I have heard guys say that they make a lot of money just talking to guys a.k.a. "mush" and betting against all of their picks. Basically they find guys or horrible services that they think really suck and they bet only the opposite of all of their games. Can people really make money doing this?
You never know....
If people were fading me this year in hoops,college and pro,they would be rich.
It's been a horrific year.....I go to a high school game in Saginaw,Mi last night.
J.Richardson is there at the game and guarantees a W in the dunk contest and can't send one home at the end.
It can't get any worse????
March Madness can not get here fast enough
Fade Me And Win.....College or Pro
If people were fading me this year in hoops,college and pro,they would be rich.
It's been a horrific year.....I go to a high school game in Saginaw,Mi last night.
J.Richardson is there at the game and guarantees a W in the dunk contest and can't send one home at the end.
It can't get any worse????
March Madness can not get here fast enough
Fade Me And Win.....College or Pro
You could have made a lot of money fading my picks in this year's hockey contest. I'm in dead last out of 138 entrants. That's hard to do, believe me. I'm not even sure I remember how I managed to do it.
But if you faded me in the Weekend Warrior college hoops contest, you would have paid dearly, since I am 48-24-3 in that one. The funny part is that I put much more effort into my hockey picks than the hoops picks. Moral of the story: Don't think too much!!!
But if you faded me in the Weekend Warrior college hoops contest, you would have paid dearly, since I am 48-24-3 in that one. The funny part is that I put much more effort into my hockey picks than the hoops picks. Moral of the story: Don't think too much!!!
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gold64:
I work with a guy who loses at everything he does.
He has no idea I'm only talking to him because he's so consistently wrong.....
one else talks to him.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
In all seriousness, i have spoken to several people who tell me that there are guys who seriously pick only 30% winners very very consistently. Maybe fading is the way to go.
I work with a guy who loses at everything he does.
He has no idea I'm only talking to him because he's so consistently wrong.....
one else talks to him.
In all seriousness, i have spoken to several people who tell me that there are guys who seriously pick only 30% winners very very consistently. Maybe fading is the way to go.
there are guys that probably hit less than 40%, but these guys generally either tap out or adapt. it doesnt take a ton of intelligence to see if that if you are just that bad then do the opposite. there are some people that I just hate seeing 'with' me or that I like being 'against' me. But I think it's best to come to your own conclusions first, otherwise you have to count on other people being either 'good' or 'bad', and I 've seen really good handicappers last for one season and just have a terrible year the next, and vice versa. Flaming generally helps a 'bad' handicapper 'do worse'. When 'bad' handicappers do 'good' for a while, they generally get 'real bad' 'real fast'.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ATX:
there are guys that probably hit less than 40%, but these guys generally either tap out or adapt. it doesnt take a ton of intelligence to see if that if you are just that bad then do the opposite. there are some people that I just hate seeing 'with' me or that I like being 'against' me. But I think it's best to come to your own conclusions first, otherwise you have to count on other people being either 'good' or 'bad', and I 've seen really good handicappers last for one season and just have a terrible year the next, and vice versa. Flaming generally helps a 'bad' handicapper 'do worse'. When 'bad' handicappers do 'good' for a while, they generally get 'real bad' 'real fast'.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Great points.
there are guys that probably hit less than 40%, but these guys generally either tap out or adapt. it doesnt take a ton of intelligence to see if that if you are just that bad then do the opposite. there are some people that I just hate seeing 'with' me or that I like being 'against' me. But I think it's best to come to your own conclusions first, otherwise you have to count on other people being either 'good' or 'bad', and I 've seen really good handicappers last for one season and just have a terrible year the next, and vice versa. Flaming generally helps a 'bad' handicapper 'do worse'. When 'bad' handicappers do 'good' for a while, they generally get 'real bad' 'real fast'.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Great points.
the book i place bets at actually has a reward for very poor gamblers.if you go 0 for 15 it pays 400 for 1. ive really tried to lose them all. its nearly impossible to be that bad.admittedly parlaying 15 games is a sign of brain damage but for those making bets in a coma the payoff is great.RG
No service is as consistently bad every year as JR Miller's. It's almost worth the $89 per month to fade him. That guy has real talent. He' been around 46% ATS for the past 2 years in the NFL and NBA.
If you ever agree with his Bonus Play, then you're basically
if you've already placed the wager.
If you ever agree with his Bonus Play, then you're basically
