63 replies to this topic

[CaneBrain]

ltrainkoja55, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 1:24 PM, said:

tatical bear -- that was the feedback i was looking for--- Thanks CraneBrainunfortunately, bets have already been made--- will have to just keep fingers crossed fortunately, it will not break me to lose but all losing hurts ---

I didnt really give you lots of hard analysis....but I will say I am always wary of road favorites week one. We dont have a great read on the teams yet and week one often has some fluky results. (remember when the bills beat the Patriots like 30 to nothing? the bills went on to do nothing that year and the Pats won the Super Bowl)plus, the home crowd is usually super pumped for week one and that can carry a team. I wouldnt worry too much though.....it is not like you made a horrific bet. The Jets should be favored given the Dolphins performance last year.

[ltrainkoja55]

Tactical Bear, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 12:28 PM, said:

I was making a joke about saving money on the juice. If we like the opposite sides of games, why would we bother paying -110 or -115 or -105 or whatever when we could just bet with each other. That was the sentiment. I ended up giving all the analysis you're going to get from me. Bengals, Jags, Jets, Steelers, and Broncos are all super-duper-public according to every source I use. Cardinals are only getting about 55% of the action at wagerline, and that's by far the least public favorite you've backed. There. That is how I know the public agrees with you. www.wagerline.com (consensus picks, NFL, etc.)Wang

That is an excellent post--- if that could have only been your original response I would have very much appreciated the info. I would have succeeded in getting your opinion while understanding how your system can work so early in the week. I hope your system works this week but only on the "other" games! As for the Jets--- I think CraneBrain is right about pennington. I was kinda blindsided with thinking the jets can exploit him. Hopefully the rookie tackle Long will play like a rookie and Pennington won't have a chance!

[DinkDonk]

God damn it. I wrote like my longest post in my FCP career and it got buried in comma-less, blocky, ranting, pseudo-English. I am so tilted.Look Ltrain- with every single one of your picks you are betting against the books. You are betting with the public opinion. If that public side wins, the books lose. Like I asked before- Do you really think that whatever analysis and research you are doing is giving you some information that the bookmakers did not have?

[ltrainkoja55]

DinkDonk, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 1:11 PM, said:

God damn it. I wrote like my longest post in my FCP career and it got buried in comma-less, blocky, ranting, pseudo-English. I am so tilted.Look Ltrain- with every single one of your picks you are betting against the books. You are betting with the public opinion. If that public side wins, the books lose. Like I asked before- Do you really think that whatever analysis and research you are doing is giving you some information that the bookmakers did not have?

no I don't--- look I am not a big time gambler! I only made this thread because I had to make the bets early. I will not have internet access after today. ( only on shared computer ) I see that I am on the wrong end. This was to get a survey for other opinions. Hopefully I can get a few lucky breaks--

[Tactical Bear]

DinkDonk, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 5:11 PM, said:

God damn it. I wrote like my longest post in my FCP career and it got buried in comma-less, blocky, ranting, pseudo-English. I am so tilted.Look Ltrain- with every single one of your picks you are betting against the books. You are betting with the public opinion. If that public side wins, the books lose. Like I asked before- Do you really think that whatever analysis and research you are doing is giving you some information that the bookmakers did not have?

You're preaching to the choir. Your analysis was perfectly rational. GrandfatherContrarian gives you his blessings.

[Poppy_Hillis]

DinkDonk, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 2:11 PM, said:

God damn it. I wrote like my longest post in my FCP career and it got buried in comma-less, blocky, ranting, pseudo-English. I am so tilted.Look Ltrain- with every single one of your picks you are betting against the books. You are betting with the public opinion. If that public side wins, the books lose. Like I asked before- Do you really think that whatever analysis and research you are doing is giving you some information that the bookmakers did not have?

Yes, excellent prior post.

[DinkDonk]

Tactical Bear, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 6:42 PM, said:

You're preaching to the choir. Your analysis was perfectly rational. GrandfatherContrarian gives you his blessings.

Poppy_Hillis, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 6:55 PM, said:

Yes, excellent prior post.

Ok now how are people not understanding this then? Hubris? Arrogance? Ignorance? I simply cannot understand it.

[Tactical Bear]

DinkDonk, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 8:06 PM, said:

Ok now how are people not understanding this then? Hubris? Arrogance? Ignorance? I simply cannot understand it.

When did you come to the realization that contrarianism -- or whatever you want to call it -- was probably the most reasonable approach to sports betting?

[DinkDonk]

Tactical Bear, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 8:09 PM, said:

When did you come to the realization that contrarianism -- or whatever you want to call it -- was probably the most reasonable approach to sports betting?

Pretty much the first time you introduced this idea to the forum. I've never placed a single sports bet before, but I understand the moving of the line and balancing action and how the bookmakers expect to profit, so when you introduced the idea of betting against the public it seemed like not only the best way to profit, but pretty much the only way to profit. I know that a ton of guys think that they can out handicap bookmakers, but honestly how many can there be? And if they can, why not just become bookmakers themselves? BTW- I will probably do some research and eventually start placing bets using a contrarian system.

