Chuck Sims
EOG Dedicated
I hear ya.ZZ CREAM said:
WHAT % OF PEOPLE ACTUALLY WIN AT SPORTS BETTING?
- Thread starter THE SHRINK
- Start date
Rainbow...once again I will say this.
If these guys are so WISE then why should BEATING a line move matter?
Why do they constantly have to pioint out that they are getting the "best" number. All they need to do is bet the game where the lines are WAY WAY off then getting the best line is irrelevant.
Who was wiser yesterday the guys that MOVED the line on Sea from -3 to -5 or the guys that took Dallas PLUS 4 and 5 and WON?
Same thing tonight. if Atl wins by just 7 who was wiser the guys who MOVED theline or the guys that took the PLUS point and WON/win(if they do).
Guys that bet Pitt and Oak yesterday (geames wher ethelines didn't have much movement) are surely more "wise" IMO because those games were not even CLOSE to the number. So if these guys are so frigging "wise" why aren't they beting THOSE games?
Eveytime someone "beats" a move they are considered wise. I laugh my ass off at that. If they were so smart and so wise, and jknew so much they would be consistantly betting the games that no matter how far the line moved they would win.
Wise guy is so antiquated it isn't even funny. Not to mention that steam and wise guys moves have been getting buried this year LOSING, so getting the best number still didn't help.
Like Shrink bragging about how his steamplay on Rice moved the other day from +7 to +4. Big frigging deal they got beat by 5 touchdowns. Wise guys are so busy worrying about getting a line before it moves, they lose sight of the fact that they lost the bet all together.
If they worried more about PICKING WINNERS rather than getting a good line, they might have somehting to talk about.
When the line moves account for maybe 2-3% advantage, if they are relying on that difference to make money, I pity them. If they are truly saying that that difference is what makes them a winner long term, then they are also not too "wise".
You don't think I track moves day in a nd day out? You don't think I don't know what games were decided by a "better" line here or there? I have data up the ass, and can get into 3 databases with 3 sets of numbers. So don't try to come in here and tell me getitng the best line is what seprates winners from losers. That is the biggest load of bullshit there is (except for the -3 line). Like I said in every sport it is around 2-3%. The only reason it is that high is because of the NCAA hoops. In the NFL it is less than a 1% advantage form "good" closures to bad "openers" 2-3 games a year basically.
I only count a unique example, where the line IS NOT available somewhere else. SOme guys might claim it is higgher but only because they use one standard to get their lines from. I use the whole collection of books to determine when and where a number actually made a difference.
I know we will never agree on this. Probably because I actually think for myself, and am not sucked into all the myths that people continue to believe that were started by books trying to fool people, or perpetuated by so called professionals to try and make the "regular" guy feel inferior and think he doesn't have a chance at winning.
If these guys are so WISE then why should BEATING a line move matter?
Why do they constantly have to pioint out that they are getting the "best" number. All they need to do is bet the game where the lines are WAY WAY off then getting the best line is irrelevant.
Who was wiser yesterday the guys that MOVED the line on Sea from -3 to -5 or the guys that took Dallas PLUS 4 and 5 and WON?
Same thing tonight. if Atl wins by just 7 who was wiser the guys who MOVED theline or the guys that took the PLUS point and WON/win(if they do).
Guys that bet Pitt and Oak yesterday (geames wher ethelines didn't have much movement) are surely more "wise" IMO because those games were not even CLOSE to the number. So if these guys are so frigging "wise" why aren't they beting THOSE games?
Eveytime someone "beats" a move they are considered wise. I laugh my ass off at that. If they were so smart and so wise, and jknew so much they would be consistantly betting the games that no matter how far the line moved they would win.
Wise guy is so antiquated it isn't even funny. Not to mention that steam and wise guys moves have been getting buried this year LOSING, so getting the best number still didn't help.
Like Shrink bragging about how his steamplay on Rice moved the other day from +7 to +4. Big frigging deal they got beat by 5 touchdowns. Wise guys are so busy worrying about getting a line before it moves, they lose sight of the fact that they lost the bet all together.
If they worried more about PICKING WINNERS rather than getting a good line, they might have somehting to talk about.
When the line moves account for maybe 2-3% advantage, if they are relying on that difference to make money, I pity them. If they are truly saying that that difference is what makes them a winner long term, then they are also not too "wise".
