending on bullpen pitcher to bullpen pitcher..but you should have a clear lean on tomorrow nights game..forget about step #2, #3, and #4.

    I'll post the result of the Base_Runs tomorrow around 4:00 PM and hope to compare.


     
    tallguyindc
    tallguyindc
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2009
    Posts: 482
    Posted: Oct. 16, 2009 - 5:45 AM ET #2145

    OK....Perhaps I was hasty again.  I ran the calculations.  First of all, I still have a little problem with "following the form set out in this thread".  There are multiple versions of the BaseRuns formula and I didn't exactly hear a clear and ringing endorsement of anyone of them. 
     
    I'm using the basic version from the Wikipedia page, primarily because it makes things easier since Baseball-reference.com doesn't show pitcher vs hitter SB and CS.   I suppose this is a fairly nitpicky point.  The other version listed only has minor changes.  However, it was still frustrating to read "go to Wikipedia" without clarifying that right off the bat. 
     
    Anyway, my understanding is that I'm supposed to use the lifetime numbers of the pitchers vs. all of the hitters currently on the other team.  I did this and for Sabathia I got
     
    A= 82
    B = 85.58
    C=147
    D = 6
    Outs = 159
    BaseRuns = 36.1722
    BaseRuns/27Outs = 6.14
     
     
    Assuming Sabathia pitches 6 innings, Chamberlain, Coke and Rivera each pitch 1, I get the Angels at 4.66
     
    Assuming Lackey pitches 6 and Oliver, Bulger and Fuentes each pitch 1, I get the Yankees at 3.96.
     
    Considering Matchbook currently has the Angels at +166 and the BaseRuns formula is giving the Angels more runs, I presume this means there is a strong lean on the Angels. 
     
    Actually, it appears to be even more tilted to the Angels because Coke and Bulger appear to have unusually good and bad numbers vs the other team and there is no guarantee either will play.
     
    I'm curious if you got the same numbers.  Believe it or not, I've never had a real problem with the basic concept of using baseruns.  My problem was that he said he clearly stated the ideas at the beginning when I don't think he did. 
     
    I also think that all of the posters that complained about units had a really good point.  You don't get credit for booking a Texas win at a higher unit total than a Seattle loss unless you clearly stated beforehand that you were betting more on Texas than you were on Seattle.  
     
    It really looks like revisionist history when he tried to take credit for betting unequal amounts postgame when his pregame posts made no attempt to differentiate between the two.  Say whatever you want, but people should assume that when somebody does that, they are full of it.  When they respond to legitimate queries with lies (I explained it earlier...) and personal insults, they look even more guilty.
     
    You can argue that he doesn't want credit and he has no need to explain himself.  In a general sense this is true, but when you create a thread, keep it going all year and post nearly everyday to create "documentation", you do need to explain yourself. 
     
    Enough of my soapbox, I'm curious if you got the same numbers.....
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    OK....Perhaps I was hasty again.  I ran the calculations.  First of all, I still have a little problem with "following the form set out in this thread".  There are multiple versions of the BaseRuns formula and I didn't exactly hear a clear and ringing endorsement of anyone of them. 
     
    I'm using the basic version from the Wikipedia page, primarily because it makes things easier since Baseball-reference.com doesn't show pitcher vs hitter SB and CS.   I suppose this is a fairly nitpicky point.  The other version listed only has minor changes.  However, it was still frustrating to read "go to Wikipedia" without clarifying that right off the bat. 
     
    Anyway, my understanding is that I'm supposed to use the lifetime numbers of the pitchers vs. all of the hitters currently on the other team.  I did this and for Sabathia I got
     
    A= 82
    B = 85.58
    C=147
    D = 6
    Outs = 159
    BaseRuns = 36.1722
    BaseRuns/27Outs = 6.14
     
     
    Assuming Sabathia pitches 6 innings, Chamberlain, Coke and Rivera each pitch 1, I get the Angels at 4.66
     
    Assuming Lackey pitches 6 and Oliver, Bulger and Fuentes each pitch 1, I get the Yankees at 3.96.
     
    Considering Matchbook currently has the Angels at +166 and the BaseRuns formula is giving the Angels more runs, I presume this means there is a strong lean on the Angels. 
     
    Actually, it appears to be even more tilted to the Angels because Coke and Bulger appear to have unusually good and bad numbers vs the other team and there is no guarantee either will play.
     
    I'm curious if you got the same numbers.  Believe it or not, I've never had a real problem with the basic concept of using baseruns.  My problem was that he said he clearly stated the ideas at the beginning when I don't think he did. 
     
    I also think that all of the posters that complained about units had a really good point.  You don't get credit for booking a Texas win at a higher unit total than a Seattle loss unless you clearly stated beforehand that you were betting more on Texas than you were on Seattle.  
     
