the proof is in the pudding
 

my record on twoplustwo, selections vs. spread:

W-Hawaii/Boise
W-Louisville/Rutgers
L-Missouri/Kansas
L-LSU/Ark
W-USC/AriSte
W-Akron/Miami(OH)
W-Nevada/MSte
W-Texas/OSU
W-Indy/Pats
L-USC/Oregon
W-Boise/Fresno
W-Bears/GB
W-Pats/Buffalo
L-Indiana/Wisconsin
W-OSU/PSU
W-Den/Pit
W-Fla(halftime)/Kentucky
W-Rice/SMiss
W-Cal/Oregon

15W/4L

it has been stated that a selector cannot hit 60% winners consistently; and most of the serious contributors here insist it is ridiculous to claim otherwise. the truth: i have hit 62% winners on average per football season, and have done so professionally. those who disbelieve the possibility of such things merely limit themselves.

-c

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

http://www.homelyscientist.com/wp-co...05/popcorn.jpg

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

can i keep the bowl?

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

LOL at Pats-Colts. You said you were on the ML, not the points.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

OP are you a clown? You sound like one. Congrats on an amazing performance over such a long period of time. Are you going tout yet and how much can we pay ya for your picks?

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
my record on twoplustwo, selections vs. spread:

W-Hawaii/Boise
W-Louisville/Rutgers
L-Missouri/Kansas
L-LSU/Ark
W-USC/AriSte
W-Akron/Miami(OH)
W-Nevada/MSte
W-Texas/OSU
W-Indy/Pats
L-USC/Oregon
W-Boise/Fresno
W-Bears/GB
W-Pats/Buffalo
L-Indiana/Wisconsin
W-OSU/PSU
W-Den/Pit
W-Fla(halftime)/Kentucky
W-Rice/SMiss
W-Cal/Oregon

15W/4L

it has been stated that a selector cannot hit 60% winners consistently; and most of the serious contributors here insist it is ridiculous to claim otherwise. the truth: i have hit 62% winners on average per football season, and have done so professionally. those who disbelieve the possibility of such things merely limit themselves.

-c

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's make a prop bet. I will lay you 3 to 2 that you can't pick 60 out of 100 winners versus widely available lines. We will have to post the money up before hand of course.

If you pick anywhere close to 62%, this is a huge edge for you. I will lay up to $15K to win $10K.

Accepting this bet will go a long way towards proving your sincerity.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
my record on twoplustwo, selections vs. spread:

W-Hawaii/Boise
W-Louisville/Rutgers
L-Missouri/Kansas
L-LSU/Ark
W-USC/AriSte
W-Akron/Miami(OH)
W-Nevada/MSte
W-Texas/OSU
W-Indy/Pats
L-USC/Oregon
W-Boise/Fresno
W-Bears/GB
W-Pats/Buffalo
L-Indiana/Wisconsin
W-OSU/PSU
W-Den/Pit
W-Fla(halftime)/Kentucky
W-Rice/SMiss
W-Cal/Oregon

15W/4L

it has been stated that a selector cannot hit 60% winners consistently; and most of the serious contributors here insist it is ridiculous to claim otherwise. the truth: i have hit 62% winners on average per football season, and have done so professionally. those who disbelieve the possibility of such things merely limit themselves.

-c

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's make a prop bet. I will lay you 3 to 2 that you can't pick 60 out of 100 winners versus widely available lines. We will have to post the money up before hand of course.

If you pick anywhere close to 62%, this is a huge edge for you. I will lay up to $15K to win $10K.

Accepting this bet will go a long way towards proving your sincerity.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd probably like some action along these lines as well.

I don't see how tlt can refuse - for someone with a long-term track record of 62% winners, to turn this down would be hating money.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

the proof of the pudding is the eating

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

i just ate some pudding

that being said i'll lay 3:2 as well for $5k if you want more action.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

From the FAQ:

# What is the highest sustainable win rate in point spread betting?
# Generally, somewhere in the 55%-60% range is considered the maximum that is sustainable. However, if you start approaching the higher end of that range, you are probably passing up some +EV wagers.



