JoelDeze
JoelDeze
Joined: Apr 20, 2016
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 467
October 7th, 2017 at 7:51:05 AM permalink
Just to catch people up on where I stand for the week. I was at +$200 (showed the screenshot in an earlier post on Chiefs' thread) as of Wednesday this week. On Thursday, I lost $50 on a 2-game parlay for New England winning SU and Louisville winning SU. The Pats won SU but I hadn't seen NC State play this year so was a bad bet, even though a small amount. That put me at +$150 as of Thursday night.

See image below.

(Image redacted at OP request. Apparently people were able to strip the masking and see personal account information. I will be cropping and replacing the 6 images on this page within the next 24 hours, but OP was not able to edit his own pics at this point.)



Last night, I decided to keep within my winnings for the week and I put 3 wagers in on Memphis. $90 to win $82 SU on -16 ATS. I then put in a 2H wager for them to win SU at -7.5 (+100) $35/$35. And, lastly, put a 2-game parlay in for $25/$73.73 for Memphis to cover by -7.5 and for the over to go over 40.5. I won all 3 of those wagers. See screenshot below.

This puts me at +$341 for the week.



Lastly, because I'm a big cubs fan, I decided to throw in a $50 wager on the Cubs at (+115). The reasoning behind this is because the Cubs are 4-1 with Lester in the playoffs and he's starting to play better. Screenshot below:



That gets me caught up with everything going into Saturdays games. Blue paint dot is my blacking out my account.
Last edited by: unnamed administrator on Oct 8, 2017
Its a dog eat dog world out there and Im wearing milkbone underwear . Norm Peterson
SOOPOO
SOOPOO 
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 108
  • Posts: 6936
October 7th, 2017 at 8:00:11 AM permalink
Is it just a coincidence that all your picks are favorites laying points?
JoelDeze
JoelDeze
Joined: Apr 20, 2016
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 467
October 7th, 2017 at 8:12:58 AM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

Is it just a coincidence that all your picks are favorites laying points?



Yeah, coincidence. For instance, one of the teams in my 3-game parlay is Utah which is an underdog. Vegas oddsmaker favorites are not always my favorites. These are in fact, system favorites that just happen to be Oddsmaker favorites.
Its a dog eat dog world out there and Im wearing milkbone underwear . Norm Peterson
JoelDeze
JoelDeze
Joined: Apr 20, 2016
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 467
October 7th, 2017 at 4:52:44 PM permalink
Quote: JoelDeze

Late night for me.

Adding 3 unique 3-game parlays to the mix as well. I'm basing these on a specific chart I have for ATS ranking difference.

Parlay 1:

Miami FL -2.5 (-110)
Marshall -14 (-110)
Fresno St. -17 (-110)
$50 to win $300

Parlay 2:

Miami -2.5 (-110)
Texas Tech -16 (-110)
Marshall -14 (-110)
$50 to win $300

Parlay 3:

Texas Tech -16 (-110)
Idaho -5.5 (-110)
Utah +3.5 (-110)
$50 to win $300



I realized that I posted an incorrect parlay so showing the parlays I wagered. I posted in the very early AM and was just tired. My apologies.


---


---



Miami, Texas Tech and Marshall does not exist. Although, if I placed a 4th parlay it probably would win. Notre Dame was the missing team.

Also, if you notice on the post I posted at 10:50 AM or so this morning, the tail end shows the start of that parlay which does in fact show Notre Dame in the parlay.
Last edited by: unnamed administrator on Oct 8, 2017
Its a dog eat dog world out there and Im wearing milkbone underwear . Norm Peterson
DRich
DRich
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
  • Threads: 72
  • Posts: 6375
October 7th, 2017 at 5:30:36 PM permalink
Joel, your early picks are looking great.
Living longer does not always infer +EV
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 99
  • Posts: 14229
Thanks for this post from:
Wizardofnothing
October 7th, 2017 at 6:50:10 PM permalink
Marshall didn't cover. Utah lost. So all the parlays as first published are dead.

The Notre Dame correction was a winning bet, as MI am and TT covered. But too late for anyone to use it.

Haven't checked your SU list, but I was neutral-to-favoring your work until you published the update. Seems an honest mistake, and really an obvious parlay on those 3 teams given their opponents (Miami was a nail biter, tho), but you lost a bit of credibility with me today. Figured you'd want to know, since you're doing this in the open.

Edit: I said Utah when I meant Idaho. Utah had not yet started, but for parlay purposes, it didn't matter. Western states...you'd never know I lived in Washington state for 10 years....lol.
Last edited by: beachbumbabs on Oct 8, 2017
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
DRich
DRich
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
  • Threads: 72
  • Posts: 6375
October 7th, 2017 at 8:33:32 PM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

Marshall didn't cover. Utah lost. So all the parlays as first published are dead.



Utah is still playing and in the second quarter.
Living longer does not always infer +EV
SM777
SM777
Joined: Apr 8, 2016
  • Threads: 6
  • Posts: 762
October 7th, 2017 at 8:37:24 PM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

Marshall didn't cover. Utah lost. So all the parlays as first published are dead.

