Sygamel's 2005 NFL Regular Season Picks Log - Page 2

YoureToast · #11 08-31-2005, 10:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The Pinnacle line was at -107, not -104. I will be happy to do the math for you (though I'd rather not have to do this every time), as sure as you are I did the wrong thing:

Probability the Raiders lose by 8 or more: 46.11%
Probability the Raiders lose by exactly 7: 5.36%
Probability the Raiders lose by 6 or less or win: 48.53%

Win calculation based on +7.5 -107 -- ($50)*(.5389)+(-$53.50)*(.4611)=+$2.28

Win calculation based on +7 +106 -- ($50)*(.4853)+(0)*(.0536)+(-$47.17)*(.4611)=+$2.51

[/ QUOTE ]

Sygamel, what I like about you is how you have dealt with the bullsh&* people on this forum have thrown at you and that you have the confidence of your conviction. I don't know if its smart, but I'm going to be following your plays all season, and putting a lot more money on them than you. We'll see how we do. I may be the sucker, but I just don't have the ability to cap games myself. If you do well, I'll do well, and there may be a little reward for you at the end. [img]/images/graemlins/ooo.gif[/img]

sygamel · #12 08-31-2005, 10:16 AM

For both of our sakes, I hope the system maintains its success of the past. I have the courage of my convictions because I've enjoyed success continuously to this point. Only bet what you are comfortable with -- I suggest using a number of different credible sources for your wagering.

YoureToast · #13 08-31-2005, 10:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
For both of our sakes, I hope the system maintains its success of the past. I have the courage of my convictions because I've enjoyed success continuously to this point. Only bet what you are comfortable with -- I suggest using a number of different credible sources for your wagering.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will line shop aggressively. The amount I risk will be small compared to my overall gambling (poker) bankroll. Do not feel any (much [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]) weight on your shoulders.

sygamel · #14 08-31-2005, 11:03 AM

I wagered 572 units last season (for me, 1 unit=$50). Plan accordingly.

tech · #15 08-31-2005, 11:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
you have dealt with the bullsh&* people on this forum have thrown at you

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you provide an example of this?

sygamel · #16 08-31-2005, 11:16 AM

I think by bullsh&* he meant skepticism

tech · #17 08-31-2005, 11:19 AM

OK. That's a lot different. Skepticism and discussion is normal and healthy. This forum could use more of it.

YoureToast · #18 08-31-2005, 11:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think by bullsh&* he meant skepticism

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, there's been some bullsh&* too....Don't want to look too far but here's one quote:

"So you just wanted to know if you can sell a flawed or unproven system on E-Bay? Let me steal your thread for a second to ask 2+2ers if I can sell (swamp) I mean beautiful Florida property on E-Bay and if they buy today I'll through in a bridge or two."

MasterShakes and some others skepticism has been great.

The13atman · #19 08-31-2005, 04:26 PM

Exactly how well has this system done for you in the past in terms of units? You've said it has increased every year but I didn't see exactly how well it did year by year. For example it would be nice to see something like:

1997: +X units
1998: +X units
1999: +X units

and so on through 2004.

sygamel · #20 08-31-2005, 05:11 PM

My records are poorly documented from '96 (first lean prototype, pre-Excel) to '01. Bets were rarer and my bankroll was small, being both in college and not long out of college; however the system was a small and consistent winner throughout. The over/under system began in '02, teasers in '03 and money line underdogs in '04. The same basis of fundamentals has been used for pointspread games since '96 with many refinements since then.

In addition, I only started using online casinos last season so the vig taken in previous years was 10%. The volume of my bets would have been larger, pre-'04, had I been able to get favorable vig prices. Why? Because a bet occurs in the system when the probability of a bet winning exceeds the cost of the bet by a certain minimum threshhold. Such occurrences were rarer when the lower half of the threshhold was 52.38% (10% vig) than under other circumstances, many of them fluid (5% vig is 51.22% for ex.)

2002 +11.7 units among 106 units transacted (meaning absolute value sum of win and loss transactions); with 5% vig, +13.9 units among 104 units transacted

2003 +9.3 units among 201 units transacted; with 5% vig, +13.7 units among 196 units transacted

2004 +34.8 units among 580 units transacted

This is the best documentation I can do for you. I am posting my picks for free consumption and debate, you can do whatever you want with them, even call me a liar if you want. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] But really, all I can say is I have total confidence in my ability to interpret mathematical NFL trends to forecast future results. Someday the levee of fundamentals that have worked well for so long may break down a bit, but I won't have any regrets about how I arrived at my intrepretations even if I end up in a losing season.