Thread Rating:

bazooooka
bazooooka
Joined: Nov 21, 2016
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 185
June 1st, 2017 at 3:18:47 PM permalink
The real numbers are out there on dozens of sites. Or you can use conservative adjustments like I suggested which are "real" and not "made up" since they will likely understate the average odds long term. You should realize that tracking the alt lines is to your benefit and to anyone who follows you. Your model has merit; but you play it the wrong way. Since you like early lines you can make the adjustment or not. I do track these in my real account. And I will chime in from time to time. I hope you don't mind.
steeldco
steeldco
Joined: Nov 30, 2011
  • Threads: 52
  • Posts: 4914
June 1st, 2017 at 3:25:06 PM permalink
Quote: bazooooka

The real numbers are out there on dozens of sites. Or you can use conservative adjustments like I suggested which are "real" and not "made up" since they will likely understate the average odds long term. You should realize that tracking the alt lines is to your benefit and to anyone who follows you. Your model has merit; but you play it the wrong way. Since you like early lines you can make the adjustment or not. I do track these in my real account. And I will chime in from time to time. I hope you don't mind.



Cool. Chime in whenever you want. Tracking those lines may or may not be to my benefit. They definitely are not if they can't be accessed within the time that I have allotted to do this stuff. As I've said, I have other interests. Many lucrative. No need to spend too much time on this.
DO NOT blindly accept what has been spoken. DO NOT blindly accept what has been written. Think. Assess. Lead. DO NOT blindly follow.
bazooooka
bazooooka
Joined: Nov 21, 2016
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 185
June 1st, 2017 at 3:25:19 PM permalink
DD,

You can get Yankees at +230 on the alt line still. Rockies were similar and it looks like they will cover the alt. If your playing his Dogs you should ask yourself. Do I like this team to win and if so "why only by 1 run"?


Quote: DrawingDead

And good on you for that. Wagers that are publicly posted in advance of the event using real betting lines one has actually found open and readily available for real-money wagering at the time of the posting is the MOST essential thing. There are enough phony fantasies around (including sometimes popping up here - for a while) and I think you deserve some applause for not being that. So there, FWIW.

djatc
djatc
Joined: Jan 15, 2013
  • Threads: 83
  • Posts: 4477
June 1st, 2017 at 4:00:20 PM permalink
Quote: bazooooka

DD,

You can get Yankees at +230 on the alt line still. Rockies were similar and it looks like they will cover the alt. If your playing his Dogs you should ask yourself. Do I like this team to win and if so "why only by 1 run"?



Steeldco probably has his reasons regarding tracking and placing bets, not to mention having to search for bettable games. If he wants to post whatever game then it's up to him.

We are getting picks for free, and steeldco has been chugging allowing with no fail. I don't know what else you expect from the guy.
"Man Babes" #AxelFabulous
RS
RS
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 8623
June 1st, 2017 at 4:03:30 PM permalink
The Colorado Rockets are covering and game is almost over. It's a lock.
DrawingDead
DrawingDead
Joined: Jun 13, 2014
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 2233
June 1st, 2017 at 4:31:33 PM permalink
Quote: bazooooka

DD,

You can get Yankees at +230 on the alt line still. Rockies were similar and it looks like they will cover the alt. If your playing his Dogs you should ask yourself. Do I like this team to win and if so "why only by 1 run"?

I'm sure that'll be quite interesting and maybe very useful for others (even though not to me) if, and only if:

a) They have a book easily and reliably available to them that they might routinely use daily to do that; and,

b) It fits well within their individual interest and base of knowledge.

I am not "playing his Dogs" nor would I EVER think of playing someone else's wagering choices handed to me, where I don't know every single dot and tittle of exactly how and why they have arrived at their opinion, and so haven't even looked at them from a lot more relevant metrics than what he chooses to use in his thread, so I can evaluate it for myself. Because that would be an extremely stupid thing to ever do. I play MY things, which include MLB moneyline wagers at Nevada books, and I'm occasionally interested in the things some others are doing for what I might possibly learn from it, or sometimes just for curiosity. But NEVER to bet them simply because THEY picked them. That would be childlike idiocy.

All of my own wagers have been and will continue to be with brick and mortar books (and their online apps) with US casinos licensed in Nevada. I don't choose to do the offshore Bananastan thing, and don't plan to. With the books I frequent, I have never seen these alt lines, in those US-legal Nevada-licensed books; but that doesn't mean much since I don't ever look for them and haven't asked, because I've never delved into betting any sort of run lines. And don't plan to start anytime soon, as I wouldn't want to without doing the extensive analysis required to thoroughly understand what I'm doing with them backwards, forwards, and every which way. One run in baseball is, of course, a very big deal. Setting out on the task of precisely quantifying that big deal under varied circumstances to my own satisfaction would be another big deal to me. Because, betting ANYTHING for significant money without first making the effort required to gain a thorough understanding of all the relevant intricacies of it, would obviously be profoundly stupid, amounting to becoming nothing but a garden variety extremely lazy impulsive wishful thinking gambler. And I'm just not all that eager to expand my own MLB interests in that direction. I also don't happen to ever bet MLB game o/u totals. Not interested; so sue me.

I will take your word for it on the availability of those "alt" lines from online offshore venues, as I have no experience wagering with whatever virtual "books" you'd be using and therefore no basis for questioning that. Or to care. But screw me and you, in whatever order. What matters here is whether SDC finds them readily available to HIM. And then, for those following the thread, whether the source of whatever he uses can be independently confirmed at any moment by anyone and everyone. So, show HIM and others you want to interest in this with a direct link if you feel it will be persuasive. It will be wasted on me. I'll just keep on looking in occasionally, specifically to follow the MLB money line wagering, and only MLB MLs, because that's what overlaps with my interests.

