Paying For Picks
 

this may or maynot have already been discussed but I "DAFS" to no avail so here we go

is this a +EV valid idea, to simply go to a handicapping team that offers picks that you gotta pay for, buy them and them simply make enough bets to cover the cost of the picks and make a small profit ?

just to get this ball rolling

Re: Paying For Picks
 

Don't.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

short answer, most of the sites advertising for-pay picks significantly exaggerate their records and very very few (if any) are actually worth paying for.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

so what your saying is I need to find a reliable one! (lol)

alright anyway has this topic been discussed alot and is there anyone out there right now thats paying for picks and preferably has done so for a year or more ?

Re: Paying For Picks
 

In the NFL go with the home team underdogs. This year the dogs are 39-21-1 against the spread. Sometimes they look awful but they win.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
most of the sites advertising for-pay picks significantly exaggerate their records

[/ QUOTE ]

Or pick ML teams that are -1000 or higher so it looks like they have an awesome record.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
so what your saying is I need to find a reliable one! (lol)

alright anyway has this topic been discussed alot and is there anyone out there right now thats paying for picks and preferably has done so for a year or more ?

[/ QUOTE ]

No what I'm saying is in my experience there isn't anyone selling picks on the internet that are worth paying for. I phrased it the way I did, as its theoretically possible that someone legit exists out there. But I seriously doubt it.

Philosophically, it doesn't make any sense. if you had the ability to make strong, reliable sports betting picks you're not going to sell them. You're going to build a syndicate and/or grow your bankroll significantly and exploit the edges yourself, not sell them to others.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
In the NFL go with the home team underdogs. This year the dogs are 39-21-1 against the spread. Sometimes they look awful but they win.

[/ QUOTE ]

in every sport....take small home dogs
free monies

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so what your saying is I need to find a reliable one! (lol)

alright anyway has this topic been discussed alot and is there anyone out there right now thats paying for picks and preferably has done so for a year or more ?

[/ QUOTE ]

No what I'm saying is in my experience there isn't anyone selling picks on the internet that are worth paying for. I phrased it the way I did, as its theoretically possible that someone legit exists out there. But I seriously doubt it.

Philosophically, it doesn't make any sense. if you had the ability to make strong, reliable sports betting picks you're not going to sell them. You're going to build a syndicate and/or grow your bankroll significantly and exploit the edges yourself, not sell them to others.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this. If you're a winning handicapper, why not place your bets, and then sell them to make more $$$$? Even if you're the best sports bettor in the world, there is still risk involved, as it's pretty common knowledge there's no such thing as a true lock (with the exception of my cfb play of the year which is now 2-0 dating back to my first poty in 2005 [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]). But the $$$ you make from selling your picks IS a lock.

Whenever this topic is brought up, people rarely mention that a winning sports bettor is very likely to have the same poor bankroll/money management and/or other leaks (i.e. pit games, poker, bad investments, etc.) as a winning poker player. Why not take the guaranteed $$$ which come from selling your picks? In the best case scenario, you put together a string of consecutive winning years, build your customer base, and grow your business.

Also, theoretically is there not a point where your bankroll grows so large that you as an individual cannot exploit all of your edges with the maximum wagers you would like?

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
so what your saying is I need to find a reliable one! (lol)

alright anyway has this topic been discussed alot and is there anyone out there right now thats paying for picks and preferably has done so for a year or more ?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've only used one service in my life, and that was Dr. Bob Sports college football picks, for like 4 years. I really liked his detailed statistical analysis of the games, and I did learn some things from his write ups.

I won $$$ with him each of the first 3 years, and I lost $$$ the last year (my losing season was less than any of my individual winning seasons). I quit using his service after the losing season, and that was like 4 or 5 years ago I think. I have no idea how he's been doing the last few years, although one of my friends still uses him religiously and claims to win $$$ every year - tifwiw.

I should also note that I didn't play all of his picks blindly. If I absolutely hated one of his picks, I usually wouldn't play it, and this did help increase my winning %. Also, one of those winning seasons would of been close to break even had I not bet Hawaii like 5 times after suffering through a losing or breakeven day with the good doctor's picks.

When I did use him, I won the most $$$ on his smaller conference picks (i.e. MAC, WAC, etc.). I'm talking about teams I didn't see play all year or could even name a player. I have a theory that the lines on these "mid-major" conference games were much softer 5 - 10 years ago than they are now, due to the massively increased exposure of these leagues since then on tv, and more information being readily available.


You want my advice? If you are serious about winning $$$ betting sports, learn how to become a winning handicapper yourself, instead of relying on a service. If you are betting sports as a purely recreational activity, don't have a problem with losing your bankroll, and don't want to put in the time and effort to properly handicap, then I think it's fine to use a reputable service (oxymoron?).

