Almost Allright
GO Bucks!!!
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
thanks for sharing Ned. :cheers
thanks for sharing Ned. :cheers
Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
- Thread starter Ned
- Start date
Hawks Fan
EOG Enthusiast
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
Ned, Thanks once again for sharing your plays... Played them all and came home last night for a nice surprise... I don't play hoop so this is really nice...
One question, does the line matter at all or just play certain situations in certain conferences no matter the line?
Thanks and keep it up....:cheers
Ned, Thanks once again for sharing your plays... Played them all and came home last night for a nice surprise... I don't play hoop so this is really nice...
One question, does the line matter at all or just play certain situations in certain conferences no matter the line?
Thanks and keep it up....:cheers
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
Ned, Thanks once again for sharing your plays... Played them all and came home last night for a nice surprise... I don't play hoop so this is really nice...
One question, does the line matter at all or just play certain situations in certain conferences no matter the line?
Thanks and keep it up....:cheers
The line always matters, you want the best that you can get, but it wouldn't deter me, simply because the volume of plays that would lose by half a point, or a point, is not ample enough to stop profitability. There is a 10-15% cushion built into this system above breakeven, so there is already a nice buffer zone, or I wouldn't even try this.
Ned, Thanks once again for sharing your plays... Played them all and came home last night for a nice surprise... I don't play hoop so this is really nice...
One question, does the line matter at all or just play certain situations in certain conferences no matter the line?
Thanks and keep it up....:cheers
The line always matters, you want the best that you can get, but it wouldn't deter me, simply because the volume of plays that would lose by half a point, or a point, is not ample enough to stop profitability. There is a 10-15% cushion built into this system above breakeven, so there is already a nice buffer zone, or I wouldn't even try this.
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
This post is one of the great pieces of analysis I have ever read on EOG. (and not surprising considering the source). It almost makes playing 2 or 3 games a night....every night....like most guys do (including me) seem ridiculous.
Finding the right situation, and then coming to the table with guns blazing is the only way to really have a chance to make money betting sports. Your method of investing, and not gambling....and that is not to say you don't lose at times....is really far superior.
Well done.
By the way, what ever happened to your old manager, Tony Torchia?
This post is one of the great pieces of analysis I have ever read on EOG. (and not surprising considering the source). It almost makes playing 2 or 3 games a night....every night....like most guys do (including me) seem ridiculous.
Finding the right situation, and then coming to the table with guns blazing is the only way to really have a chance to make money betting sports. Your method of investing, and not gambling....and that is not to say you don't lose at times....is really far superior.
Well done.
By the way, what ever happened to your old manager, Tony Torchia?
Hawks Fan
EOG Enthusiast
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
Question for Ned and everybody else following these:
Do you play them all when Ned post's them or wait till closer till tip off?
I have just been playing them all at once and going about my day....
Ned, wish I had the time to break things down and look for these types of trends in sports and betting but just don't. Can't even begin to imagine how much time you have spent gathering stats/info and then searching/studying to get the angles/trends that you play...
Question for Ned and everybody else following these:
Do you play them all when Ned post's them or wait till closer till tip off?
I have just been playing them all at once and going about my day....
Ned, wish I had the time to break things down and look for these types of trends in sports and betting but just don't. Can't even begin to imagine how much time you have spent gathering stats/info and then searching/studying to get the angles/trends that you play...
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
By the way, what ever happened to your old manager, Tony Torchia?
Hey how did you know I played for Torchia? The last I heard he was in serious financial dispair. When I went to my reunion Wade Boggs told me he went belly up from the ponies. He had an affinity for the horses, and evidently he didn't do enough homework.
By the way, what ever happened to your old manager, Tony Torchia?
Hey how did you know I played for Torchia? The last I heard he was in serious financial dispair. When I went to my reunion Wade Boggs told me he went belly up from the ponies. He had an affinity for the horses, and evidently he didn't do enough homework.
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
I show 19-10 so far in this latest enterprise.91023i2ndw;l
That is correct!
Just a side note, and how vital it is to know what your looking for, know how to read and interpret what you find, and utilize it properly.
There are 12 other systems within this system that connect on 56-59.3% over the same 11 yr. period, and I have been tracking them thus far, and you will be pleased to know, that I discarded them, and rightfully so:
They collectively are 8-11 so far 42.1%!
