Silver Charm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 6 straight wins in a Money Line parlay is
> significant. It wasnt 6 straight against the
> Raiders. You said it yourself.
>
> Always may have been an exaggeration. If its 60%
> of the time that's enough for a professional group
> like the one Billy Walters described in his Book.
> They played Coin Toss Selection tendencies. As in
> do they take the ball or defer. Amd who scores
> first. He claimed they had $50K maybe $100K on
> that Parlay in the Super Bowl with Arizona and
> Pittsburgh
>
> And NFL Official could call holding on every play.
> A Breeders Cup Vet is he watching every horse warm
> up stride for stride. No he can't. And if he is
> just watching certain Trainers and Connections
> that is a serious problem. Kenny runs them sound
> and Mystik Dan if that is the last race of his
> career should not be remembered as "lame and
> unsound" because a Hometown Vet said he was. Horse
> Racing is becoming unbettable.

You aren't playing a 6 game ML parlay because you haven't yet identified the streak. At what point do you say.....hey this team wins with this ref??

Unless you have an incredible ability to target a streak before it even happens.

Its an insignificant sample size, and you didn't target the streak from game 1 because you had no clue the next 5 games would also be wins....so not one person would have put together a 6 game ML parlay. Zero.

And my point using the Raiders is that if its so significant, why did they barely win as a 13 point fav?

Yes, there are very few officials that hover around 60%. And again, you have to identify them in time for it to matter...and guess what.....the following year they aren't close to 60%.

Your premise isn't bad, but putting it into practice isn't nearly as easy as you're making it out to be.

P-Dub