Tweet
My interest in handicapping began in high school when someone was passing around parlay sheets in class during the 1981 season. During the Summer of 1982 I bought mags and stuff and began research.
A couple of systems that I read about that peaked my interest at the time was how teams did after scoring 30 points back to back, and how they did after allowing 10 or less back to back.
I read about these, and other angles, in mags by Jim Fiest, Gary Austin, and Ed "the Professor" Horowitz, among others.
Naturally, I was curious to know how teams did after doing BOTH of these angles back to back. The key thing with me is that it made sense to go against them in this role.
I found some favorable results, including the Chargers, as 4-pt dogs on Monday night football, complete beat down of the Steelers, 35-7. So in 1983 I began using it. The double 30-10 was always my biggest play of the season. Whatever amount I could afford to lose, that was the amount I would bet. I have won every time since then, with the exception of last year's Washington-Baltimore game, and I think one other game that involved the Chargers. This is the first year I have not bet on it, and it is 3-0. I had no action this season.
Somewhere down the road I noticed is performed significantly better in non-division games, so I "passed" on division games and incorporated the "tightener" into the criteria. I also broadened the criteria to 30-12 at some point, allowing for a safety and incorporating the 2-pt conversion rule, which opens the possibility of a team scoring 11.
In 1989, I published the system in a magazine to promote my service at the time. I received a call from another service, and the guy cussed me out for publishing it. He told me, "this kinda' stuff is for us!". I said, "Who's us"? He hung up.
I was out of handicapping for a awhile, and then in 1998 I learned to use a computer and began capping again. I posted the picks and the system at another forum. There was a time when, along with the pick, I would actually post a plea: Please do not go against this system. Go with it, or pass the game. There was also a time when, every time I posted it, I would get this response: "You should not have posted it. It's cursed now and it will go to sh*t.".
But I've been posting/publishing it publicly for 21 seasons, and it's still winning, despite all the well-reasoned and logical analysis that begs the other side. I have always said about this system: When it comes up, throw EVERYTHING else out the window. EVERYTHING. Even key injuries.
No one thought Arizona had a shot in 2006 against the mighty Bears of that season, since a rookie QB was starting for the Cards on Monday night. But the system did as expected, when the Bears came crashing down to reality for an easy point spread winner with the Cardinals.
We saw the Packers come crashing down last week, trailing at one time 31-10 in a game in which the entire planet was on Green Bay, moving the line from +2.5 to -3.0.
So, my guess is that the Vikes come crashing down in the Big Easy Sunday night against a Saints team that is back on track and whose opportunistic defense is finally healthy again.
SAINTS -4.0
gl,
dave
A couple of systems that I read about that peaked my interest at the time was how teams did after scoring 30 points back to back, and how they did after allowing 10 or less back to back.
I read about these, and other angles, in mags by Jim Fiest, Gary Austin, and Ed "the Professor" Horowitz, among others.
Naturally, I was curious to know how teams did after doing BOTH of these angles back to back. The key thing with me is that it made sense to go against them in this role.
I found some favorable results, including the Chargers, as 4-pt dogs on Monday night football, complete beat down of the Steelers, 35-7. So in 1983 I began using it. The double 30-10 was always my biggest play of the season. Whatever amount I could afford to lose, that was the amount I would bet. I have won every time since then, with the exception of last year's Washington-Baltimore game, and I think one other game that involved the Chargers. This is the first year I have not bet on it, and it is 3-0. I had no action this season.
Somewhere down the road I noticed is performed significantly better in non-division games, so I "passed" on division games and incorporated the "tightener" into the criteria. I also broadened the criteria to 30-12 at some point, allowing for a safety and incorporating the 2-pt conversion rule, which opens the possibility of a team scoring 11.
In 1989, I published the system in a magazine to promote my service at the time. I received a call from another service, and the guy cussed me out for publishing it. He told me, "this kinda' stuff is for us!". I said, "Who's us"? He hung up.
I was out of handicapping for a awhile, and then in 1998 I learned to use a computer and began capping again. I posted the picks and the system at another forum. There was a time when, along with the pick, I would actually post a plea: Please do not go against this system. Go with it, or pass the game. There was also a time when, every time I posted it, I would get this response: "You should not have posted it. It's cursed now and it will go to sh*t.".
But I've been posting/publishing it publicly for 21 seasons, and it's still winning, despite all the well-reasoned and logical analysis that begs the other side. I have always said about this system: When it comes up, throw EVERYTHING else out the window. EVERYTHING. Even key injuries.
No one thought Arizona had a shot in 2006 against the mighty Bears of that season, since a rookie QB was starting for the Cards on Monday night. But the system did as expected, when the Bears came crashing down to reality for an easy point spread winner with the Cardinals.
We saw the Packers come crashing down last week, trailing at one time 31-10 in a game in which the entire planet was on Green Bay, moving the line from +2.5 to -3.0.
So, my guess is that the Vikes come crashing down in the Big Easy Sunday night against a Saints team that is back on track and whose opportunistic defense is finally healthy again.
SAINTS -4.0
gl,
dave
BOL Dave. Thanx as always for your insights.
Comment