just another passer by I losing streak and and itsLosing streaks happen, but consider this. In the last 6.3 years and over 8000 bets ive never lost more than 6 times consecutively. And have only lost more than 4 times.7 times, I have won more than 4 times 126 times over the same period. Thats the comparison
all documented
I bet u this time next year (or less) The Zone will be history
u just a guy that had another handle and tried his picks until it "sticks"
congrats buddy, ur on a winning streak today!!!!
every few weeks a "new" guy come on here and start saying he is 60%+ over the past million years....
dime a dozen on covers
0
Quote Originally Posted by Sentinel3:
just another passer by I losing streak and and itsLosing streaks happen, but consider this. In the last 6.3 years and over 8000 bets ive never lost more than 6 times consecutively. And have only lost more than 4 times.7 times, I have won more than 4 times 126 times over the same period. Thats the comparison
all documented
I bet u this time next year (or less) The Zone will be history
u just a guy that had another handle and tried his picks until it "sticks"
congrats buddy, ur on a winning streak today!!!!
every few weeks a "new" guy come on here and start saying he is 60%+ over the past million years....
I bet u this time next year (or less) The Zone will be history
u just a guy that had another handle and tried his picks until it "sticks"
congrats buddy, ur on a winning streak today!!!!
every few weeks a "new" guy come on here and start saying he is 60%+ over the past million years....
dime a dozen on covers
Examine you're on, I love you doubting Thomas's you think you have seen it all. As I said to another doubter on here. The passage of time will garner some SERIOUS respect and reverence for this strategy. Ive studied statistics and strategies from everything from roulette to baseball to greyhounds. Nothing but nothing touches the zone.
I will be waiting for you to give it up a year down the rope and admit you didn't know it all.
0
Quote Originally Posted by examine:
all documented
I bet u this time next year (or less) The Zone will be history
u just a guy that had another handle and tried his picks until it "sticks"
congrats buddy, ur on a winning streak today!!!!
every few weeks a "new" guy come on here and start saying he is 60%+ over the past million years....
dime a dozen on covers
Examine you're on, I love you doubting Thomas's you think you have seen it all. As I said to another doubter on here. The passage of time will garner some SERIOUS respect and reverence for this strategy. Ive studied statistics and strategies from everything from roulette to baseball to greyhounds. Nothing but nothing touches the zone.
I will be waiting for you to give it up a year down the rope and admit you didn't know it all.
Man Lapentti made hard work of it, but after a third set tie break that looked like it was about to rival Borg McEnroe 1980 Wimbledon. Lapentti took it fittingly 12--10
That's a new record for the ZONE, 12 straight wins.
I will see if I can keep it going to tomorrow and also try to hit a sweet strikerate of 80%.
0
Man Lapentti made hard work of it, but after a third set tie break that looked like it was about to rival Borg McEnroe 1980 Wimbledon. Lapentti took it fittingly 12--10
That's a new record for the ZONE, 12 straight wins.
I will see if I can keep it going to tomorrow and also try to hit a sweet strikerate of 80%.
Examine you're on, I love you doubting Thomas's you think you have seen it all. As I said to another doubter on here. The passage of time will garner some SERIOUS respect and reverence for this strategy. Ive studied statistics and strategies from everything from roulette to baseball to greyhounds. Nothing but nothing touches the zone.
I will be waiting for you to give it up a year down the rope and admit you didn't know it all.
don't matter
this is probably ur 5th attempted to gather some votes here
congrats on ur run
The Zone is what is
0
Quote Originally Posted by Sentinel3:
Examine you're on, I love you doubting Thomas's you think you have seen it all. As I said to another doubter on here. The passage of time will garner some SERIOUS respect and reverence for this strategy. Ive studied statistics and strategies from everything from roulette to baseball to greyhounds. Nothing but nothing touches the zone.
I will be waiting for you to give it up a year down the rope and admit you didn't know it all.
don't matter
this is probably ur 5th attempted to gather some votes here
Looking through the thread not sure I follow the Zone practice. I do understand that this is a money management piece but doesn't explain approach to picking tennis wagers. I have to admit ITF/Challengers can be low hanging fruit. Limited number of offshore books (Bovada, 5dimes) for USA players give access to lower level tournaments with max bets of $200 each.