You don't think I track moves day in a nd day out? You don't think I don't know what games were decided by a "better" line here or there? I have data up the ass, and can get into 3 databases with 3 sets of numbers. So don't try to come in here and tell me getitng the best line is what seprates winners from losers. That is the biggest load of bullshit there is (except for the -3 line). Like I said in every sport it is around 2-3%. The only reason it is that high is because of the NCAA hoops. In the NFL it is less than a 1% advantage form "good" closures to bad "openers" 2-3 games a year basically.
I only count a unique example, where the line IS NOT available somewhere else. SOme guys might claim it is higgher but only because they use one standard to get their lines from. I use the whole collection of books to determine when and where a number actually made a difference.
I know we will never agree on this. Probably because I actually think for myself, and am not sucked into all the myths that people continue to believe that were started by books trying to fool people, or perpetuated by so called professionals to try and make the "regular" guy feel inferior and think he doesn't have a chance at winning.
BTW if there are say 100 million people world wide that bet on a regular basis(and that might be low) 1% of that is still 1 million guys (for the guys who are bad at numbers) who are winning. I am not sure it IS that high, but it is possible I guess.
Books Worst Enemy
EOG Addicted
Are point spreads infallable?
That is the true question.
There is no way to prove either side of the arguement.
Later,
Books Worst Enemy
That is the true question.
There is no way to prove either side of the arguement.
Later,
Books Worst Enemy
Rainbow, I will give you an assigment. You track all the games you bet following steam. Then you track all the games where steam occurred. Then you take the show the games you won SPECIFALLY because you got a better line, then you look atthe games where the line change meant NOTHHING.
I think you are so caught up in trying to be IN with these guys you lose sight of all reality.
The elitism of these guys is amazing, it basically looks like it is wearing off on you.
Getting the best number in a football game doesn't make you a wise guy. It also doesn't mean you are going to win more than the joe schmoes you chase or fade the steam.
Getting the best MONEYLINES WILL make a difference, in ALL sports. Because that is REAL money difference. Getting +135 versus +125 WILL make you last a lot longer if not make you a profittable player A LOT more than betting +2.5 versus +2.
But in terms of SPREADS constantly worrying about getting the best of them is worthless. And it is proveable. The problem is the guys that perpetuate this don't have the balls to admit when their steam loses. They blame it on public money or touts moving the line that much.
That is why I said it is perpetuated by people to confuse the regular guys. All one can do is take an overall view, unless they are actually getting the plays. that is why I gave Rainbow the assignment. Obviously he wouldn't admit if they lost either, but itmight be a reality check for himslef personally if he tracked them for an extended period of time.
That was kind of whyi wanted to see what Shrink had to say about it. Unfortunately he only listed a single game, which may or may not have been actual steam.
Would be interested to see a year long list of the steam plays both ways to see how they actually do. A lot of people would be surprised I am sure.
I think you are so caught up in trying to be IN with these guys you lose sight of all reality.
The elitism of these guys is amazing, it basically looks like it is wearing off on you.
Getting the best number in a football game doesn't make you a wise guy. It also doesn't mean you are going to win more than the joe schmoes you chase or fade the steam.
Getting the best MONEYLINES WILL make a difference, in ALL sports. Because that is REAL money difference. Getting +135 versus +125 WILL make you last a lot longer if not make you a profittable player A LOT more than betting +2.5 versus +2.
But in terms of SPREADS constantly worrying about getting the best of them is worthless. And it is proveable. The problem is the guys that perpetuate this don't have the balls to admit when their steam loses. They blame it on public money or touts moving the line that much.
That is why I said it is perpetuated by people to confuse the regular guys. All one can do is take an overall view, unless they are actually getting the plays. that is why I gave Rainbow the assignment. Obviously he wouldn't admit if they lost either, but itmight be a reality check for himslef personally if he tracked them for an extended period of time.
That was kind of whyi wanted to see what Shrink had to say about it. Unfortunately he only listed a single game, which may or may not have been actual steam.
Would be interested to see a year long list of the steam plays both ways to see how they actually do. A lot of people would be surprised I am sure.
Books Worst Enemy
EOG Addicted
Heritage lists the opening and closing lines on their website.
Obviously there is nothing to following or fading line moves or Heritage wouldn't post it on their website.
Later,
Books Worst Enemy
Obviously there is nothing to following or fading line moves or Heritage wouldn't post it on their website.