[Tactical Bear]

DinkDonk, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 8:16 PM, said:

Pretty much the first time you introduced this idea to the forum. I've never placed a single sports bet before, but I understand the moving of the line and balancing action and how the bookmakers expect to profit, so when you introduced the idea of betting against the public it seemed like not only the best way to profit, but pretty much the only way to profit. I know that a ton of guys think that they can out handicap bookmakers, but honestly how many can there be? And if they can, why not just become bookmakers themselves? BTW- I will probably do some research and eventually start placing bets using a contrarian system.

I'll have a response to this when I get back from my date. It will go terribly, because I am getting killed on the bases today. Fucking Braves/Marlins series gave me angina.

[HollywoodAFD]

Early indications: Go long on JetsHaven't totally decided... but that's how I'm leaning.

[powerpoker]

ltrainkoja55, on Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008, 10:59 AM, said:

Okay-- I am going to a wedding (San Fran) on Thursday so I have to make bets on Wednesday. I do not like this but no other options. I am passsing on NCAA this week since I will not be able to watch the games. Here are the games I like --- feedback is welcomed big time--- as I have to bet tommorrow---UGH! Cincinnati Bengals -1½ -- Rookie Flacco making first start-- Johnson has a lot to prove ---4 units New York Jets -3 (-115) -- Favre debut and the Jets know Pennington's tendencies --- 4 units Pittsburgh Steelers -6½ -- the texans oline can not pass block against the steelers d --- 2 units Jacksonville Jaguars -3 (-105) -- I do not believe Young can handle their defense --- 2 units Arizona Cardinals -2½ -- I like Warner starting and expect Boldin and Fitz to put up a lot of points --- 2 units Denver Broncos -3 -- Oak has spent millions on Walker and safety Wilson??? Cutler will break out this year! - 4 unitslet me know what you think---

Cincy/Bal- Ill prob be on the other side but ill most likely pass the game.Jets/Miami- I like miami taking the pts at home.Hou/Pit - i dont like either side...i will most likely be on the overJack/Tenn- I like neither team, neither showed me anything in the preseason to take either side. PassCards/49ers- Again i like the other sideDenver/Oak - If i do get involved i do like Den.I will give my analysis of each game, when i have time, which will probably tomorrow or friday. Good luck

[ltrainkoja55]

powerpoker, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 5:31 PM, said:

Cincy/Bal- Ill prob be on the other side but ill most likely pass the game.Jets/Miami- I like miami taking the pts at home.Hou/Pit - i dont like either side...i will most likely be on the overJack/Tenn- I like neither team, neither showed me anything in the preseason to take either side. PassCards/49ers- Again i like the other sideDenver/Oak - If i do get involved i do like Den.I will give my analysis of each game, when i have time, which will probably tomorrow or friday. Good luck

cool good stuff--- I will be able to look at the board tommorrow but since i will be sharing a computer will not want to use any passwords. Looks like I took the wrong side in most games.. No worries--- There is always next week! good luck to everyone saturday and sunday---

[tskillz187]

Man this stuff is my new fav stuf to read on FCP. Anyone wanna swap? I ship $200 on AP (or Tilt, possibly Stars) for $200 on sports betting site of your choice.

[ltrainkoja55]

tskillz187, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 6:19 PM, said:

Man this stuff is my new fav stuf to read on FCP. Anyone wanna swap? I ship $200 on AP (or Tilt, possibly Stars) for $200 on sports betting site of your choice.

it has gotten pretty funny hasn't it! if I ever win I might help you out! Hey Tactical bear I seriously would like some advice on how you chose games? Is it as simple as if you agree with the public then stay away? Or do you just look for sides you like that the public doesn't? Thanks PS-- i tried to figure this out but i have the education of a third grader!!!! ( this is a joke!)

[DinkDonk]

ltrainkoja55, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 10:27 PM, said:

it has gotten pretty funny hasn't it! if I ever win I might help you out! Hey Tactical bear I seriously would like some advice on how you chose games? Is it as simple as if you agree with the public then stay away? Or do you just look for sides you like that the public doesn't? Thanks PS-- i tried to figure this out but i have the education of a third grader!!!! ( this is a joke!)

The contrarian philosophy that Wang/Tactical Bear employs is thoroughly outlined in a number of places, but if I were you, I'd start by reading the Sports Gambling 201 thread. (It's really excellent stuff.)

[Poppy_Hillis]

DinkDonk, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 5:16 PM, said:

Pretty much the first time you introduced this idea to the forum. I've never placed a single sports bet before, but I understand the moving of the line and balancing action and how the bookmakers expect to profit, so when you introduced the idea of betting against the public it seemed like not only the best way to profit, but pretty much the only way to profit. I know that a ton of guys think that they can out handicap bookmakers, but honestly how many can there be? And if they can, why not just become bookmakers themselves? BTW- I will probably do some research and eventually start placing bets using a contrarian system.

