Picks and stuff 2023

[truthstorm]

Dropping in with picks and percentages from a few different systems that have done well for me over the past years, mixed in with rambles and rants.
And nothing but truth.

First up, Whiskey Purdue under 54.
You can get this at anywhere between 53' and 54' right now.
I'll use 54 because:
1 - it's readily available, most players can get this number easily
2 - posting picks with fake lines that no one can get is a dick move
3 - it's the number I bought

League-wise, this particular play is 5-3 this year. Not a spectacular 62% cuz it's only 8 games, early in the season with not much data accumulated, but it's above the water line and that's better than the alternative.

Team-wise, Wisc and Pur are each 1-0 in this play, so I got that going for me.

Taking a look at a few others, will add additional picks over the next few days.
I'll also show you how you could be hitting over 70% in college ball this year, using info right here at your fingertips, if anyone is interested.

Before I bail, a word about Spectrum.
Raised their rates AGAIN this summer.
And then there was the whole lost sports channels clusterfuk as they battled it out with Mouse Land over who is the bigger crook.

Done with them, cutting the cord.

Chose YouTube TV as my new content provider, because it offers the most college games.

Chose AT&T as my new internet provider because Milana "Lilly" Vayntrub has a killer rack (always a major factor when making any crucial buying decision.)

 

[truthstorm]

Change - Just checked a few more outs. I'm going to use 53' for Badgers and Boilers, seems to be the commonly available number right now.

 

[indiana]

T. Storm.....welcome to the RX CFB Forum......
sure you will enjoy the site....many solid cappers here.....
BOL with your action....indy

 

[truthstorm]

Indy, thanks for the welcome, best of luck to you, too.


Next pick, N Mex St vs Hawaii under 57.

I'm late on this one, it opened 59, but I'm on it anyway (see B below.)
It's the same play as the Wisc game (5-3 this season) but with two differences:

A) Team-wise, N Mex and Haw are both 0-0, not 1-0 each like Wisc vs Purdue.

B) I missed the best number, 69, but of the 8 times this play has come up this season and had a line drop of 2 or greater, the record is 2-0.

Does that 2-0 make it a guarantee? Of course not, no more than 20-0 would. There's no such thing as GUARANTEED!!! in sports betting. But at 2-0 I'll play it until it loses. The value in streaks is getting on them early. When you see stuff like, "HOT!!! I'm 14-1 my last 15 picks!" you have to realize the value in that trend started 15 games ago. NO ONE hits 93% over the long run and the value in an already established streak like that has likely passed.
Am I saying fade the streak? No, not unless you have strong numbers in favor of doing so. All I'm saying that if you chase streaks you'll probably lose money. What you want to do is identify streaks and get on early, before the worm turns. (Yes, easier said than done.)

Now, about that "You could be hitting 70%" that I mentioned in my first post. I make my own numbers, my own formulas, my own plays, but most people in Forum Land don't handicap for themselves. If you're in that group here are a couple of points to consider:

1) The majority of sports bettors lose. Estimates have it as high as 95-98% of bettors (except on the internet of course, where everybody's a "winner".)

2) The majority of forum visitors look for a winner to tail.

See the disconnect between the two?

People are looking for the needle in the haystack rather than the easier find - a loser worth fading.
How do you spot a loser?
In any forum you can just throw a dart and hit one. But you need one who is worse than the average 45-50 % guy.
How can you spot them?
Easy - like bad poker players they have tells.
I'll point out a few of these tells as I add picks over the next three days.

First, and easiest tell to spot - the Magician.
A guy who posts his record, (won/loss and dollar amount) after a lucky win in the first game or two of the season, but then the losses pile up and he turns into David Copperfield and makes the record disappear!
Eventually, after he gets lucky and wins a few, the record magically reappears. But it's never accurate, always missing many losses, hoping no one notices. Bettors/posters who are really winning don't have to hide their record. (And no, I'm not saying all posters should give a record, that's their personal choice.)