I show 19-10 so far in this latest enterprise.91023i2ndw;l
That is correct!
Just a side note, and how vital it is to know what your looking for, know how to read and interpret what you find, and utilize it properly.
There are 12 other systems within this system that connect on 56-59.3% over the same 11 yr. period, and I have been tracking them thus far, and you will be pleased to know, that I discarded them, and rightfully so:
They collectively are 8-11 so far 42.1%!
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
This post is one of the great pieces of analysis I have ever read on EOG. (and not surprising considering the source). It almost makes playing 2 or 3 games a night....every night....like most guys do (including me) seem ridiculous.
thanks for that....but wagering 2-3 games a night can be profitable, it is just more difficult. When you seek out methodology such as what I do, and blitz the books with an array of 60-70% situational sets that have enough games in the dataset, to overturn binomial distribution, and offer high confidence intervals, your odds improve greatly, but what also improves is the risks that the books catch on, because they aren't identified by a single entity, they are risk adverse, meaning the risk is outlayed by having several different high caliber edges working simotaneously in different ways. That's why I refer to this, and many I use as "stealth" systems, they are undetectable.
The one concern I have, is I now see these appearing in other forums, because there are trancient attendees here, that float around and seek information, and display elsewhere. It's ok with me, because it will never doom what I do, I have many modes of operation. Yes, I will lose, you can bet on it, we all do...but longterm, I will not! I have too big of an edge.
How much time does it take?
It's taken me 25 years, at anywhere from 8-15 hour a day. That's what it takes. Is it worth it? I can only say if it wasn't I would have quit a long time ago!
Bottomline, there are many that aren't in the game anymore, I'm still in the game, and thriving, so until they find a way to combat what I do, I'll remain in the game.
This post is one of the great pieces of analysis I have ever read on EOG. (and not surprising considering the source). It almost makes playing 2 or 3 games a night....every night....like most guys do (including me) seem ridiculous.
thanks for that....but wagering 2-3 games a night can be profitable, it is just more difficult. When you seek out methodology such as what I do, and blitz the books with an array of 60-70% situational sets that have enough games in the dataset, to overturn binomial distribution, and offer high confidence intervals, your odds improve greatly, but what also improves is the risks that the books catch on, because they aren't identified by a single entity, they are risk adverse, meaning the risk is outlayed by having several different high caliber edges working simotaneously in different ways. That's why I refer to this, and many I use as "stealth" systems, they are undetectable.
The one concern I have, is I now see these appearing in other forums, because there are trancient attendees here, that float around and seek information, and display elsewhere. It's ok with me, because it will never doom what I do, I have many modes of operation. Yes, I will lose, you can bet on it, we all do...but longterm, I will not! I have too big of an edge.
How much time does it take?
It's taken me 25 years, at anywhere from 8-15 hour a day. That's what it takes. Is it worth it? I can only say if it wasn't I would have quit a long time ago!
Bottomline, there are many that aren't in the game anymore, I'm still in the game, and thriving, so until they find a way to combat what I do, I'll remain in the game.
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
GENTLEMAN:
here is something I'm working on for next year's conference tournaments. See if you can follow along, understand the premise, and where I am going with this.
FACTS:
68 Conference games played this season through 3/7/09
A typical 1st half total will be 50% of the game total -4 to -5 points
So as an example:
North Carolina Duke a high total for the game is 166
The first half total is 79
So divide the game total by 2 = 83 and then subtract the 1st half total of 79, and you have 50% of the game total -4.
Low scoring game take game total Ohio St. game of 126.5 vs 1st half total of 58.5. Divide game total by 2 = 63.25 subtract 1st half total you have -4.75.
It is always (of course there are exceptions) 4-5 points less than 50% of the game total.
SPECULATIVE PREMISES LOW SCORING 1st HALF IN CONFERENCE TOURNAMENTS:
1) Teams come out nervous and the first half is under achieving expectations in points scored
2) New arenas with new backgrounds takes more time to adjust
3) Many times this is a do or die game for teams, and both come out feeling each other out, and the first 5-8 minutes is very conservatively played
4) Defense like the NBA playoffs is stepped up, but this is a do or die game for many seniors.
