Fezzik GOY

Heim

Heim

EOG Master
Same BS as the other day:


"STRONG OPINIONS, not official plays

FYI if you have access Bet Rivers has best numbers

758 Kansas Mline -5000 is good
746 ALA Mline -5000 is really good

I personally risked 10 units on KU, 20 units on ALA

.......I get it, I will win almost nothing.

However KU wins 99.5% and ALA 99.7% of the time IMO. And 98% is breakeven"
 
trytrytry

trytrytry

All I do is trytrytry
he is on about a 9 year bad losing streak, incredible he has followers that twitter feed on this is hysterical many many many followed him to ruin.

fezz was pretty funny in one tweet he said well still up on the week. lol
 
A

andyfezzik

EOG Addicted
+EV at -4500. A good value but doesn't become a bad value just because the hundred sided die rolls a 1. I'd personally never go more than 5 units on this type of play but I know Steve will go as high as 10 or 20 being maximally aggressive. Still it's very recoverable. Would be interesting to see where bookmakers set the odds if that same game were replayed next week.
 
Heim

Heim

EOG Master
andyfezzik said:
+EV at -4500. A good value but doesn't become a bad value just because the hundred sided die rolls a 1. I'd personally never go more than 5 units on this type of play but I know Steve will go as high as 10 or 20 being maximally aggressive. Still it's very recoverable. Would be interesting to see where bookmakers set the odds if that same game were replayed next week.
Click to expand...

Big LOL.....number 2 in last 5 years and you're defending -4500.

Wake up and smell the new CBB landscape.
 
P

pro analyser

EOG Dedicated
andyfezzik said:
+EV at -4500. A good value but doesn't become a bad value just because the hundred sided die rolls a 1. I'd personally never go more than 5 units on this type of play but I know Steve will go as high as 10 or 20 being maximally aggressive. Still it's very recoverable. Would be interesting to see where bookmakers set the odds if that same game were replayed next week.
Click to expand...
Many bets come down to risk reward,and your bankroll. Laying 45-1 maybe a good bet,but is it worth the risk if it loses. Heres a better bet: Bill Gates offers you 3-1 on a coin flip for your entire net worth,would you do it(note can't get any backers) If your net worth is not much you may do it,but if your worth is 100 million you'd be crazy.
 
Last edited:
J

Jammer

EOG Dedicated
andyfezzik said:
+EV at -4500. A good value but doesn't become a bad value just because the hundred sided die rolls a 1. I'd personally never go more than 5 units on this type of play but I know Steve will go as high as 10 or 20 being maximally aggressive. Still it's very recoverable. Would be interesting to see where bookmakers set the odds if that same game were replayed next week.
Click to expand...
Keep suckin your brothers dick homeboy, you do it well!
 
mr merlin

mr merlin

EOG Master
andyfezzik said:
+EV at -4500. A good value but doesn't become a bad value just because the hundred sided die rolls a 1. I'd personally never go more than 5 units on this type of play but I know Steve will go as high as 10 or 20 being maximally aggressive. Still it's very recoverable. Would be interesting to see where bookmakers set the odds if that same game were replayed next week.
Click to expand...
It's not +EV just because he says it is, no tournament team would lose 99 out of 100 to purdue, nor would they lose 44 out of 45. Purdue was not worthy of being a #1 seed, therefore they shouldn't have been lumped in with the 150/151 # 1 seed wins over # 16.
 