    It really looks like revisionist history when he tried to take credit for betting unequal amounts postgame when his pregame posts made no attempt to differentiate between the two.  Say whatever you want, but people should assume that when somebody does that, they are full of it.  When they respond to legitimate queries with lies (I explained it earlier...) and personal insults, they look even more guilty.
     
    You can argue that he doesn't want credit and he has no need to explain himself.  In a general sense this is true, but when you create a thread, keep it going all year and post nearly everyday to create "documentation", you do need to explain yourself. 
     
    Enough of my soapbox, I'm curious if you got the same numbers.....
     
    ruffcutter2006
    ruffcutter2006
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: May, 2006
    Posts: 3674
    Posted: Oct. 16, 2009 - 12:29 PM ET #2146

    Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:

    OK, I appear to have launched an emotional response.  Perhaps, I was tad trite. 
     
    You guys even convinced me that I was a touch dismissive and that I should go back and reanalyze the past posts.  I was suspicious, but as I said before I believe in sabermetrics and I think it can be profitable in sports wagering.  Hell, it has been profitable in sports wagering.  I'm already successful with it.  I use an approach different from the one that you guys use but I'm always open to new things.
     
    Anyway, I did go back and reread the posts.  I don't think you like what I'm going to say.  As a matter of fact, I can pretty much predict the reaction.  I'm a loser.  I'm embarrassing myself.  You aren't really here to help me.  You don't have to respond to bottom feeders like me, etc. etc.  What you won't hear is a direct answer to the legitimate points that I make.
     
    I'm being respectful and logical and directly responding to the issue.  You could try doing the same. 
     
    This "system" is a complete and total fraud. There might be some success in the formula he uses.  There might not be.  Through over 2000 posts, its never directly documented.  Every attempt that anybody makes to ask direct questions is obfuscated. 
     
    He does post games.  He posts 100s of games. Perhaps 1000s. But his true results are never documented.  He never posts the units that he bets.  Only the units that he "won" after the fact.  This allows him to routinely be up +14 units after 6-4 days but only down -2 units after 4-6 days. With the ability to determine bet size after the games are played, its no wonder he is up quite a few units on the year.
     
    When people ask him to explain his unit betting strategy, he directs them to post #508, which can be summed up as "Unit management is really important.  Be sure you do it..."  When people ask him a second time, he says he already did it.  When they point out that #508 doesn't actually say anything useful, he starts to call them names.  He also tells them to do their own work and that he isn't really here to help them, etc.   He tells them he'll send them the units privately.  What exactly is the point of having a public forum?????
     
    Why is he here?
     
    He is here to document his method, of course.  Yet the process of "documentation" seems to always leave out the most important details.

    I haven't seen him try to sell anything...yet.  But I suspect the real reason is to eventually sell his picks and say look I earned a zillion dollars in 2009. 

    I've invested way too much time in this already.  But having gone this far, I would like to warn anyone that might possibly stumble across this post.  I have no doubt what the next posts will say:  A bunch of personal insults of me, claims that I haven't tried hard enough, etc. He might even include a threat to ban me from the forum, because what good is negativity like mine.
     
    What they won't include is any attempt to document an actual unit management strategy....
     
    You can be profitable with sabermetrics sports wagering but you won't win anywhere near 70% of your bets.  Anybody telling you otherwise is a con man operating a shell game. 
     
    I had high hopes for this thread but I'm sorely disappointed...
     



    What he said....
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:

    OK, I appear to have launched an emotional response.  Perhaps, I was tad trite. 
     
    You guys even convinced me that I was a touch dismissive and that I should go back and reanalyze the past posts.  I was suspicious, but as I said before I believe in sabermetrics and I think it can be profitable in sports wagering.  Hell, it has been profitable in sports wagering.  I'm already successful with it.  I use an approach different from the one that you guys use but I'm always open to new things.
     
    Anyway, I did go back and reread the posts.  I don't think you like what I'm going to say.  As a matter of fact, I can pretty much predict the reaction.  I'm a loser.  I'm embarrassing myself.  You aren't really here to help me.  You don't have to respond to bottom feeders like me, etc. etc.  What you won't hear is a direct answer to the legitimate points that I make.
     
    I'm being respectful and logical and directly responding to the issue.  You could try doing the same. 
     
    This "system" is a complete and total fraud. There might be some success in the formula he uses.  There might not be.  Through over 2000 posts, its never directly documented.  Every attempt that anybody makes to ask direct questions is obfuscated. 
     
    He does post games.  He posts 100s of games. Perhaps 1000s. But his true results are never documented.  He never posts the units that he bets.  Only the units that he "won" after the fact.  This allows him to routinely be up +14 units after 6-4 days but only down -2 units after 4-6 days. With the ability to determine bet size after the games are played, its no wonder he is up quite a few units on the year.
     