Best of luck to you.
0
Nice Streak......
Looking through the thread not sure I follow the Zone practice. I do understand that this is a money management piece but doesn't explain approach to picking tennis wagers. I have to admit ITF/Challengers can be low hanging fruit. Limited number of offshore books (Bovada, 5dimes) for USA players give access to lower level tournaments with max bets of $200 each.
Hi and thanks, yes Knapp has given me three straight wins. I will go into more detail later about my bet selection process. Im now thirteen straight wins. I need it to lose now lol, so I can raise stakes and make some real money.
Strikerate is at a dream level of 80% now. It will soon drop back to the 70s again, that's the nature of variance.
0
Quote Originally Posted by gtmoney76:
Got Knapp -2 -125 games best of luck
Hi and thanks, yes Knapp has given me three straight wins. I will go into more detail later about my bet selection process. Im now thirteen straight wins. I need it to lose now lol, so I can raise stakes and make some real money.
Strikerate is at a dream level of 80% now. It will soon drop back to the 70s again, that's the nature of variance.
Not to sound like a hater but a regression towards the mean is closer to 50-55% wta is a very hard thing to be only favorites and expect 70% . That said I can see a high % in ITF/ challenger given ATP/ wta players cleaning up at this level.
0
Not to sound like a hater but a regression towards the mean is closer to 50-55% wta is a very hard thing to be only favorites and expect 70% . That said I can see a high % in ITF/ challenger given ATP/ wta players cleaning up at this level.
Not to sound like a hater but a regression towards the mean is closer to 50-55% wta is a very hard thing to be only favorites and expect 70% . That said I can see a high % in ITF/ challenger given ATP/ wta players cleaning up at this level.
Ive had six years where my lowest finish was a strikerate of just over 70% in 2010. I'm going to give you a greater insight into my bet selection process in about an hour. Then see if I can make it 14 straight winners for the day.
0
Quote Originally Posted by gtmoney76:
Not to sound like a hater but a regression towards the mean is closer to 50-55% wta is a very hard thing to be only favorites and expect 70% . That said I can see a high % in ITF/ challenger given ATP/ wta players cleaning up at this level.
Ive had six years where my lowest finish was a strikerate of just over 70% in 2010. I'm going to give you a greater insight into my bet selection process in about an hour. Then see if I can make it 14 straight winners for the day.
01--Only favourites that fall into the zones pricing range of 1.40--1.80 or 2/5--4/5 are considered. The reason for this is if you bet on short favourites it takes at least three wins to match every loss. the odds are already stacked against you.
With the Zone you will require about two wins to break even which is an acceptable exchange to me. And as we saw with DJokovic and Federer last week. Short priced favourites do get beaten.
At the other end of the spectrum. Favourites priced above 1.80 are more 50/50 and tend to lose more often.
02--Betting frequency, you may not consider this. But it's a CRUCIAL FACTOR to success in sports betting. I never bet on more than four picks in any one day. 2--4 is my range, depending on time and available qualifiers. This has allowed me to dodge losses for longer on the whole. And you can already see the results.
03--Player consideration. Im not big of the H2H factor. Federer had beaten Cilic 5--0 before his semi final thrashing by him. I saw people saying things like bet your house on Federer to win. Some people are beyond stupid. Thats why I don't consider the player to player factor.
What I do consider is how well certain players perform on a surface and their general showing in the early to quarter final stages. I NEVER bet on finals. And only occasionally on semi finals. I generally don't like Slams. More upsets tend to happen. FIVE of my eight losses since I started posting on this forum came from ONE tournament. THE U.S OPEN.
Thats why overall I concentrate on the lower level tournaments. So those are the considerations I make when choosing picks.
I appreciate American bettors are limited. But even if you do have a limit of 200 dollars on these type of events, you can do alright. The ZONE holds up if you're a flat bettor as you will see. I know the purists and so-called professional handicappers sneer at anything but flat bets. But the thinking is they will survive a nasty losing streak. But what if you have a method/system/strategy that doesn't know what a nasty losing streak is?
Then you have greater staking freedom. I knew someone that subscribed to one of these handicappers who gave out sports picks. In this case BASEBALL. They were doing alright until they hit an 9 game losing streak. Followed by a win and another 7 game losing streak.