Later,
Books Worst Enemy
Sam Odom
EOG Master
wantitall,
To me, getting the better # means betting the best # on a team I've capped to be the better of the 2 teams playing. Not just blindly following steam. If I already believe team A is a TD better than team B and I have a choice of A-6.5 or A-7 then the better number is of course -6.5 but say I waited and the steam moved the # to 8. In my way of thinking I would still bet team A or make no bet at all. Bottom line, picking the best team and finding the best number will increase a bettors profit.
To me, getting the better # means betting the best # on a team I've capped to be the better of the 2 teams playing. Not just blindly following steam. If I already believe team A is a TD better than team B and I have a choice of A-6.5 or A-7 then the better number is of course -6.5 but say I waited and the steam moved the # to 8. In my way of thinking I would still bet team A or make no bet at all. Bottom line, picking the best team and finding the best number will increase a bettors profit.
OMNIVOROUS FROG
EOG Master
Roxy testified under oath no one can beat sports betting long term. I sure hope he was not lying under oath. The number always thrown out is less than 2%. So when you are in that crowd of drunk degenerates, and say I am a 2 percenter, everyone can laugh together. Because 98% are lying like rugs. The only way I even pay the overhead is to scalp, middle, and glom bonuses. Always helps to cash a future or two. Ordered couple bills worth of books yesterday. I think the big seperation question would not be % of people who actually win, but % of people who make a successful living at it. The people who actually win at sports betting are the ones taking the bets. Not the ones making them.
Best Wishes...OF :+waving-5
Best Wishes...OF :+waving-5
Sam Odom said:
Nearly impossible to handicap the NFL with any amount of surety. This weekend is a great example, including last night's game. with 2 minutes left most guys would still have bet the Jets +7.
Picking winners is obviously the main objective when betting one way. But doing that long term is nearly impossible. Especially when you are forced to pick a team MINUS a spread.
A good test is this. Enter one of those stupid pick the SU winner contests and track your record. I am willing to bet that most guys can't even pick 60% SU winners WITHOUT spreads. Why? Because they let the SPREADS influence them too much.
For the most part if you can picka SU winner you will make money gambling on the NFL. That is why I say most guys can't even do that with any consistancy.
So trying to pick a team to win by a certain amount of points is doubly hard. So if they can't pick 60% without spreads, how are they going to pick 55% WITH them?
You might say dogs, but for the most part dogs that cover win SU rather than simply "covering". A little tested this year as more dogs are "covering" instead of winning SU. But it will even out before the year is over.
Basically everything we debate and argue IS connected in some way, but getting the actual importance in the right order is where people differ.
I would much rather take a fave -150 on the ML instead of -3 if I think the line is going to move to 3.5 or higher, because then I have a great shot at a scalpable middle or even an outright scalp on the ML both ways. Case in point was NYG this weekend. Had NYG -120. Which I posted here during the week, and no one commented. Then I bet the Broncos ML and + the points. So I made out like a bandit. Was I lucky, of course I was. Would I have been just as profitable if I had kept my original position on NYG PK? Not quite, but I had the "insurance" that basically is having a "better" line.
Do I think I am sharp or wise for making that play? Of course not, but it is what I do, and sometimes you do get lucky and get the best of both worlds. THAT is much more profitable long term than if I had simply taken the NYG Pk -120. Guys taking the BEST POINTSPREAD LINE on the NYG still lost that game, and people defiantley bet them so I have a hard time thinking the "wiseguys" were on Denver in that spot. But they will probably tell you they were.
That is the point people LIE, noone wnats to admit they lsoe. So they use everything at their disposal to confuse you or make you think they win all the time or have all the answers all the time. Even guys that post loser after loser after loser. They always have an unposted halftime bet or a buy back that saved them from losing. That is laughable when those guys are the most adamant against hedging. So their believeability factor is less than zero.
I am not afraid to admit I take positions and buy back. Do I think Ican handicap. Yes, but I also know that handicapping is a losing position longterm. I like t take the luck out of it, and take the sure money. I would rather have money than an ego.
That is why you won't ever see me bragging about making a big score on a game, because unless it is a big future or something it woun't ever happen. And the main reason why a couple years ago those tickets I cashed on the Marlins to win the NLCS will be the single largest play I will ever cash, and that is ONLY because the Cubs were such a ludicrous number against them that I couldn't buy back enough to make it worthwhile. I got lucky in the win order, and the come back for sure. But I surely do not think I was sharp or wise for doing it. I was lucky.
