GETT1NLOTS
-
Posts
4,417 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by GETT1NLOTS
-
-
Re: Odds - 3 questions to answer if you dont mind? Thanks for taking the time to reply. Ok; I'll go with my Bankers versus Stats thread then. I'll Private message you to confirm the full details. I will post the 4 out of 6 system though for my interest if thats ok? I think over a (virtually) full season 'luck' will be evened out - although I take your point entirely. Cheers.
-
Hi Odds, I would like to enter the systems league. (I have read the rules but need to clarify a few things - sorry). 1) Do I have to start the thread and let you know (and how do I do that?) that I want that thread entered into the league? 2) You say only 'single bets' will be accepted. I am considering a system that utilises fourfolds from 6 selections. Is this ok? 3) You say the applicant might need to send you a private message to explain the system. Do you mean an e-mail? If not how do I get in touch without posting my questions like this and bothering everyone else? Cheers.
-
Re: Bankers versus Stats Thanks Oddsfellow.
-
Re: Bankers versus Stats BTW I didn't have Everton last week - I had them the week before against Fulham! I had Sheffield Utd to win this week (they obliged with an 87th minute winner - phew!)
-
Re: Bankers versus Stats You're quite correct that I do take value into consideration. And you are right again when you say that I would not have a banker at 1.2. It has to be a game that I see a clear winner in BUT not at stupidly prohibative odds. If the banker isn't at least 1.66 then I wouldn't back it as I know I will get the occasional one wrong and need my correct selections to make enough profit to cover the odd wrong pick... On the subject of the 'Professional Gambler' you refer to - is that a book, a website or....? Please let me know. Thanks.
-
Re: Bankers versus Stats Agreed and Thanx. I will add the exact nature of the staking plan that will go alongside the bankers later in the week when I evaluate my bank and the realities of what I would need the weekly wage to be - taking into account the inevitability of the occasional loss.
-
Re: Bankers versus Stats West, by the way, You're right. The BANKER is often picked on a PART instinctive intuition - not only price. Is this to do with price, value, form, know-how, team selections or a combination of all - I don't know? I put it down to the LOVE of the game that i would follow ANYWAY and this knowledge MIGHT lead me to know better than the bookie sometimes??? Dunno???????
-
Re: Bankers versus Stats West, You mention a number of points I appreciate greatly. Firstly I agree, the 'joo joo', is something I worry about because AS YOU SAY I believe knowing that my picks are going to be posted in the future MIGHT effect the selection of the BANKER. Having said that.... I am going to post the banker anyway: - Because if I don't I know people (including me somehow) will doubt the validity of the BANKER, ONE BET ONLY system. Thanks for your input. Wish me 'luck'???? :|
-
Re: Bankers versus Stats Joe Sshmooo. I aint scared of that statistical playground bully. ;) Come on Joe! Tell me why I'm as 'mad as a box of frogs' then??? :D
-
Re: Bankers versus Stats On a seperate point.... Is there any reason why you cannot edit your posts in this thread / section?
-
Re: Bankers versus Stats BCrazy, I see your point. To be fair it's not a 'shock' as you put it but I suppose the stats speak for themselves. If I state that 75% of my bankers should be right then obviously 25% will be wrong (assuming I don't back the draw to cover the win stake). This meansd that of course the 25% could come in a run of 4 in a row. So 'thanks' that helps with the Martingdale'esk' part I tagged on to the end. Still, I maintain though that even with 75% correct, if I keep the bets the same - I will make a healthy profit. ;) p.s. I expected a more vitriolic attack from you lot than this! :D
-
Re: Bankers versus Stats Odds I have added a bit more detail since your reply so actually I think it is more like 10 to 12 selections on the trot rather than 18... but that is working on memory... although I am clear the bankers have not gone down once. I know that your response (as any sane person would say) would be "Ok - post them". That's fair enough and although I believe it might be bad 'joo joo' :lol (you know the gambling Gods and all that) I think that's what I will do starting next week. Assuming I pick a banker (very rarely I cant see one). I would still like debates and comments from others as I can't be the first to have believed in himself to this extent surely???.
