Is this the winning way in sports betting?

99steak · Jul 14, 2009

Fading touts and following them at only certain times? I have used many services and most of them show good results but as soon as i Join they start losing. Obviously, this means they are faking the records or just showing the hot streaks like Brandon Lang. This guy at toutbuster claims he turned things around as soon as he started fading certain touts. Below is the quite from his site toutbuster.com But again, wouldn't the pressure that he is talking about take effect even when you are using the fading method? Quite an interesting topic to discuss.

I got into sports betting about 10 years ago and my first 7 years were losing years. During the first 5 years I made my own picks and followed some tipsters on message boards--finished each of those 5 years in the negative or close to par. Then I realized that even If I managed to pick/find more winners than losers, it is still hard to make profit because of the psychology of money management. This is when I decided to join sports handicapping services to simply follow their advice so that I don't have to let my psychology affect anything. I spent the next 2 years trying numerous sports services--each of those 2 years were huge negatives--I lost more during those 2 years than what I lost in the first 5 years combined. During my first 5 years, the biggest bet I ever placed was $250. Then the next 2 years when I was trying out different sports services, I placed wagers ranging from $50 to $500.

The winning formula

Psychology of a gambler (be it handicapping a game to pick the winning side or deciding on how much to bet) almost always work against him because they always fall for the bookies trap when they are under the pressure to perform/win. Nearly 2 years after using many sports services, I realized that the above fact is true for all sports services as well because most of them bet on their picks. Even if they don't bet on their picks, they still have the same pressure and mentality as the gamblers because they get paid to make their selections. They pick loser after loser causing you to lose money and when they pick more winners than losers, they would still lose money because of the staking psychology. When I made the above realization it was already the beginning of 2006 and that was when the tide turned in favor of me.

By the fall of 2006 I have successfully mastered the art of when to fade and when to follow a sports service. There are hundreds of services out there, that means a lot picks. Key is to study them all and make a wise decision and play them with strict discipline. I have 3 rules that I strictly follow. 1. Never bet more than $1000 (I use only 4 bet sizes: $250, $500, $750, $1000. Majority of the bets are for $500.) 2. Never bet more than three games on a given day. 3. Don't break rules one and two.

I have received many emails regarding rule one considering the success I have had in the past two years. They always ask, why don't I move to Vegas and do this full time betting a lot more etc. If I do that, I know for sure that the psychology that I was talking about earlier would come into play causing destruction. Sometimes, I myself get the temptation to bet large amount, but I refuse to break my rules. When you involve too much money, you involve too much emotion and that my friend will have a big negative effect on your betting related decisions. BETTING ON SPORTS WILL ALWAYS REMAIN A LEISURE FOR ME--NOT A CAREER!

I get many emails regarding the psychology and pressure that I was talking about earlier--people ask if I could continue my success with the added pressure of people paying me. Well, there is no pressure for me. I am not making picks to sell. REMEMBER THAT I HAVE A REAL JOB AND BETTING IS A LEISURE FOR ME. I BET WITH WHAT I CAN AFFORD TO LOSE, SO THERE IS NO PRESSURE FOR ME.

Psychology and pressure that I was talking about earlier was for sports services who make picks to sell (that is their only job). They always sell their picks with guarantees such as unrealistically high winning rate, free weeks if they don't maintain certain success rate or units in profit etc. When you see such guarantees, you can be sure that they will eventually make you lose your bankroll because they will try too hard to avoid giving free weeks.

Thanks for reading. May the winnings be yours!

Lifelessdead · Jul 14, 2009

I like your avatar dude!

letsgohoosiers · Jul 15, 2009

Yes, it works.

I've been doing it on and off with certain touts for a while. Tried showing others but was told "GTFO, shut up, and let me make my 10 units on over 550+ wagers placed"!

Touts are very useful resources, because they provide a pick everyday. People who do this won't win, they'll fall victim to the vig. There's no rhyme or reasoning behind their selections. They just do it to make money. All their bets are the same types of widely placed bets (point spread, moneyline, etc.).

Touts aren't out there to win, they are out there to entice you to purchase picks. Why anyone would pay for a pick is beyond me, but that's another story.

Play it like you would a stock market. It's simply a numbers game, they'll always be close to the .500 line. When they get way above .500, fade. When they get way below, play. Buy low and sell high.

Laws of probability state that each event is separate, however if I see a tout going on a streak (2 days, 3 days, 4 days, etc.) I'll start fading. The percent chance of him hitting 5 winning days in a row is very low, although mathematically this doesn't increase the chance that his card today is a winner.