(emphasis added)



Not to say anything about sample size, yadda yadda.

No one says its "impossible" to pick 60%.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
No one says its "impossible" to pick 60%.... when you are faking your record

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

can you transform into NT for a few weeks?

plz?

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

Heh.

If I turned in to NT, I'd probably be banning Thremp every two days...

-P

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

It's funny - perf's avatar shows exactly how I imagine him as he moderates this forum. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

Cato-tonia/thelyingthief is now in hiding. It seems he was never serious about his wild claims of a 62% win rate.

Thanks for the laugh tlt - keep 'em coming! You do bring some levity to this forum.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
Heh.

If I turned in to NT, I'd probably be banning Thremp every two days...

-P

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true. I will not refute the fact that my behavior is horrendous by even the most generous of standards.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

fine, thremp takes one for the team, and we do some december cleaning [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

word of advice --- if you really are winning at a profitable rate, keep your plays to yourself, make money, and continue to do so season after season. the fact that you need accolades on a public forum from a bunch of internet dudes just demonstrates you're either a. not actually putting money down or b. not actually putting any sizable amounts down. but also shows that you're definitely c. a clown.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

LOL 15-4, what a square. I believe I'm something like 12-0 on my posts including a 17/2 and a 5/1 winner, but you don't see me creating new topics to announce it. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Seriously though I've been betting online for 3 years now and I keep a log of every bet I've made. Throwing out arbs. I've won a shade over 81% of my bets, so I believe you.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

such a howl and crescendo..

yes, indeed, the whole gist of the post was missed; and, in being missed, underscored...

how's that tail feel, fellas? pulled?

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
such a howl and crescendo..

yes, indeed, the whole gist of the post was missed; and, in being missed, underscored...

how's that tail feel, fellas? pulled?



[/ QUOTE ]

Did tlt get banned? Thats usually why I use an alternate name. Why are you?

Why the brag thread?

Seems pointless.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
LOL 15-4, what a square. I believe I'm something like 12-0 on my posts including a 17/2 and a 5/1 winner, but you don't see me creating new topics to announce it. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Seriously though I've been betting online for 3 years now and I keep a log of every bet I've made. Throwing out arbs. I've won a shade over 81% of my bets, so I believe you.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] thanks for Helio mang!

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
i just ate some pudding

that being said i'll lay 3:2 as well for $5k if you want more action.

[/ QUOTE ]

there aren't 100 bettable football games left this year.

however, for next year, i will happily book your bets if:

1) you offer me my expected rate of return, compounded over the betting period--i earn 300% per season. we are looking at 3 to 1, not 3 to 2.

2) the choice of games is in my control.

3) the security of my capital is not in doubt. your uncle frank is not a secure venue.

4) i have recorded win rates as high as 70% and as low as 57%: we must settle on a minimum acceptable rate. everybody experiences variance, i refuse to lose money on a variant year.

5) we must arrange a means to keep my selections secret till after post time; this means, the selections are not published AND they are not available to those betting against me. this would require a third party of impeccable credentials, or a repositor who receives the selection within some fraction of time immediately prior or after the game starts. i will NOT accept any arrangement that permits others from using my selections to defray the cost of their wager.

to put it bluntly, i'm gonna take your [censored] money; and i'm not going to accept a proposition that puts the other guy in a win/win situation. this is the bottom line: i will NOT put money at a risk/rate of return lower than my annual compounded rate. but, then, since no one can select a win rate as high as i have claimed, you are guaranteed of a successful wager, aren't you? there shouldn't be any issue with it, i wouldn't think. so, these are my terms.

-c

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
such a howl and crescendo..

yes, indeed, the whole gist of the post was missed; and, in being missed, underscored...

how's that tail feel, fellas? pulled?

losers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did tlt get banned? Thats usually why I use an alternate name. Why are you?

Why the brag thread?

Seems pointless.

[/ QUOTE ]

the point is: your facile belief system. and you still haven't published your win rate, average rate of return, and bet size. you talk a great deal about kelly. so let's talk some kelly, thremp. show me what you know.

-c

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

http://www.sbrforum.com/Betting+Tool...alculator.aspx

Umm... Use it?