-
Re: Bankers versus Stats Sorry I need to add another couple of things. (It won't let me edit?) I don't back draws as the main BANKER bet EVER because if you think a game is so close it will end in a draw then defacto you are saying that the game could go either way surely? What's the sense backing a game like that? Backing a draw to COVER a BANKER might make sense to cover what you might consider the 'luck factor' against your selection - depending on the value of the odds. Also I accept that whilst, as I have said honestly, in the last six months my bankers have come in (including the mid season break so probably only 10 -12 weeks in all) I accept that no-one can get them right 100% of the time. That would be ridiculous. But I believe that I can get my BANKER right over 75% of the time and considering I back teams between 1.66 (min) to 2.8 range normally as my banker (I do not and would NEVER back teams at 1.12 like Man Utd, Celtic, Rangers) I should turn a really good profit. The next bit (akin to a Martindale staking plan I might or might not add. mI need to think more about the following.) I have a healthy bank (for me anyway) and I believe that if a BANKER went down one week I would increase my bet the next week to regin my losses AND the money I had expected to win (my lost wages from the previous week!!! :lol ). I think based on my bank AND my needed weekly 'wage' I could do this for a maximum of 4 weeks. I refuse to believe that I would get 4 BANKERS wrong in any streak - ever. Right.... that should get us arguing. ;)
-
Ok.. I'm going to break a forum rule here (to a degree) by discussing past bets that have been posted.... but not as 'Naps' or Bankers. Every week since I got back into betting about 6 months ago (about when I found this site actually) I have looked through the football coupon and (as most of us do?) thought "That's my banker". And every week, And HONESTLY, Every week that Banker has won. (This week it was Sheff Utd, last week it was Everton etc) Now this has got me thinking.... well re-thinking actually. When I joined this forum a few months ago I came here thinking that you could pick one team a week, place a BIG bet and IF you had a sound knowledge of football - not because you studied - just because you loved the game - you could turn a profit. HOWEVER My head soon got turned with talk of Value, Yields, Stats and other such things. (Actually I agree with Value analysing). Anyway as a result of these new ideas (to me anyway) I tried a 'Draw' betting system based on the odds of a home team and other such nonsenses believing that my original thoughts of staying away from the ONE BIG BET PER WEEK THEORY had been erroneous. (Incidentally, rightly or wrongly I had always believed in this theory prior to coming on the forum because that's what I thought PROFESSIONAL GAMBLERS did - still don't know if that's true or not?). As a result of trying stat analysis, staking plans, yield 'proofed' ideas etc I broke even or lost a bit. But my BANKERS came in every week. So (getting ready for major abuse here) I have had to come out and speak my mind. :| I think it is possible to win at football betting based on placing one big bet as and when you feel a team is a BANKER. Now you might cover with a Draw as well to break even (all depending on the value offered) however 90 - 95% of the time just a straight win. You AVOID accys, trebles, doubles. You avoid backing a team just because a statistical yield plan thingybob says so. You avoid even backing a team because they represent value (like Birmingham yesterday that I honestly thought might get something with Bellamy and Woodgate out.) You just back your banker, based on football knowledge, gut feeling, form and team information because betting in ANY other way is the bookmakers DREAM. You see, I believe that most of us get the majority of our 'calls' right. Just read through the 'tips' threads. It's that we ruin our bets with that ONE extra selection that goes on the end. And all the while... the BANKER rolls in... laughing at you. :lol Your thoughts please. Feel free to be BRUTAL. :p
-
Re: photos/images. Nah, this one is better.
-
Re: photos/images. Just checking if the photo works....
-
Saturday 1st March 2003 I know I'm the only one still interested in this but I'm gonna keep plugging away.... :eek FIRST YANKEE West Ham v Tottenham @ 21/10 Grimsby v Coventry @ 11/5 Millwall v Portsmouth @ 11/5 Sheff Weds v Preston @ 21/10 SECOND YANKEE Watford v Notts Forest @ 11/5 Brentford v Tranmere @ 11/5 Notts County v Luton @ 21/10 Swindon v QPR @ 11/5 All the above are 1 unit yankees as normal. Starting Bank 100 units Total Wagered 111 units Total Returns 20.12 units :o Current Bank 9.12 units :o
