Here is what I can share from my personal experience regarding IntPicks: I first signed up for them back at the beginning of the CFB season in 2013. I've been a member on-and-off since then and they always posted their picks shortly after the games start that whole time.
I actually had a long conversation with their founder fairly recently, very humble, super-smart guy. Completely opposite the typical shady Vegas capper type. He shared with me the story of why he started this service, I'm probably not going to do it justice but the brief version is that he's been a quant nerd in financial sector for many years and bet on sports as a side hobby. In his time, he bought picks from nearly all prominent services. just to see how they'd perform and -no surprise- you'd be better of flipping a coin.
None of these services had verifiable long-term records, they were just marketing machines capitalizing on the novice bettors looking for a magic solution with "game of the year!" type of non-sense. Keep in mind that some of these services were charging over $1.000/month and this was over a decade ago.
So, he decided to start his own service with everything he would want to see himself in an ideal world. which included these elements:
- Transparent record. Without transparency, the rest is worthless. He was a RAS subscriber at the time (2012) and liked how they posted their picks shortly after the games started so he did the same.
- No marketing gimmicks like "Game of the Year!" etc. All picks will have 1 or 2 unit ratings, except for CFB which also has a 3 unit rating. Long-term focus on steady profit building.
- Reasonable prices. They have not changed their membership cost since 2012.
The other differentiating factor they have is their methodology; they utilize proprietary algorithms that simulate each game 50,000 times, the results are then reality checked by respective league experts. These experts include ex-Vegas line-makers. He said the simulation based only system (such as Accuscore and Sportsline), barely hit 50% long-term. In fact, I signed up for Sportsline just too check them out and they don't post their historical records exactly for this reason. However. the combination of simulations plus the reality check process (which incorporates hard-to-quantify human factors such as team motivation, morale and situational analysis). proved to be a much more accurate and reliable predictor, he said
If you think about it. they have been around for over a decade and surely they've had many subscribers along this time; which means, if they had any shenanigans going on with their records, surely they would have been called out and likely wouldn't be around this long. I personally have not seen any foul play.
Having said all this, the only real way to find out for sure is to sign-up for a period and see if what they send you as member picks is what they post on the site. I'm not encouraging to sign up necessarily but that will be the proof you'd need to know 100%. I hope this helps.
Thanks so much for corroborating what I strongly suspected based on my sports betting fo around 5 years and based
on my knowledge of sports services which is based on following them since they started in the mid to late 70s!!
To be honest, when I was a young and naive gambler, I bought into the lies of these con artists and way back when there was
no internet, gambling sites, etc, which meant there was no real way to find out who was telling it as it is and who was lying!!
Obviously, that is not the situation today and has not been for quite a few years ago.
Thank God for modern technology for bettors and to the dismay of scamdicapping services!!
Good try but your post doesn't address ANY of the points I made today including the number of 3-star picks released
over eleven years, which resulted in the alleged 69% winning percentage, precisely when the picks started to be released
after ten minutes.
The rest of what you post for the most part is irrelevant, namely the reason why the founder set out to start his own sports
service, his/your/bashing other services that lie through their teeth and telling us about the founder's methodology while
interesting to read, is very weak argumentatively speaking/pertinent to the specific questions I have raised, some
of which I summarized earlier in this post and the remainder in my other posts today including why the name of this service
and its records are not known all over Vegas and for that matter all over the country to folks who bet on sports!!
Thanks for responding, but for me anyway, you have not stated anything to alter my overall opinion for the reasons stated!!
Looks like this guy wanted a bigger piece of the pie than he was getting by not just using his picks for himself and doubling his money! JMO 
The rest of what you post for the most part is irrelevant, namely the reason why the founder set out to start his own sports
The rest of what you post for the most part is irrelevant, namely the reason why the founder set out to start his own sports
sound advice, take it to the Bank!
One final comment that I didn't mention in my last post:
Your inference that being around for 11 years proves nothing for at least two years because like Feist, Kelso, Root and a large host
of others have been around a LOT longer!!
I will leave it to you and others to decide whether that in itself means they are good!!
Also your allegation that no one has complained about IntPicks was just proven to be not true as one person just posted.
Also along the same lines without knowing how many DOCUMENTED regular subscribers the service has had, it is impossible to draw
any reliable and valid conclusions and especially so if the sample is small that would in itself decrease the probability of anyone
complaining!