But if anyone else had done and made what I did in that series they would have gone tout and used that as their hallmark for doing it. Claiming they were geniuses for picking the Marlins at 65 and 70 to 1 and cashed. Not my style. I am a little more realistic. I got lucky.
OMNIVOROUS FROG
EOG Master
Roxygirl/guy? Never read his/her posts. LVSC's Roxy. Guy used to fill the seminars. And what a reputation as an expert witness. He sold that off just when they became irrelevant. Master of self promotion. You tell people you are the genius of odds, enough times and even the harshest critics associate genius and Roxy. Bad writer, his books are just coma inducers. But engaging personality, and master of manipulation. No one handed him the keys to success.
Best Wishes...OF :+waving-5
Best Wishes...OF :+waving-5
Any books left?
Any books left?
Wynn will take large $$$ on straight sports wagers.
They don't seem to be worried whether they win or lose every day -- because they know if they can attract enough handle, they will win in the long-term (especially when you consider how much cash the squares that stay at the Wynn have to throw around)
Wynn is one of the few real books left.
The current trend in Las Vegas now is for the books to report frequently whether they won or lost -- and that tends to make everyone very careful to limit action -- so they have few big highs and few big lows.
Any books left?
ZZ CREAM said:
Wynn will take large $$$ on straight sports wagers.
They don't seem to be worried whether they win or lose every day -- because they know if they can attract enough handle, they will win in the long-term (especially when you consider how much cash the squares that stay at the Wynn have to throw around)
Wynn is one of the few real books left.
The current trend in Las Vegas now is for the books to report frequently whether they won or lost -- and that tends to make everyone very careful to limit action -- so they have few big highs and few big lows.
rainbow
EOG Master
WANTI, you are saying longterm you will beat these WAGERS.
132. A@M -9
140. W.MICHIGAN -3.5
196 GIANTS OVER 41
222. STELERS -8.5
I will make MINCE MEAT out of you longterm, you better try another TRADE besides SPORTS, because you have no clue about what you say CONSISTENLY, that it doesnt matter if a player beats the line or not, I wish you will BOOK these WAGERS, I will post up with the SHRINK, just make it light on your self if you decide you want to, I will do it every week with you, just make the WAGERS worth while.
132. A@M -9
140. W.MICHIGAN -3.5
196 GIANTS OVER 41
222. STELERS -8.5
I will make MINCE MEAT out of you longterm, you better try another TRADE besides SPORTS, because you have no clue about what you say CONSISTENLY, that it doesnt matter if a player beats the line or not, I wish you will BOOK these WAGERS, I will post up with the SHRINK, just make it light on your self if you decide you want to, I will do it every week with you, just make the WAGERS worth while.
Pancho Sanza
EOG Addicted
Dont waste your time arguing with want, you aint gonna change his mind.:+waving-5
BW doesn't bet ONE way either. Nor does anyone else on this forum that can show a long term winning record.
Just because people SAY they win, and maybe even post a few winners doesn't mean they actually do win.
I know enough about Walters to know that he doesn't bet one way, and that his first real bankroll was defintely not "won" betting sports. It wasn't even "won".
I won't get into how he really got it, but anyone that claims to know him should already know how he got it. If they don't then they don't know as much as they think they do.
Just because people SAY they win, and maybe even post a few winners doesn't mean they actually do win.
I know enough about Walters to know that he doesn't bet one way, and that his first real bankroll was defintely not "won" betting sports. It wasn't even "won".
I won't get into how he really got it, but anyone that claims to know him should already know how he got it. If they don't then they don't know as much as they think they do.
waldogeraldofaldo
EOG Member
wantitall4me,
You were an entertaining cynic back in your covers days, but you've since progressed to a delusional state.
Where's Kiss1 when you need him?
You were an entertaining cynic back in your covers days, but you've since progressed to a delusional state.
Where's Kiss1 when you need him?
rainbow said:
Of course not :doh1
wantitall4moi and rainbow...........
you guys can agree to disagree...:+waving-5
btw...this is just a rehashing of the stale line thread a week ago...
:frustrate :frustrate :frustrate :frustrate :frustrate :frustrate :frustrate
you guys can agree to disagree...:+waving-5
btw...this is just a rehashing of the stale line thread a week ago...