-
Worst Strat Ever????? Wish it would end. I expected losing streaks but thought the odd yankee could more than make up for it.... Ahhh the naivity of inexperience..... :lol FIRST YANKEE Leeds v Newcastle @ 9/4 = 0-3 :( Sunderland v Middlesborough @ 21/10 = 1-3 :( Brighton v Millwall @ 21/10 = 1-0 :( Preston v Wolves @ 21/10 = 0-2 :( Return = 0 units SECOND YANKEE Walsall v Watford @ 21/10 = 2-0 :( Cheltenham v Colchester @ 11/5 = 1-1 :D Northampton v Bristol City @ 9/4 = 1-2 :( Port Vale v Swindon @ 21/10 = 1-1 :D Return = 9.92 units Starting Bank 100 units Total Wagered 89 units Current Bank 31.12 units :x
-
Re: Double Result Yankee System Hi Mr Intensity - I am trying a similar system based on draws in this same section (TITLED - "BETTING ON DRAWS"). It isn't going that well to be honest however your selection criteria (although based on odds like mine) is different in other ways. I wish you luck. :D
-
Saturday 22nd Feb FIRST YANKEE Leeds v Newcastle @ 9/4 Sunderland v Middlesborough @ 21/10 Brighton v Millwall @ 21/10 Preston v Wolves @ 21/10 SECOND YANKEE Walsall v Watford @ 21/10 Cheltenham v Colchester @ 11/5 Northampton v Bristol City @ 9/4 Port Vale v Swindon @ 21/10 Starting Bank 100 units Total Wagered 89 units Current Bank 21.2 units :eek If I can get one of these yankees to produce 3 winners I wont be far of breaking even. The occasional 3 winners in every few yankees WAS the original idea after all.... :rolleyes 'IF'................. :\
-
Re: hmm Osesame the bets are made based on the teams being 0.5 within each other for a win. Thanks for the stats 'West'. Seems blindly betting on close odds teams for a draw proves statistically unfeasable. I will probably perservere and see if I get major lucky just coz I said I would until the units run out. (If it did get lucky and I didn't do it before the 100 units ran out I would be sick. :x ) If I ever get back to 100 units I will take the money and run :D
-
Re: some comments Bad Luck Whopper - Keep going. As for the comments made by Irish I have to say that I do not agree with him at all. :b Whopper is posting his picks UP FRONT so if it is as good a system as we all hope it will be then what is MEAN about telling you his tips before the game starts? :rolleyes Put your money on if you want to. :D As for the lego collecting thing well it's got to be healthier than my growing obsessions with porn and / or Tommos post about Prague (see General Chat) ...... :lol :lol
-
Re: Latest Picks based on close odds RESULTS FIRST YANKEE Notts Co v Bristol C @ 21/10 = 2-0 :( Crewe v Wigan @ 11/5 = Postponed :| Stockport v Oldham @ 11/5 =1-2 :( Bristol R v Bournemouth @ 21/10 = 0-0 :D = 3.1 unit return SECOND YANKEE Swansea v Cambridge @ 11/15 = 2-0 :( Northwich v Hereford @ 9/4 = 2-2 :D Nuneaton v Dag & Red @ 11/5 = 1-3 :( Scarborough v Halifax @ 11/5 = 0-1 :( = 0 unit return THIRD YANKEE Ross County v Queen of the South @ 12/5 =Postponed :| St Johston v Inverness @ 23/10 = 2-0 :( Aidrie Utd v Berwick @ 12/5 Postponed :| Cowdenbeath v Dumbarton @ 21/10 Postponed :| = 4 unit return Starting Bank 100 units Total Wagered 67 units Current Bank 43.2 units Lots of postponed games making the whole strat a bit pointless. Mind you I was 5 minutes away from St Johnstone drawing and effectively breaking me even. Another 'bad beat' story as us poker players say.... :x I'm gonna stick with it but to be honest I'm losing faith. Seems the bookies might think these games are close but they are ending in a 'result' more often than a draw...
-
Latest Picks based on close odds No one can call me a quitter :lol :lol All below (as before) are 1 unit yankees. FIRST YANKEE Notts Co v Bristol C @ 21/10 Crewe v Wigan @ 11/5 Stockport v Oldham @ 11/5 Bristol R v Bournemouth @ 21/10 SECOND YANKEE Swansea v Cambridge @ 11/15 Northwich v Hereford @ 9/4 Nuneaton v Dag & Red @ 11/5 Scarborough v Halifax @ 11/5 THIRD YANKEE Ross County v Queen of the South @ 12/5 St Johston v Inverness @ 23/10 Aidrie Utd v Berwick @ 12/5 Cowdenbeath v Dumbarton @ 21/10 Starting Bank 100 units Total Wagered 67 units Current Bank 36.1 units
Odds - 3 questions to answer if you dont mind?
in Betting Systems & Strategy
Posted
Re: Odds - 3 questions to answer if you dont mind? Odds, If you re-read the first post on my 'Bankers versus Stats' thread you will see the most 'un-short' description ever!!! :lol :lol :lol v I am sure the 'joo joo' will kill the system after all I have posted!!! Thanks for allowing me to post my 4 from 6 system although I accept the reasons why it is NOT allowed into the league. On the reasons for doubles being allowed etc I also take your point. Give people an inch....... :D