Posted:
#1
If so how would you do it? 
Would you play a 5 game chase system?
...
Views: 1451
Posts: 10
Posted:
#4
Yet--you didn't finish your sentence. ALL SYSTEMS LOSE at one point-as far as back tested: I can go back and pick any sport and say that my system won over that time period. This is not a discussion when it comes to systems, it is a mathematical fact. When human error is factored (ie sports are people playing against people) you can uncover statistical advantages or variances but never guarantee an outcome (like 1 win in five games). Again, not trying to argue with you but ANYONE with a rudimentary understanding of statistics and probability will tell you (barring outright cheating by players or officials) nothing is a certainty. So, no, I would never play a chase system.
Posted:
#6
I agree with you Azranger - but one thing that intrigues me and I'm not math guy in any way, is I read an article - cant remember by who - but the thing you have to remember about any type of betting is it is based over time and any system or model will lose over time unless you have a positive EV that overcomes the vig. However, if you think of sports betting as a closed loop meaning a finite number of bets - I think systems can be profitable. I could be wrong but it makes sense to me
For example - lets say over 50,000 games a model is break even. You might say that model is not profitable - but what is it would take you 2 lifetimes to bet 50,000 games using that model. So really as long as your system is profitable over the last 10 years can you really say eventually it will lose - sure it will but will you be alive when that happens.
For example - lets say over 50,000 games a model is break even. You might say that model is not profitable - but what is it would take you 2 lifetimes to bet 50,000 games using that model. So really as long as your system is profitable over the last 10 years can you really say eventually it will lose - sure it will but will you be alive when that happens.
Posted:
#7
Quote Originally Posted by azranger:
Yet--you didn't finish your sentence. ALL SYSTEMS LOSE at one point-as far as back tested: I can go back and pick any sport and say that my system won over that time period. This is not a discussion when it comes to systems, it is a mathematical fact. When human error is factored (ie sports are people playing against people) you can uncover statistical advantages or variances but never guarantee an outcome (like 1 win in five games). Again, not trying to argue with you but ANYONE with a rudimentary understanding of statistics and probability will tell you (barring outright cheating by players or officials) nothing is a certainty. So, no, I would never play a chase system.
Yet--you didn't finish your sentence. ALL SYSTEMS LOSE at one point-as far as back tested: I can go back and pick any sport and say that my system won over that time period. This is not a discussion when it comes to systems, it is a mathematical fact. When human error is factored (ie sports are people playing against people) you can uncover statistical advantages or variances but never guarantee an outcome (like 1 win in five games). Again, not trying to argue with you but ANYONE with a rudimentary understanding of statistics and probability will tell you (barring outright cheating by players or officials) nothing is a certainty. So, no, I would never play a chase system.
Thx for your opinion that's what makes the world go around a difference in opinions. I do agree that YES this system has a small probability of losing but even if it does the system(s) will always make money. I can almost with a 100% guarantee say that playing to win 1unit per game for a season NO handicapper I know can win more units in a season than using one or a combination of systems used here,especially my all DOG chase where your exposure is way less than most. Good luck with your picks sir and may we all win! 
Posted:
#8
Quote Originally Posted by JEFFTHEHAT:
If so how would you do it?
If so how would you do it?
I would look at the gm 4 and gm 5 losses and if they are minimal and the system doesn't have a ton of juice I would run it with labby line(s). Labby kicks the garbage out of martingale everytime...much better to grind away and accept/plan for inevitable losses rather than try to find the perfect system. Just my 2 cents.
Posted:
#9
I would play a 5 game chase with a separate unit size in mind. If my normal unit size is $100 I would lower it to $30 for plays on such a system which would increase the amount of units I have in the bank.
Yes, I would not win much money, but if the system is 100% over many years my risk is minimal if it happens to fail once I try to use it.
Little money is still money.
Yes, I would not win much money, but if the system is 100% over many years my risk is minimal if it happens to fail once I try to use it.
Little money is still money.
Hot Forum Topics