SECOND HALF HIGHER SCORING 2nd HALF SPECULATIVE PREMISES:
1) Teams fall behind and let it loose in the second half
2) Close games end in extended free throw shooting contest to milk the clock, in a last ditch effort to save their last game, moreso than regular season when not as much on the line. (Saw that in games yesterday with teams trailing by 10+ refusing to give up!)
IF SPECULATIVE PREMISES ARE TRUE THEN THE FOLLOWING SHOULD ALSO BE TRUE:
Second halves of games should be out-performing the 1st half, by the longterm average of 4-5 points a game.
FACT:
58 Tournament games played:
First half points scored: 4,244 62.41 per game
Second half points scored: 4,784 71.26 per game
------------------------------------------------------
second half differential +540 +7.94 per game
It is in fact true that the second halves are inordinately high of expectations! It is also true that 1st halves are under achieving expectations.
IF first half approaches are conservative then they should be lower scoring, and if the second half is played wide open, and extended foul plague endings, beyond what is normal and customary in the regular season, there should be gross disparagements between 1st and 2nd half performances.
FACT:
There has been 0 games out of 58 that saw the 1st half outscore the second half by 21+ points.
There have been 12 second halves outscoring the first half by 21+ points!
THAT IS 21% OF ALL GAMES!
DOES A HIGH SCORING FIRST HALF SHOW A GAME THAT IS GOING OVER THE TOTAL?
FACT:
IF 70 or more points were scored in the frist half, it was followed by a second half that averaged 78.6 points per game, which is +8.3 points of expectation!
GAMES WITH 1st HALF SCORING 60 POINTS OR LESS: 37/68 54.4%
GAMES WITH 2nd HALF SCORING 60 POINTS OR LESS: 13/68 19.1%
As you can see all the premises verify. There is definately a weakness, or market bias in how the oddsmakers are completely unaware of what is happening here, as they continue to process computer generated lines, that don't take "tournament" bias and generate it into the equation. This is where I step in and destroy what they put out!
MY PROJECT:
I'm going to take all games and process all the information for the last 5 years of conference tournaments, and what the lines, totals, etc. were going into the game, and process the biggest weakness in the lines.
MY SPECULATIVE THOUGHTS ON WHERE THE GOLD WILL LIE:
Judging by my experience doing this, I have a hunch where the gold will be. It will be based on a system that projects winners on the first half UNDERS with certain prevailing indicators, or 2nd half OVERS, with certain prevailing circumstances, and they will connect at an inordinately high rate.
By next Tournament you'll see a system added to the equation, that will provide a larger dump of plays over a very short period of time, extract some big money from the books, without them even noticing it!
GENTLEMAN:
here is something I'm working on for next year's conference tournaments. See if you can follow along, understand the premise, and where I am going with this.
FACTS:
68 Conference games played this season through 3/7/09
A typical 1st half total will be 50% of the game total -4 to -5 points
So as an example:
North Carolina Duke a high total for the game is 166
The first half total is 79
So divide the game total by 2 = 83 and then subtract the 1st half total of 79, and you have 50% of the game total -4.
Low scoring game take game total Ohio St. game of 126.5 vs 1st half total of 58.5. Divide game total by 2 = 63.25 subtract 1st half total you have -4.75.
It is always (of course there are exceptions) 4-5 points less than 50% of the game total.
SPECULATIVE PREMISES LOW SCORING 1st HALF IN CONFERENCE TOURNAMENTS:
1) Teams come out nervous and the first half is under achieving expectations in points scored
2) New arenas with new backgrounds takes more time to adjust
3) Many times this is a do or die game for teams, and both come out feeling each other out, and the first 5-8 minutes is very conservatively played
4) Defense like the NBA playoffs is stepped up, but this is a do or die game for many seniors.
SECOND HALF HIGHER SCORING 2nd HALF SPECULATIVE PREMISES:
1) Teams fall behind and let it loose in the second half
2) Close games end in extended free throw shooting contest to milk the clock, in a last ditch effort to save their last game, moreso than regular season when not as much on the line. (Saw that in games yesterday with teams trailing by 10+ refusing to give up!)
IF SPECULATIVE PREMISES ARE TRUE THEN THE FOLLOWING SHOULD ALSO BE TRUE:
Second halves of games should be out-performing the 1st half, by the longterm average of 4-5 points a game.