The Notre Dame correction was a winning bet, as MI am and TT covered. But too late for anyone to use it.

Haven't checked your SU list, but I was neutral-to-favoring your work until you published the update. Seems an honest mistake, and really an obvious parlay on those 3 teams given their opponents (Miami was a nail biter, tho), but you lost a bit of credibility with me today. Figured you'd want to know, since you're doing this in the open.



He's thrown an NFL pick into his college record, not listed juice when foolishly buying points, and taken credit for winners posted after the games are over. Switching a parlay middle of the day is just the next step for him, it's par for the course really.
JoelDeze
JoelDeze
Joined: Apr 20, 2016
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 467
October 7th, 2017 at 9:19:38 PM permalink
Quote: SM777

He's thrown an NFL pick into his college record, not listed juice when foolishly buying points, and taken credit for winners posted after the games are over. Switching a parlay middle of the day is just the next step for him, it's par for the course really.



My College Record is (BELOW):

Non-Wager Picks that Covered:

WON - Syracuse -170 ML

Wager Picks that Covered:

WON - Georgia -16.5 (+$100)
WON - Penn St. -13.5 (+$100)
WON - UL Monroe -6.5 (+$100)
WON - Miami FL -2.5 (+$100)
WON - Colorado St. (+$100)
WON - Wash St. -2.5 (+$250)
WON - UCF -16.5 (game is still considered final and they won by +28, covering) (nothing won nor lost as wager was terminated)
LOST - TCU -13.5 (-$110)
LOST - UTSA -12.5 (-$110)
LOST - Kentucky -9.5 (-$115)

Parlays

WON - Notre Dame -14.5, Texas Tech -16, Miami FL -2.5 (+$300)
LOST - Utah +3.5, Idaho -5.5, Texas Tech -16 (-$50)
LOST - Marshall -14, Fresno St. -17, Miami Fl -2.5 (-$50)

I went 7-3 on ATS wagered picks, 1-0 on ML picks not wagered on.

Overall 8-3 on picks, 1-2 on parlays.

Money won: $1,050
Money lost: $435

Net: +$615 (on all posted picks)

-----------

The parlays are clearly shown and the Notre Dame parlay is posted as of this morning.

THE JUICE IS LISTED IN THE ATS SPREADS!! READ BETTER!

If a line is -130/100 what do you think the juice is? Unbelievable......

Once again, I'm going to ask a Moderator to do something about SM777 for his trolling and genuine harassment on my threads. Everything I posted is visible and easy to read. If he can't read well that's not my fault. I'm really tired of the misinformation he provides and the constant false information he continues to post.

Finished the week +$906 and have screen shots of every wager, every outcome so if SM777 want's to go that route I'll disprove him yet again. I would have been $1,006 but the UCF as far as wagering goes did not reach mid 4th Q, even though it was final and the score is set with UCF winning by +28. So, annoying weather but I can't do anything about that.
Last edited by: JoelDeze on Oct 7, 2017
Its a dog eat dog world out there and Im wearing milkbone underwear . Norm Peterson
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 99
  • Posts: 14229
October 7th, 2017 at 10:20:16 PM permalink
Quote: JoelDeze



(Snip)...

The parlays are clearly shown and the Notre Dame parlay is posted as of this morning.

THE JUICE IS LISTED IN THE ATS SPREADS!! READ BETTER!

If a line is -130/100 what do you think the juice is? Unbelievable......

Once again, I'm going to ask a Moderator to do something about SM777 for his trolling and genuine harassment on my threads. Everything I posted is visible and easy to read. If he can't read well that's not my fault. I'm really tired of the misinformation he provides and the constant false information he continues to post.

Finished the week +$906 and have screen shots of every wager, every outcome so if SM777 want's to go that route I'll disprove him yet again. I would have been $1,006 but the UCF as far as wagering goes did not reach mid 4th Q, even though it was final and the score is set with UCF winning by +28. So, annoying weather but I can't do anything about that.



So, ok. I'm apologizing for my credibility swipe. Not your fault the parlays you picked lost. As I said, honest mistake on the one mis-posted. Was a bit unhappy you didn't correct the error before game time, as I was going with your parlay picks, and the one that won was the one mis-posted. So you caught a few sour grapes you probably didn't deserve.

Yeah, also, I agree SM777 has been dogging you some, though imo it falls short of trolling. He's trying to be factual in his criticism of your methods. However, I think you and he may be losing things in translation, and I'm ignorant of the argot and implications of sports betting, so I've stopped short of adminning your threads and his criticisms. Mission, who does understand better than I do, has already stepped in once, so I've asked him to look at the threads again. On the face of it, I say again, SM777 has stopped short of trolling you, imo.

Your best course of action is to prove him wrong. 8-3 or 7-3 or whatever (saw both claimed) is pretty profitable. Nice job! Is it repeatable? Consistent? Are you perhaps a little sloppy on some of the details he's calling you out on? If you can use what's constructive and ignore the rest to show a better product, that only makes you look good.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.

  • Jump to: