Tim Trushel's Highest Rated Plays

Again you are looking at the wrong column and are counting each play as one unit. A 36-30 "not weighted" result is +3 units. But for the third time, we rate plays one and two units. Based on the weighted results as reflected by the monitored reports in net profits, the profits are up +10.4 units Additionally you previously reported it as a losing season.

This simply does not add up to a winning record in football. I'll send away for the complete TSM records.

I would think about Flexing this record out but what's the point. Even when you get the answer, you're no closer to an answer. Cuz first you have to deal with the systematic grading inflation over the past 2-4 years where Ruth looks at the best available line on gameday. So according to Ruth, no pick is bad and gets negative line movement. How do you factor that in? Now even if you knew that you have to factor in the OK Monitor incompetence. Really, the OK Monitor is just an old lady and her pencil. I know from extremely reliable sources just what haphazard carelessness is going on there. Multiple times in a season her email is going down and throws back everything that was sent to her. Now if you sent in winners you resend them past-posting. If you had a bad day, well you passed that day. Every week she updates the records and, from my sources, there were so many mistakes they found the whole thing laughable. So the only thing I can say about the modern OK Monitor is that if you're under 50% youre a sure loser. But if you're 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, or 57%? You're no closer to the answer. Still, some services are consistently at the top of the OK Monitor and perhaps one can just say those are worth a try. In Trushel's case, I was just making a reasonable guess. This is not a random forum capper. Fezzik is documented (by me) as a winning capper over 6 or so years and this is fact and I know there is no inflation. We know Fezzik is sharp. Fezzik has his Tuesday group with Truschel and believes the strong-rated plays are good. One would have to start to look at those to see when they're released, have they steamed prior to release, any good line value, etc. Ehhh...I'll probably Flex it out anyway just cuz I havent in so long. OK Monitor does show 2-unit plays so that would be interesting. Joeflex

[QUOTE=Old School;2866]Then TSM records are completely incorrect. Are we to trust a monitor or a tout?[/QUOTE] Exactly I agree with Old School 100%, I don't trust sportsmemo or any other tout and Old School is proving why. Great work exposing them Old School!!!!!

JoeFlex, I sent you a spread sheet of every play I have quoted in the above records since 2006 football season. It has nearly 2000 plays across all sports covering every play clients have gotten since the 2006 football season. You can use it to compare the theory of grade inflation. My experience at the Sports Monitor tells me that there is limited inflation and in the past, in the early-to-mid nineties before the Internet and Don Best, they was a record deflation. It was only recently, handicappers got the widely available grade they submitted to clients. Regardless, this will provide you data to compare nearly 2000 selections over thee full calendar years in the current grading environment. As far as other issues with the Sports Monitor such as missed plays, incorrect grades, difficulty in communication; those are all correct for the most part. We choose to get monitored there, not because it is the most accurate or easiest to use, but rather because it is the ONLY monitor that actually gives you a return on investment with potential client inquiries. The other monitors are flawed as well, but they typically don't have traffic or provide a return in business.

I use certain cappers All the time. Its part of what I do for winning seasons. I have refined it over a decade. You talk of the "Tuesday Group" where the majority of participants are "touts". I literally have a blank schedule that gets filled to amazing notes by Friday. Based on developing relationships with touts and industry connections my access IMO is better than anyone who thinks they have access. To that end my bets are at best #s. Its because of touts like Tim who help me get there. Ijn the end I get the syndicate plays. If they match I have a better #. If they are opposite I can get off and/or play a better # coming back. I have been "on" Tims 20 star plays for almost 2 years. I would not be on them if he was losing. I am not talking about marketing his business, the hows and whys of that business are obvious if you have a clue about the industry. I am talking about Tims effort to produce information and winners-Its been working very well. I hope this place does not have a Sports Illustrated JINX!

[QUOTE=Iceman;2817] more importantly a solid all around person, IMO. quality guys who work VERY VERY hard at their craft EVERYDAY.[/QUOTE] This is a bad mistake. Oprah is solid. Dolly Parton is a quality person. But I don't want their handicapping advice! Fezzik is lazy, and I mean this in a positive way. He filters information and then only works hard to bet it. But he doesn't "work very very hard" on useless statistics. Endless work is symptomatic of somebody who doesn't really know what is important. Maybe they were once nice guys with good intentions. But you know they don't put out long-run winners. If they had real confidence and success then they would never have considered the tout business. Now maybe, just maybe the two-star plays in a specialty sport will win in the long-run. But then what are they doing selling one-star plays in all the other sports? It's a sleazy business. Some enthusiastic sports nuts want to live the fantasy of being professional sports bettors. When that doesn't work out, they resolve their cognitive dissonance by selling picks. They pretend to be the Brandon Lane character from the movie "Two for the Money". But good intentions don't justify staying in the tout business. That's the real problem. Perhaps you are a Helmut who starts small and soon moves lines. Your early clients get a good line, and five minutes later your clients get break-even lines. A few seasons later you have lost your edge. But you still have degenerate losers clamoring for your picks. Do you sell them your latest untested ideas, or do you apply for jobs at a car wash? Iceman needs to think about his long-run future in this game too.

Kimlee Touts I would hope most here already know what you are preaching. In the end if you can utilize information to help your bottom line I could care less-even if it came from the worst tout in the world. In the end its can you afford the cost of a season pack with a tout that can help you win. I can. I will continue to use them just like Fez does. (see thread where he tells you the touts he subscribes to) Again, the "tuesday group" has a high percentage of touts participating. Does that make Fez info bad? People who bet would like to win. Most do not. Since most can not win on there own what is better: keep losing or get the best touts that win? Please do not respomd touts can not win. Only your ignorance can believe that.

>>Again, the "tuesday group" has a high percentage of touts participating. Does that make Fez info bad?

[QUOTE=members;2896]I would hope most here already know what you are preaching. People who bet would like to win. Most do not. Since most can not win on there own what is better: keep losing or get the best touts that win? [/QUOTE] We still get questions from newbies about touts. JoeFlex looked far and wide, and destroyed most touts by simply compiling their records. They got angry and indignant when he asked! I would rephrase your question: [I][Touts] who bet would like to win. Most do not. Since most [touts] can not win on thir own what is better: keep losing or [sell picks]?[/I] Fezzik is motivated by betting, and merely offers his opinions as a sideline. JoeFlex compiled Fezzik's record as 53.44%, which already includes shopping. Fezzik's posts opinions at random times. The number has often moved by a point or more. That's proof that Fezzik's information is influential, but it also illustrates the difficulty of profiting. That 53.44% becomes a loser when you subtract a point. Unfortunately the tout industry is a marketing game. You can't totally blame the tout. Clients insist on high volume and plays for T.V. games. Now you have to distinguish between the "real plays" and the "marketing plays". The touts will always parse their records to look good. If the two-star plays win more then they will hype those. If regular season wins then they will ignore the preseason and playoff records. It looks so easy when past records hit 60%. But then they can hit a brutal 40% when you subscribe. The best touts historically do not win in the future.