I mean is their really much to discuss? Its a well published and researched bet sizing system if you know your edge.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

On a side note, I did post my long term ROI. Which is of course highly variable since when betting Kelly your recent results will have the most effect on your ROI. So its somewhat moot. Win rate is immaterial. I could pick 85%+ and still be a loser or pick 14% and a long term winner.

Finally bet size is ultra pointless. Sportbetting is extremely scalable. This isn't poker where being a winner at higher stakes proves who's better at a game. Yawn.

If I had more time, I'd go back through your picks. Check each post and look for the WA line and timestamps for each. But frankly your a liar who keeps saying you'll leave but won't. And it annoys me.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
there aren't 100 bettable football games left this year.


[/ QUOTE ]

Don't you bet NCAA basketball or NBA? How about NCAA football? Between NFL, NCAAF, NCAAB and NBA, there should be plenty of opportunities to bet in the coming months.

[ QUOTE ]

however, for next year, i will happily book your bets if:

1) you offer me my expected rate of return, compounded over the betting period--i earn 300% per season. we are looking at 3 to 1, not 3 to 2.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, the proof is in the pudding all right. You were offered a massively EV bet (based on your 62% win rate), and you ran for the hills!

3 to 1? Why would I offer a 62% capper 3 to 1 that he can't win 60 out of his next 100??? What does your annual rate of return have to do with anything? You would still be betting on these picks, wouldn't you? You could announce your selections just before kick off/tip off for all I care.

[ QUOTE ]

2) the choice of games is in my control.


[/ QUOTE ]

Here's an idea of what I would expect.

1. the game is available on major books (we can settle on 3-4 major online sites)
2. it is possible to bet $500 or more on the /total/side/prop you are selecting
3. the juice is -105 or higher

[ QUOTE ]

3) the security of my capital is not in doubt. your uncle frank is not a secure venue.


[/ QUOTE ]

We can post the money up with a 2+2 mod.

[ QUOTE ]

4) i have recorded win rates as high as 70% and as low as 57%: we must settle on a minimum acceptable rate. everybody experiences variance, i refuse to lose money on a variant year.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is hilarious! You refuse to lose money on variance? How do you ever place a bet? Even a 62% capper loses the occasional wager.

I am offering you an opportunity to have massive EV on a $10K wager. I never said that winning or losing this wager would prove anything. Even a 50% capper has a shot of winning 60 out of his next 100 picks. The point is not to prove anything; it is to have the best of it.

[ QUOTE ]

to put it bluntly, i'm gonna take your [censored] money. i am going to whip your ass, and it is going to cost you.


[/ QUOTE ]

Oh come on TLT, it's clear to everyone that you are scared shitless. There is no way you are going to make a bet with anyone. The reasons are obvious:

1. you are probably a 51% capper at best
2. your bankroll is so small that we would laugh at any sum you were willing/able to wager

[ QUOTE ]

this is the bottom line: i will NOT put money at a risk/rate of return lower than my annual compounded rate.


[/ QUOTE ]

I am fine with this TLT. Let's just move it up to 300 picks and 180 wins, and I will be more than happy to lay you 3 to 1. This will also reduce the variance, which is what you said you wanted.

[ QUOTE ]

but, then, since no one can select a win rate as high as i have claimed, you are guaranteed of a successful wager, aren't you?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, you are quite correct. No one can win 62% of their wagers. This is easy money for me. That's why I am offering the bet.

Why are you so scared? If you can win 62% of your wagers, then this is easy money for you.

[ QUOTE ]

there shouldn't be any issue with it, i wouldn't think. so, these are my terms.
-c

[/ QUOTE ]

It should be obvious I am very willing to bet with you. On the other hand, you seem scared. Why? As you said, "the proof is in the pudding."

I will make you another offer. I will bet you that you can't win 145 out of 250 (a mere 58%) and will lay you 5 to 4. A 62% capper would have enough of an edge to bet almost his entire bankroll on such a proposition. How could you possibly turn down such an incredible offer? Can't you scrape together a few hundred bucks to bet against me TLT?