Second, the Chaser.
After another day of losing badly he doubles down on his losses on the late game.
This is strictly an amateur move. (If you're new to betting - Don't do it!)

Back tomorrow with more. I'll leave with this - lately, the sycophantic sports media has been even more cringe-worthy than usual. I'm speaking specifically about their Deification of Deion. At a press conference last week he was asked a typical-of-the-press fawning, moronic question, "Coach Prime, how do you feel about winning your first three games?" And I thought, where is Stuttering John when ya need him? "Uhh, uhh, umm, Da-da-da-Deion, wha-wha-what would you rather have, three wins or your two toes?"

 

[VegasKnows]

League-wise, this particular play is 5-3 this year. Not a spectacular 62% cuz it's only 8 games, early in the season with not much data accumulated, but it's above the water line and that's better than the alternative.

What 8 games are you talking about?????? Define league-wise.
There have been only 4 conference games so far, all under.

 

[truthstorm]

VK, thanks for visiting, and adding a comment/post.
There's no mention of "conference' in my posts, this is a situational play, "league-wise" as stated, not conference-wise; all FBS teams.
But, I do a LOT of stat work, and being human I make mistakes, so if you (or anyone) see something that does not look right, please point it out so I can double check. I appreciate it.

Here's the chart:
S Jose St/USC L
N Mex/Tex A&M L
Tex St/Baylor L
Ill/Kan W
W Mich/Syr W
Tex St/Tex SA W
Wisc/Wash W
Syr/Purdue W
5-3

After dropping three straight it's riding a five straight win streak so I'm taking these two.
Nev vs Tex St game also fits the parameters to qualify as a play, but I probably won't take that one.

Best of luck to you this weekend.

 

[truthstorm]

Record 1-1

I like Coach Fickell when I'm playing an under because he usually employs smart play-clock management with a 4th quarter lead. I had a win in sight with the under (had 54 on my ticket, 53' in the forum), his Badgers up 30-17 late in the game. But Purdue fumbled deep in their own territory and at the three minute mark Wisc scored, 36-17 now.
The extra point will give me a push on my ticket, but up 19 points with just three minutes left, Fickell decides to go for a two point conversion to make the lead 21 (as if Purdue could score three TD's in 3 minutes.)
If he misses, I win. If he makes it, I lose by 1.
They made it.

Fortunately, I nailed the Hawaii game as it stayed under by a comfortable 20 points.

First play I made this week, E Car vs Rice over 46'.

The line on this game has already dropped 4 points or more depending on where you shop. I could wait to see if it keeps dropping but bettors who got it at 50/49' might look to get a FG-or-greater-than middle, so I grabbed it now in case a buy-back sends the number back up.

I need 23 points from each of them.
E Car has reached that number in of two of three games vs teams that aren't named Michigan (ranked #1 in the country on D for PPG.)
Rice has hit the 23 mark in three of four games, missing only against Texas on the road (ranked #14 in PPG.)

I watched the Rice game last week and saw them get beat up on the ground (162 yards) and the air (435 yards), surrendering 42 pts.
E. Car should be able to do enough damage to get 23 points and I think Rice, who has scored a TD in 10 of 12 quarters vs teams not named the Longhorns, can get me at least three TD'S at home vs this Pirate D, ranked 102 in the country in PPG.

 

[indiana]

t/storm.......nice write up buddy....
BOL with your action this week....indy

 

[truthstorm]

Thanks Indy. Looked good on paper, but E Car fell short.

Recap: 0-1
Record: 1-2

Got the 23+ I needed from Rice, but E Car came in at a pitiful 17, well short of Rice D's avg of 28 PPG.