FACT:
58 Tournament games played:
First half points scored: 4,244 62.41 per game
Second half points scored: 4,784 71.26 per game
------------------------------------------------------
second half differential +540 +7.94 per game
It is in fact true that the second halves are inordinately high of expectations! It is also true that 1st halves are under achieving expectations.
IF first half approaches are conservative then they should be lower scoring, and if the second half is played wide open, and extended foul plague endings, beyond what is normal and customary in the regular season, there should be gross disparagements between 1st and 2nd half performances.
FACT:
There has been 0 games out of 58 that saw the 1st half outscore the second half by 21+ points.
There have been 12 second halves outscoring the first half by 21+ points!
THAT IS 21% OF ALL GAMES!
DOES A HIGH SCORING FIRST HALF SHOW A GAME THAT IS GOING OVER THE TOTAL?
FACT:
IF 70 or more points were scored in the frist half, it was followed by a second half that averaged 78.6 points per game, which is +8.3 points of expectation!
GAMES WITH 1st HALF SCORING 60 POINTS OR LESS: 37/68 54.4%
GAMES WITH 2nd HALF SCORING 60 POINTS OR LESS: 13/68 19.1%
As you can see all the premises verify. There is definately a weakness, or market bias in how the oddsmakers are completely unaware of what is happening here, as they continue to process computer generated lines, that don't take "tournament" bias and generate it into the equation. This is where I step in and destroy what they put out!
MY PROJECT:
I'm going to take all games and process all the information for the last 5 years of conference tournaments, and what the lines, totals, etc. were going into the game, and process the biggest weakness in the lines.
MY SPECULATIVE THOUGHTS ON WHERE THE GOLD WILL LIE:
Judging by my experience doing this, I have a hunch where the gold will be. It will be based on a system that projects winners on the first half UNDERS with certain prevailing indicators, or 2nd half OVERS, with certain prevailing circumstances, and they will connect at an inordinately high rate.
By next Tournament you'll see a system added to the equation, that will provide a larger dump of plays over a very short period of time, extract some big money from the books, without them even noticing it!
Superskrub
EOG Enthusiast
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
@Ned
So the strategy should be to take the games you allready have picked as under bets for conference play, and bet these very heavy on the Under for the first half, as its due to first half performance these games will go under.
Also the games you have picked as over bets, should be bet very heavy on the Over for the second half, as its due to second half performance these games will go over.
Am I right about this?
@Ned
So the strategy should be to take the games you allready have picked as under bets for conference play, and bet these very heavy on the Under for the first half, as its due to first half performance these games will go under.
Also the games you have picked as over bets, should be bet very heavy on the Over for the second half, as its due to second half performance these games will go over.
Am I right about this?
ballwonder
EOG Master
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
Ned after seeing the result this year I am very curious to see what the years prior where. I would think oddsmakers have a harder time playing catch up with lines with this many games but I could be wrong. My question is this wouldnt lines makers take into consideration if this was a pattern every year and make adjustments based off this?
Ned after seeing the result this year I am very curious to see what the years prior where. I would think oddsmakers have a harder time playing catch up with lines with this many games but I could be wrong. My question is this wouldnt lines makers take into consideration if this was a pattern every year and make adjustments based off this?
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
What I posted about a project has nothing to do what I will do this year, right now it is inconclusive!
About the oddsmakers. I think some give them too much credit. Don't get me wrong, they are extremely good at what they do. Sports wagering is a highly efficient market, and the weaknesses I find, are not something they would catch onto. If they do, then they have yet to prove it!
What I posted about a project has nothing to do what I will do this year, right now it is inconclusive!
About the oddsmakers. I think some give them too much credit. Don't get me wrong, they are extremely good at what they do. Sports wagering is a highly efficient market, and the weaknesses I find, are not something they would catch onto. If they do, then they have yet to prove it!
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
Ned, thanks for all of your efforts.
Question....have you looked at anything for the NCAA tournament? Since it appears your conference tournament and BB systems are based on tendencies in these two types of tournaments, I would guess that similar tendencies may be there for the big dance. Just curious.....
Ned, thanks for all of your efforts.
Question....have you looked at anything for the NCAA tournament? Since it appears your conference tournament and BB systems are based on tendencies in these two types of tournaments, I would guess that similar tendencies may be there for the big dance. Just curious.....
munson15
I want winners...