My advice would be to watch someone's picks, start noticing trends in how he picks games, and fade under profitable scenarios.

Sugarbear · Jul 15, 2009

No. But LTH's insights is as close as you can get to making it work. In the end a tout will go 49/51 over a season with several streaks going both ways.

OnWisconsin · Jul 15, 2009

hell, if you feel like doing some research just go to the service forum and look at last year's picks (talking bout football). it's a lot of work, but you get an idea of the touts who were consistent.

although the service plays forum will only let me go back to september of last year....i was hoping to get at least a 3 year look at things, and hopefully 5 year....

buffettgambler · Jul 15, 2009

A lot of fallicious statements and thoughts reliant on gamblers fallacy within this thread.

A strategy predicated on fades is simply as unprofitable in the long run as almost any other system that appears touted on this boad. Simply put, it is much harder for fades to exist than advantage gamblers to exist as there are embedded contraints within these pickers that presumably pick less at a lesser rate than the theortical hold, including risk of ruin and a self fullfilling prophecy that disallowers "faders" to keep within their strategy that allowed them their well below average win rate.

Now are there touts out their whose picks are predicated on some accumulation of conditions are generate -EV picks (i.e. a bias to pick public backed teams, heavy juice, ect.)? Certiainly. Enough to overcome vig? Almost certainly not. At best, a duration in which such a tout runs out of subscibers seems the best possiblity for faders can be achieved (not likely though). It would also be more prudent to diasect what variables such a "fade" is using to derive his picks, and use them directly in their handicaping to achieve a higher EV.

When dealing with less efficient sportsmarkets, a possible fade opportunity may come from EV touts whose effect on the market is "oversteam" that creates pockets of time which a price may react irrationally to this touts picks and leave a fading opportunity prior to market correction.

99steak · Sep 19, 2009

thats the thing, you don't blindly fade all the touts or blindly follow all the pics of a certain tout. toutbuster guy says that he finds the top fades of the day (never more than 3)...most of the time its 1 or 2 unless its a weekend day. i also like his discipline.

TomGshotput · Sep 19, 2009

I don't see how it can work. If a tout can't pick winners, all they have to do is flip a coin and they still make their money. How can you play or fade that and expect to make money?

99steak · Sep 25, 2009

TomGshotput said:
I don't see how it can work. If a tout can't pick winners, all they have to do is flip a coin and they still make their money. How can you play or fade that and expect to make money?

If you flip a coin the win % is 50%....but most touts are 50% or less. And most of them lose because of their moneymanagement, when they lose they chase and or release big plays. Those big plays that the pick under pressure are the best plays. There is a brandon lang fade thread somewhere in this thread which has shown good profit. But if you are more selective like toutbuster with the plays there is money to be made. Take a look at the results in his records page, its pretty consistent.

letsgohoosiers · Sep 25, 2009

99steak said:
If you flip a coin the win % is 50%....but most touts are 50% or less. And most of them lose because of their moneymanagement, when they lose they chase and or release big plays. Those big plays that the pick under pressure are the best plays. There is a brandon lang fade thread somewhere in this thread which has shown good profit. But if you are more selective like toutbuster with the plays there is money to be made. Take a look at the results in his records page, its pretty consistent.

That thread hasn't shown good profit, rather that Lang is a 50% capper who loses to the juice. It's nothing more than people who were burned by Lang wanting a chance to laugh at him.

To use Lang's selections to your advantage you have to track him and figure out when he does good and bad. There are certain cards he puts out there that are obvious fades.

ProPokerPlayer · Sep 25, 2009

Most touts are just big squares who once won a few in a row.
And they are correct you will always go right around 50-50 with them.
However you can go to see some of these sites where guys record their picks just like a sportsbook. You have to do a little research on them but there are guys there who only post a bettable amount of picks, they do it regularly and they are pretty consistent losers. they will go streaks of 3 or 4 losing days in a row and hardly ever win back to back days. There are ofcourse most of the players who bet every game on the board but its not possible to fade 15 plays a day...lol
Thats where the research comes in...finding those regular losers...
And no pms wanting sites or players....ive worked hard to build my stable...lol

99steak · Sep 26, 2009

letsgohoosiers said:
That thread hasn't shown good profit, rather that Lang is a 50% capper who loses to the juice. It's nothing more than people who were burned by Lang wanting a chance to laugh at him.

To use Lang's selections to your advantage you have to track him and figure out when he does good and bad. There are certain cards he puts out there that are obvious fades.

