Printable View
This week: straight plays: 3-2. Win: $440. Season: 13-12-1. Loss: $290
Parlays to date: 0-5. Loss: $500
COT: Loss: $790
Expenses to date: $250
Total win/loss: -$1040
Don't forget---I'm accumulating EV on every play because every play is at +EV because I say so.
So a loss means nothing.
Being behind means nothing.
It'll all work out in the end.
You'll see.
Advantage play never loses (at least around here)
Now I'm putting on my fairy dust and march for the right to marry a tree.
What percent is the edge you are working? Can you define your advantage and where it comes from, please?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Wise Up Sixty
How much do the bets go up next week?
The season is getting shorter.
Time is running out.
Guess it doesn't matter since your going to Reno/Tahoe for your Family Christmas.
Must be nice to be you since you will probably get all your Football Losses back from Machines Playing the Singer Strategy!
Of course, like Redietz says, when Football is over you can bet Hockey.
What are the 250 dollar Expenses for betting on Football?
Sounds like some serious Vig on top of the Vig you are already paying betting on Parlays and such.
I know nothing about betting sports but I can appreciate high level sarcasm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Redietz did tell you to omit the "expenses" from your tally.
Omitting the expenses, better known as creative accounting, will not give the true bottom line.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI know nothing about betting sports but I can appreciate high level sarcasm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Redietz did tell you to omit the "expenses" from your tally.
A couple of notes:Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmOmitting the expenses, better known as creative accounting, will not give the true bottom line.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI know nothing about betting sports but I can appreciate high level sarcasm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Redietz did tell you to omit the "expenses" from your tally.
1) In "Rob's" favor, the results from 40 or 50 games don't really mean much of anything. You can get a sense of style and what he's trying to accomplish, but as to whether he win or loses -- not really.
2) You miss an additional advantage of "Rob" including expenses that he's paying someone to put his bets in. "Rob" therefore has no tickets in his possession. You know, just in case someone asked for him to post pictures of the tickets and such. Now nobody is going to ask that because the amounts being wagered are relatively modest. Right?
3) Ahem. Do you remember when I mentioned that certain formal rules were put in place to hinder some of Billy Walters' actions? Did anybody ever figure out some of those rules? Because the NGC would not be happy with what Rob posted here. They really wouldn't care, because the wagers are modest, but they wouldn't be happy.
Obviously, regarding #2 and #3 above, I have sat on these for awhile. It's the Christmas spirit. Now, does anyone really think "Rob" made these wagers?
My edge runs between 4%-7%.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPenWhat percent is the edge you are working? Can you define your advantage and where it comes from, please?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Wise Up Sixty
It's against the AP Code of Conduct to disclose the details of lucrative plays, so I'll respect that.
Bets don't go any higher. $500/game and $600 for my lock are where this tops out.Quote:
Originally Posted by monet
Yes if I'm behind by Christmas I'll play enough vp sessions to recover any losses between Christmas and New Years.
I don't know enough about hockey to bet it, and I only have interest in watching the Cup Finals.
I pay my friend in LV $50/week to place these bets. I use a straight 10% vig for easy reporting purposes.
I was waiting for stupid comments like these, and they arrived just as expected: straight from outer space.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzA couple of notes:Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmOmitting the expenses, better known as creative accounting, will not give the true bottom line.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
1) In "Rob's" favor, the results from 40 or 50 games don't really mean much of anything. You can get a sense of style and what he's trying to accomplish, but as to whether he win or loses -- not really.
2) You miss an additional advantage of "Rob" including expenses that he's paying someone to put his bets in. "Rob" therefore has no tickets in his possession. You know, just in case someone asked for him to post pictures of the tickets and such. Now nobody is going to ask that because the amounts being wagered are relatively modest. Right?
3) Ahem. Do you remember when I mentioned that certain formal rules were put in place to hinder some of Billy Walters' actions? Did anybody ever figure out some of those rules? Because the NGC would not be happy with what Rob posted here. They really wouldn't care, because the wagers are modest, but they wouldn't be happy.
Obviously, regarding #2 and #3 above, I have sat on these for awhile. It's the Christmas spirit. Now, does anyone really think "Rob" made these wagers?