    When people ask him to explain his unit betting strategy, he directs them to post #508, which can be summed up as "Unit management is really important.  Be sure you do it..."  When people ask him a second time, he says he already did it.  When they point out that #508 doesn't actually say anything useful, he starts to call them names.  He also tells them to do their own work and that he isn't really here to help them, etc.   He tells them he'll send them the units privately.  What exactly is the point of having a public forum?????
     
    Why is he here?
     
    He is here to document his method, of course.  Yet the process of "documentation" seems to always leave out the most important details.

    I haven't seen him try to sell anything...yet.  But I suspect the real reason is to eventually sell his picks and say look I earned a zillion dollars in 2009. 

    I've invested way too much time in this already.  But having gone this far, I would like to warn anyone that might possibly stumble across this post.  I have no doubt what the next posts will say:  A bunch of personal insults of me, claims that I haven't tried hard enough, etc. He might even include a threat to ban me from the forum, because what good is negativity like mine.
     
    What they won't include is any attempt to document an actual unit management strategy....
     
    You can be profitable with sabermetrics sports wagering but you won't win anywhere near 70% of your bets.  Anybody telling you otherwise is a con man operating a shell game. 
     
    I had high hopes for this thread but I'm sorely disappointed...
     



    What he said....
     
    kreatture
    kreatture
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: May, 2009
    Posts: 2312
    Posted: Oct. 16, 2009 - 3:47 PM ET #2147

    Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:

    OK....Perhaps I was hasty again.  I ran the calculations.  First of all, I still have a little problem with "following the form set out in this thread".  There are multiple versions of the BaseRuns formula and I didn't exactly hear a clear and ringing endorsement of anyone of them. 
     
    I'm using the basic version from the Wikipedia page, primarily because it makes things easier since Baseball-reference.com doesn't show pitcher vs hitter SB and CS.   I suppose this is a fairly nitpicky point.  The other version listed only has minor changes.  However, it was still frustrating to read "go to Wikipedia" without clarifying that right off the bat. 
     
    Anyway, my understanding is that I'm supposed to use the lifetime numbers of the pitchers vs. all of the hitters currently on the other team.  I did this and for Sabathia I got
     
    A= 82
    B = 85.58
    C=147
    D = 6
    Outs = 159
    BaseRuns = 36.1722
    BaseRuns/27Outs = 6.14
     
     
    Assuming Sabathia pitches 6 innings, Chamberlain, Coke and Rivera each pitch 1, I get the Angels at 4.66
     
    Assuming Lackey pitches 6 and Oliver, Bulger and Fuentes each pitch 1, I get the Yankees at 3.96.
     
    Considering Matchbook currently has the Angels at +166 and the BaseRuns formula is giving the Angels more runs, I presume this means there is a strong lean on the Angels. 
     
    Actually, it appears to be even more tilted to the Angels because Coke and Bulger appear to have unusually good and bad numbers vs the other team and there is no guarantee either will play.
     
    I'm curious if you got the same numbers.  Believe it or not, I've never had a real problem with the basic concept of using baseruns.  My problem was that he said he clearly stated the ideas at the beginning when I don't think he did. 
     
    I also think that all of the posters that complained about units had a really good point.  You don't get credit for booking a Texas win at a higher unit total than a Seattle loss unless you clearly stated beforehand that you were betting more on Texas than you were on Seattle.  
     
    It really looks like revisionist history when he tried to take credit for betting unequal amounts postgame when his pregame posts made no attempt to differentiate between the two.  Say whatever you want, but people should assume that when somebody does that, they are full of it.  When they respond to legitimate queries with lies (I explained it earlier...) and personal insults, they look even more guilty.
     
    You can argue that he doesn't want credit and he has no need to explain himself.  In a general sense this is true, but when you create a thread, keep it going all year and post nearly everyday to create "documentation", you do need to explain yourself. 
     
    Enough of my soapbox, I'm curious if you got the same numbers.....




    I was also on the Angels for tonight, but I did grab the +1.5 insurance yesterday, just in case.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:

    OK....Perhaps I was hasty again.  I ran the calculations.  First of all, I still have a little problem with "following the form set out in this thread".  There are multiple versions of the BaseRuns formula and I didn't exactly hear a clear and ringing endorsement of anyone of them. 
     
    I'm using the basic version from the Wikipedia page, primarily because it makes things easier since Baseball-reference.com doesn't show pitcher vs hitter SB and CS.   I suppose this is a fairly nitpicky point.  The other version listed only has minor changes.  However, it was still frustrating to read "go to Wikipedia" without clarifying that right off the bat. 
     