The Pirates had two possessions in the final 5 minutes, possessions where they would use all 4 downs to try and advance, score, and tie the game, but they crapped out both times, including one of the plays I hate most - the QB sack on 4th down with under a minute to play.
I'm okay with that if he gets blindsided and didn't see it coming, but this wasn't one of those. This was one of those 'scramble around like an idiot and then eat dirt instead of just throwing it downfield' type of play. Worst case ya risk an INT, but when you take the sack you now have NO chance, game over, so just heave it downfield - ya got nothing to lose!
Oh well, end result - I dropped a unit. A lot of football left, easily recoverable.

I got a unit on tonight's game for some Wednesday action.
I lean to the 1-4 home team in a desperation spot but that's just gut feel, so I'll lay off that play because I have numbers to back the play I made, and I always prefer math over feelings. I'm on the over.
The total is 11 points lower than my number. Any game that has a total with a differential of 10 or more than my number is an automatic play.
Jax St/Mid Tenn St over 51'

 

[indiana]

T. Storm.......BOL with your total tonight buddy.....indy

 

[Juggler]

Not for nothing, but anyone who says they can win 70% of their wagers, surely wouldn't be posting on a sports forum. I wish you luck but my advice is to Tone down the Hyperbole!

 

[truthstorm]

"70%? Tone down the hyperbole."

Juggler,
Thanks for stopping in.
No hyperbole (of COURSE no one hits 70% long-term.) I should have been clearer. I'll clarify.

I didn't say someone is and/or will consistently hit an avg of 70%.
And I certainly didn't say that I hit 70%.
If you look at my post you'll see I wasn't even talking about myself when I referred to the 70%.

I started with: "I'll show you how you could be hitting over 70% in college ball this year, using info right here at your fingertips." ("right here" meaning in this forum, not in my posts.)

I followed up with: "Now, about that "You could be hitting 70%" that I mentioned in my first post. I make my own numbers, my own formulas, my own plays, but most people in Forum Land don't handicap for themselves. If you're in that group here are a couple of points to consider" and I went on to explain that IF they follow others rather than handicap themselves it is easier to find a losing bettor to fade than a winning one to tail.
And I gave a few tips on what to look for when seeking someone to fade.

There is a post (or was a post? I can't find it anymore. Deleted?) by a member who was sharing picks from someone he said was a good fade for college, for those who look to bet fades. I replied that there's a better college fade, and gave his record at that time, which had more than 60 picks and a 32% win percentage, or about a 70% fade. That is the 70% I alluded to. Not hyperbole, not self-promotion (I'm not a service, not a shill) just facts.

Again - thanks for stopping in.

Recap: 1-0
Record: 2-2

Jax St/MTS comes in at 75 points scored, 23' above the posted total 51' and about 12 above the number I made on the game.
A winner, but not a 100% ROI for me on the night. I didn't post it as a recommended play in my thread but I gave in to the "gut feel" that I mentioned and took a little action on MTS, too.
Up 21-7 they looked good at the half, but man - what a brutal second half, outscored 38-7!

I have a few games circled this weekend, I'll post any that I feel strongly enough to recommend.

 

[truthstorm]

Recap: 0-0
Record: 2-2

Today, a pick, some betting advice from a bookmaker's POV, and an answer for Joe$$Moneyline's unanswered question (I think it was Joe.)

I didn't post any games here Saturday so no change on my record.
I already made one bet this week, UTEP/FIU under 44.

Four of of six UTEP games stayed under this number, and three of six of FIU's games did too.
That's a combined 7 of 11 (one game would have pushed.)
There's a playable edge there, but if handicapping was that simple everyone would be rich.
I prefer to look for contrarian plays anyway rather than ride a trend.
And I don't particularly like 44 for this matchup. So why did I play it and post it?
It fits a situational play I use and I like the record for that play.

Here's some advice. If you're winning, congrats, you don't need this. If not, here's something that may help:

As a bookmaker, I HAD to put up a line on every game. That was my disadvantage (when it comes to smart players.)
As a player, you DON'T have to bet every game. You can pick and choose your spots.
The more games you play the more the odds slowly shift back in my house's favor.