:frustrate :frustrate :frustrate :frustrate :frustrate :frustrate :frustrate
rainbow said:
Missed that post...I would be willing to take even money that those lines won't even be a factor, so getting them versus what is available now is probably moot. Meaning what is available now has pretty much the same chanceof covering as the originals did.
THAT is my whole point. Getting those numbers means something MAYBE 2-3% of the time. Just because you or anyone else got them surely doesn't make you a winner more than enough times to make you profittable on those bets alone.
The ONLY way getting those numbers will make a difference is if AM wins by 8 or 9, Best nyumberI saw on Western Mich was 5.5 so not sure if that is a typo or not. They are now 7. So you have a 6 and a 7 that makes a difference there. 41 in the NYG game is THE ONLY One (and that is a push) 42 might be the better choice anyways since over 42 is +107 I will risk a tie for 12-14 cents any day. And the Steelers 9 and 10 are the differences.
So you have one number each that would win and a couple numbers that would push. Like I say, I will take my chances. You need specific scores and differentials to make getting those "great" spreads any better. And like I have said over and over again, I don't want the games I am staking my livingon being that close and that reliant on a half point here or there.
"I would be willing to take even money that those lines won't even be a factor, so getting them versus what is available now is probably moot. Meaning what is available now has pretty much the same chanceof covering as the originals did."
"Getting those numbers means something MAYBE 2-3% of the time. Just because you or anyone else got them surely doesn't make you a winner more than enough times to make you profittable on those bets alone."
This is precisely the ideology that leads people to the mistaken conclusion that they can win money betting on sports. The ones who succeed do so BECAUSE of that 2-3%, not in spite of it.
Revere14
"Getting those numbers means something MAYBE 2-3% of the time. Just because you or anyone else got them surely doesn't make you a winner more than enough times to make you profittable on those bets alone."
This is precisely the ideology that leads people to the mistaken conclusion that they can win money betting on sports. The ones who succeed do so BECAUSE of that 2-3%, not in spite of it.
Revere14
Card Counter
EOG Member
I think it is 4-8% which can turn a profit on sports betting using discipline, reduced juice, and money management. I have hit 54.5% ATS in Football and basketball the last 7 years. If I can do it, I'm sure others do it as well.
Revere14 said:
Wrong wrong and wrong. Beating a SPREAD move will not, and has never made anyone, a long term winner. The only time it is adventageous is if you buy it at reduced juice (-2.5 -107), and then buy back at a "better" line at a reduced juice the other way. +4 (-108) Some guys would have you belive that getting the -2.5 was a much stronger play, since it not only moved, but it moved though the 3. Even without the possibility of a middle or a side here, when you have the reduced vigs you are protecting yourself.
But since it is a spread bet you can still "lose" money. Because even reduced, if it doesn't land on a 3 or 4 point differential it doesn't matter. that is why these guys that preach getting the best number are understanding it. If you are spot playing or being very selcetive, then yes, getting and looking for that better number is probably better. But if you bet enough games those will surely even out. And if you follow a plan that will have you betting for a lifetime, then the games that you "spot play" will also add up to where they may not even matter either.
But on a ML play where the money is definately there no matter what, it makes A LOT more difference. So having a -120 and a +140 in the same game will be far more profittable than having -2.5 and +5 in another like game. Sure you MIGHT hit amiddle, but those middles do not hit frequently enough to overcome the SURE money you obtain with a pure ML scalp.
When the spread only come into play about 15-17% of the time (depending on your source) Worrying abut it as much as people do is counter productive. But people like to sound "sharp" or pretend to be "wise", when in fact what they are saying and doing, the cliche' of being both those things, isn't improving their chances of being profittable at an appreciable level.
Example: say over 100 bets you DO get the "better" number 3 times (the 3% I say it matters) Also say you are a 52% capper. So you go from 52-48 to 55-45. At -110 and betting the same amount on each play you would have gained (if they both WIN and not push) $573.73 per $100. Sounds good to most, but that is a short term result and a pretty much best case scenario. What people will try to tell you that it is also correlary, which means over 500 plays you will have gained $2868.65, which isn't true. The more plays you make, the less likely the chance that it will matter or even happen. This is pretty theoretical, and I cannot prove it. All I can talk about is my personal experiences.
And point out that if it was that great an advantage then MIDDLING would be profittable as well. Which it isn't. Even when the so called sharp's money is generating their own line move to buy back on.
