Our Rx friend and commentator, Fezzik, starting to get ripped

Fishhead · Nov 8, 2005

Show me the TOP five handicappers the world has EVER known to mankind and tell me they have never had an equilavant or worse streak than you claim Fezzik is on currently.

Those top five have all had WORSE...........and Fezzik will be the first to tell you that he himself has probably had a worse run than what he has had the last 10 weeks.

This so called "bad streak" in the NFL that everybody is referring to on Fezzik is nothing more than a minor storm.

My goodness gracious..........:neenee:

-Fish-

ps- Once yours trully went on something in the neighborhood of a 21-79 streak involving basketball and football a few years back............does that make me a "terrible sportsbetter/handicapper" with impractical moron theories?

Had what would be considered a "horrible" NFL season in regards to SU wagers vs the spread last year(around 44%)............does that qualify me as being an a very sub-par NFL handicapper?............YES, FOR THAT YEAR.........BUT CERTAINLY NOT OVERALL AND IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS.

Statistcal probability will have one encounter many so called "bad streaks"........even if one were a 64% handicapper over the years........which nobody is even remotely close to longterm !!!!!!

A GREAT, yes GREAT, handicapper is any capper that can can hit over 54% lifetime and those hitting between 54% and 60% will encounter not one, buy MANY horrible streaks over their career.

xpanda · Nov 8, 2005

Fishhead said:
First off, it is just ONE very small sample of games.

ANYBODY that rates a handicappers ability on anything less than 1,000 games and/or 3 years of selections has no idea of the REALITY of sportsbetting and/or gambling in general.

Exactly.

So what is Fezzik's record over the past 1,000 games? Maybe David Matthews can come in and tell us? I do recall that he's said Fezzik is doing well in his total posted plays, just getting killed on the Hilton selections. Mind you, that was a couple of weeks ago, so maybe things have changed.

Seems to me that most sharps are getting killed this year, with the chalk players laughing to the bank. Stardust entrants doing poorly as a group, for example.

Santo · Nov 8, 2005

redpimp: When you rely on a sample of 10 games, 1-9 from a 55% handicapper isn't unlikely.

Illini · Nov 8, 2005

I couldn't stand Fezzik at first. I just thought he was arrogant, and had no respect for the newer bettors like myself who didn't have much experience. He can still come across like that at times, but I do respect him a lot, and I listen to anything he has to say. I've listened to his radio show, and he doesn't seem like a bad guy at all on there. I know that he left an executive job at an insurance company to bet full-time, so I don't think he's hurting too bad. I'm sure he'll bounce back, and he has assured all of his followers that his confidence hasn't wavered. I haven't followed his plays, but I might in the future. Gambling is hard, and even the best fail many times. He may or not be a great pure handicapper, but he knows how to make money gambling in many forms. I wish him the best, and hope to learn from him. One thing is for sure.....he accepts challenges and puts his picks on the line for all to see.

ChuckSims · Nov 8, 2005

Santo, its not 10 games, its 9 weeks. If you go to the Hilton Contest, Fezzik's 9 week record is there for all to see. His picks have been horseshit this year.

If you look closely at his picks, you will notice a common theme. He takes almost every team that has a point spread value over what the current line is. For example, if the Hilton Contest line has team x -2½, and the current line was team x -3, Fezzik would select that team. He has done that throughout the contest. Its not working as he is getting killed.

Fezzik made a challenge on the posting boards to anyone who would like to go head to head with him using the Hilton Contest picks for the challenge. Fortunately for him only three people took him up on it.

I like listening to Fezzik. He comes across as very intelligent. But when you start threads congratulating yourself on a winning pick, you better be prepared to take it when your picks stink up the forums.

Hitman26 · Nov 8, 2005

I wonder if he will do the 10k challenge again next year. If so then I imagine he will have at least 10 chomping at the bit to try their luck with him.

kermit16 · Nov 8, 2005

Fezzik is one of the sharpest guys on this forum and I am very confident He will return to his normal winning ways. There are a lot of sharps out there that have been taking their lumps so far this year. It's been a very un-usual year in which the value plays have been the wrong side. That doesn't happen very often nor does it continue for very long. Good luck to
Fezzik and all his followers.

ChuckSims · Nov 8, 2005

Hitman26 said:
I wonder if he will do the 10k challenge again next year. If so then I imagine he will have at least 10 chomping at the bit to try their luck with him.