We loved when a tourist flew in for Sunday and bet a side on every game. And totals, too. And parlays. And teasers.
Because we knew we were going to make bank on him.

If you're not winning, take a look at how many games you're playing.
If you're betting a lot of games it might be one reason why you're losing.
For example, let's say a guy uses a standard betting unit of $110/$100.
And let's say he posts 34 college picks this week.
That's the kind of betting that will find you at 45-63, 41% for the season. Down almost $9,000.00, more than $11,000 with NFL added.
That's 110 units lost. That's a LOT of units. (I'll say it again for those that look to tail the play of others - it's easier to find a loser to fade than a winner to follow.)

Don't be that guy.
Wagering on that many games takes a special kind of talent to maintain a profit. It works for a very few. Most that try it lose.
Be smart, be selective.

 

[truthstorm]

A pick and a clarification from my last post.

The pick: E Carolina's meek 17 points against Rice's pathetic D tagged me with a loss on the over.
The Pirate's pitiful performance of 17 was sandwiched between Rice giving up 42 to S Fla and 38 to U Conn.
Yes, U Conn! The offensively challenged Huskies of U Conn scored 38 vs Rice while E Car could only manage 17??!!
The Dread Robert wannabe's owe me one and I'm going to give them a chance to repent for their sin this week and bring home the booty vs SMU. I bought the over today while 51 is still available; this one's going up.

Not purely a revenge bet though. As noted on my reasoning for the Jax St/MTS over pick - "Any game that has a total with a differential of 10 or more than my number is an automatic play."
This one clears that bar.

The clarification: In case anyone thought "$100 units, 45-63" is not down 9k - he uses various units, from 1* to 5.* The 9k is accurate.

Plays: UTEP/FIU under 44, SMU/E Car Ov 51

 

[truthstorm]

Okay, blew it on that one. In the time between when I started writing the post above and finishing it the line changed again.
Opened 51, went up a hook at some houses so I bought it this morning at 51. Now at 49' across the board.

Obviously I'm not happy about having a worse number than I could have but my play (a differential of 10 or more) has a strong win %, and the line drop means the differential between my number and the posted number is even greater now, so I'm not sweating it.

I could say, "Cancelling my over 51. Adding over 49" but as everyone knows books don't let you cancel bets after the line moves and re-bet at a better number. And only someone "air betting" on the internet with monopoly money pretends they do.

I should have at least one or two more plays, not finished handicapping Saturday's card yet.

 

[truthstorm]

Recap: 1-1
Record: 3-3

UTEP under 44 won but E Car only scored 10 at home, and screwed me for the second time on an over this season (impotent rat bastards.)

A few picks for this week.
Next post I'll dispel the myth of the Vegas Trap Line. I was going to put it in here, but this post ran a little long (gee, who'd have figured?)

One of the reasons I didn't drop in with any recommended plays the last two weeks is none of the formulas I use are producing desired results. I'm tracking and charting five different plays in college right now and 4 of 5 are hovering around 50%, which leaves me nothing to bet on, nothing to bet against with a fade.
So, it was back to the drawing board - I spent a lot of time these last two weeks rooting around like a truffle hog, diggin through numbers, stats, and trends looking for a play that might give me an edge. I have two new ones I'm going to try this week.
One play has popped up 5 times the last two weeks.
It's 4-1 overall, 1-0 on favorites and 3-1 on dogs.
It may revert to the mean this week, but until it does I'm going to ride it.
I played all three games that qualify: Coastal Carolina +4, Washington -26', New Mex +1.

Coastal: I watched the not-so-Thundering Herd last week and can't recall seeing a more pitiful offensive display.
The scoreboard says they scored 9 points, but that was from special teams (a kickoff returned for a TD) and the D (a safety.)
Their offense scored ZERO and was a mess in every way - talent-wise, execution, and play calling from the coaching staff.
They were -4 rushing yards for the game. -4!!!
Recent form has Marsh losing three straight, Coastal winning their last two; edge to CC.
Getting better than a FG at home, with a team that should win SU, I'm on Coastal.

