Joeflex, if any remember him from last baseball season, is a guy who
seeks out cappers to follow who have documented winning records
over a period of several years. He was simply presenting the facts
he had obtained to date on one of these. Last year he was inquiring
into Choptalks MLB capping career.
"Who cares TN. You get this because you are a good capper and like to share your thoughts. Did it ever occur to anybody that these idiots are from other sites, ghosting, even maybe someone hired because they want the GOOD cappers to get fed up and leave.
Who wins in that scenario? Noone but the basher."
I'm not sure why this is a bashing thread. For those who think they can just piggyback on Tomorrow's Newspaper and win as his record indicates, they can not. I wish it were the case that they could too.
Joeflex
Who wins in that scenario? Noone but the basher."
I'm not sure why this is a bashing thread. For those who think they can just piggyback on Tomorrow's Newspaper and win as his record indicates, they can not. I wish it were the case that they could too.
Joeflex
I guessed that is if a Tomorrow's Newspaper follower did no shopping and just grabbed the standard Pinny or Betjam line at the time Tomorrow's News posted (before this year) he would hit lets say 4 cents worse on average. So yes, I think for every 25 bets you would cost yourself a unit (I think that works out). And even in that scenario, as I pointed out, you're hitting over 53%. Now add in some shopping, get some bonuses and you'll do better than 53% and get closer to TN. Some days some can do it, some days others can do it. And its a great free service to have for everyone.
But the key is this year. I looked at a few days of this season and all TN's picks seem widely available and easy to get (and then TN reaffirmed). So someone could come in and say, "oh yeah I'm getting all of TN's lines so I'm gonna have a great year!" but this year is completely different. TN himself should expect to have a much worse year as hes getting a few cents worse per pick, so even getting the line is not what it once was. So his picks are NOT heavily shopped this year (if he has no Bodogs, Hollywoods, Intertops, etc.) and so, just guessing, he will do 4 cents worse and this should hit him at 53%.
But then there are other factors- what about that ALL his profit could be from the rogue books and he could actually be losing over the last 5 years at say Pinny? What if there are other picks on here that I'm unaware of right now in the NFL, CFB, CBB, NBA where he is hitting 50% and so baseball became his lucky sport (are there other sports?)? What about the fact that most all posters are hobbyist posters who can expect to hit 49-51%? What about the view that many consider that lines are tightening as the donkey money is no longer part of the equation? So I guessed 52%. You are all optimists, so when in Rome.....I repredict 52.5%!
Joeflex
My last response to this.
Anyone following my plays could get the same numbers as I posted. If they did not have enough outs and paid more than they should that was their choice. As Clip stated, they only paid extra 47.5% of the time (since you believe I only hit at a 52.5% clip). Did you factor in the prices into that 52%? Wouldnt it matter what the average price was more than the percentage won? I could hit at 60% and lose money if I play nothing but big favorites. That's why win/loss means nothing in baseball, its all about units.
I have actually posted plays at numbers worse than I got because at the time of the post it was no longer available, just to avoid situations like these. Guess I should care less and just post what I actually get since I am accused of doing this same thing. And as for the no shopping just use pinnacle lines, most of my plays the last couple of years were at pinnacle, and a good portion of my profits came from that book. I am hoping matchbook will fill their place in my wagering needs or it could be a long year.
oh, and for those that actually care, I had no plays today. A lean on Tampa at +145 but passed as I wanted at least +150.
Anyone following my plays could get the same numbers as I posted. If they did not have enough outs and paid more than they should that was their choice. As Clip stated, they only paid extra 47.5% of the time (since you believe I only hit at a 52.5% clip). Did you factor in the prices into that 52%? Wouldnt it matter what the average price was more than the percentage won? I could hit at 60% and lose money if I play nothing but big favorites. That's why win/loss means nothing in baseball, its all about units.
I have actually posted plays at numbers worse than I got because at the time of the post it was no longer available, just to avoid situations like these. Guess I should care less and just post what I actually get since I am accused of doing this same thing. And as for the no shopping just use pinnacle lines, most of my plays the last couple of years were at pinnacle, and a good portion of my profits came from that book. I am hoping matchbook will fill their place in my wagering needs or it could be a long year.
oh, and for those that actually care, I had no plays today. A lean on Tampa at +145 but passed as I wanted at least +150.
I'm not sure what to make of Joe Flex...it appears he put in a ton of time to do this research , not sure it's worth a hill of beans...
Joe not coming down on you but don't you think if Newspaper was constantly posting unavailable lines several people would have questioned it?
We're talking about years of selections here by one of the most well known baseball players.
Joe not coming down on you but don't you think if Newspaper was constantly posting unavailable lines several people would have questioned it?
We're talking about years of selections here by one of the most well known baseball players.
That seems to make sense. I don't know about that method though. What I did was from the units and number of plays, after converting to a pointspread sport, I just multiplied .04 by the losers. I think either way it should ballpark to around the same number. So as I had converted it to 1433-1216 I just multiplied 4 cents times 1216 to get the number of units shaved off.