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
I don't believe the oddsmakers can 'catch up' when they are dealing with unknowns-unknown opponents playing in unfamiliar surroundings. They don't even know who's playing until literally the night before, whereas during the regular season, they have the whole schedule mapped out and have plenty of time to anticipate possible weak areas. These conference tournaments, played at neutral sites for the most part, must be a nightmare for the books. There's not much time to find out who's banged up from the night before, and how the respective clubs will react to games played on short notice. The dynamic is completely different than all year when they whip out a rotation book and analyze each team for days. Instead of days, they have hours to get it right. Just my .02.
I don't believe the oddsmakers can 'catch up' when they are dealing with unknowns-unknown opponents playing in unfamiliar surroundings. They don't even know who's playing until literally the night before, whereas during the regular season, they have the whole schedule mapped out and have plenty of time to anticipate possible weak areas. These conference tournaments, played at neutral sites for the most part, must be a nightmare for the books. There's not much time to find out who's banged up from the night before, and how the respective clubs will react to games played on short notice. The dynamic is completely different than all year when they whip out a rotation book and analyze each team for days. Instead of days, they have hours to get it right. Just my .02.
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
There is one problem with the NCAAB which makes it a much bigger fish to fry. It is the most popular multiple day event in all of sports. The only thing that tops it is the Superbowl, which is a singular event, on one day.
The NCAAB Tournament is under a huge microscope, the conference tournaments are considered a joke for all but the fans of a particular team, a particular conference, or a particular school. Noone would care what North Texas does in the conference tournament, or what George mason does in a conference tournament, that's why there is "stuff" to be found and exploit. When thise teams noone cares about gets into the big dance, everyone knows about them, everyone! Office pools encounter the name, women will know.
How do you attack an enemy? Do you go at his strength, when they know everyone is looking, every media person in the world is eyeing the pointspreads, the matchups, learning about the teams? Or do you go when everyone has their backs turned (including the oddsmaker), Conference Tournaments, and exploit their ultimate carefree weakness?
I think you can answer that!
SUNDAY UPDATE 8:17 PM
TODAY: 5-1 83.3%
OVERALL 24-10 70.6%
Sports investing, is taking an efficient market, and finding the vulnerable areas and exploiting it clean! here is the map of doing just that:
BRACKETBUSTER:
06-07 34-14 70.8%
07-08 35-19 64.8%
08-09 38-23 62.2%
CONFERENCE TOURNAMENTS:
08-09 24-10 70.6%
OVERALL:
131-66 66.5%
OTHER:
Countless plays posted in singular form here
NCAAF WINNER WITH FLORIDA
NFL SUPERBOWL WINNER WITH ARIZONA
SINGLE HIGHEST PERCENTAGE PROP PLAY WINNER
AND MANY OTHERS, ACHIEVING SIMILAR RESULTS
I'm not sure how many players hit about 67 percent of their action with over 200 plays. When I first came on here and said I don't play anything unless it is a 65% chance of winning, I think it got some laughs, and I could understand why.
That isn't the important part, or why I am here. I hope your all learning how to finally understand how to beat this. Many can win, and have a big year in a given sport, but it is just a loan, they give it back in the next sport, or the one after.
Get pissed off at losing, and understand that if you really want to make money, it takes a different approach. I'm sure that noone has ever seen this type of approach before, blitz the books, when their not paying attention, and rape them, while everyone goes about trying to beat a single game.
There are opportunities to make a bundle if you open your mind, and understand that winning 1 game at a time, is more stressful, more strenuous, and more defeating than blitzing hard on something with a 60-70% track record, and letting it fly! I guarantee anyone that is playing every game for the last 3 bracketbusters, and this conf. tournament, made more money in what amounts to 5 days total going 62-33 than they ever will in their life.
What is sad, is I'll bet 90% of the people that followed, already pissed away what they won in bracketbuster. Get pissed, get renewed, and start winning. I hate people losing, because they are married to a system that is highly efficient.
If you get nothing else from this, I hope at least one person figures it out, because it will change your life forever and you'll never work again!
There is one problem with the NCAAB which makes it a much bigger fish to fry. It is the most popular multiple day event in all of sports. The only thing that tops it is the Superbowl, which is a singular event, on one day.