Re: Paying For Picks
 

Good post, Spackler...

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree with this. If you're a winning handicapper, why not place your bets, and then sell them to make more $$$$? Even if you're the best sports bettor in the world, there is still risk involved, as it's pretty common knowledge there's no such thing as a true lock (with the exception of my cfb play of the year which is now 2-0 dating back to my first poty in 2005 [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]). But the $$$ you make from selling your picks IS a lock.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true, and this is the same advice I give about posting plays here on 2+2 and sharing information, and is one of the main reasons I post my set of public picks here. But I still don't buy the validity of purchased picks, just from the aspect of we're playing a negative sum game here and I can't see giving up information edges in releasing your picks when you can exploit them to near infinity.

The short of it is that the people making picks aren't any more certain about their results than any of the rest of us. You're just paying for expert advice, the same way you would with a stockbroker. Yeah, its possible that someone is honest and is a lifetime 55% or 60% capper and is selling picks to maximize the smoothness of their income. That's theoretically possible. I'll certainly admit that. But I just don't see it often in practice. Instead we see the industry littered with touts who advertise impossible winning percentages who are most interested in getting your money.

But that said, there is another factor not mentioned in all of this: line availability. when you're talking about betting small edges, as we are in sports betting, lineshopping and line availability makes all the difference in the world. Someone releasing a pick where you can't get the line they get, tracking their record against a different line, that's not going to do you much value. Reference Fezzik, where most of his followers can't get the lines he tracks at. He's legit in his picks, but there are a lot of people that follow Fezzik but are slower in grabbing the lines and shift from winners to losers just based on the line/vig moves. Its the reason I track my public picks against WA lines when I post the play, not necessarily against what I secured, if that's NLA.


[ QUOTE ]
Also, theoretically is there not a point where your bankroll grows so large that you as an individual cannot exploit all of your edges with the maximum wagers you would like?

[/ QUOTE ]

To some extent, yes. If you had a multi-million dollar bankroll there would certainly be diminishing returns where your movement on a line would result in a line shift immediately. But I really don't think that this is the problem with touts, that they have so much money that they can't maximize the equity of their picks and such have to result to selling their picks.

This is also a big part of where syndicates come in - simply a group of people with disparate accounts who can make transactions for a single pick in the same immediate timeframe.

For example, purely hypothetical, say that both I, my wife, and my brother have accounts on Pinnacle, all of which I have control of - could be direct control i.e. I have their user/pass, or could be I just call them up and say "ok, bet #242 for $5000". When i release a MMA wagering card, I use all three accounts - either myself, or even at the further extreme of contacting each of them to place the bets for my little "syndicate". While its certainly possible that we can shift the line when we place, we're all likely to secure nearly the same line and we've circumvented the max wager amount. Not to mention sites like Pinny where the max bet is a one-time max and not a total max. If i wanted to wager $100k on an MMA fight I could do it with my own account, albeit after making a series of 20 bets at the 5k max (or whatever) giving Pinny an opportunity to adjust the line for each...

Re: Paying For Picks
 

Am I understanding this correctly on Fezzik's main page right now:

118-61
+50.80u
(66%)

That following his picks and getting his lines would lead you up 50 Units so far this year? Does this not include juice on the losses? This seems very high to me.

Also, if this is true ( and this is more trustworthy then any other tout's site) then you don't need to play, winning picks are free.

Ken

Re: Paying For Picks
 

I would suggest if you are going to use a handicapper, and pay for the picks, then at least use one who pays to be monitored by a legitimate sports monitoring service. I think there certainly are legitimate and trustworthy researchers out there who are simply trying to offer good honest advice.

But like a lot of things, there are so many [censored] bags that make it hard for the good guys.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

My understanding is that Fezzik's record is both public and accurate.

The problem with trying to track Fezzik's picks is that he relies a lot on geting good numbers which you may not be able to get. I don't mean that he is falsifying things, but rather that when he says "Giants +4.5 -110 for 2 units" the whole world rushes out to bet the Giants and the number quickly becomes much worse.

So unless you're watching and ready to pounce on everything he posts, it'll be hard to do as well as he does.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

Is he really 118-61? Does that include a lot of favorites on big moneylines? That record is unconscious.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is he really 118-61? Does that include a lot of favorites on big moneylines? That record is unconscious.

[/ QUOTE ]

like most sharps, he lost $$ last year -- but this year, he basically is unconscious.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is he really 118-61? Does that include a lot of favorites on big moneylines? That record is unconscious.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it doesn't. He's a legitimate, expert, line-moving, feared-by-casinos sharp who is also on a hot streak. That's a pretty good combination.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
My understanding is that Fezzik's record is both public and accurate.