A

andyfezzik

EOG Addicted
mr merlin said:
It's not +EV just because he says it is, no tournament team would lose 99 out of 100 to purdue, nor would they lose 44 out of 45. Purdue was not worthy of being a #1 seed, therefore they shouldn't have been lumped in with the 150/151 # 1 seed wins over # 16.
Click to expand...
They had a 29-5 record, one of the best in the country, against a very strong group of opponents. Farleigh Dickinson, by contrast, had a weak schedule and really a terrible ranking in Kenpom particularly on defense where I think they were one of the worst rated division 1 teams. So you literally had one of the best offenses up against one of the worst defenses. Regardless of whether Purdue should have been seeded #1 or #2, this was an epic mismatch where absent a miracle FDU should never have won. Miracles do happen in the NCAA, though, and this was one of two that we've seen historically. If he had bet it at -9000 then sure there's an argument there was no value there. At -4500 I'd hit it again if the game was replayed next week. Even after the win, Purdue only dropped to #8 in Kenpom and Farleigh Dickinson is #274. It would remain an epic mismatch. The odds wouldn't change that much.
 
mr merlin

mr merlin

EOG Master
andyfezzik said:
They had a 29-5 record, one of the best in the country, against a very strong group of opponents. Farleigh Dickinson, by contrast, had a weak schedule and really a terrible ranking in Kenpom particularly on defense where I think they were one of the worst rated division 1 teams. So you literally had one of the best offenses up against one of the worst defenses. Regardless of whether Purdue should have been seeded #1 or #2, this was an epic mismatch where absent a miracle FDU should never have won. Miracles do happen in the NCAA, though, and this was one of two that we've seen historically. If he had bet it at -9000 then sure there's an argument there was no value there. At -4500 I'd hit it again if the game was replayed next week. Even after the win, Purdue only dropped to #8 in Kenpom and Farleigh Dickinson is #274. It would remain an epic mismatch. The odds wouldn't change that much.
Click to expand...
Purdue played many big 10 games against horrible big 10 teams, they did play some good teams as well, purdue was not worthy of a #1 seed and as such was not a 98-99% favorite , FD was a huge underdog but had more like a 4-5-6% chance of winning. -2000 - -2500 were the max fair odds.
 
Heim

Heim

EOG Master
Again, the guy is selling his tournament package for $150. Yet recommending value on MLs of -5000.

If they could afford laying 5k, they wouldn't be buying from Fezzik.
 
Heim

Heim

EOG Master
Clients finally got a release from Fezzik they could bet more than $50. Duke -3. All that means is back to knee-jerk 1H unders.
 
T

texaswizzard

EOG Dedicated
Andy - Arguing that -4500 was a good play on Purdue is one of the worst plays ever released by a tout in the last 50 years. Unless they were playing a middle school team it was an awful play. What do you know about playing sports? I've played in pickup games where plenty of times the team with the best team at every postion losses.You probably were the last kid picked when playing kickball in elementary school.
 
mr merlin

mr merlin

EOG Master
All that needs to happen is to bet the #1 seeds in the first rd for the next 12 years, (winning every one) and he's even. After that it'll be easy(risking 100 to win 2) money!
 
A

andyfezzik

EOG Addicted
texaswizzard said:
Andy - Arguing that -4500 was a good play on Purdue is one of the worst plays ever released by a tout in the last 50 years. Unless they were playing a middle school team it was an awful play. What do you know about playing sports? I've played in pickup games where plenty of times the team with the best team at every postion losses.You probably were the last kid picked when playing kickball in elementary school.
Click to expand...
You demonstrate why the house hold is so high. You're probably cutting in line to bet long shot dog after dog at 5% implied odds where the actual odds are 1%. "It's just like middle school sports!". Uh, no, it's not. Yes one in one hundred times, give or take, a 16 is going to beat a 1. It's Cinderella and it's fun and I guess some entertainment for a $100 bettor hoping to make $2k who doesn't really care about getting a horrible number.
 
FairWarning

FairWarning

Bells Beer Connoisseur
andyfezzik said:
You demonstrate why the house hold is so high. You're probably cutting in line to bet long shot dog after dog at 5% implied odds where the actual odds are 1%. "It's just like middle school sports!". Uh, no, it's not. Yes one in one hundred times, give or take, a 16 is going to beat a 1. It's Cinderella and it's fun and I guess some entertainment for a $100 bettor hoping to make $2k who doesn't really care about getting a horrible number.
Click to expand...
I get your point, but four teams had to be a 1 seed, that doesn’t make them automatically a -4500 favorite. Yes Purdue won the conference, but they were trending downward as the season went along.
 