And they were paying good money for that.
0
BET SELECTION FOR THE ZONE.
01--Only favourites that fall into the zones pricing range of 1.40--1.80 or 2/5--4/5 are considered. The reason for this is if you bet on short favourites it takes at least three wins to match every loss. the odds are already stacked against you.
With the Zone you will require about two wins to break even which is an acceptable exchange to me. And as we saw with DJokovic and Federer last week. Short priced favourites do get beaten.
At the other end of the spectrum. Favourites priced above 1.80 are more 50/50 and tend to lose more often.
02--Betting frequency, you may not consider this. But it's a CRUCIAL FACTOR to success in sports betting. I never bet on more than four picks in any one day. 2--4 is my range, depending on time and available qualifiers. This has allowed me to dodge losses for longer on the whole. And you can already see the results.
03--Player consideration. Im not big of the H2H factor. Federer had beaten Cilic 5--0 before his semi final thrashing by him. I saw people saying things like bet your house on Federer to win. Some people are beyond stupid. Thats why I don't consider the player to player factor.
What I do consider is how well certain players perform on a surface and their general showing in the early to quarter final stages. I NEVER bet on finals. And only occasionally on semi finals. I generally don't like Slams. More upsets tend to happen. FIVE of my eight losses since I started posting on this forum came from ONE tournament. THE U.S OPEN.
Thats why overall I concentrate on the lower level tournaments. So those are the considerations I make when choosing picks.
I appreciate American bettors are limited. But even if you do have a limit of 200 dollars on these type of events, you can do alright. The ZONE holds up if you're a flat bettor as you will see. I know the purists and so-called professional handicappers sneer at anything but flat bets. But the thinking is they will survive a nasty losing streak. But what if you have a method/system/strategy that doesn't know what a nasty losing streak is?
Then you have greater staking freedom. I knew someone that subscribed to one of these handicappers who gave out sports picks. In this case BASEBALL. They were doing alright until they hit an 9 game losing streak. Followed by a win and another 7 game losing streak.
Looking through the thread not sure I follow the Zone practice. I do understand that this is a money management piece but doesn't explain approach to picking tennis wagers. I have to admit ITF/Challengers can be low hanging fruit. Limited number of offshore books (Bovada, 5dimes) for USA players give access to lower level tournaments with max bets of $200 each.
Best of luck to you.
he bets about 15$ a play so he well below any max wagers
too bad that his zone confidence does not translate to real money
its like a life long trial run
0
Quote Originally Posted by gtmoney76:
Nice Streak......
Looking through the thread not sure I follow the Zone practice. I do understand that this is a money management piece but doesn't explain approach to picking tennis wagers. I have to admit ITF/Challengers can be low hanging fruit. Limited number of offshore books (Bovada, 5dimes) for USA players give access to lower level tournaments with max bets of $200 each.
Best of luck to you.
he bets about 15$ a play so he well below any max wagers
too bad that his zone confidence does not translate to real money
he bets about 15$ a play so he well below any max wagers
too bad that his zone confidence does not translate to real money
its like a life long trial run
I am down to $15 a play, because its winning way past my expectations. Once it loses. I will jump up 10 fold. There's a saying talk quietly but walk with a big stick. In gambling terms that translates to bet modestly but have a powerful bankroll in relation to your bet size.
One of the cardinal mistakes made by gamblers is risking too much of their bankroll on a given bet. Plenty have ended up broke as a result. As good as I know the ZONE is. I STILL have respect for variance and the downward turn. And that's why I will only play big on certain occasions.
0
Quote Originally Posted by examine:
he bets about 15$ a play so he well below any max wagers
too bad that his zone confidence does not translate to real money
its like a life long trial run
I am down to $15 a play, because its winning way past my expectations. Once it loses. I will jump up 10 fold. There's a saying talk quietly but walk with a big stick. In gambling terms that translates to bet modestly but have a powerful bankroll in relation to your bet size.
One of the cardinal mistakes made by gamblers is risking too much of their bankroll on a given bet. Plenty have ended up broke as a result. As good as I know the ZONE is. I STILL have respect for variance and the downward turn. And that's why I will only play big on certain occasions.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