    Anyway, my understanding is that I'm supposed to use the lifetime numbers of the pitchers vs. all of the hitters currently on the other team.  I did this and for Sabathia I got
     
    A= 82
    B = 85.58
    C=147
    D = 6
    Outs = 159
    BaseRuns = 36.1722
    BaseRuns/27Outs = 6.14
     
     
    Assuming Sabathia pitches 6 innings, Chamberlain, Coke and Rivera each pitch 1, I get the Angels at 4.66
     
    Assuming Lackey pitches 6 and Oliver, Bulger and Fuentes each pitch 1, I get the Yankees at 3.96.
     
    Considering Matchbook currently has the Angels at +166 and the BaseRuns formula is giving the Angels more runs, I presume this means there is a strong lean on the Angels. 
     
    Actually, it appears to be even more tilted to the Angels because Coke and Bulger appear to have unusually good and bad numbers vs the other team and there is no guarantee either will play.
     
    I'm curious if you got the same numbers.  Believe it or not, I've never had a real problem with the basic concept of using baseruns.  My problem was that he said he clearly stated the ideas at the beginning when I don't think he did. 
     
    I also think that all of the posters that complained about units had a really good point.  You don't get credit for booking a Texas win at a higher unit total than a Seattle loss unless you clearly stated beforehand that you were betting more on Texas than you were on Seattle.  
     
    It really looks like revisionist history when he tried to take credit for betting unequal amounts postgame when his pregame posts made no attempt to differentiate between the two.  Say whatever you want, but people should assume that when somebody does that, they are full of it.  When they respond to legitimate queries with lies (I explained it earlier...) and personal insults, they look even more guilty.
     
    You can argue that he doesn't want credit and he has no need to explain himself.  In a general sense this is true, but when you create a thread, keep it going all year and post nearly everyday to create "documentation", you do need to explain yourself. 
     
    Enough of my soapbox, I'm curious if you got the same numbers.....




    I was also on the Angels for tonight, but I did grab the +1.5 insurance yesterday, just in case.
     
    GMSI
    GMSI
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Jun, 2009
    Posts: 170
    Posted: Feb. 16, 2010 - 4:00 AM ET #2148

    mlb around the corner....!

     

    GMSI

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User

    mlb around the corner....!

     

    GMSI

     
    BottomUpCeo
    BottomUpCeo
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Feb, 2010
    Posts: 13
    Posted: Feb. 18, 2010 - 4:05 PM ET #2149

    GMSI,

    I'm new to covers and sports betting all together. I stumbled acrossed this thread about an hr ago and i have been tryna figure this thing out i was wondering if you had any insight or can explain it a lil more n detail

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User

    GMSI,

    I'm new to covers and sports betting all together. I stumbled acrossed this thread about an hr ago and i have been tryna figure this thing out i was wondering if you had any insight or can explain it a lil more n detail

     
     
    nolemonasses
    nolemonasses
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Jul, 2009
    Posts: 2230
    Posted: Feb. 18, 2010 - 8:12 PM ET #2150

    Yeah, the guy who started it is MIA and won't be posting it again this year.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Yeah, the guy who started it is MIA and won't be posting it again this year.
    All Forums | Systems & Strategies
    «First Previous 868788 ... 888990 Next Last»

    Hot Forums IconHot Forum Topics

    • 🤢🥴💩_ Fubah's risky baseball bets _🥶😲🥵 445,798 Covers arrow
    • 🏈🏈🏈 Fubah2's risky CFB bets 253,266 Covers arrow
    • Couple thoughts 4,079 Covers arrow
    • 9/8 POD 🔥🔥???? 3,636 Covers arrow
    • Tuesday 09/08/2026 980 Covers arrow
    • I'm embarrassed for Trump supporters 57,292 Covers arrow
    • NFL LOCKED IN! 94,833 Covers arrow
    • Breathtaking ....truly 20,481 Covers arrow
    • PART DEUX 225 Covers arrow
    • 2026 SIDE POT for 6-0, ROUND 1 178 Covers arrow

    Warning - External Link

    Report User

    Thank you for reporting
    This content is abusive or harmful
    This post is spam
    An error has occurred
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

    Delete Post

    Are you sure you would like to remove this post?

    Remove Thread

    Are you sure you would like to remove this thread?

    Scan Results

    Login/Register

    Happy to have you join the conversation. To do so, please login or create an account.
    Accounts are free and easy to create.

    Search


    Loading…

    Loading…

    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
    Join our community today
    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
    YouTube logo
    Facebook logo
    Twitter logo
    Instagram logo
    LinkedIn logo
    Google News logo
    Covers is verified safe by:
    Evalon Logo Logo GPWA Logo GDPR logo Logo GeoTrust logo Logo PCI DSS logo Logo
    Copyright © 1995 - 2026 CS Media Ltd. 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.