Posted:
#451
So....How many units is this system down?
Post All-Star Home System
Posted:
#452
Quote Originally Posted by hawk007:
So....How many units is this system down?
So....How many units is this system down?
Don't know how many units the Texas series would've costed had you played a 6- game chase. Probably in the ballpark of 150-200. But I doubt anyone played it like that.
I'm personally up 6 units with the betting structure I outline earlier. I would really recommend it. 
Posted:
#458
Quote Originally Posted by conrad63:
Is anyone going for all four game 1 plays today?
TEXAS, ATLANTA, CINNCINATI and PITTSBURGH.
GL
Is anyone going for all four game 1 plays today?
TEXAS, ATLANTA, CINNCINATI and PITTSBURGH.
GL
Since the Braves just won the division, I may wait to see what kind of lineup they throw out there. They do have a 1.5-game lead for the best record so still do have something to play for. As for the others, I'll be on them. I'm sure the Rangers will once again work their magic.
Posted:
#460
Well, that will do it for the season as the Orioles clear on Game 2.
Unfortunately, the system endured its first loss since I started tracking in 1999.
2013 season:
Record: 37-1
Game 1 wins -- 23
Game 2 wins -- 11
Game 3 wins -- 1
Game 4 wins -- 2
The overall record stands at 488-1.
Game 1 wins -- 290
Game 2 wins -- 139
Game 3 wins -- 43
Game 4 wins -- 10
Game 5 wins -- 4
Game 6 wins -- 1
There always are tweaks to made, ways to manage your money and learn as you go. For me, I'll never endure a six-game chase even though that's what the system says. Depending on how I'm doing, I'll reinvest my money elsewhere or cut teams earlier. I cut Texas after four games. Hopefullly, no one got destroyed with them.
In the last three seasons, the system has produced 84 wins, with 82 of them in the first three games. Perhaps that's the way to go in the future, just cut things after three games. You would've lost twice there but things would've been OK.
I'm always open to suggestions for the future on how to improve. If anyone has advice, let's hear it.
Thanks to everyone who participated and kept the bashing out of the thread. We all rant, including myself quite often which makes things fun from time to time.
Best of luck to everyone moving forward.
Chris
Unfortunately, the system endured its first loss since I started tracking in 1999.
2013 season:
Record: 37-1
Game 1 wins -- 23
Game 2 wins -- 11
Game 3 wins -- 1
Game 4 wins -- 2
The overall record stands at 488-1.
Game 1 wins -- 290
Game 2 wins -- 139
Game 3 wins -- 43
Game 4 wins -- 10
Game 5 wins -- 4
Game 6 wins -- 1
There always are tweaks to made, ways to manage your money and learn as you go. For me, I'll never endure a six-game chase even though that's what the system says. Depending on how I'm doing, I'll reinvest my money elsewhere or cut teams earlier. I cut Texas after four games. Hopefullly, no one got destroyed with them.
In the last three seasons, the system has produced 84 wins, with 82 of them in the first three games. Perhaps that's the way to go in the future, just cut things after three games. You would've lost twice there but things would've been OK.
I'm always open to suggestions for the future on how to improve. If anyone has advice, let's hear it.
Thanks to everyone who participated and kept the bashing out of the thread. We all rant, including myself quite often which makes things fun from time to time.
Best of luck to everyone moving forward.
Chris
Posted:
#461
I recommend people just chasing 2 games. In 2013 this system went 34/38 = 89%. Overall this system is 429/489 = 88%
Why in the world would some play roulette like that when you can just take the win on game A or B and if the system somehow finds its way to C back off and dip for A or B which you have GREAT odds to win.
Why in the world would some play roulette like that when you can just take the win on game A or B and if the system somehow finds its way to C back off and dip for A or B which you have GREAT odds to win.
Posted:
#462
Quote Originally Posted by DeFacto:
I recommend people just chasing 2 games. In 2013 this system went 34/38 = 89%. Overall this system is 429/489 = 88%
Why in the world would some play roulette like that when you can just take the win on game A or B and if the system somehow finds its way to C back off and dip for A or B which you have GREAT odds to win.
I recommend people just chasing 2 games. In 2013 this system went 34/38 = 89%. Overall this system is 429/489 = 88%
Why in the world would some play roulette like that when you can just take the win on game A or B and if the system somehow finds its way to C back off and dip for A or B which you have GREAT odds to win.
If you do that it's 34-11 still 75.5% but I'm sure the ave. was at least
-160 which doesn't leave much profit.
Posted:
#467
Looking over the standings, only 2 teams are locks to qualify (Oakland, Detroit). The Angels, Dodgers, Giants, and Cardinals would all have to win these next 2 games to qualify, The Brewers and Orioles have to win one of the remaining two games to qualify. Since the Cards and Brewers are playing each other, only one will qualify. There's a very good possibility that there could only be 3 teams to qualify this season after having a record number of teams qualify last season.
Posted:
#473
While this is true, you would have eliminated a number of wins over the 15 years that this system has been tracked. If you look closely at the 6 games that Texas lost last year, Darvish lost two 1-0 games, and a third game was lost because of Nathan coughing up a lead in the ninth...some things never change. The law of averages were against always winning. If two teams can pull out six wins at Texas like Oakland and Pittsburgh did last year, tip your hat and move on. While it was painful, it reinforces the fact that no system is 100% accurate.
GL
GL
Posted:
#474
Quote Originally Posted by Luckydan:
While this is true, you would have eliminated a number of wins over the 15 years that this system has been tracked. If you look closely at the 6 games that Texas lost last year, Darvish lost two 1-0 games, and a third game was lost because of Nathan coughing up a lead in the ninth...some things never change. The law of averages were against always winning. If two teams can pull out six wins at Texas like Oakland and Pittsburgh did last year, tip your hat and move on. While it was painful, it reinforces the fact that no system is 100% accurate.
GL
While this is true, you would have eliminated a number of wins over the 15 years that this system has been tracked. If you look closely at the 6 games that Texas lost last year, Darvish lost two 1-0 games, and a third game was lost because of Nathan coughing up a lead in the ninth...some things never change. The law of averages were against always winning. If two teams can pull out six wins at Texas like Oakland and Pittsburgh did last year, tip your hat and move on. While it was painful, it reinforces the fact that no system is 100% accurate.
GL
Beautifully said and agree completely..
While it is always important to go back over notes or look at how to avoid a similar loss in a system... sometimes, you just gotta say they were too good this time..
Hot Forum Topics
