UNDERDOGS Barking at Match Play Golf

UNDERDOGS Barking at Match Play Golf B2B years, we see the dogs cashing the tickets.

Indeed. I would consider this when determining whether Alf needs a break. He's fine. Match play may be a bit of a buzzsaw when employing whatever basic strategy he uses for his picks.

[QUOTE=joelshitshow;40094]Indeed. I would consider this when determining whether Alf needs a break. He's fine. Match play may be a bit of a buzzsaw when employing whatever basic strategy he uses for his picks.[/QUOTE] Except last year in this same event he was 0-8 in the first round of the same tournament (All plays were favorites) so it seems nothing was changed to his model/strategy.

I think we're both right on this one, burg. My point was that the strategy itself is fine, but it should not be applied to MP.

[QUOTE=joelshitshow;40098]I think we're both right on this one, burg. My point was that the strategy itself is fine, but it should not be applied to MP.[/QUOTE] Oh. I see what you are saying. Still the fact that the strategy in question didn't change in this specific event after last years lumps is troublesome.

If the pattern is that strong in match play maybe the inverse would be the call.

[QUOTE=bkeiller;40100]If the pattern is that strong in match play maybe the inverse would be the call.[/QUOTE] Possibly. Regardless I don't think focusing on this event is the most wise decision. Going into this event I'm thinking the record was somewhere in the 1-14 range? I may be off a loss or 2 and possibly even a missed win (I can't recall more than 1) but I know I am somewhere close. I have attempted to spark discussion regarding the strategy implemented but it was turned away to no avail, citing that "Too many bettors and handicappers have become enamoured with betting underdogs IMO. The real hidden value is with the favorites" and the people who didn't understand this concept were labeled as "NONE of them make a living year after year betting sports, they are break even at best and yet they still chase the dogs, and they don't have the bankroll to lay it when needed." This was troubling to hear from Alf. I like Alf and I think he puts a lot of time and thought into his golf selections. I fear the market has passed him by (much like RAS) and his methods/strategy are outdated and prehistoric. I actually think Alf has the golf knowledge to earn betting the links every year but not in the manner that he is accustomed to. The golf world has changed and the injury news is outdated. By the time injuries are noted and put into the line the injuries themselves are usually healed or have at the least progressed by leaps and bounds. The field of golfers in general have become much like the parody of NFL teams in the late 90's and early 2000's. Every golfer can beat anyone on any given day. There are SO MANY good golfers out there and the weaknesses of each golfer are shinking year by year. IMO... Laying the amount of chalk is/will continue to make it impossible for Alf to win barring a drastic change in approach and extending his range to "diligent dogs" instead of "focused favorites".

Alf getting some rude punches to the gut. IMO he had Holmes over Allenby last week was a good play. I know you had to lay the price on him and what do you know Allenby comes out as the leader after the 1st round. Alf wasn't the only one that seemed to indicate that Holmes was the right side of that matchup as I heard Golf Channel and the analysis on CBS really speak about Allenby's poor play and inability to make a putt. But he hung in there and hit the ball well and I lost a small bet on it. What went wrong? Best I can tell Allenby won the event several years ago, Australians like playing Riviera and I guess he had enough good karma to play well and Holmes faded at the end but did have a good week. What should I have done (and probably Alf too)? Come back right against Allenby with his matchup vs. Fisher. YOu had to lay it on Fisher. And Fisher won easily this week. Allenby out in the 1st round. He likes to lay favourites and he missed this one. Donald also a solid player in match play and has been a favourite and he's winning. The Tiger information is excellent and was also reinforced from what I heard and read and also turned into a winning ticket. No doubt I want to win these matchups if I bet them that is obvious. But the information Alf is passing through here I do think is good. I wish it would win more often. You have to believe he has enough information and good analysis that he'll start winning these more than he loses. I'm not sure that Jimenez being 47 years old is enough for me to think he would lose to Crane but he threw enough in there in his analysis about Crane maybe it was a good play. It certainly didn't win. Actually, I really want to defend Alf deliberately because he at least explains his plays. Boy, I cut someone a lot more slack when they do that. I really find with Dr. Bob I outperform the doctor just from reading his analysis. I like certain plays more and I'm leery of some of the writeups. A leery writeup and crappy market endorsement of a play and I might not bet it. A great writeup, a side I agree with and even a tiny endorsement from Pinnacle and I'll bet a little extra on it. With RAS and even Fez, there is either no writeup or little write up and you've got nothing but your record to tell me you know something. Now does anyone here from what they've read actually think Alf doesn't know something about golf?