Starting Monday 1/23/06 NEW Posting Picks Rules: Please Read !!

[craig]

Starting this Monday 1/23/06 there will be a few new rules when posting picks.

Instead of having a picks thread for your picks for everyday of the week, please post all picks for the week (Monday-Sunday) in the same thread. Though, if you are posting picks on seperate sports, please create a different thread for each sport per week.

Below are some of the rules for the picks thread:

1) Please include your YTD record updated on a daily basis. Do not include parlays, teasers, etc... in this record. Keep them in a seperate record.

2) Please include your YTD units won/lost as well updated daily. Once again, do not include parlays, teasers, etc... in this units W/L record. We would appreciate it if you kept a weighted and unweighted record, but we will not require that until the beginning of the baseball season.

3) Others may comment in your thread; in fact, we highly encourage this.

Please make sure that you follow the above rules.

[mrbaseball]

This is the stupidest thing I have ever seen.

We (at least I am) are here to discuss sports betting in hopefully a mature fashion. I don't make "picks" threads but I will often break down a game or two and I like to get involved in others games discussions and give my two cents if I have an opinion.

When I do break down a game it won't include records because I don't list every bet I make but I do like to discuss games and ideas.

Pick listing is ridiculous anyway. There are any number of places on the web to list picks and see listed picks. I'd like to see 2+2 rise above the chest pounding smack talkers and actually intelligently discuss sports wagering.

[craig]

[ QUOTE ]
We (at least I am) are here to discuss sports betting in hopefully a mature fashion. I don't make "picks" threads but I will often break down a game or two and I like to get involved in others games discussions and give my two cents if I have an opinion.


[/ QUOTE ]

Where in the above rules that I posted did it say that you couldn't discuss individual games? You can still "break down" games. This is for the people that are already making picks (or are going to beging to). As was also mentioned, you can post in people's threads as well. I never said one couldn't.



\ [ QUOTE ]

Pick listing is ridiculous anyway. There are any number of places on the web to list picks and see listed picks. I'd like to see 2+2 rise above the chest pounding smack talkers and actually intelligently discuss sports wagering.


[/ QUOTE ]

The purpose of this is so picks can be intelligently discussed. But, records, stats, etc... are important. I know you have mentioned in the past that you don't agree with that as much as others, but some think that it is important.

craig

[craig]

Also, not everybody thinks pick listing is stupid (which is obvious from the amount of pick threads). That is also your opinion.

craig

[gomberg]

I'm relatively new to sports betting (so that's my excuse if this question is insanely stupid)

What is a weighted / unweighted units win/loss record? Does this have something to do with making your unit size bigger according to a growing bankroll?

[craig]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm relatively new to sports betting (so that's my excuse if this question is insanely stupid)

What is a weighted / unweighted units win/loss record? Does this have something to do with making your unit size bigger according to a growing bankroll?

[/ QUOTE ]

It isn't insanely stupide. Basically an "unweighted" record is where one would always wager one unit (or to win one unit). "Weighted" would be where they might bet more than one unit on a game.

The reason we wanted it seperate, is because somebody might be down 50 units and then make a post where they bet 50 units on one game. Thus, they would look like a winner, but it would obviously be deceptive.

craig

[tech]

Just so everyone knows ... since I have been moderator of this forum, I have gotten tons of requests for some type of common picks format. I was never willing or able to invest the time necessary to monitor every single thread, so I never pushed hard for a common format.

Craig is willing to do it so more power to him. I will say that in my experience, forums with such a format are infinitely more valuable than those without. However, it will undoubtedly alienate some people, and I hope that you will all be supportive of Craig's efforts when complaints arise (and they certainly will).

[BobJoeJim]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm relatively new to sports betting (so that's my excuse if this question is insanely stupid)

What is a weighted / unweighted units win/loss record? Does this have something to do with making your unit size bigger according to a growing bankroll?

[/ QUOTE ]

It isn't insanely stupide. Basically an "unweighted" record is where one would always wager one unit (or to win one unit). "Weighted" would be where they might bet more than one unit on a game.

The reason we wanted it seperate, is because somebody might be down 50 units and then make a post where they bet 50 units on one game. Thus, they would look like a winner, but it would obviously be deceptive.

craig

[/ QUOTE ]
So in other words, "wnweighted" has nothing to do with units per se, it's just a pure win-loss record, except it factors in the juice?

Whereas "weighted" acknowledges how many units you've bet on each game, if you vary your bet sizes?

And these guidelines only apply to threads specifically about keeping track of pick records, and they in no way restrict anyone who just wants to start a thread to discuss any one specific game?