Thanks for the info, and I do mean that sincerely, but it doesn't happen to fit for me.
Last edited by: DrawingDead on Jun 1, 2017
"I'm against stuff like crack and math" --AxelWolf
Shootress
Shootress
Joined: Jul 29, 2016
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 20
Thanks for this post from:
RisingDough
June 1st, 2017 at 6:14:40 PM permalink
I probably have no business saying this, as a purely recreational bettor who uses a local book (old school!!) ...and a WOV member who hardly ever posts..but I can't help it. You guys have an open forum, on this website and many others, where you can post your viewpoints. It seems that you prefer to spend your time trying to convince Steel that there's a better way for him to do his thing. I find it kind of antagonistic, and, if I'm being honest, a little bit rude. I don't claim to understand all of the mechanics behind your suggestions, but what I do know is this. You've got a guy here who not only shares his many hours of hard work and research with you...but expects nothing in return. Also, he never has a cross word for any of you (even you, Drawing Dead) who are clearly mocking in some of your posts. If you don't agree with Steel's algo, start a thread with your own. But don't spoil it for the bettors like me who enjoy coming to this thread every day to see what's next. Agree to disagree, but remember that at the heart of this thread is a guy spending precious time to share the fruits of his labor with all of us. Again, I apologize if I'm out of line, or if I've misconstrued something, but this has been bothering me for the better part of a week and I had to get it out. Thanks Steel, for all you do. Peace...out!
!
RS
RS
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 8623
June 1st, 2017 at 6:28:48 PM permalink
The good ol' Yankeerooskies are winning 9-0. Another lock.
DrawingDead
DrawingDead
Joined: Jun 13, 2014
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 2233
June 1st, 2017 at 7:37:30 PM permalink
It most definitely is certainly your business to say what you like, if you like. And last I looked, someone's post count or frequency had nothing to do with that. But it seems there may be a problem expanding that concept beyond Shootress.
Quote: Shootress

Also, he never has a cross word for any of you (even you, Drawing Dead) who are clearly mocking in some of your posts.

Oh, really! Good grief, I wasn't aware I'd "mocked" him. If you think so, you didn't read what I've written in addressing him, now or in the past. Since you're so concerned about what I think, what I do think from having read the whole five+ years, is that even though it isn't collectively a success to date for those who actually look, I happen to think he's quite sincere, and that he's much more diligent than many and honest in his public sportsbetting efforts. No small thing, since most who do the endless tout threads that exist all over the web like this are not any of that. And doing some of it publicly while trying to work it out imposes good discipline, and in a tough way eliminating the gambling degenerate's "that doesn't count" thinking, and that is deserving of some kudos.

And, since you're so concerned about it, I also think that over the long haul he's not likely to improve a lot upon his overall existing five year record of net losses without re-thinking some some aspects to improve his long-range expectation. And, some of those are things he's characterized as "I believe" so after a few brief exchanges on some of those subjects, I'm quite content to let him be him, agreeing that we disagree, as he wishes.

If I "mock" anything, I will indeed "mock" the two people who've seemed determined to demand that there should never be anything but "rah-rah, don't anybody say anything could ever be less than wonderful, go team, rah-rah!" That mindless demand for a private fan club in a public forum begs to be mocked. But, believe it or not, this is not the first or only time this kind of sports betting effort has been done, amazingly enough! And multiple people here have been rather gentle over the last several years with an attitude of occasionally wanting to help on some really fundamental mistakes that amount to repealing basic arithmetic and the most fundamental logical concepts involved in any gambling proposition. Unless things like The Gambler's Fallacy which has been understood and written about extensively in logic, basic statistics, and gambling psychology for centuries, is no longer a fallacy, and The Monte Carlo Delusion wasn't an illusion, or these things don't apply to those who just believe hard enough.

And those who've asked questions or offered different thoughts have NOT been as courteously received by the very strange little "Don't Nobody Never Go Boo to My Free Pix" club. Guess what, there are THOUSANDS of "picks" you can find with a few clicks, at any given time about a third of them will appear to be winning, and some of them are on non-forum sites where you'll never hear any of the questioning that bothers you so much.

If you don't like this, you're really just going to have to grow up and get used to it. And most of all, you really, really, REALLY don't want to ever accidentally venture into any of the sites geared for people who are seriously into sports betting, and you sure don't want to see them remarking on all the "Free Pix!" I've seen nothing here, from anyone, this year, or last, or year before, that has been remotely harsh or discourteous towards your hero. But like Feathers, you didn't actually read what that said above, did you? No you didn't. Too many words, so what you just took from it is "He's not cheering like me, and not saying how much he's grateful for 'free-pix' so he's being mean to my guy!" 'Cause some people are just not that sort of "nice" that they always just say "you look great" and smile when someone's fly is open or they're trailing three feet of toilet tissue stuck to their heel. Some are the sort who sometimes try to do what your hero's signature line says. Right there, see it? Those rotten meanies, who don't just cheer.
Quote: WhoDat?

DO NOT blindly accept what has been spoken. DO NOT blindly accept what has been written. Think. Assess. Lead. DO NOT blindly follow.

Last edited by: DrawingDead on Jun 1, 2017
"I'm against stuff like crack and math" --AxelWolf
michael99000
michael99000
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 1891
June 1st, 2017 at 9:45:42 PM permalink
I think steeldco is aware that there's a large number of people betting real money on his picks each day , and he doesn't want to include a bet type that may not be available to his loyal followers. Being one of those people , and not having access to the alt run lines , I'm appreciative of his not using them

  • Jump to: