drunkguy said:
Then what shold we discuss if everything will kill an edge? if you post an analysis of a game, someone might take that and apply it to other games, and your methods were just exposed to others, thereby taking away your edge. Don't say anything useful in forums b/c there goes the edge. Just call theories horseshit...Go RX! :lolBIG:
Pancho Sanza said:
I told you what the bet is. Are you just dumb or is this the new method you're using to get out of the bet?
You wrote:
"As far as him asking me to post facts/statistics, I didn't see any from him.
Trust me he doesn't have em because if he did, he wouldn't have made his silly statement."
The bet is that I do have the stats. The wager is for whatever you choose to make it. Now that we are back onto the original accusation, are you going to change the subject again?Trust me he doesn't have em because if he did, he wouldn't have made his silly statement."
Now if someone is new to gambling, I will STILL tell him to never lay more than a FG in the NFL.
Does that mean I won't lay 6 or 8 points? No
... but it gets him to stop thinking that the "the better team will clobber the other team". It helps in changing his midset. Same thing with me saying to never play a worse line.
Shrink once wrote than any new gambler should play twice as many unders and overs and twice as many dogs as favorites. Does that mean we should too? No - but it does give the guy a starting point.
Now can you stop changing the subject? Are you going to make the bet or are you going to run off with your tail between your legs, Pancho? and before you ask me again, the bet is that I have the stats!!!!!!!!
Does that mean I won't lay 6 or 8 points? No
... but it gets him to stop thinking that the "the better team will clobber the other team". It helps in changing his midset. Same thing with me saying to never play a worse line.
Shrink once wrote than any new gambler should play twice as many unders and overs and twice as many dogs as favorites. Does that mean we should too? No - but it does give the guy a starting point.
Now can you stop changing the subject? Are you going to make the bet or are you going to run off with your tail between your legs, Pancho? and before you ask me again, the bet is that I have the stats!!!!!!!!
Pancho Sanza said:You want me to bet you that you have data?
data on what?
what a fucknut.ucking:
YEAH - that is what you accused me of not having and that is what you have been trying to weasel out of. You made a good effort, but the proof is in the pudding.
Either you;re dumb
...or you just dont have the balls, so from now on, I will refer to you as SHE
I think you are the type of girl who talks the talk, but can't walk the walk, Sweetie.
I have the stats that say that wagering for a team to cover both halfs is less than 50% and that is essentially what we are debating here - because that is what gives you a worse line in the 2nd half - since you would be taking a team that covered the first half if you're going to get a worse overall line. I hope that is not too hard for you to understand
Are you going to weasel out of this one too, Ms Pancho? I guess you'll just act like you don't understand the reasoning or something.
Are you going to weasel out of this one too, Ms Pancho? I guess you'll just act like you don't understand the reasoning or something.
cincy_ said:
Thats far different from what you originally said, when you said NEVER.
If you had said that in the first place, I would never have made the horseshit comment.
Which book are you taking opening/closing lines from on that and over which seasons, I still may be willing to bet you because intuition tells me the team covering the first half probably covers the 2nd half more often than not.
And if the bet is anything less than $5000, dont waste my time.
Pancho Sanza said:
Case closed, Ms. Pancho. You really don't have the balls, as far as I am concerned.
The $5,000 comment and all the details that you want to get into is enough for me to know that if I try to advance this further, you'll wait until the last minute and come up with something again ad say "if you had said that in the 1st place".
Now you're talking about INTUITION???
You must not understand English.
I said I may be willing to bet you on your second point, where you
I have data too son, tell me which seasons you base this theory (your 2nd one) and which books you are grabbing lines from and I will post up the $5000.
We can get pinnacle or Olympic to hold it.
I said I may be willing to bet you on your second point, where you
I have data too son, tell me which seasons you base this theory (your 2nd one) and which books you are grabbing lines from and I will post up the $5000.
We can get pinnacle or Olympic to hold it.
Pancho Sanza said:
YAWN.
Ms. Pancho, you need to stop the weaseling.
I would not post a challenge like this with anyone but you, ma'am. You try to degrade people and you act like a know-it-all and then you turn out to be a fraud. In Southie (which is South Boston) we have a phrase for a person like you:
ALL GAS AND NO EXPLOSION
PS: I will not reply any further post and will not even read this thread anymore.
parlayin said:
not to interrupt the little love-fest going on here,
but 99.99% of people on these sites have absolutely zero to offer. Most people's "methods" can't be exposed because they don't even know if what they are doing is long-term profitable
there has been a thread all day on the front page about how often do underdogs cover in bowl games
I am not even at home and was able to find the answer in 30 seconds (and posted it)
now if no one at the RX can come up with a simple ATS record after a post has been up 6 hours, how are they going to be able to repay a post which might represent weeks of work collecting data and analyzing it?
Journeyman said:
1. keep up on new books and industry news. Helps me keep from being stiffed
2. general entertainment
3. The occassional nugget of good information
anyway, anyone want to go answer the guy's question about underdogs covering? I see no one could give him a better answer than me, thread now at 10 hours on the front page