Wash: Yes, 26' is a lot of points to cover, and I rarely lay this many, but I am in this one. After their big win vs Oregon two weeks ago the 6-0 Huskies turned into poodles last week and were losing to 1-5 Az St going into the 4th quarter, before pulling out a 15-7 win. I like that performance because it means they should be more focused to NOT let it happen again this week, facing a 2-5 Stanford team.
USC beat Stanford by 46, the Oregon beat them by 36, and last week UCLA whupped 'em by 35 points.
Suddenly, 26' doesn't really seem too much to ask for, does it?

N Mex: Nevada had their first win of the season last week, but more notably their first win in their last SIXTEEN games!
This puts them in what I call the "Monkey Off Your Back - Time to Slack" next-game let-down spot.
But even if they don't have a let down performance their typical performance still sucks, so I got that going for me.
Grab the point now because the wrong team is favored, by game time this number will likely flip.

 

[truthstorm]

Today: Dispelling the myth of the Vegas Trap line as promised in my last post.

Everyone who has spoken or written about the Vegas Trap Line all have one thing in common - NONE of them were in the room when the lines are made. I was. For years. And in too many meetings to count, not ONCE was the concept of making a number to trap the public discussed, not once was the word trap ever mentioned. It's just not the way it's done.
The process is simple - make a number that will get equal action and shoot for the vig.

Sports Directors are just like everyone else - they want to keep their job so they can pay bills and provide for their family.
A trap line implies an odds maker decides which team he wants money to come in on, rather than two-way action.
That is what is known as "playing with house money" and the execs at the top of the casino/hotel food chain do not abide with employees who play with house money.
Does it occasionally happen?
But bookmakers who play with house money quickly become ex-bookmakers, and their carcasses are tossed out on the Vegas strip.
I know a few.

Some will insist that Trap Lines are a real thing. They'll say, "You're WRONG! I know a guy who" etc, etc.
I'm not here to debate or discuss. All I can do is offer what I know from years of being there.

 

[truthstorm]

Today's post was meant to be a three-parter: Trap Lines, Betting Advice, and an odds update on my three plays for Saturday.
But I accidentally tapped the enter key and the post was submitted, leaving me only a few minutes (far too few for a wordy mo'fo like me) to make edits and corrections. Here is the rest of the post.

The Trap section is missing the word "Yes" after, "Does it occasionally happen?"


Opinion - Betting Advice for Players Who Don't Handicap their Own Games

A quick recap of previous advice.

I've offered advice/opinion on how to bet - look for someone to fade. (Most bettors lose. Therefore, it's easier to find a loser to fade than a winner to tail, easier to find someone who consistently loses 60% rather than someone who consistently wins 60%. This isn't a guess, it's based on access to data on thousands of players, from the player databases at a Vegas book to offshore online houses I've done consulting for.)

I've offered advice/opinion on who to fade - (perpetual losers.)

I've offered advice on how to spot perpetual losers (Look for cheaters. Winners don't have to cheat. Look for someone who gets called out every year, multiple times, by multiple posters, for being dishonest; someone whose "line" is always 1-2 points better than the line every other poster uses, except live lines where his "number" is sometimes 6-7 points better than the real number, someone who "cancels" bets after his team is losing and hopes no one notices, a guy who cheats on his record, winnings, etc.)

Now I'll tell you the best time to fade.
Timing Is Everything. As the saying goes, "Even losers get lucky sometimes." So, obviously, the best time to fade a loser is after a rare winning streak. This is prime time for the natural order of things to be restored as he reverts back to his losing ways.
And especially when you see him chasing, increasing his unit size by two, three, five and even as much as ten times or more his standard bet size, not because he grades those games higher and worthy of a larger wager, but because he's desperate to recoup losses.