I'm somewhat in the same place you are. I haven't bet sports in a long time, mainly because I realized everything Wang's been saying about out-handicapping the books. Then I remember noticing every time I thought I had a "lock" because the line seemed wrong, I would lose. Then I remembered hearing a quote by Einstein or somebody like that saying, "if you give a man 2 choices, one right and one wrong, more often than not he'll pick the wrong one." Then I read Sports Gambling 201 and it all came together. I'll be betting pretty high selectively rather than spreading money out over several games. I need either an all or nothing result to be satisfied either way. I'm not expecting to make money this NFL season, but at least there's a method behind it now.Wang, what do you make of the Dallas/Cleveland game starting at 3.5, Dallas getting all the action, then the line going to 5.5? Stay away? Also, the Indy/Chicago game started at 10, 70% of action came in on Indy and it moved down to 9.5; that about fits the requirement doesn't it?

[Tactical Bear]

DinkDonk, on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008, 8:06 PM, said:

Ok now how are people not understanding this then? Hubris? Arrogance? Ignorance? I simply cannot understand it.

It is very hard for people who think they know a lot about sports to fully understand that their sports "knowledge" doesn't have a place in the world of sports handicapping. They'll see a number that makes no sense, and pounce, because they KNOW UNC is the best team in the country, or they KNOW the Patriots are, literally, unbeatable. Besdies, who wants to bet on the bad teams? Who likes playing the Mariners every day for a month? Who likes taking UL-Monroe two weeks in a row because "they looked good in a shutout loss to Auburn" last week? People would rather make an ocassional correct decision based on their handicapping skills than consistently beat the books by aligning themselves with them. The books are smart. They know nobody wants to get their money in consistently on the Pirates and the Mariners of the world, so that's where they hide it.It's also, to be honest, quite a tough idea to simply stumble upon. It requires a basic knowlege of economics and the psychology of the Sports Book. It's humbling to be the only guy in the bar rooting for the KC Royals, night after night, and it's lonely, too. If I'd simply come in here and posted plays instead of outlining my thought process, would ANYONE have thought Miami +1 or ATL +3 or Toronto -105 with David Purcey on the mound against the Twins yesterday were good picks? I doubt it. Everyone would have gone all HollyWood AFD on me. (shrug)So, in the way of an answer, it's a combination of ignorance and pride

[DinkDonk]

Tactical Bear, on Thursday, September 4th, 2008, 10:54 AM, said:

So, in the way of an answer, it's a combination of ignorance and pride

Yeah I understand this in the beginning, but how many times have you explained your approach now? A number of us have even tried to dumb it down for the guys like Hollywood and Ltrain and yet they still refuse to even consider the possibility that a non-favorite can be a good bet. When you posted your leans in the NCAA week 2 thread, Hollywood thought you were joking. How the **** does that even make sense? Does he assume that the bookmakers never watch a single game of football and just blindly throw shit up on the board? Does he think they're just snickering to themselves about how some stupid assholes are going to bet on Cincinatti because nobody has ever heard of how good Oklahoma is? And anyway how can any pick really be that big of a ****ing joke? The lines are close enough that you could pick at absolute random and not do any worse than paying the juice over time. In fact, I would wager that over a significant sample size, Hollywood would do much better by picking at random than with his current system of snapping up every single super public "lock," by the same philosophy that you will be able to beat sports betting long term by fading that same public side.I guess this is all unnecessary rambling because Hollywood personifies something I hate about most people. He can take valuable knowledge, stare it right in the ****ing face and never let a single sentence absorb into his brain.

[kers2]

DinkDonk, on Thursday, September 4th, 2008, 12:40 PM, said:

Yeah I understand this in the beginning, but how many times have you explained your approach now? A number of us have even tried to dumb it down for the guys like Hollywood and Ltrain and yet they still refuse to even consider the possibility that a non-favorite can be a good bet. When you posted your leans in the NCAA week 2 thread, Hollywood thought you were joking. How the **** does that even make sense? Does he assume that the bookmakers never watch a single game of football and just blindly throw shit up on the board? Does he think they're just snickering to themselves about how some stupid assholes are going to bet on Cincinatti because nobody has ever heard of how good Oklahoma is? And anyway how can any pick really be that big of a ****ing joke? The lines are close enough that you could pick at absolute random and not do any worse than paying the juice over time. In fact, I would wager that over a significant sample size, Hollywood would do much better by picking at random than with his current system of snapping up every single super public "lock," by the same philosophy that you will be able to beat sports betting long term by fading that same public side.I guess this is all unnecessary rambling because Hollywood personifies something I hate about most people. He can take valuable knowledge, stare it right in the ****ing face and never let a single sentence absorb into his brain.

I cleaned it up a bit, but you just gave me a new signature. Thanks