T

texaswizzard

EOG Dedicated
Andy - I didn't bet FD ML. Your brother never saw FD play and for that reason alone it was a bad bet. This isn't football where a great college football team like Alabama would crush Akron and beat them either 99 or 100 out of 100 times. This is basketball which is a completely different animal. You both don't understand that. Your brother uses many betting strategies 15, 20, 25 & 30 years old that just plain don't work anymore. He's a Dinosaur Bettor. No one is afraid of taking his action betting sides, totals of ML bets. If my brother gave this bet out and he was in the handicapping business I'd tell him how dumb he is. Now go home and get your shine box!
 
A

andyfezzik

EOG Addicted
texaswizzard said:
Andy - I didn't bet FD ML. Your brother never saw FD play and for that reason alone it was a bad bet. This isn't football where a great college football team like Alabama would crush Akron and beat them either 99 or 100 out of 100 times. This is basketball which is a completely different animal. You both don't understand that. Your brother uses many betting strategies 15, 20, 25 & 30 years old that just plain don't work anymore. He's a Dinosaur Bettor. No one is afraid of taking his action betting sides, totals of ML bets. If my brother gave this bet out and he was in the handicapping business I'd tell him how dumb he is. Now go home and get your shine box!
Click to expand...
Well keep in mind 1% true odds would be -12000 pricing and he got -4500 which is closer to 3% implied odds. I think at 3% it is at worst a breakeven play even if we accept the narrative that someone who closely follows FDU might have gleaned that they surged toward the end of the season and were outplaying what all the statistics and Kenpom rankings indicated. It's certainly not a 5% chance.
 
raycabino

raycabino

Long Live Wilson!
andyfezzik said:
Well keep in mind 1% true odds would be -12000 pricing and he got -4500 which is closer to 3% implied odds. I think at 3% it is at worst a breakeven play even if we accept the narrative that someone who closely follows FDU might have gleaned that they surged toward the end of the season and were outplaying what all the statistics and Kenpom rankings indicated. It's certainly not a 5% chance.
Click to expand...
Pinnacle disagreed as they dealt the ml on that game at -2700. It did get bet up to -3200ish but...... Long story short I get the logic here but I think the game has changed too much (more variance because of amount of 3s attempted making pts worth slightly less and more parity). I would take +3000 blind on every 16 seed going forward til the end of time and would make a side bet that I'm big winner when it's over.
 
T

texaswizzard

EOG Dedicated
Andy - Who said the true odds were 1%? I said in college football the odds of say an Akron beating a team like Alabama are less than 1%. In college basketball going forward the odds of a #15 or #16 seed beating a #1 or #2 seed are probably in the 4%-6% range. If you watched Purdue closely in February & March they were nowhere close to a #1 seed. In fact based on the last 45-50 days I would have said they were no better than most #4 or $5 seeds and we all know how often #5 seeds lose to #12 seeds. Purdue lost 4 times during those 45-50 days to tourney teams but nothing special Indiana twice, Maryland and Northwestern and survived in March winning by 5 points or less to Wisconsin, Illinois, Rutgers & Penn State. The last 5 minutes of many games from February on their entire starting 5 looked like they had alligator arms when taking shots from the field. Your brother probably looked at past history and saw only 1 -#16 seed beat a #1 seed and thought he'd add a free unit to his portfolio. He got slapped silly. He's closing in on being down almost 100 units since Jan 1st. I usually want to be politically correct when I write something especially for my kids sake as they have corrected me a few times over the last decade but in this case I'm going to say it.

If anyone is betting or buying your brothers sides, totals or ML bets they are either a moron or retarded.
 
FairWarning

FairWarning

Bells Beer Connoisseur
Not knowing a thing about FD, ok. One thing we do know about Purdue is their coach is someone you don’t want to lay big odds on in a one and done scenario.
 