10?...I am thinking a 1,000. LOL!

redpimp · Nov 8, 2005

Chuck Sims said:
Santo, its not 10 games, its 9 weeks. If you go to the Hilton Contest, Fezzik's 9 week record is there for all to see. His picks have been horseshit this year.

If you look closely at his picks, you will notice a common theme. He takes almost every team that has a point spread value over what the current line is. For example, if the Hilton Contest line has team x -2½, and the current line was team x -3, Fezzik would select that team. He has done that throughout the contest. Its not working as he is getting killed.

Fezzik made a challenge on the posting boards to anyone who would like to go head to head with him using the Hilton Contest picks for the challenge. Fortunately for him only three people took him up on it.

I like listening to Fezzik. He comes across as very intelligent. But when you start threads congratulating yourself on a winning pick, you better be prepared to take it when your picks stink up the forums.

Yes man its nine weeks (10 really if you count the one winning week)...

I am not bashing Fezzik for losing, i am more or less bashing old time cappers who always want to force people to use antiquated systems of handicapping (like fading the public or playing dogs for example, or relying on bogus trends)

A good handicapper should be able to make adjustments or even totally quit a particular once he realizes a losing streak is on the way... For some one to stubbornly maintain that an individual who fails to adjust his ways of gambling is a great capper is absurd....It can take only one losing season to see a capper totally broke and looking for a job waiting tables or cleaning bathrooms!!!! (btw and most importantly a capper who cant adjust his plays probably has even lousier money management abilities so that nine week loss should be hurting that poor man seriously)

Iceman · Nov 8, 2005

followed Fezzik for a few years now and because he is opinionated(sp) and confident he comes across as slightly arrogant and stubborn. He has his method and style and it works for him. But all in all a guy who is trying to teach and help everyone in this battle.

InsideThePylons · Nov 9, 2005

What I find to be hilarious is the fact that after 4 winning years in the Hilton contest, Fezzik basically touted himself as "the man" in the contest before this years event. How can anybody reasonable have a can't lose expectation after such a small sample of 360 games over 4 years. It would be like playing blackjack heads-up against the dealer for 2 hours and after showing a profit, claiming that "I am the man" and I will challenge anybody because I will never lose.

When playing horses for 4 years at 50 weeks a year, betting 250 races a week which includes 10 bets per race and 100+combos per race (much more,but easier to figure), for 4 years you have a statistical sample of 50,000 races.....500,000 bets.....and 5,000,000+ combos. To think that after 4 years of winning betting horses with this statistical sample you "MIGHT" start to think that you have it figured out, it is truly laughable that anybody with a clue would think that they have it figured out after a sample of 360 games.
:think2: :think2: :think2:

PatrickMcIrish · Nov 9, 2005

I disagree with Fezzik at times (like that go for 2 when down by 4 or 8 stuff) but to disqualify him over less than 50 picks this year is downright silly. If he was up a ton in 50 picks then it wouldn't prove him a guru no more than being down at this stage makes him an idiot. I can't personally vouch for the guy's plays the last few years but I would bet money he's smarter than most his critics, that is usually the case.

Geez, the guy gives his plays away and shares with his readers for nothing. Can't see much of a reason to bash the guy, if he's that dumb then just start fading his plays.

zeeman · Nov 9, 2005

Fish, if Fezzik knows more then 99% of sports bettors, then maybe he knows to much for his own good. He touted Patriots +4 over Indy. His reasoning was every favorite won on Sunday, and Dog bettors were out of Money. So Favorite players move a line that should have been indy -3 to Indy -4 or -5. Fezzik said there was value in getting +4 on the game. Any average handicapper knew Colts were a way better team, Pats are not the same team they have been in the past. They have so many key injuries, no healthy running backs. Plus Indy had huge motivation because Manning never beaten Brady. Indy was a no brainer, and Fezzik was talking about getting value at +4, because the line opened lower and should be lower but all Dog Money was lost on Sunday. What a Joke.

quantumleap · Nov 9, 2005

redpimp said:
Yes man its nine weeks (10 really if you count the one winning week)...