A talented handicapper/steady winner can chase after a few losses because he knows the odds are the pendulum is going to swing back his way, but for MOST bettors chasing is a losing proposition, a painful, real life example of The First Rule of Holes - Stop Digging.

I've given this advice out for many years but I know most people still look for a winner to follow rather than a loser to fade.
If looking for winners to follow works for you - great, keep doing it. But if you're still losing, try something different, try fading a cheater.
In fact, you could be 10-2 this week, fading one who's 2-10 after some rare wins (again, Timing Is Everything.)

Final advice - DON'T BLINDLY TAIL ANYONE. Don't follow someone just because he says that he's, for a hypothetical example, up $1,600 for the season. In reality, he might be 111-131, down over $9,000 for the season.

Final, final advice - HANDICAP YOUR OWN GAMES. And you won't be dependent on anyone winning or losing for you.


Play update:

From Wednesday: "I played all three games that qualify: Coastal Carolina +4, Washington -26', New Mex +1"

When to make a play is sometimes as important as what you play.

Wash is now at -27' so grabbing it Wednesday at -26' was a good move.

Also did well with the two teams I think are Wrong Dogs, as Coastal Carolina and New Mex lines both swung in my favor.
I got +4 with CC and it's now +3 across the board.

New Mex, as guessed at in the post, has become the Fav, going from a Dog of +1 to a Fav of -1 ', rewarding my hours spent number crunching, giving me a 2' point additional edge for anticipating the line move and betting at the right time (Timing is Everything.)

I don't always make the right decision on when to place my wagers (obviously) but I'm decent at it.
Now if only my read on the final scores is as true as my read on line movements . . .

 

[bristolnole]

Real solid read, with sound advice.....I appreciate your efforts!

My comment, fwiw, on "fading a loser"....Years ago I tried that strategy for a period of time and had some modest success. My inclination was however to try to "guess" when the winning streak might start on other 'cappers whom I felt were good ones, and follow them instead. Some modest success at that as well, but nothing of great note. I always found the concept of "fading" others efforts to be weird, simply because those guys are wanting to win too. I don't know, I get the idea conceptually, it was too counter-intuitive I guess for me.

Eventually, I went back to handicapping my own plays and have been doing so for the last 25+ years....If nothing else, I found it to be a WHOLE lot more satisfying when I won, but more importantly perhaps, A WHOLE lot LESS frustrating when I would lose - and then learned to use the knowledge gained from analyzing my loss to try to use it to my advantage moving forward....
Didn't mean to ramble, but the bottom line for me is I enjoy the process way more this way....

 

[truthstorm]

Bristolnol,
I know what you mean about fading someone who's just trying to win, it's kind of like betting "Don't pass" when someone is rolling the dice at a craps table. I don't tail or fade, I make my own numbers and make my own plays based on them. But if someone doesn't make their own plays I recommend fading rather than tailing. But hey, whatever works for someone - keep doing it.
Thanks for stopping by. Good luck to you today.

Recap: 1-2
Record: 4-5
Review: Disappointing day at 1-2 last time I was in here, really liked my odds of hitting two out of three, especially the Wrong Dogs (I've been doing well with those this season.)

Hit the early game when Coastal won SU.
Lost the mid-afternoon game - got the improvement from Washington's offense I was looking for but their defense let me down.
My profit or loss was going to be decided by the late afternoon game.
I had my money on New Mexico but unfortunately New Mexico's quarterback had his money on Nevada and he threw not one, not two, but THREE interceptions - in just the first half!
That put the Lobos in a 24-point hole. They came back and took the second half 24-10 but it wasn't enough to cover.

I have at least two today.
Coastal over 51' and Charlotte +4.
The Coastal play is one where I'm looking for both teams form (unders in this case) to reverse.
The Charlotte play is the same situational play I used for Coastal and New Mexico last week, Wrong Dogs, where the game qualifies if there's enough differential between the number I make and the number the books are offering.

No time for a more extensive write-up today.
May add a play or two later.