I mentioned it before. I can bet a baseball game at Book A for the max amount and watch the line move 7-10 cents. My money has basically given me a free buy back. So all I need to make some money gauranteed, is have that line move a penny or more MY way.
That is the difference between Spread and MLs, because the moneyline bets ARE correlary, meaning they all add up.
You still LOSE spread bets no matter how sharp you think you are, or how GREAT the line is that you got. If you got -1 and it moved to -14, and the team loses by a SINGLE point, guess what YOU LOSE. You even lose on your middle shot if you bought back. If I bet that -1 at -115 on the ML then bet the +14 at +350 on the ML, and probably +14 for a scalpable middle, guess what, I win...TWICE. Spreads are meaningless, the MLs are what are far more profitable and reliable.
Getting the best MONEYLINE is FAR FAR FAR (tribute to try try try) more relevant than getting a better SPREAD number.
The General
Another Day, Another Dollar
Chasing is just so bad. I mean honestly, image a world where no one chased their losses. Sports betting only. I suspect the winning percentage would go up greatly. That addiction to throw darts for action and chasing is the cause for the high percentage of losers.
dirty
EOG Master
Agreed General....The only way to make a Profit in Sports Betting is to bet everything the same amount and Play only your strongest plays of the day...if you have none then don't bet
I get in trouble becuase I bet games I don't feel good about and it hurts the bottom line...Discipline and Money management is the key
I get in trouble becuase I bet games I don't feel good about and it hurts the bottom line...Discipline and Money management is the key
Moon88 said:
Moon if you pick 50% and lay -105 on every bet and bet 1% or your bankroll and ADJUST it after every play, how much money are you going to win? Or if you utilize Kelly or Martingale or whatever crazy theory is the flavor of the month and you pick 50% how much are you going to make?
MM is so overrated it isn't even funny. Guys don't go broke because of MM they go broke because they can't pick winners consistatly, and they bet too much trying to get back in the game. Bad MM is more or less a prodct of the inability to pick winners. They go hand in hand to break people.
If guys COULD pick winners cosistantly enough or show at least a profit consistantly enough, they would practice alot better MM. It is easy to put it in a vaccuum, and people that comment on it are generally the most hypocritcal, and more than likely do not practice what they preach. Not because they are lying or trying to trick or fool someone, but because they cannot pick winners constantly enough to do what they think they know is the "right" way to do it.
Please or not, I had to comment:+waving-5
rainbow
EOG Master
WANTI, you are way off on this TOPIC, 1ST OFF, DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG REDUCED JUICE HAS BEEN IN THE INDUSTRY? I've been around this BUSINESS for over 30yrs, maybe the GUYS YOU HANG AROUND WITH LIE TO YOU ABOUT THEM WINNING, THE PEOPLE I'M TALKING ABOUT DID IT -110 AND YOU CAN TAKE THAT TO THE BANK, I THINK YOU GREW UP AROUND LOSERS. WANTI, I DONT CARE ABOUT YOUR PERCENTAGES, THAT'S ALL I KNOW IS IF YOU BEAT THE LINE YOU BEAT THE GAME IN EVERY SPORT, BY THE WAY HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT ME TO POST UP WITH SHRINK? AND WE WILL DO IT SUNDAY NIGHT OR MONDAY MORNING AND WE WILL USE CRIS OR OLYMPIC, YOU PICK THE BOOK BECAUSE I DONT WANT YOU TO SAY CRIS HAD IT THIS OR OLYMPIC HAD IT THIS, PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS, I'M SERIOUS AS A HEART ATTACK, IF YOU DONT WANT TO DO IT DONT ARGUE ABOUT IT NO MORE BECAUSE YOU ARE CLUELESS ABOUT HOW MANY PEOPLE WIN OUT THERE, WORD'S MEAN NOTHING UNLESS YOU CAN BACK THEM UP IN MY BOOKS.
rainbow said:
I don't get the challenge actually. If you are looking to somehow prove that getting a better line wil make you a winner. All you need to do isdo what I told you to do a long time ago. Post or write down every game you bet where the line you bet wass better and then IF and ONLY IF the line you got was better than the closer (which lost or pushed) keep track.
I am saying that those few times that you get a "better" number WILL NOT make a difference in your bottomline if you bet enough games. And certainl;y will not make a difference if you can't pick enugh winners to win anyways.