A

andyfezzik

EOG Addicted
raycabino said:
Pinnacle disagreed as they dealt the ml on that game at -2700. It did get bet up to -3200ish but...... Long story short I get the logic here but I think the game has changed too much (more variance because of amount of 3s attempted making pts worth slightly less and more parity). I would take +3000 blind on every 16 seed going forward til the end of time and would make a side bet that I'm big winner when it's over.
Click to expand...
Interesting yes if Pinnacle was dealing -2700 that would definitely have given me pause. They usually deal an accurate line and attract a lot of large bets. What were they offering on point spread? If the spread was 23 like the other books then it seems -2700 ML would be most inaccurate.
 
railbird

railbird

EOG Master
andyfezzik said:
They had a 29-5 record, one of the best in the country, against a very strong group of opponents. Farleigh Dickinson, by contrast, had a weak schedule and really a terrible ranking in Kenpom particularly on defense where I think they were one of the worst rated division 1 teams. So you literally had one of the best offenses up against one of the worst defenses. Regardless of whether Purdue should have been seeded #1 or #2, this was an epic mismatch where absent a miracle FDU should never have won. Miracles do happen in the NCAA, though, and this was one of two that we've seen historically. If he had bet it at -9000 then sure there's an argument there was no value there. At -4500 I'd hit it again if the game was replayed next week. Even after the win, Purdue only dropped to #8 in Kenpom and Farleigh Dickinson is #274. It would remain an epic mismatch. The odds wouldn't change that much.
Click to expand...
bad handicap, you had a slow white defense vs 4 quick guards that came off a great form, purdue nowhere near as good as their record. fdu is improving, purdue isnt. this is why i made halftime ml bet at +800. if the 2 teams met again the line would be 14 not 23
 
Heim

Heim

EOG Master
Anyway you look at it, FDU was a top 64 team.

If you want a 99.9 percent play. Pick a small conference tourney (one bid) with a glaring discrepancy in talent and fire away.

Example Davidson when they were in the SoCon.

Wasn't Fezzik who recommended a -400 ML bet on Patriots over NYG in SB?

I think JK would remember 😁
 
Last edited:
ZzyzxRoad

ZzyzxRoad

EOG Dedicated
andyfezzik said:
Interesting yes if Pinnacle was dealing -2700 that would definitely have given me pause. They usually deal an accurate line and attract a lot of large bets. What were they offering on point spread? If the spread was 23 like the other books then it seems -2700 ML would be most inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Does your therapist know how much time you spend on the internet pretending to be your brother?
 
V

Valuist

EOG Master
mr merlin said:
Regardless of who thinks their handicapping of true odds is right, can we agree that betting $4500 to win a hundred bucks is foolish in the extreme?
Click to expand...

I remember hearing a racetrack guy after hearing somebody loved a 3 to 5 shot. "If you have the 5, why do you need the 3? And that's 3-5. Not 1-45 odds.. The risk/reward is just too insane. Remember hearing how the "no safety" was such a great bet in the SB? Until it lost. Several times. At brutal low odds.

Horsebettors understand these "theoretical locks" never are. We've all seen the impossible. Secretariat lost a maiden race. The 1998 Rams at 4-12 went on to win the 1999 Super Bowl.
Mine that Bird won the 2009 KY Derby at 50/1. And he should've been about 200/1. And he destroyed the field. 14 years later, it's as unlikely a finish as I've ever seen. Maryland BC has to be up there. FDU? Purdue has lost to 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and now 16 seeds since 2011.
 
Last edited:
Heim

Heim

EOG Master
mr merlin said:
Regardless of who thinks their handicapping of true odds is right, can we agree that betting $4500 to win a hundred bucks is foolish in the extreme?
Click to expand...

He can do what he wants as a private bettor.... however he forgets he's a tout too. He has some fiduciary duty to clients that risk money on his recommendations.

Yes, it's a shit profession with no regulations but they deserve more than a half hearted I'm sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top