Along the same lines, how do we know that nobody complained to the service directly-I am quite sure that if they did, the
service would let people know about it!!
That's it for today unless you offer a response later on.
- They definitely have occasional losing months but no losing seasons so far. A month is simply not long enough of a sample size. With that approach, the last 30 days they have been on fire so it just depends on when you sign up.
- They never claimed 69% overall performance, that figure is only for 3 Star CFB picks (437-197 all time).
- As for their lines, they use 8 prominent sports books and go with the prevailing line at the time of the release. I've never seen any line manipulation of any kind.
I am back but just briefly!!
Your claim of a 437-197 record for an eleven-year spin is to be blunt LIE unless you can fully document this record!!
It is not achievable, never has been achievable and probably won't be achievable not until/if/when AI can pick the games.
If this occurs, I can hardly wait for the claims of 99% accuracy by some sports services that claim they use it!!
l am glad to see that at least you admit they have some losing months.
On the other hand, I would be serious money if it could be proven if you mean that over the eleven years, they have never had
a losing season in any sport!!
Finally, unless I missed something since you started posting, all I see are 10-2, 5-1, etc. and just very positive
days.
How come we don't see at least once in a while a 1-5, 2-4 day, etc. posted-I mean you clearly said that they lose sometimes!!
It seems to me that if they have a bad day or a short losing streak(sorry every service has one!!), you don't mention it and simply
bury it in the longer term and/over any time frame you choose to make the service look better than it is!!
This is essentially what Phil Steele and Northcoast have been doing since they started and one of the reasons I have been
exposing them in different threads and forums for over twenty years as well as their REAL records as opposed to the deceptive
ones they give out.
if you are not familiar with this, I suggest you check out my NC Records Thread in the College Forum Section.
That is positively it for my posting in this thread for today!!
IntPicks
Free Pick of the Day for Thursday, January 11, 2024:
College Basketball
#770
1 Star
7:00 PM ET
USA @ James Madison
Take JMU -12
Recent verified record (they post all picks 10 mins after the games start for transparency):
28-11 College hoops run
48-28 NBA run
11-2 Three Star picks run
69% 3 Star picks all-time since 2012
44-21 NFL run
They just released their Thursday full card:
4 CBB & 2 NBA picks, 1 top rated each
Free Pick of the Day for Thursday, January 11, 2024:
College Basketball
#770
1 Star
7:00 PM ET
USA @ James Madison
Take JMU -12
Recent verified record (they post all picks 10 mins after the games start for transparency):
28-11 College hoops run
48-28 NBA run
11-2 Three Star picks run
69% 3 Star picks all-time since 2012
44-21 NFL run
They just released their Thursday full card:
4 CBB & 2 NBA picks, 1 top rated each
Claiming a 69% win ratio is pure nonsense. Anyone that has been betting on sports for any extended period of time knows that a 69% win rate is
just not possible.
Is Intpicks a good service? I have no idea because I have not used the service. I do know that in my 30 years of betting on sports I have come across
2 handicapping services that are worth the money. The dozens of other services I've used have lost money.
I do appreciate the Intpicks being posted if for nothing other than tracking purposes.
Best of luck
just not possible.
Is Intpicks a good service? I have no idea because I have not used the service. I do know that in my 30 years of betting on sports I have come across
2 handicapping services that are worth the money. The dozens of other services I've used have lost money.
I do appreciate the Intpicks being posted if for nothing other than tracking purposes.
Best of luck
I believe that in ONE given season a service can and has got that hot to have an extraordinary winning percentage!!
However to maintain it for in this case eleven years is impossible I don't care what methodology is used.
The bounce of the ball so to speak, the betting line itself and other unexpected things that can and will happen during games,
intangibles and a lot more even out meaning a 69% winning percentage cannot be attained with the bigger plays, and
for that matter neither can 59% over that long a period of time.
The claim of a profit over that period of 372K for a hundred dollar play per unit is not only not true but imo insulting
when the claims of other top services over a significant period of time is a tiny fraction in the five figures!!
What I posted over the last few days with the top services maintaining a winning perentage in the low 50% and not even reaching 55%
is clear evidence of that.
If I was just starting out with sports gambling and didn't have the knowledge I have about sports services since following
them since they began in the70's and even having used them way back, I wouldn't be running my mouth!!
