absolutely not.
I've never spent more than a half hour researching a single game.. for baseball I look at the starters last 3 starts, if they have pitched against the team this year and how they did, and I look at the line ups and go with what my gut tells me. football.. no research other than looking for injuries.. i see a number and I react. no reaction=no play.
end of story.
I've never spent more than a half hour researching a single game.. for baseball I look at the starters last 3 starts, if they have pitched against the team this year and how they did, and I look at the line ups and go with what my gut tells me. football.. no research other than looking for injuries.. i see a number and I react. no reaction=no play.
end of story.
And how successful are you over 5 years with such methods? I suppose its possible to be a small winner with lots of shopping, but I can't see you being as effective as someone who does a lot of research. A war room isn't necessary, but more than a cursory look at the games generally is. I would say about 20 hours a week minimum is needed to be a pretty solid handicapper and the guys that put in the 50-70 hours a week are generally winning quite a lot of units and if they have done it over the years their bankrolls are probably fairly sizable.
I've been gambling for 5 years.. what is small to you may not be small to me. I'm a 250-500$ per play player.. sometimes a dime if I'm hot. I really couldnt tell you an exact figure, but you can go on this.. I have paid my car payment/rent and all other bills for the last year strictly from gambling winnings
Well then keep it up Mr. K. Whatever works is what people need to do, just that the very best the ones that make big money have the "war room" mentality. Thing is some people could try it and screw everything up, they could be decent casual handicappers and then decide to get serious about it and then they fail.
Trends are useful in some situations , but in my opinion, not always.Teams just change too much from year~to~year now~a~days to rely on them too often. Perfect example was Tamp-Miami Friday night. Someone posted that the Under was 7-0 in last meetings vs. the 2 (preseason I believe) BUT...... You have to take into consideration that Gruden wasn't head coach all of those previous years either, which makes a huge difference offensively. Simply put, treds are overrated. If you flip a quarter and it lands on heads 7 times in a row, are you going to use that as you "leverage", like a trend, and bet on heads next time?!
Plays I have made in the last few seasons took on different forms. Sometimes it would take only a minute of work, sometimes up to an hour of work. There are also plays I might think about for a couple of days if there is time to see how lines move, etc.
But I speak from experience when I say that plays won just from a quick gut instinct (i,e, - saying to myself 'if the line is XX, I take it!) were just as common as plays won with lots of research behind them.
But I speak from experience when I say that plays won just from a quick gut instinct (i,e, - saying to myself 'if the line is XX, I take it!) were just as common as plays won with lots of research behind them.