The problem with trying to track Fezzik's picks is that he relies a lot on geting good numbers which you may not be able to get. I don't mean that he is falsifying things, but rather that when he says "Giants +4.5 -110 for 2 units" the whole world rushes out to bet the Giants and the number quickly becomes much worse.

So unless you're watching and ready to pounce on everything he posts, it'll be hard to do as well as he does.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true to an extent. Any publically released plays must be against a WA number or it's a no play. For example here is his pick for last night:



Possible Play on Eagles on MNF
12-04-2006 at 02:27 PM
Play the line 45 minutes prior to game time.
At +3 +105 or +3 +110, play it as a 1 weight.

At +3.5 -110 or better, play it as a 2 weight.

No play at less than +3 +105.

Since Eagles +3 +105 or better was never WA this was graded as a no play.

For anyone here who doesn't read Fezzik's board, you should. There are some posters over there you can learn a lot from.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

As you can see, his plays are weighted. So a 118-61 record doesn't include 179 different games. Some games are 2 or 3 weights. This makes his record look better or worse then it actually is, depending on whether he is having a hot or cold streak.

I have no doubt that he is a positive expectation capper though. Just don't expect an over 55% long-term record from anyone (including Fezzik or anyone for that matter).....unless some handicapper comes along who has access to a Time Machine and an almanac.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
Just don't expect an over 55% long-term record from anyone (including Fezzik or anyone for that matter).....unless some handicapper comes along who has access to a Time Machine and an almanac

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point RR. The vast majority of those who make money at sportsbetting long term don't do so because of their superior handicapping ability, they do so because of their superior ability to analyze the market and bet accordingly.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is he really 118-61? Does that include a lot of favorites on big moneylines? That record is unconscious.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe many of the games in that record were moneylines. I rarely see him post ML bets, and I subscribe to his FREE email list pick service.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

Can I get some legit sports monitoring service links suppose that could be my next step

Re: Paying For Picks
 

There are only a handful of services I'm aware of with a winning record against real (widely available) lines over a significant number of selections. Stanford Wong's Sharp Sports Betting, Scott Kellen's Sixth Sense, and Fezzik are the only ones off the top of my head. (Fezzik is currently giving his picks away for free but has charged in the past.)

Re: Paying For Picks
 

You can get most of them for free online if you know where to look. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
For anyone here who doesn't read Fezzik's board, you should. There are some posters over there you can learn a lot from.

[/ QUOTE ]

Link?

Re: Paying For Picks
 

Fezzik's Place

http://www.fezziksplace.com/

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
Reference Fezzik, where most of his followers can't get the lines he tracks at. He's legit in his picks, but there are a lot of people that follow Fezzik but are slower in grabbing the lines and shift from winners to losers just based on the line/vig moves. Its the reason I track my public picks against WA lines when I post the play, not necessarily against what I secured, if that's NLA.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Fezzik's picks *are* graded at widely available lines.

I've bet as many of his plays this year as I could, and I don't recall ever being unable to find the quoted line when I was online at the release time. It's true that if you're not online when the play is released, the line may have moved before you see the play (particularly with regards to totals), but that's not something Fezzik can control and could be true of any handicapper.

Last week's plays were:

112 NMEXST -11.5 1 weight
120 SJST -4 1 weight
143/144 Colts/TITANS UNDER 47.5 2 weight
160 Giants +3.5 2 weight.

I only have a line history for Pinnacle, but Pinnacle's lines at the time he posted his picks (931am PST on the 30th) were:

NM ST -11.5 -108
SJ ST -4 -105
NYG +3.5 -106
IND/TEN un47.5 -105

Neither college play had budged an hour later. NYG bounced around a bit but was still -109 over an hour later. The only one of these which moved significantly on Pinnacle was IND/TEN, which was -109 4 minutes later and -113 6 minutes later, and stayed at high juice for a while until they moved it to 47. But, it was still not that hard to find 47.5 elsewhere even after the release time. I was on the beach without a cell phone signal when those plays were released and 45 minutes later when I was able to check, I still had plenty of books with 47.5 -110, and Bodog had 48 -115 even on the sharp line.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

Just curious, but does Fezzik only do football plays? I noticed that his balance seemed to jump from day to day so got the impression he has plays everyday.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

Fezzik's non-football picks are of average success, but I've only followed them for a little over a year.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

If you're talking about "his balance," I assume you're talking about the FezzDAQ, which was an experiment he did over the past year. The FezzDAQ included many different sports.