I am not bashing Fezzik for losing, i am more or less bashing old time cappers who always want to force people to use antiquated systems of handicapping (like fading the public or playing dogs for example, or relying on bogus trends)

A good handicapper should be able to make adjustments or even totally quit a particular once he realizes a losing streak is on the way... For some one to stubbornly maintain that an individual who fails to adjust his ways of gambling is a great capper is absurd....It can take only one losing season to see a capper totally broke and looking for a job waiting tables or cleaning bathrooms!!!! (btw and most importantly a capper who cant adjust his plays probably has even lousier money management abilities so that nine week loss should be hurting that poor man seriously)

I have to agree with redpimp here. Sports betting is not like blackjack, where if you subscribe to a certain way of betting you will have swings (due to standard deviation) to where you will come out ahead if you know what you are doing. Sports betting is recognizing trends in each portion of the sports season and reacting to those.

In the NFL this season the favorites have been winning at a higher than average clip. To continue to bet dogs because dogs end up winning in the long-run is to ignore a significant trend and will put you in the poor house in a hurry. Another example would be to notice that in the middle of baseball season the trends that happened before the All-Star game no longer hold true afterward. The reasons for this are several.

I'm not saying Fez bet dogs and I'm not saying Fez didn't adjust because I'm not familiar with his bets. The point I'm trying to make is that if you don't adjust to trends and changes in trends during the season you will lose in the long run as most do.

kermit16 · Nov 9, 2005

What everyone heres keep ignoring is the fact that what is happening this year so far is very unusual and doesn't fit the normal pattern in past years ! As I mentioned earlier in this thread, a lot of sharps are getting killed this year and according to the radio appearance of Sports Book Manager at the Las Vegas Hilton, Bob Scucci, the books have been taking a beating so far this year. Does anyone really believe that the Sportsbooks will continue to lose $$ year in and year out ? I think not and I believe that handicappers that make value plays will do fine over the years. Fezzik is very sharp and will ride out this very unusual year and stage a comeback I am sure. The comeback may be too late for this year but nobody wins big year in and year out !

Iceman · Nov 9, 2005

I have read in the past that a 55% nfl handicapper will have a LOSING year 1 in 6 or 7 years. Like everyone has said I judge his FREE picks by the context as much as the results and I he knows alot more than most

kermit16 · Nov 9, 2005

ice man said:
I have read in the past that a 55% nfl handicapper will have a LOSING year 1 in 6 or 7 years. Like everyone has said I judge his FREE picks by the context as much as the results and I he knows alot more than most

I agree with you 100 %. For example, my best bet this weekend was Colts - 31/2. I saw no value whatsoever in making a wager of the decimated Patriots whether the line was + 3 1/2 or + 5. Everyone should read plenty but in the end make their own decision.

DrunkenHorseplayer · Nov 9, 2005

He lists his picks on his website and, depite the vicious losing streak in which he's currently stuck, he's still ahead a little bit for the year; the guy knows what he's doing.

zee · Nov 9, 2005

I am not bashing Fezzik for losing, i am more or less bashing old time cappers who always want to force people to use antiquated systems of handicapping (like fading the public or playing dogs for example, or relying on bogus trends)

Absolutely correct, I'd go further and say that people who use the same system over and over again will struglle.(example, I'll take all teams that aplly on a 61% situation - why? I dunno, it just seems to make mathematical sense(even if there are more than a couple of laws saying that the coin has no memory)).
As far as I'm concerned, handicapping is not about applying a system, but about being able to decide what exactly do you need to apply on a specific game and what you should ignore(should, not could).(e.g. in baseball, before even starting to HC a game, you need to figure out - do I care about the wind in that game? Do I care about the pen in that game? Do I care about both starting pitchers or only one of them? Do I need to look pitcher vs batter stats? Do I use home record only? Away record only? Complete season record? How about that ump? Do I look at his NL games only? Do I look at his games vs pitchers? vs teams? etc.).
The easy answer most people give is to look @ everything, as there can't be useless information. As far as I'm concerned, some of the information is not only useless but harmful. I'm one that believes that the psychological factor in handicapping outweights the mathematical models most often than not. Or what I'm trying to say, I would back against a math model on psyche, I won't back against psyche only on some situation or cause the DST suck and they're projected to have 740 rushing yards....

Edit: And to get back to that earlier Fish post.. somebody who hit 55% 14 seasons, and 45% in 2, is not only a bad, but an awful handicapper.

Fishhead · Nov 9, 2005

zee said:
Edit: And to get back to that earlier Fish post.. somebody who hit 55% 14 seasons, and 45% in 2, is not only a bad, but an awful handicapper.

Suppose Joe Paterno is not only a bad coach, but an awful one.

Ok, whatever.

:smokingbb