[craig]

[ QUOTE ]
So in other words, "wnweighted" has nothing to do with units per se, it's just a pure win-loss record, except it factors in the juice?

[/ QUOTE ]

Right it factors in the juice. But, in games with Money Lines, like baseball, units won/lost is more important than the actual record.

[ QUOTE ]
And these guidelines only apply to threads specifically about keeping track of pick records, and they in no way restrict anyone who just wants to start a thread to discuss any one specific game?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. We don't want less discussion. I did want to edit to say that if everyday you (not you personally, the general "you") are starting a thread with, "I like X game today, and Y game today", well that is in effect just like having a "picks thread", but calling it something different. It will take some subjectivity at first, but I feel that we are all grown up enough here to know the difference.

craig

[mrbaseball]

[ QUOTE ]
"you") are starting a thread with, "I like X game today, and Y game today", well that is in effect just like having a "picks thread", but calling it something different.

[/ QUOTE ]

I may do that once or twice a week. Maybe even 3 times. Does that mean I'm listing picks even though it isn't daily? Also on more than a few occasions last baseball season someone would specifically ask who I liked on a certain day. Often I would respond by telling them (with reasoning). Is this listing picks?

I just think this is going to be an unenforcable nightmare that will cause problems. Lets just discuss wagering and the reasons why certain wagers are good (or bad!).

Imagine if we needed to first submit our pokertracker databases before we discussed poker strategy. This all just seems ludicrous to me.

[TWolf2006]

Have you looked at the forum lately. Its full of people going

I like this team and this team.

And thats it, it needs to be organized and if theres no writeups as to why you like a team then what is it good for without at least showing you are picking more winners then losers.

[Easy E]

craig, what are you looking for as the final result of your efforts as you've detailed them?

Are you looking to cut down on the number of threads?

Are you looking to weed out potential "salespeople" and fake chest-thumpers?

Are you looking to make it easier to ignore a poster's threads, if they are not up to snuff?

Are you looking to simplify your job as moderator?

As to the W-L records- since those numbers mean very little without validation, wouldn't it be better to list 2+2 posted win/loss records? Those can be verified and judged accurate; other sources usually cannot, due to control questions.

I personally think I'd rather see one "Picks of x/x/06- (sport)" thread that everyone replies to, rather than having to drill down into craig's baseball picks for the week, then find mr baseball and drill down into his for Friday's picks, then hit tech's weekly thread.... and so on.

I am curious what your objectives are here. Given some of the constraints of the forum software, and Search facilities, I don't know if what you're imposing is going to be helpful or not.

Can you give some examples of what you expect the forum to be like?

[Easy E]

[ QUOTE ]
then what is it good for without at least showing you are picking more winners then losers.

[/ QUOTE ]

As if a self-reported win/loss record means all of that much, for many posters that match your description?

Much better for validation (if not easier to cross-check) if people would make those "I like" posts. You can't manipulate your w/l record if your posts are available for all to recheck.

Frankly, I feel that using w/l records as justification for the validity of your current picks is misleading/useless in a lot of ways.

Care to expound?

[TWolf2006]

Of course a self reported win/loss record is useless without being able to validate it. I dont take into consideration any posters who post their first pick of the year and say they are 33-2 so far this year. If its your first posted pick then your record should be 0-0.

And in awnser to your last paragraph I dont thing that using win/loss records as justification for the validity of your current picks is misleading/useless.

I disagree with you. While betting just on people who have positive units may not net you more wins on the long run and it does not suggest that the people with negaitive units wont end up with positive units and the people with positive units wont end up with negative units does not mean that the information is misleading or useless. By not providing this information you are missing out on facts of the person who posts their picks. Does a guy with +20 units against a guy with -14 units make the +20 unit guy a better tipster, the awnser to that would be yes. Logically if I were to use someones picks I would bet the guy who is making money rather than losing money if I knew nothing about the games that I was betting on. Maybe for you, this is no good as you know what you want to bet on and the info could be useless to you, but this info is needed and wanted by many and if you want to make picks that other people might bet on you need to be accountable for your actions and post all the given facts including win/loss and +/- units. If you are posting picks and you dont want people to use them then whats the point.

[craig]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you looking to cut down on the number of threads?

[/ QUOTE ]

No

[ QUOTE ]
Are you looking to weed out potential "salespeople" and fake chest-thumpers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Somewhat

[ QUOTE ]
Are you looking to make it easier to ignore a poster's threads, if they are not up to snuff?

[/ QUOTE ]

No

[ QUOTE ]
Are you looking to simplify your job as moderator?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a definite "no". If anything this will make moderating tougher. I am going to have to verify (others will help I am sure) that people's records are accurate.