In addition to the FezzDAQ, Fezzik also releases official plays. As of late, those have been limited to football, the NBA playoffs, and the NCAA basketball tournament, although last year Fezzik also did some regular season NCAA basketball handicapping as well, focusing mostly on second half lines.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

The FezzDAQ is much tougher to match for the average gambler.
It's more of a taking advantage of soft lines deal that close up quickly. It does show how far one can get by pwning soft lines.

As the rest have said, his picks are fairly easy to follow at the current time.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
For example, purely hypothetical, say that both I, my wife, and my brother have accounts on Pinnacle, all of which I have control of - could be direct control i.e. I have their user/pass, or could be I just call them up and say "ok, bet #242 for $5000". When i release a MMA wagering card, I use all three accounts - either myself, or even at the further extreme of contacting each of them to place the bets for my little "syndicate". While its certainly possible that we can shift the line when we place, we're all likely to secure nearly the same line and we've circumvented the max wager amount. Not to mention sites like Pinny where the max bet is a one-time max and not a total max. If i wanted to wager $100k on an MMA fight I could do it with my own account, albeit after making a series of 20 bets at the 5k max (or whatever) giving Pinny an opportunity to adjust the line for each...

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't notice this the first time, but even though this was a hypothetical example, I should point out that using multiple accounts to circumvent their limits is one of the few things that Pinnacle will close accounts for doing.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

Good point, beetman. I should have picked a better example - the example of three accounts that our hypothetical sharp calls the owners of and tell them to bet under his control is a better example in this case.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

there are some good paid services (aim for cheaper ones... phil steele, twominutewarning.com, gold sheets etc.)... but the "free" picks on this forum are pretty good (and better if they have some sort of explanation).

vis-a-vis the original poster's question, it is a huge amount of work to handicap something like ncaa basketball, unless you're playing a system, although i think the inefficiency is there to make $$$$.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
there are some good paid services (aim for cheaper ones... phil steele, twominutewarning.com, gold sheets etc.)... but the "free" picks on this forum are pretty good (and better if they have some sort of explanation).

vis-a-vis the original poster's question, it is a huge amount of work to handicap something like ncaa basketball, unless you're playing a system, although i think the inefficiency is there to make $$$$.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do not use goldsheet. I've used them for threee straight years in football, which is supposed to be their bread and butter. This year has been horrendous. Last year I won a little bit, and the first year I also lost. Net loser in three years. Moreover, I sent them the following email earlier this year (the factual predicate of which is true and to which they did not respond):


While I have been a somewhat satisfied customer for
the past (at least) 3 seasons, it is disturbing that
Goldsheet posts the LTS releases on the webpage, but
conveniently neglects to include the 9/8/2006
selections, which lost 3.85 units. That day is the
difference between being profitable and being
unprofitable at this point in the season, and absolute
honesty and full disclosure is invaluable in the shady
world of sports handicapping.

Do you disagree?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx[my name]


Again, they did not respond to this email, and to date have not updated their historical data to reflect the picks posted on 9/8 (for Saturday, 9/9). Snce then, their picks have absolutely tanked.

Caveat emptor.

I'm thinking of giving the Sharpsportsbetting.com guys a shot soon. The goldsheet performance and dishonesty was very troubling. I had heard for many years that they were the real thing. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: Paying For Picks
 

Here is a good sports monitor:

www.sports-watch.com

This is another good one:

www.thesportsmonitor.com

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
Good point, beetman. I should have picked a better example - the example of three accounts that our hypothetical sharp calls the owners of and tell them to bet under his control is a better example in this case.

[/ QUOTE ]

I fully understand what you're saying here, but what would be the standard amount of compensation to the other account owners who are placing wagers for you? A certain % of your profit, a flat monthly fee, etc.?

Re: Paying For Picks
 

Phil Steele has so many different clubs and service plans that it's almost impossible to track a true documented record for him.

Re: Paying For Picks
 

[ QUOTE ]
Phil Steele has so many different clubs and service plans that it's almost impossible to track a true documented record for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point, and one I think worth amplifying. Consider this: a tout registers 70 or 80 different services with a sports monitor at the beginning of football season. He then picks different plays, randomly, for each service. At the end of football season, doubtless several of his registered and monitored services have winning records, although the aggregate record of all picks made is right at 50% -- losing vig at the same rate your aunt Sharon would have. In fact, if a tout registers enough services, he can give himself a very good chance of haveing one or more of them perform well for more than just one season. And there you have it -- legitimate winning picks, tracked by a reputable motitoring service! You sign up, pay the tout, and we all know what happens with the picks (think aunt Sharon).

If you don't know how many different service plans an individual "handicapper" has registered, even the info from otherwise trustworthy sports-monitoring sites can be very misleading.

I have no evidence (other than beetman's comment above) that the touts do this, but if I can think of it, and if Phil Steel is doing it, the smart money says that the touts have been doing it for years.