Fade guy from work plays for today
- Thread starter eeeerock
- Start date
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
Over 1000s of picks someone with no skill isn't going to pick worse than 47%. It's just the law of averages. I'll never understand the concept of 'fading' someone. It's a negative return play.
A. Don't tell me that no one is capable of picking less than 47%. Extremely rare, yes. Impossible, not by a long shot.
B. The thing that makes these fades so profitable is that they always seem to lose their big picks. The may be near 50% overall, but they get caught up in the hype of sucker bets. They then bet big on them. Anyone reading this thread, play all of the fade's picks that are 60 and above. You will be rolling in clover.
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
I'm not trying to be a dick like I usually am. It's a fact. Not worth arguing. When you get into a sample size large enough to be valid, bettors without any skill aren't going to pick bad enough for you to profit.
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
I agree hammer can't pick for shit but if you took 1000 of his picks they would be around 49-51%. Which gets you no where.
:mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :00hour :00hour :00hour :scared :scared :scared Plenty of losers out there that are great fades. BRANDEN 'LOSER' LANG COMES TO MIND.
opcorn2 opcorn2 :shrug: :shrug: :shrug: :shrug:
opcorn2 opcorn2 :shrug: :shrug: :shrug: :shrug:
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
:mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :00hour :00hour :00hour :scared :scared :scared Plenty of losers out there that are great fades. BRANDEN 'LOSER' LANG COMES TO MIND.
:facepalm:
