The Marc I can't pick a winner thread

[dogpick]

FrankB:

Now your logic makes no sense. You admit that he picks 55% winners, but you cringe when he is on the same side of you and would not play his picks if they were free (which they are--right here). That is completely illogical because he obviously wins over the long haul if he picks 55% winners. Do you honestly think any service hits 55% winners over the long term such as more than a few months? I doubt it. From everything I have seen or read, 55 percent over the long term is solid and I would never be dissatisfied with that. When I look at monitors I rarely see any service that hits much better than that over the course of just one season (which I would consider the short term) let alone over the course of a whole year in all sports.

[friday]

wallstreet

any idea how blazer is doing this year with his bb selections? he's not listed in the sports monitor. where do you get your records? another one that I'd like to know about is sycamore. he's usually deadly in that conference with indiana st, ill st. etc...

[dogpick]

Friday:

I read on another site that Sycamore and Blazer run what was termed the "Football Betting Guide" scam. They publish a magazine every year called the "Football Betting Guide" that rates several services, but they always rate themselves number one and two. Apparently they charge other services for a top ten ranking in the magazine. The article I read also said that both of those services run some kind of consensus service where they sell the picks of legitimate cappers for less money than what you would have to pay to that capper if you just signed up with the capper.

I think I have seen the Football Betting Guide around, but I have never really looked at it.

[frankb03]

I believe there are many players who win long term in excess of 60%.

I agree. There are very few services, if any, that win in excess of 55% long term.

I know I can pick in excess of 55%. I'll stick with my selections and use the money I'm saving not paying a service towards my wagers. Guess what? I win more because I have more to play with. When I lose a play I lose once. Not twice!

To purchase Marc's NBA selection for tonight game it'll cost you $25. A $100 player can't justify spending 25% of his bet on the selection. A $500 play is spending 5% on the selection. You'd have to hit around 54% to cover the expense of the service leaving 1% winning assuming he wins 55%. Why would someone pay 5% for a service with a 1% return? If you truly think that's a good invest well..................

I'll put it this way. It's your money. I would never tell you what to do with your money. The intentions of this thread is to make the new members here more aware that paying these services is not an easy get rich scheme.

[dogpick]

FrankB:

I agree with you on the point that you would not make much money. Nevertheless, as my final point I would say that it is better to make money than to lose it, which I believe is the fate of most sports gamblers. You could do alot worse than following Marc Lawrence if he actually hits 55%, which I don't know if that is even possible over the long haul. I know Marc Lawrence's service is not the best investment in the world, but most of the time gambling is inherently a horrible investment.

If you hit 60%, could you post your plays in a thread so we could all follow?

[dogpick]

FrankB:

Sorry, I mean if you hit 55% (not 60%), could you post your plays so we could follow?

[dogpick]

FrankB:

I do see one discrepancy in your reasoning. I think Marc Lawrence does a pay after you win program. Thus, you don't have to pay the $ 25 if you lose. Therefore you would do a little better than your numbers show.

[frankb03]

I didn't say I hit better than 60%. I said I hit over 55%. I do post plays. I haven't posted this week. I've been too busy to handicap effectively.

My posted NBA selections:

ATS 18-10 64.3%
OU 2-4 33.3%
Total 20-14 58.8%

I'm leaning towards Denver tonight.

[dogpick]

FrankB:

Does that mean that people that want to follow you for the 55%should play Denver, or will you say for sure later?

[Ripped71]

dogpick

You state that Loser Lawrence has a pay after you win program. Do you really think that someone who drops $500+ on a selection that Marc gives out will feel comfort in the fact that he doesn't have to pay the $25 for the pick!!

Take a look at the Oklahoma sports monitor and ask yourself the question why Marc's college football record is not posted for 2002 and 2003! It's not posted b/c he sucks!

Just a thought.

[frankb03]

True! If its a guaranteed selection you don't pay. If you join his service the selections aren't guaranteed. However, you won't pay $25 a selection either.

I do have a HUGE problem with the guaranteed selection from the websites. They can put out any game hoping for a winner. With the websites they receive maximum exposure. If they lose there's another sucker who will click on his site tomorrow. Also, have you ever noticed how many sites Marc sells his picks?

IMO I truly don't believe Marc plays his own selections.

[frankb03]

Ripped71

Very good point! As a stated in a post earlier. I doubt any client would remain satisfied with 55%. I know I wouldn't!

Dog, I pose the question to you. Would you be a satisfied client with 55%? Would you be a satisfied client knowing the reasoning behind his picks. I know I wouldn't.

[dogpick]

Ripped:

You are right, but my point regarding the pay after you win program was only to be used in the contest of the 55% argument. Obviously you will be pissed any time you follow somebody and lose $ 500. The only point was that you could pay for the service and still make money if he actually hit at 55%, which I even doubt that he does consistently. Go to any monitor and find a service that hit 55% in all sports for all of 2003. I doubt there are more than a handful if that.

Frank: Is Denver one of your 55% plays for tonight?

[frankb03]

dog

You don't think he's misleading his customers when his reasoning is such:

Mizz Tigers play with revenge knowing they are 93-13 SU at home vs non conference opposition. With Syracuse playing their 1st road game of the season, look the Orangemen to drop to 2-31 ATS in games they lose SU against revenging foes.

As I stated in an earlier post. OK Mizz is 93-13. Gamblers don't bet SU. In those 106 games what's the ATS. I'm willing to bet is 50/50 or close to it.

His selection tonight is being marketed as such:

Marc Lawrence shares a 100% perfect pointspread Super Pick Super Play Friday night in the NBA.

Gamblers who don't follow his selections would think they are getting a sure winner. I'm certain everynight he's gaining customers who've never placed one wager on a single game based on that get rich scheme.

[dogpick]

Frank:

To answer your question, yes I would be happy if I played all year and ended up in the positive after paying for the service. If you subsribed to Marc Lawrence for a whole season and he hit 55% then I don't think you have much room to complain. I mean, how many people actually win? I don't think all these internet sportsbooks keep going because people are consistently winning. I also doubt he plays his own games because he really would not have much reason to do so if people bought the selections and he could profit without risk to him.

If he hit 55% and I was a subsriber that lost, I either should not have subsribed to an expensive service because I did not bet big enough amounts to make up the cost of the service, or I did not properly manage my bankroll.