Factor in my age of 79(ugh), meaning that I have a pretty good knowledge of life itself!!
That's it for me unless of course the service itself or its representative in this thread agrees to post all of their picks in this thread for FREE
for say a month with the existing lines when they are released!!
if they can manage a 69% winning percentage with their top plays or even a 59% winning percentage, then perhaps someone
who wants to try them out in this thread can oblige and buy the picks and tell us how they are doing!!
If the service feels that they would be losing too much potential money by posting their plays publicly BEFORE they start,
then I suggest that they submit them to a moderator who will agree NOT to post them but at the end of the day when the
are over, to release them and how they did!!
In short and to summarize, imo the chances are that tis service is much better than most and may actually be near the top
and doesn't need to exaggerate its record.
If this occurs and/or I see other evidence/documentation from the Sports Monitor or some other recognized monitoring
service, I will maintain a rightful healthy bit of skepticism!!
I am going to take back the word "lie" I used yesterday because I don't have the actual plays released over the eleven years
not how they did, meaning I can't actually prove that they did not hit 69% even though I listed quite a list of reasons
why they did not/could not achieve that.
One thing that I didn't state in my previous post and the others and that cannot be stressed enough is that 69% doesn't
take into account that in basketball and football one must not only pick the winner but the equalizing factor of the point spread,
which compounds the difficulty.
If it was a matter of just picking winners straight up, I would give a 69% winning percentage a much better chance if being maintained
over eleven years although even with the ats left out, imo it would still be difficult to achieve.
In baseball and hockey which don't involve point spreads(except if one chooses to use one), the equalizing factor is the money line
and especially so if one plays a lot of favorites.
take into account that in basketball and football one must not only pick the winner but the equalizing factor of the point spread,
which compounds the difficulty.
If it was a matter of just picking winners straight up, I would give a 69% winning percentage a much better chance if being maintained
over eleven years although even with the ats left out, imo it would still be difficult to achieve.
In baseball and hockey which don't involve point spreads(except if one chooses to use one), the equalizing factor is the money line
and especially so if one plays a lot of favorites.
I'm not sure why the whole 69% issue is still not clear for IntPicks... Once again, that's only for their 3 Star CFB picks and they never claimed it's their overall record.
Here is their overall all-time performance in all leagues, including by-unit (Star) breakdowns. You can also see all of their individual picks (over 17,000) at their site. hope this helps:
Here is their overall all-time performance in all leagues, including by-unit (Star) breakdowns. You can also see all of their individual picks (over 17,000) at their site. hope this helps:
ALL TIME RECORDS ALL SPORTS
| W | L | Win % | Winnings |
| 10074 | 7026 | 59% | $371,633 |
ALL TIME FOOTBALL PICKS RECORDS
| Leagues | W | L | Win % | Winnings |
| CFB | 1539 | 1032 | 60% | $86,859 |
| NFL | 1072 | 748 | 59% | $43,467 |
| Total | 2611 | 1780 | 59% | $130,326 |
ALL TIME BASKETBALL PICKS RECORDS
| Leagues | W | L | Win % | Winnings |
| NBA | 2527 | 1709 | 60% | $94,548 |
| CBB | 2479 | 1750 | 59% | $76,932 |
| Total | 5006 | 3459 | 59% | $170,800 |
MLB PICKS RECORDS BY STARS
| Units | W | L | Win % | Winnings |
| 2 Stars | 1084 | 609 | 64% | $36,257 |
| 1 Star | 2021 | 1607 | 56% | $32,749 |
| Total | 3106 | 2216 | 58% | $69,099 |
COLLEGE FOOTBALL PICKS RECORDS BY STARS
| Units | W | L | Win % | Winnings |
| 3 Stars | 437 | 197 | 69% | $52,896 |
| 2 Stars | 558 | 377 | 60% | $25,734 |
| 1 Star | 544 | 457 | 54% | $8,779 |
| Total | 1539 | 1031 | 60% | $87,409 |
NFL PICKS RECORDS BY STARS
| Units | W | L | Win % | Winnings |
| 2 Stars | 578 | 353 | 62% | $34,948 |
| 1 Star | 494 | 395 | 56% | $8,519 |
| Total | 1072 | 748 | 59% | $43,467 |
COLLEGE BASKETBALL RECORDS BY STARS
| Units | W | L | Win % | Winnings |
| 2 Stars | 987 | 551 | 64% | $54,782 |
| 1 Star | 1676 | 1293 | 56% | $22,150 |
| Total | 2663 | 1844 | 59% | $76,932 |
NBA PICKS RECORDS BY STARS