Edit to add: What I said about the -105 juice is obviously not what I meant. You can't bet on -400 moneylines, lol. Let's say -115 or better (i.e. -110, -105, +100, +105, etc.).

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

he can't scrape together 2 wooden nickels and is trying to go tout, isn't it obvious?

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
he can't scrape together 2 wooden nickels and is trying to go tout, isn't it obvious?

[/ QUOTE ]

Should I be buying TLT's TEN STAR LOCK OF THE WEEK or his 25 DIME GUARANTEED WINNER?

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he can't scrape together 2 wooden nickels and is trying to go tout, isn't it obvious?

[/ QUOTE ]

Should I be buying TLT's TEN STAR LOCK OF THE WEEK or his 25 DIME GUARANTEED WINNER?

[/ QUOTE ]

For a small fee, I will tell you which one is his 'real' playof the week!

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

put me down @ -150 giving op a chance to win 6k more

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
From the FAQ:

# What is the highest sustainable win rate in point spread betting?
# Generally, somewhere in the 55%-60% range is considered the maximum that is sustainable. However, if you start approaching the higher end of that range, you are probably passing up some +EV wagers.



(emphasis added)



Not to say anything about sample size, yadda yadda.

No one says its "impossible" to pick 60%.

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly...I was 24-8 my first full year posting football ATS picks on 2p2 because it was only my best plays

even today as I'm a .500 warrior, my POTW's posted on 2p2 are 27-15 IIRC




also, if you are thelyingthief, where is the loss for Wisconsin @ Penn St? That is the game where I came across and tried to discuss things with you, so it kind of sticks out in my mind.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
such a howl and crescendo..

yes, indeed, the whole gist of the post was missed; and, in being missed, underscored...


[/ QUOTE ]

So enlighten us, oh masterful picker of the 61% rate. What exactly was the point?

You post a 19-game sample.

My opening five weeks from the NFL last year (Performify's Pigskin Picks, through Week 5, all posted on this forum, all against Widely Available lines and all with units tracked and posted before games):


9-5-1. Excluding the tie, that's a 64.2% win percentage. If you take through week six, seventeen games, it drops to a measly 59%. What does a small sample prove?

What if you even jump to the end of both seasons and look at my total weighted record? I've got publicly available picks against widely available lines for the last two seasons, winning seasons both, against WA lines (i'll repeat). But still, what does it matter?

If you want to jump to MMA, something that doesn't directly compare to spread picks, but still, I'm 18-8 up double digit units for the last four events. Weeee, variance is fun!


So back to the matter, what's your point?

Are you disappointed that you're not being welcomed as an expert, and still seeking that affection and respect that you crave?

Did you miss the parade we threw in your honor the first week you arrived? Or the key to the forums which Sklansky himself enscribed and presented?

Truly, you are god's gift to handicappers and we shall shower you with adoration every time you weigh in on a post.

-P

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

I posted a thread earlier about how variance had my ROI 4x what it should've been. WHERES MY LOVE?

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

Holy crap I've never seen Perf totally clown someone like that in almost 5 years. Where has this talent been hiding?

I didn't get invited to the parade. Where was it again?

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
I posted a thread earlier about how variance had my ROI 4x what it should've been. WHERES MY LOVE?

[/ QUOTE ]

nobody cares about you, ldo


it's about time Performify takes his turn in what people do best around here

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

I went 4 for 4 the opening week of the NFL.

IIRC I think I went 10 for 12 or something ridiculous the opening week of the NCAA-F season.
I posted all those picks on here.

Evidently, I should only be betting in opening weeks.

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

[ QUOTE ]
I went 4 for 4 the opening week of the NFL.

IIRC I think I went 10 for 12 or something ridiculous the opening week of the NCAA-F season.
I posted all those picks on here.

Evidently, I should only be betting in opening weeks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or become a tout after opening week!

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

LESSON: If you are very selective about your bets, you can hit alot of them.....Thremp already showed us this a few weeks ago


My personal problem with your post is that you are cherry-picking your 'picks'...ie outright lying

Re: the proof is in the pudding
 

That was a pretty sick burn. Ups P.