Exactly...thats what Tom Griese from toutbuster website talks about.

lakeshow13 · Sep 29, 2009

Have you guys actually signed up for this site? DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO TOUTBUSTER! I signed up 2 months ago and he has lost every week. He just uodated his results page and he claims he has won just about every week. Not only has he lost, he has gotten killed. One of the worst handicappers I have ever seen. Stay away!

BillyWaltersJr+ · Sep 29, 2009

buffettgambler said:
A lot of fallicious statements and thoughts reliant on gamblers fallacy within this thread.

A strategy predicated on fades is simply as unprofitable in the long run as almost any other system that appears touted on this boad. Simply put, it is much harder for fades to exist than advantage gamblers to exist as there are embedded contraints within these pickers that presumably pick less at a lesser rate than the theortical hold, including risk of ruin and a self fullfilling prophecy that disallowers "faders" to keep within their strategy that allowed them their well below average win rate.

Now are there touts out their whose picks are predicated on some accumulation of conditions are generate -EV picks (i.e. a bias to pick public backed teams, heavy juice, ect.)? Certiainly. Enough to overcome vig? Almost certainly not. At best, a duration in which such a tout runs out of subscibers seems the best possiblity for faders can be achieved (not likely though). It would also be more prudent to diasect what variables such a "fade" is using to derive his picks, and use them directly in their handicaping to achieve a higher EV.

When dealing with less efficient sportsmarkets, a possible fade opportunity may come from EV touts whose effect on the market is "oversteam" that creates pockets of time which a price may react irrationally to this touts picks and leave a fading opportunity prior to market correction.

Sharpest post in the entire thread, by far.

BG knows what he's doing, and here he speaks the absolute truth.

99steak · Sep 29, 2009

lakeshow13 said:
Have you guys actually signed up for this site? DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO TOUTBUSTER! I signed up 2 months ago and he has lost every week. He just uodated his results page and he claims he has won just about every week. Not only has he lost, he has gotten killed. One of the worst handicappers I have ever seen. Stay away!

hey i am looking into the sign up...can you be more specific? are you for real, its your first post and you decide bash this guy? i sent the link to this thread to tom from toutbuster and he says that sometimes new clients don't take the bets as fades. did you bet the games that he sent or the opposite?

oldmanTED · Sep 29, 2009

Any comment that says you can't make money by fading certain consistent losing individuals is absolutely incorrect. This is meant as no disrespect to the individual poster, but if you faded The Rodfather, for example, in everyone of his plays, you would be well, well ahead. The fact is only 3% of gamblers are long term winners which means 97% are long term losers. Which side of those numbers would you rather be? Trying to follow who you think might be one of the 3% or fading the likely one of the 97%.

BillyWaltersJr+ · Sep 29, 2009

oldmanTED said:
Any comment that says you can't make money by fading certain consistent losing individuals is absolutely incorrect. This is meant as no disrespect to the individual poster, but if you faded The Rodfather, for example, in everyone of his plays, you would be well, well ahead. The fact is only 3% of gamblers are long term winners which means 97% are long term losers. Which side of those numbers would you rather be? Trying to follow who you think might be one of the 3% or fading the likely one of the 97%.

One word:

Juice

oldmanTED · Sep 29, 2009

Billy Walters Jr said:
One word:

Juice

Juice is a small percentage to pay for fading an individual that is consistently winning at a 40% rate.

BillyWaltersJr+ · Sep 29, 2009

oldmanTED said:
Juice is a small percentage to pay for fading an individual that is consistently winning at a 40% rate.

Very, very few consistently win at a 40% rate. Long term, that has the same probability of winning 60%.

You can't say that 97% of bettors win at a 40% rate. It would be just as hard to find someone who wins 40% of the ti as it would be to find someone who wins 60% of the time. Of course, I am talking long term, as in years.

oldmanTED · Sep 29, 2009

Billy Walters Jr said:
Very, very few consistently win at a 40% rate. Long term, that has the same probability of winning 60%.

You can't say that 97% of bettors wins at a 40% rate. It would be just as hard to find someone who wins 60% as it would be to find someone who wins just 40% of the time.

I didn't say that 97% of bettors win at a 40% rate, however, if you do your homework, even on this website, you will find that there are some posters who consistently struggle to get to 40%. It is a lot easier to find them then one who wins at a 60% rate. The problem is that most gamblers have an ego and look at only those that appear to win, while it is much easier to find those that lose. They don't think about the money potential but rather being on the winning side. Been in this business nearly 40 years and know for a fact, it is easier to find losing gamblers then winning ones. They're everywhere.