[beetman]

I never said I've been betting sports for a decade. I've been betting sports seriously for a little under 4 years. Nor did I ever make any statements touting my sports betting prowess. I do consider myself an excellent baseball handicapper but I don't believe that topic even came up. In other areas I am largely still learning.

You are flat out lying about me making ad hominem attacks. I didn't call anybody a bitch, and the post about "bottom of the food chain" was a REPONSE to a post where someone else called me a dick! In your world I suppose the person defending himself against insults is at fault when you like the former person and don't like the latter person. It warms my heart to see so much impartiality in this thread!

You're a complete amateur if you read my last 50 posts and didn't think I provided anything of value. Among other things, I recall posting that NFL home dogs perform better on the ML than away dogs, that Denver and the under were correlated in last Sunday's game (btw, that little tidbit alone has been a significant portion of my NFL profits over the last few years and partially saved an otherwise dreadful 2005 season), and I've posted plenty of math stuff, etc. Also, simple math would dictate that if +164 was reasonably similar to +3 +108, that +151 is reaosnably similar to +3 +100, etc. If these conversions are "so obvious" why are there so many threads asking "which middle is best?" "how much is this half point worth" etc., and for that matter, why do so many people suggest using the Pinnacle pull down menu in the arbitrage threads?

Obviously the content I posted all went right over your head, but that doesn't mean it didn't have any value. Also, I certainly never said +150 was the same as +3 -110 on a home dog in the NFL. These things vary based on the total and some other factors but +150 is certainly superior in all situations.

I suggest you try actually reading posts instead of just making stuff up.