[ QUOTE ]
As to the W-L records- since those numbers mean very little without validation, wouldn't it be better to list 2+2 posted win/loss records? Those can be verified and judged accurate; other sources usually cannot, due to control questions.

I personally think I'd rather see one "Picks of x/x/06- (sport)" thread that everyone replies to, rather than having to drill down into craig's baseball picks for the week, then find mr baseball and drill down into his for Friday's picks, then hit tech's weekly thread.... and so on.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am unsure what you mean by "wouldn't it be better to list 2+2 posted win/loss records"? Do you mean as a group or individually. If you mean as a group, I don't see what the point of that would be. If you mean individually, then that will be pretty tough to go through every thread and add up people's picks. Plus, you will have the extra burden of people saying, "no, I never said, I bet that, I just said I liked it, etc...". But, if they are listing picks in the manner I suggested (and others, I am not just doing this on my own) then it will be easy to verify the records.

As far as one day for each sport, those threads get very long and filled with a bunch of "homerism" and "bs reasoning". Plus, a lot goes unnoticed in the uber-long threads. Plus, others, including myself, don't want to wade through a bunch of that.



[ QUOTE ]
I am curious what your objectives are here. Given some of the constraints of the forum software, and Search facilities, I don't know if what you're imposing is going to be helpful or not.

Can you give some examples of what you expect the forum to be like?

[/ QUOTE ]

My objective is to make the forum better. Other sports betting forums that have had a similar structure seem to produce more well thought out picks and discussions (not less, like others think). When you look at the other strategy forums on 2+2 there is nothing else on the Internet that can even come close to matching the advice and knowledge that is spread. But, unfortunately, this strategy forum does not. There are better Sports Bettting forums and I think that with some type of structure, with us having people with well documented winning records, and with the discussions we are going to have, this forum could also be the best sports betting forum on the Internet. Tech has also mentioned that other forums with similar structures are sometimes better. And I think some accountability will make this forum better.

I am not going to guarantee that this forum will be better because of the new structure. I am also not saying that the new "rules" aren't changeable. I am a reasonable person who is always open to criticism. If this doesn't work well, we (as a group) can change it.

On the same note, not that much is changing. I am not making rules that "you must have X posts before making a post in here" or anything like that. All I am saying is that if you are going to make picks you should be accountable for them. No more bsing us (especially new people) that you have solid winning advice, when you don't. W/L records over the long run do say something. Over the short term, they are meaningless (we all should know that).

If anybody can propose a better and easier system for some form of accountability while making the forum better, I am all ears. You can PM me or post here.

craig

[20Five]

craig, can you tell me if my "20's contribution picks thread" is following all of these guidelines properly..? from what i can tell it seems fine but just want to follow the same standard as everyone else, thanks

[craig]

[ QUOTE ]
craig, can you tell me if my "20's contribution picks thread" is following all of these guidelines properly..? from what i can tell it seems fine but just want to follow the same standard as everyone else, thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

It should be like Null's and Bill217's pick thread. It is much easier to read through if it is weekly.

craig

[20Five]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
craig, can you tell me if my "20's contribution picks thread" is following all of these guidelines properly..? from what i can tell it seems fine but just want to follow the same standard as everyone else, thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

It should be like Null's and Bill217's pick thread. It is much easier to read through if it is weekly.

craig

[/ QUOTE ]

if you dont mind, i think i'm going to try to keep it where it is for now.. i dont make a whole bunch of plays per day so its not too confusing, and there doesnt seem to be many other people posting to it so its not that messy.. granted it sucks having to get to the last post.. perhaps once mlb rolls around i'll revamp?

[Losing all]

Are we using WA lines? if so, how are we coming up with them?

[plus_man]

Craig, I agree with the new format that you want for this forum but one thing I don't like is having to post separate weekly threads for each sport I'm betting on in a week. I'd rather have all my weekly picks in one weekly thread. Everyone could see my record for each sport within that thread.

[badpokerplyr]

[ QUOTE ]
Craig, I agree with the new format that you want for this forum but one thing I don't like is having to post separate weekly threads for each sport I'm betting on in a week. I'd rather have all my weekly picks in one weekly thread. Everyone could see my record for each sport within that thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would like to see this too, as long as within reason.. in my case during this time of year I'm following only NBA/NCAA, no hockey.. I think it would be appropriate to have basketball in the same thread (with break out of records if necessary).

