Hmmm........ Sounds familiar - Good stuff man I will try and back tack last years results including OT losses to be conservative If the magic # of 35 doesn't provide profitable results then I would wonder how we could adjust the qualifying # to achieve optimum results
Also I am looking into chasing the biggest dog on the +1.5 / PL labouchere style. Somebody else did some back testing and the #'s look alright whether a 3 or 6 gm chase was used And those other systems I found too I will try and track Elsewhere there is a thread on taking overs with dogs getting +190 or above. It was at +200 but they dropped it down. No chasing but somebody did suggest it. Pretty successful last year going 41-20-1 starting in Dec I think
0
Hmmm........ Sounds familiar - Good stuff man I will try and back tack last years results including OT losses to be conservative If the magic # of 35 doesn't provide profitable results then I would wonder how we could adjust the qualifying # to achieve optimum results
Also I am looking into chasing the biggest dog on the +1.5 / PL labouchere style. Somebody else did some back testing and the #'s look alright whether a 3 or 6 gm chase was used And those other systems I found too I will try and track Elsewhere there is a thread on taking overs with dogs getting +190 or above. It was at +200 but they dropped it down. No chasing but somebody did suggest it. Pretty successful last year going 41-20-1 starting in Dec I think
So far I messed around with only a several games from Jan of last year as a basis with about 30 games in Tight home and road records Mixed results Thinking of utilizing JM's tactic of the RPI filter in a way I mean is to use a number instead of .35 but rather like .10 or so But again nothing concrete here Just ideas and not enough time to test out Where's a computer geek when I need one to back test all this junk
JV............
I am still working on others
0
So far I messed around with only a several games from Jan of last year as a basis with about 30 games in Tight home and road records Mixed results Thinking of utilizing JM's tactic of the RPI filter in a way I mean is to use a number instead of .35 but rather like .10 or so But again nothing concrete here Just ideas and not enough time to test out Where's a computer geek when I need one to back test all this junk
So far I messed around with only a several games from Jan of last year as a basis with about 30 games in Tight home and road records Mixed results Thinking of utilizing JM's tactic of the RPI filter in a way I mean is to use a number instead of .35 but rather like .10 or so But again nothing concrete here Just ideas and not enough time to test out Where's a computer geek when I need one to back test all this junk
JV............
I am still working on others
I thought .35 might be too high for hockey. but then again even if only a handful of plays work out it might be worth it if theres a high percentage of wins.
0
Quote Originally Posted by MontanaMax:
So far I messed around with only a several games from Jan of last year as a basis with about 30 games in Tight home and road records Mixed results Thinking of utilizing JM's tactic of the RPI filter in a way I mean is to use a number instead of .35 but rather like .10 or so But again nothing concrete here Just ideas and not enough time to test out Where's a computer geek when I need one to back test all this junk
JV............
I am still working on others
I thought .35 might be too high for hockey. but then again even if only a handful of plays work out it might be worth it if theres a high percentage of wins.