over -150 is risk wager. all big favs. are to risk wagers. under -149 is win wager. In post# 49 at the end I said win wager when i ment to say risk. Oak. and Boston where big favs.
over -150 is risk wager. all big favs. are to risk wagers. under -149 is win wager. In post# 49 at the end I said win wager when i ment to say risk. Oak. and Boston where big favs.
yoiur interpeting it wrong the way he has them listed is this
on 5/23 san dieago +137 he put 86.19 under the risk colum this would be 2% of his current bankroll.
on 5/23 san Fransisco -105 he put 86.19 under the win colum wich is 2% of his bankroll
according to the directions on the top of the page he did it right and theres nothing wrong with the math.
if san fransisco was above -150 then the 86.19 wich is 2% would go in the risk colum
That means there's more than just the above/below -150 rule; there's also the 'dog' rule.
Because going by what you said, you RISK the percentage on dogs, you WIN the percentage on favs from -101 to -149, and then you RISK the percentage on favs of -150 or greater.
I thought his dog plays would definitely be 'to win'.
Quote Originally Posted by jv040:
yoiur interpeting it wrong the way he has them listed is this
on 5/23 san dieago +137 he put 86.19 under the risk colum this would be 2% of his current bankroll.
on 5/23 san Fransisco -105 he put 86.19 under the win colum wich is 2% of his bankroll
according to the directions on the top of the page he did it right and theres nothing wrong with the math.
if san fransisco was above -150 then the 86.19 wich is 2% would go in the risk colum
That means there's more than just the above/below -150 rule; there's also the 'dog' rule.
Because going by what you said, you RISK the percentage on dogs, you WIN the percentage on favs from -101 to -149, and then you RISK the percentage on favs of -150 or greater.
I thought his dog plays would definitely be 'to win'.
Hot Forum Topics
