I DIDNT RIGHT THIS IT WAS A POSTER BY THE NAME OF ARIZONA BOUND. (THANKS FOR INFO)
I stop in at the RX on occassion, primarily to see what the touts are heavily favoring so I can either go against or jump off a play that there is a heavy consensus on. I decided to back date the tout consensus (started this about 2 weeks ago a little each day) and found that fading the touts heavy consensus can be very profittable. NO explanation as to why it works out but these numbers do not lie:
Fading strong consensus of touts in MLB since day 1 has produced approximately 90 winners and 77 losers (54%). 54% is good but not great. However, peel the onion a little further:
Of the 167 games all but 13 were DOGS. The 13 favs never had a juice over -120 and average less than -110.
The 90W and 77L equate to nearly $2600 profit if betting $100 per game
If you adjust the record based on a standard of -110 juice vs the profit you will see that the record is at 60% equivalent. I will also note that I rounded DOWN on every play so that this is a LOW estimate. Realistically you could have profitted at least 10cents extra on each of the 90 winners which would have netted more like $3500 or 62% equivalent.
Let me qualify this by saying my definition of a heavy consensus is based on
1. At least 2:1 touts on one side
2. Must be at least a 5 tout difference (8-4 is double but not more than 5 so does not qualify, but 8-3 does)
3. No more than 5 touts on the other side even if rule 1 and 2 apply. So 13-6 would not qualify under the 3rd criteria although it does pass the first two.
These were guidelines I attempted to follow. I ignored who the touts were and what their track record was, hell I don't know who more than a few are anyway.
I decided to do this for a couple reasons:
1. Noticed at another site that people were fading a heavy wagerline consensus with success....so why not the touts
2. Seemed everytime there was a lot of "touting" for a play it ended up losing.
3. My own curiousity and thought it might be a tool to help me make a final decision on a play. I can say it has saved me money by being armed with this information.
One last thing, there were a few days where the information was not available (the site I pulled the info did not do the tally and I did not take the time to do one myself), but I can tell you it is VERY accurate and a solid snapshot and a large enough sample to make some conclusions.
Sorry to take up so much space but I thought it was info worth sharing.
Best of luck with you plays RX
THE PLAYS TONIGHT WENT 4-0. THIS IS YOUR CLASSIC FADE BUT HE HAS PUT RULES TO IT WHICH MAKE ALOT OF SENSE. I AM GOING TO TRACK THIS FOR A MINUTE AND SEE HOW IT WORKS. IT ACTAULLY KEPT ME OFF OF TORONTO, PLAYED HOUSTON AND FLORIDA. LAA WON AND MIL WON. JUST PASSING THIS INFO IF ANYBODY DIDNT CATCH IT IN THE SERVICE THREAD.<!-- / message -->
I stop in at the RX on occassion, primarily to see what the touts are heavily favoring so I can either go against or jump off a play that there is a heavy consensus on. I decided to back date the tout consensus (started this about 2 weeks ago a little each day) and found that fading the touts heavy consensus can be very profittable. NO explanation as to why it works out but these numbers do not lie:
Fading strong consensus of touts in MLB since day 1 has produced approximately 90 winners and 77 losers (54%). 54% is good but not great. However, peel the onion a little further:
Of the 167 games all but 13 were DOGS. The 13 favs never had a juice over -120 and average less than -110.
The 90W and 77L equate to nearly $2600 profit if betting $100 per game
If you adjust the record based on a standard of -110 juice vs the profit you will see that the record is at 60% equivalent. I will also note that I rounded DOWN on every play so that this is a LOW estimate. Realistically you could have profitted at least 10cents extra on each of the 90 winners which would have netted more like $3500 or 62% equivalent.
Let me qualify this by saying my definition of a heavy consensus is based on
1. At least 2:1 touts on one side
2. Must be at least a 5 tout difference (8-4 is double but not more than 5 so does not qualify, but 8-3 does)
3. No more than 5 touts on the other side even if rule 1 and 2 apply. So 13-6 would not qualify under the 3rd criteria although it does pass the first two.
These were guidelines I attempted to follow. I ignored who the touts were and what their track record was, hell I don't know who more than a few are anyway.
I decided to do this for a couple reasons:
1. Noticed at another site that people were fading a heavy wagerline consensus with success....so why not the touts
2. Seemed everytime there was a lot of "touting" for a play it ended up losing.
3. My own curiousity and thought it might be a tool to help me make a final decision on a play. I can say it has saved me money by being armed with this information.
One last thing, there were a few days where the information was not available (the site I pulled the info did not do the tally and I did not take the time to do one myself), but I can tell you it is VERY accurate and a solid snapshot and a large enough sample to make some conclusions.
Sorry to take up so much space but I thought it was info worth sharing.
Best of luck with you plays RX
THE PLAYS TONIGHT WENT 4-0. THIS IS YOUR CLASSIC FADE BUT HE HAS PUT RULES TO IT WHICH MAKE ALOT OF SENSE. I AM GOING TO TRACK THIS FOR A MINUTE AND SEE HOW IT WORKS. IT ACTAULLY KEPT ME OFF OF TORONTO, PLAYED HOUSTON AND FLORIDA. LAA WON AND MIL WON. JUST PASSING THIS INFO IF ANYBODY DIDNT CATCH IT IN THE SERVICE THREAD.<!-- / message -->