The NCAAB Tournament is under a huge microscope, the conference tournaments are considered a joke for all but the fans of a particular team, a particular conference, or a particular school. Noone would care what North Texas does in the conference tournament, or what George mason does in a conference tournament, that's why there is "stuff" to be found and exploit. When thise teams noone cares about gets into the big dance, everyone knows about them, everyone! Office pools encounter the name, women will know.
How do you attack an enemy? Do you go at his strength, when they know everyone is looking, every media person in the world is eyeing the pointspreads, the matchups, learning about the teams? Or do you go when everyone has their backs turned (including the oddsmaker), Conference Tournaments, and exploit their ultimate carefree weakness?
I think you can answer that!
SUNDAY UPDATE 8:17 PM
TODAY: 5-1 83.3%
OVERALL 24-10 70.6%
Sports investing, is taking an efficient market, and finding the vulnerable areas and exploiting it clean! here is the map of doing just that:
BRACKETBUSTER:
06-07 34-14 70.8%
07-08 35-19 64.8%
08-09 38-23 62.2%
CONFERENCE TOURNAMENTS:
08-09 24-10 70.6%
OVERALL:
131-66 66.5%
OTHER:
Countless plays posted in singular form here
NCAAF WINNER WITH FLORIDA
NFL SUPERBOWL WINNER WITH ARIZONA
SINGLE HIGHEST PERCENTAGE PROP PLAY WINNER
AND MANY OTHERS, ACHIEVING SIMILAR RESULTS
I'm not sure how many players hit about 67 percent of their action with over 200 plays. When I first came on here and said I don't play anything unless it is a 65% chance of winning, I think it got some laughs, and I could understand why.
That isn't the important part, or why I am here. I hope your all learning how to finally understand how to beat this. Many can win, and have a big year in a given sport, but it is just a loan, they give it back in the next sport, or the one after.
Get pissed off at losing, and understand that if you really want to make money, it takes a different approach. I'm sure that noone has ever seen this type of approach before, blitz the books, when their not paying attention, and rape them, while everyone goes about trying to beat a single game.
There are opportunities to make a bundle if you open your mind, and understand that winning 1 game at a time, is more stressful, more strenuous, and more defeating than blitzing hard on something with a 60-70% track record, and letting it fly! I guarantee anyone that is playing every game for the last 3 bracketbusters, and this conf. tournament, made more money in what amounts to 5 days total going 62-33 than they ever will in their life.
What is sad, is I'll bet 90% of the people that followed, already pissed away what they won in bracketbuster. Get pissed, get renewed, and start winning. I hate people losing, because they are married to a system that is highly efficient.
If you get nothing else from this, I hope at least one person figures it out, because it will change your life forever and you'll never work again!
ballwonder
EOG Master
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
Ned what a day so far. Since you started this I have played every game for equal amounts and have not really played anything else. My roll has grown and thanks a million.
Ned what a day so far. Since you started this I have played every game for equal amounts and have not really played anything else. My roll has grown and thanks a million.
ballwonder
EOG Master
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
Ned I wanted to ask, the system that you are using now how long have you used this system? This may have been asked before but I did not see it. Also at the end of the tourney would you be willing to describe the system to us to understand? Thanks again for this hardwork as many are very grateful.
Ned I wanted to ask, the system that you are using now how long have you used this system? This may have been asked before but I did not see it. Also at the end of the tourney would you be willing to describe the system to us to understand? Thanks again for this hardwork as many are very grateful.
Outhouse Tim
EOG Member
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
Ned
Thanks for your observations. You certainly know what you are doing. Brackbuster was a blast. I stumblerd upon this yeaterday, and these last 2 days have been great as well.
Ned
Thanks for your observations. You certainly know what you are doing. Brackbuster was a blast. I stumblerd upon this yeaterday, and these last 2 days have been great as well.
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
This is year 2 for me, and yes I'll leave the map behind for anyone that wants it, there may be some additions, as there are a few things I am tracking that were in the 58.5-59.5% range, which I don't use, as I said I like the 10-15% buffer if I'm going deep into the well, which I have been doing on these.