If someone is doing a weekly thread but posting a slew of picks and comments daily, I wouldn't want to see a combo of NFL/NHL/NBA/NCAA in it.. but if it's sporadic updates I wouldn't mind rather than see a whole bunch of new threads.

[craig]

That is fine!

[ QUOTE ]
(with break out of records if necessary).


[/ QUOTE ]

Each sport needs to to be sepertated; i.e. NCAAB, NBA, etc...

craig

[NoChance]

I think I have gone through about 7 drafts now with very long responses about how I don't agree with what this thread is trying to accomplish. Instead, I will simply say I don't like it and leave it at that.

[NoChance]

Craig has asked me for the reasons I don't like what is being proposed. Rather than do it in private messages, I figured I would add to this discussion so that others may agree with me or choose to put me in my place.

I will attempt to list a few things I don't like about it. I don't neccessarily have solutions but then again that's because I don't belive I need to provide them because it was just fine the way it was.

[ QUOTE ]
Instead of having a picks thread for your picks for everyday of the week, please post all picks for the week (Monday-Sunday) in the same thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like this for several reasons. First, I only post picks for the Unranked vs Ranked trend. All other picks and opinions have been added to either support or refute other people's picks. In posting that trend, I have started 12 threads in 9 weeks. In other words, somtimes there are zero picks in a week and other times there are three or four picks. This is a strong trend and I think enough people either follow it or fade it that they need their own thread otherwise some might get buried or missed. I don't start enough threads that I feel I clutter these boards.

Second, If I had it my way, I wish everyone would start a new thread each day that contains their picks. When I click on a thread, I want to see what I am looking for right away. If I am interested in that person's picks, I expect them to be in that first message. I don't like clicking on the long threads with compiled picks for multiple days. You never know if someine is asking a question, saying congrats, ripping on them for losing, or the OP adding more picks. I hade wading through all that. It's just much easier to epen a new thread and see it right away.

[ QUOTE ]
1) Please include your YTD record updated on a daily basis. Do not include parlays, teasers, etc... in this record. Keep them in a seperate record.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no problem either way with this. It's probably good that people post the YTD but then again, I'm not one to spend time worrying about whether it's accurate or not. I know Craig said he is willing to do that. I just think it's too much trouble for what it's worth. I like to read the reasons behind the pick and get to know a person's style. That is much more important to me.

[ QUOTE ]
2) Please include your YTD units won/lost as well updated daily. Once again, do not include parlays, teasers, etc... in this units W/L record. We would appreciate it if you kept a weighted and unweighted record, but we will not require that until the beginning of the baseball season.

[/ QUOTE ]

This I hate. I don't want to instruct people how to bet and I certainly don't do it the same for every bet I make. I generally put 5 units on my trend picks when I decide it's time to put the wager in. Sometimes, if the line moves in my favor, I will add and additional 2.5 units. I may even repeat that process a third time if I really like it. I don't want to tell other people to do this, nor do I want to explain what I did everytime. That creates a gray area and if I post my true units, nobody will think they are accurate anyway because I wont feel the need to update this forum every time I place a wager. FYI, I usually go 1-2 units when liking someone else's pick on these forums.

[ QUOTE ]

3) Others may comment in your thread; in fact, we highly encourage this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely! The more the better! Even the negative stuff! It's all beneficial in some way. We all get defensive when someone disagrees but instead, maybe we should all take a step back and consider what the other person sees. Looking at it from another perspective can never be a bad thing.

The other thing I simply don't like is moderation in itself. I think it causes more trouble than it does good. Chest-beaters come and go. They never last very long because they are not good bettors and they end up losing. Usually when someone like this comes along, they more respected posters put them in their place anyway. That is all the moderation I need.

These are my opinions only. I don't expect everyone to agree with them. Also, just because I don't agree with what is trying to be done here, it does not mean I am out to cause trouble. I will say though that if people have problems with the way I post, I would rather not post at all than conform to things I don't agree with or find silly.

Plese discuss. Craig/Tech are looking for feedback.

[mrbaseball]

Great post No Chance. It pretty much mirrors my sentiments exactly.

[ QUOTE ]
I wish everyone would start a new thread each day that contains their picks

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate the mega threads and mainly ignore them. One thread per day is relevant and usually worth a look. Also I am anti-moderation where none is needed.

Come baseball season when I start to post game analysis from time to time I plan to do it exactly as I have done in the past. I plan to, for the most part, totally ignore these new posting rules. If that makes me in violation to these rules so be it. I guess I'll get kicked out?

I wanna talk about sports and betting strategy and ideas. Picks can and do sometimes stimulate these kinds of discussions. But picks for the sake of picks with no analysis is what I think should be against the rules.