| Units | W | L | Win % | Winnings |
| 2 Stars | 924 | 516 | 64% | $70,936 |
| 1 Star | 1602 | 1267 | 56% | $23,412 |
| Total | 2526 | 1709 | 60% | $94,348 |
IntPicks
Free Pick of the Day for Friday, January 12, 2024:
NBA
#518
1 Star
9:30 PM ET
Toronto @ Utah
Take Utah -2.5
Recent verified record (they post all picks 10 mins after the games start for transparency):
31-12 College hoops run
48-29 NBA run
44-21 NFL run
They just released their Friday full card:
3 CBB & 3 NBA picks, 1 top rated each
Free Pick of the Day for Friday, January 12, 2024:
NBA
#518
1 Star
9:30 PM ET
Toronto @ Utah
Take Utah -2.5
Recent verified record (they post all picks 10 mins after the games start for transparency):
31-12 College hoops run
48-29 NBA run
44-21 NFL run
They just released their Friday full card:
3 CBB & 3 NBA picks, 1 top rated each
You can post the alleged record as many times as you want along with the alleged winnings when the other services I posted
post am overall record a little above the amount needed to show a profit and with profits a tiny fraction of what yours are.
I have a strong background in statistics meaning that your comp. over time the posted comp.s should also show some kind of winning
percentage that at least approaches 59% or 69%, which is not the case!!
Also the fact is that you haven't answered any of my questions, nor commented on why anyone should believe your record
without documentation going back to 2012!!
"I'm not sure why the whole 69% issue is still not clear for IntPicks... Once again, that's only for their 3 Star CFB picks and they never claimed it's their overall record."
This does nothing to help your cause in the way of documentation and amounts to simply begging the question and poisoning the
well!!
Again this week I have offered compelling reasons why your 69% and even 59% claimed records is not sustainable and in reality
amoutns to nothing but hearsay and unsupported gossip!!
I say post all of the picks with the real bettable lines before the games start for a day for a month or so and/or send
them to the moderatotrs with the promise that they will not reveal them until the end of every day and then post the picks how they
did.
Either that or submit them to the Sports Monitor or some other monitoring service!!
As I stated yesterday, all I see posted every day are winning records for the day before like 6-0, 5-1, etc but NEVER the records
for losing days which at best you simply try to bury into a longer time period which shows positivity.
You stated that the service has losing days, weeks and even months, but yet one would never gather that by
reading your alleged records every day!!
In short, you need to show a LOT more transparency than you do if you want to have any credibility with seasoned veterans
like myself who know the ropes and who has been betting on sports for around 53 or 54 years and has followed
sports services since their
inception in the mid to late 70s!!
Speaking of sports service, lets all chip in and purchase these"bargain-priced" picks before Stu decides to raise the prices because
of his "documented" 89.9% accuracy rate attained for well over 30 years of gambling!!
I am afraid IntPicks is going to have to step it up a bit from its mere 69% winning percentage for a lousy 12 years to Stu's for
well over 30.
In all fairness Feiner's pricing is kind of high but who cares if you win 90% of the time meaning that prices like $100K are a pittance
if folks chip in to buy them!! lol
ps The reason that the 89.9% is not posted on the website is because Stu is a modest guy and doesn't want to bring too much attenttion
to himself!! lol
www.stufeiner.com
of his "documented" 89.9% accuracy rate attained for well over 30 years of gambling!!
I am afraid IntPicks is going to have to step it up a bit from its mere 69% winning percentage for a lousy 12 years to Stu's for
well over 30.
In all fairness Feiner's pricing is kind of high but who cares if you win 90% of the time meaning that prices like $100K are a pittance
if folks chip in to buy them!! lol
ps The reason that the 89.9% is not posted on the website is because Stu is a modest guy and doesn't want to bring too much attenttion
to himself!! lol
Buy My Picks — Stu "The Source" Feiner
www.stufeiner.com
IntPicks.com Review - Sports Handicapper
The latest customer reviews, user experiences, or complaints for IntPicks. Have you used this service? Write your own review today.
www.cappertek.com
It sure looks like that there are at least some folks out there who agree with me and what I have stated!!