As indicated by my post earlier in this thread, I will have even more weapons in the arsenol next year, see this year's work is already done, I'm making a bigger and more widespread blueprint for next year. I already am putting together February and March 2010, so when it comes I'm way more ready than the books will ever be, that will include tweaks to bracketbuster. See, it's like an investment portfolio, the more spreadout the risk over many systems applying to the same sequence of games, the less liklihood of it tanking!
I also want everyone to know, not all of what I do, is laden with gold, there will be a stocking full of charcoal here and there, I'm not invincible, or immune to losing, but when you hit the books with the high hard one, you can easily absorb the bag of coal once in awhile, and as sure as death and taxes, there will be some.
Just keep looking at the big picture, paint with a broad sweeping paintbrush, and the gold dust, will turn into some hefty nuggets!
This is year 2 for me, and yes I'll leave the map behind for anyone that wants it, there may be some additions, as there are a few things I am tracking that were in the 58.5-59.5% range, which I don't use, as I said I like the 10-15% buffer if I'm going deep into the well, which I have been doing on these.
As indicated by my post earlier in this thread, I will have even more weapons in the arsenol next year, see this year's work is already done, I'm making a bigger and more widespread blueprint for next year. I already am putting together February and March 2010, so when it comes I'm way more ready than the books will ever be, that will include tweaks to bracketbuster. See, it's like an investment portfolio, the more spreadout the risk over many systems applying to the same sequence of games, the less liklihood of it tanking!
I also want everyone to know, not all of what I do, is laden with gold, there will be a stocking full of charcoal here and there, I'm not invincible, or immune to losing, but when you hit the books with the high hard one, you can easily absorb the bag of coal once in awhile, and as sure as death and taxes, there will be some.
Just keep looking at the big picture, paint with a broad sweeping paintbrush, and the gold dust, will turn into some hefty nuggets!
munson15
I want winners...
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
My one concern on the over/under situation would be that closer lined games would tend to go overtime at a greater rate than games involving a huge favorite. Those games would have a higher % of games going over the total. You obviously have spent way more time analyzing this, I was just wondering if this factor was taken into consideration. I anxiously await your next foray into tournament play, and I'd like to commend you for the tremendous performance of this latest venture. I show 25-13 thus far with St. Mary's and the Troy total still out.:cheers
munson15
I want winners...
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
I bet the Troy total around noon today and got 147.5, which could cost me a winner. The line went all the way down to 144 later, so sometimes waiting can be to your benefit. I don't think you can anticipate line movement, if you can, you don't even need Ned to make money.:+textinb3
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
My one concern on the over/under situation would be that closer lined games would tend to go overtime at a greater rate than games involving a huge favorite. Those games would have a higher % of games going over the total. You obviously have spent way more time analyzing this, I was just wondering if this factor was taken into consideration. I anxiously await your next foray into tournament play, and I'd like to commend you for the tremendous performance of this latest venture. I show 25-13 thus far with St. Mary's and the Troy total still out.:cheers
OVERTIME:
9 games went into OT this week:
pointspread 6 or higher OT games: 6
pointspread less than 6: 3
not what you think
My one concern on the over/under situation would be that closer lined games would tend to go overtime at a greater rate than games involving a huge favorite. Those games would have a higher % of games going over the total. You obviously have spent way more time analyzing this, I was just wondering if this factor was taken into consideration. I anxiously await your next foray into tournament play, and I'd like to commend you for the tremendous performance of this latest venture. I show 25-13 thus far with St. Mary's and the Troy total still out.:cheers
OVERTIME:
9 games went into OT this week:
pointspread 6 or higher OT games: 6
pointspread less than 6: 3
not what you think
Superskrub
EOG Enthusiast
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
Ha ha
Short Term Investment Management might be another good name
Ha ha
Short Term Investment Management might be another good name
Re: IF YOU THOUGHT BRACKETBUSTER WAS FUN
Re: IF YOU THOUGHT BRACKETBUSTER WAS FUN
Awesome run my man. Keep up the good work!
Hey, what's with picking the Zags tonight over my Gaels!oij213490
Re: IF YOU THOUGHT BRACKETBUSTER WAS FUN
Awesome run my man. Keep up the good work!
Hey, what's with picking the Zags tonight over my Gaels!oij213490
ballwonder
EOG Master
Re: Q & A COMMENTS ON IF YOU THOUGHT BB WAS FUN PICKS
I love the GPS Ned!
I love the GPS Ned!