If what you're saying is correct, and it sounds good, then we'd need an exact breakdown of each to get more accurate but I'm just ballparking the whole thing anyway.
Joeflex
Tomorrows Newspaper: "Anyone following my plays could get the same numbers as I posted."
Not true. The first 1 or 2 posters might have an opportunity to get the line if you did not move it. After that, everyone is getting worse. When you post Philly +133 and the Widely Available number is +124 do you think anyone can get that? When you post a Betonsports +125 and the Widely Availabe is +118, how many are going nail that?
"If they did not have enough outs and paid more than they should that was their choice. As Clip stated, they only paid extra 47.5% of the time (since you believe I only hit at a 52.5% clip). Did you factor in the prices into that 52%?"
I'm trying to address this right now, I'm not sure what type of affect this is going to have on the argument.
Joeflex
Not true. The first 1 or 2 posters might have an opportunity to get the line if you did not move it. After that, everyone is getting worse. When you post Philly +133 and the Widely Available number is +124 do you think anyone can get that? When you post a Betonsports +125 and the Widely Availabe is +118, how many are going nail that?
"If they did not have enough outs and paid more than they should that was their choice. As Clip stated, they only paid extra 47.5% of the time (since you believe I only hit at a 52.5% clip). Did you factor in the prices into that 52%?"
I'm trying to address this right now, I'm not sure what type of affect this is going to have on the argument.
Joeflex
Journeyman: "I'm not sure what to make of Joe Flex...it appears he put in a ton of time to do this research , not sure it's worth a hill of beans..."
Not worth a hill of beans? How can you say that? If I, or anyone, was considering blindly following Tomorrow's Newspaper at the current Widely Available numbers when his record is NOT based on following Widely Available Numbers then you should better know what to expect. In one case, you're making a bet expecting 54.10% and in another you're making a bet expecting 52ish%.
Joeflex
Not worth a hill of beans? How can you say that? If I, or anyone, was considering blindly following Tomorrow's Newspaper at the current Widely Available numbers when his record is NOT based on following Widely Available Numbers then you should better know what to expect. In one case, you're making a bet expecting 54.10% and in another you're making a bet expecting 52ish%.
Joeflex
If the number is available at a major sportsbook it is available to anyone. Just because every sportsbook doesnt offer it doesnt mean they cant bet it at that number. If I post bet on sports at +125, everyone can get it at that time at +125.
I guess you want me to take an average price or a mean price to give out?
This is getting a bit much for me. Sorry.
I guess you want me to take an average price or a mean price to give out?
This is getting a bit much for me. Sorry.
"I guess you want me to take an average price or a mean price to give out?"
Nothing inherently wrong with the way you did it. No I dont want you to do it that way. Flipping the argument, I suppose if you did the average price, then I could do the exact same thing I'm doing now but instead of deflating I could inflate to see how much more someone can make shopping your numbers. Two different ways.
Its just that to evaluate a record one needs to know how much shopping was done in it. Now I know. Its a great record really. Its higher than many people that I currently pay for. I think most here are disappointed that I downgraded your record to 53% because they do not realize that 53% is still a fantastic record against Widely Available Numbers. That might be your true estimate of edge going forward- 53%. I did guess 52 - 52.5% but that's just me kinda throwing numbers out in light of the fact that I have no other info besides your record. Really, what you've proven here is 53% and I know a lot of people who would pay you for that.
I'd probably need more information to figure it out better, as well as a consultation with my Censai. I'm just a workerbee.
Joeflex
Nothing inherently wrong with the way you did it. No I dont want you to do it that way. Flipping the argument, I suppose if you did the average price, then I could do the exact same thing I'm doing now but instead of deflating I could inflate to see how much more someone can make shopping your numbers. Two different ways.
Its just that to evaluate a record one needs to know how much shopping was done in it. Now I know. Its a great record really. Its higher than many people that I currently pay for. I think most here are disappointed that I downgraded your record to 53% because they do not realize that 53% is still a fantastic record against Widely Available Numbers. That might be your true estimate of edge going forward- 53%. I did guess 52 - 52.5% but that's just me kinda throwing numbers out in light of the fact that I have no other info besides your record. Really, what you've proven here is 53% and I know a lot of people who would pay you for that.
I'd probably need more information to figure it out better, as well as a consultation with my Censai. I'm just a workerbee.
Joeflex
I wouldn't be offended at what JoeFlex is saying. In fact, it's a compliment. Rx posters might not know much about him, but Joeflex has been around for a while (I know him from Sanford Wong's site).
He's simply trying to find cappers who win long term using what is known as "widely available lines." That phrase is always going to be a bit troublesome.
The fact is, to find a long-term documented winning capper is incredibly difficult, and Joeflex is on a mission to uncover them. He puts a lot of work into it, and what he does might not be for everybody, but he's a serious person and not just some kook.
He's simply trying to find cappers who win long term using what is known as "widely available lines." That phrase is always going to be a bit troublesome.
The fact is, to find a long-term documented winning capper is incredibly difficult, and Joeflex is on a mission to uncover them. He puts a lot of work into it, and what he does might not be for everybody, but he's a serious person and not just some kook.