I could easily ask for pics of the tickets from the guy who gets them and put them up each week, but just as with you and Dan and anyone else who bets sports whether online or not, nobody else does it because it ain't worth doing. Besides, the next peeling down of the silly onion will be "well Argentino, how do we know these were purchased with YOUR money, you know, given you're homeless and all...."
Trust me.
Who says anyone believes that you are buying these tickets. Maybe your talking bolivars instead of USD. Plus your expenses in relation to your so called edge are too high.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerI was waiting for stupid comments like these, and they arrived just as expected: straight from outer space.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzA couple of notes:Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
1) In "Rob's" favor, the results from 40 or 50 games don't really mean much of anything. You can get a sense of style and what he's trying to accomplish, but as to whether he win or loses -- not really.
2) You miss an additional advantage of "Rob" including expenses that he's paying someone to put his bets in. "Rob" therefore has no tickets in his possession. You know, just in case someone asked for him to post pictures of the tickets and such. Now nobody is going to ask that because the amounts being wagered are relatively modest. Right?
3) Ahem. Do you remember when I mentioned that certain formal rules were put in place to hinder some of Billy Walters' actions? Did anybody ever figure out some of those rules? Because the NGC would not be happy with what Rob posted here. They really wouldn't care, because the wagers are modest, but they wouldn't be happy.
Obviously, regarding #2 and #3 above, I have sat on these for awhile. It's the Christmas spirit. Now, does anyone really think "Rob" made these wagers?
I could easily ask for pics of the tickets from the guy who gets them and put them up each week, but just as with you and Dan and anyone else who bets sports whether online or not, nobody else does it because it ain't worth doing. Besides, the next peeling down of the silly onion will be "well Argentino, how do we know these were purchased with YOUR money, you know, given you're homeless and all...."
Trust me.
Who says I learn nothing here? I now know what a bolivar is.
Nobody can realistically assign an edge to a game of opinion. It doesn't matter if you have made 12% annually for 30 years, as certain handicappers might have done. It really shouldn't be used as a projection of anything. Personnel changes, rules change, you change. Nothing even approaches permanence. It's not really a math equation.
All one can say is, "historically, this is what's happened." You really should not say, "I have such and such an edge." Saying something like that is not logically permissible for a game of opinion, and it doesn't just smack of hubris, it trumpets hubris.
How absolutely ridiculous that you're challenging Rob about whether or not he made bets that lost. If you're going to challenge him, at least challenge bets that won.
You people never cease to amaze me.
Alan, you should probably stick to stuff where you have some small idea of what you're talking about.
1) First of all, whether he's actually making bets is irrelevant towards his alleged expertise. Makes no difference. He could be betting pennies. It doesn't matter. If he wins, he wins. If he loses, he loses.
2) I just happen to think it's all likely make believe. I'm pointing out the convenience of having someone else put wagers in for him as a means of sidestepping the question.
3) You keep the tickets for losing wagers. So you should have easy access to posting photos of losers. Not even the nominal step of taking photos of all tickets is required.
Asking whether someone is lying about every aspect of what they are doing is completely separate from evaluating whether they can handicap football games or not. One would think that a consumer reporter would notice this.
What edge? Singer has never...not once shown how he plays with any edge. Not by REAL mathematics. Only by Singer alternative math. And only in Singer's fantasy world.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
Everything, and I mean everything he says and claims he does contradicts sound mathematical principals.
Really? You're going to make an issue whether or not he made losing bets?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I couldn't find the sarcasm emoji.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJWhat edge? Singer has never...not once shown how he plays with any edge. Not by REAL mathematics. Only by Singer alternative math. And only in Singer's fantasy world.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
Everything, and I mean everything he says and claims he does contradicts sound mathematical principals.
I wouldn't charge a friend for making wagers for them. I might however take a small piece of the winnings. Here in Rhode Island we just legalized sports betting so if anyone wants to place a bet...
Okay. Sounds good. Put some pics of the tickets up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
He didn't charge me. I offered the fee up front. Just like when I graced Gaming Today with my column for nearly 8 years. They wanted to pay me more than what they paid Dancer and that loser Skip Hughes combined. I demanded I do it for free.Quote:
Originally Posted by quahaug
As soon as you do Mickey. After all, you claim to make sports bets also. Let's see some net worth here Mickey :)Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmOkay. Sounds good. Put some pics of the tickets up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer