Betting Talk

Can anyone verify sharpfoortball analysis's record?

increasedoddincreasedodd Senior Member
edited September 2014 in Sports Betting
http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/

I'm not looking to advertise these guys. Never heard of them. Debating subscribing. I know their record does not match up with one of the monitoring sites, but they seem to have compelling reasons.

In any case, has anyone here used these guys for 2-3 years and is able to say the NFL record is accurate? Seems to good to be, but if it is, I'm missing out...

Thanks in advance.

Sean
«1

Comments

  • jammerjammer Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    This is a few weeks old, and was posted on 10/3 over at LVA, but hope this helps:

    I will update on the status of these guys....

    Sharp is 23-15 overall 61% but his different types of plays are: Overs 1-0, Over leans 1-1, Unders 1-1, Computer ATS 3-1, Personal Plays 18-13

    He had his big over play last night and won very easily, fun bet! From his twitter: "In 3rd straight winning week, I went 10-5 (67%), 9-4 (69%) no overlap and nailed the big Over, now 3 yrs w/o loss and 60-12 (83%) lifetime."

    My feedback: his NFL totals all moved the spreads last Tuesday, so u must get on his stuff early.... he sent out a email on that... saying to be ready for them on tues. I LOVE his Over plays, a huge moneymaker to my bankroll. Once again this year, sick writeups and analysis. Very happy again w/ him this yr... this guy is prob the best I've ever used in NFL IMO...

    You can see his plays yesterday + records and sample writeups here: http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/records.php and [url]http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com...s-eye-view.php[/url]
  • increasedoddincreasedodd Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    Thanks - the only problem is I have never heard of the guy posting that. Not saying it's not legit, but would feel much better about it if a few of the long time posters here or there chimed in that they have watched this for a few years..
  • jammerjammer Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    Hold on a sec- let me find a few more posts from this guy, I think he's been with them for a while.
  • jammerjammer Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    Here is a post with someone disputing his record.

    I'm not saying SFA is not a winner and you would know better than I would because you subscribe to his service. But, what I know, since being touted before the 2009 season at being a guy who hits over 65% (not realistic) is his record at The Sports Monitor is less than spectacular. His 2009 record was 70-64. going 46-45 on sides and 24-19 on totals. His 2010 record was 65-71 going 26-35 on sides and 39-36 on totals. He was monitored in 2010 with another group of plays called his personal plays (not a big fan of guys who have multiple services) that went 53-43, going 51-40 on sides and 2-3 on totals.

    What am I missing? These numbers aren't even close to your numbers. And, I understand the difference because of possible line moves but that can't be making up the large variance in these numbers.

    Again, not saying he is not a winner but there is a large difference between what you are saying and what an independent monitoring service is saying. Simply looking for an explanation.
    I have no idea where those numbers come from. First of all, you have 39-36 in totals this year? Impossible - He had over 100 plays this year in NFL totals. You show him having 75. This year his totals also combined to hit 59%, brought down because of 47% on unders. Your % shows him hitting just 52%. Totally wrong, not even close. You also show his Personal Plays having a record on totals of 2-3. I know he made a couple of his totals into personal plays, but definitely not 5. The 2009 numbers are much closer to what he released than 2010 but still not right exactly - he hit 60% in totals last year, this is a fact. But the 2010 numbers they have are way off.

    Sharp is much better in totals than sides. But if you compare his sides to the "beat 52.4% = average" than he's very good in sides. His personal plays are generally the sides to follow, and the 3 years I have been betting the personal plays dilligently, he went 132-96 (58%).

    His totals are off the chart. I am telling you, his overs plays are without loss the last 2 years. He didn't give them out in 2008 until late in the season when he started charging for palys. I bet them in 2007 when he posted them online and in 2009 and 2010. He went 21-1 in 2007, 4-0 in 2009 and 6-0 in 2010 in his strongest over plays. That's 31-1, and it's no BS. I didn't bet every single one early in 2007 but I got on about 15 of them and lost 1. This season he shared the system's leans, to make more plays for the clients, and those leans went 40-22, though not all the leans were shared early in the season.

    Now, let's stop the dog/pony show - Sharp is not without his own problems, but those records you share are not correct. This is not a thread to dwell on the minor issues with each service, as no service is perfect and Sharp/Wunderdog/Trapp are not without their own problems. They each have things I wish were improved, but they are minor compared to most services, especially when what matters most is w/l records and prices. What I am saying is that all 3 have easily crushed the 54% margin for a number of seasons, and all 3 are heads and tails better than what you get from 95% of the other NFL services out there. I know for a fact because I've bought them all.
  • jammerjammer Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    another post about this persons experience:

    A short list of my most profitable and highest recommended NFL services. I don’t care that I’m hyping them up, they deserve the praise and I’m mainly starting this thread to show people like Fez that there are guys out there beating 54% for multiple seasons…

    Sharp Football Analysis
    •He wins and has the strongest computer model I’ve ever seen in any sport – particularly for totals and specifically for overs – 83% over 5 years. I’ve personally seen them for 2007, part of 2008, 2009 and 2010. He hasn’t even lost a play on these the last 2 years. Any over from him and it’s a max bet for me without hesitation.
    •Totals system combined for 5 years: 226-123 (65%)
    •Great write-ups on “personal plays” (non-computer based) - he shares lots of reasoning and many winning angles/trends. These hit just over 58% last year.
    •Honest w/ honest records and reliable service & great customer service.
    •Releases plays EARLY, I'm talking Tues-Thursday for most of his computer totals, so you can get good lines and beat closing #s. Most of his stuff is released well before Sunday.
    •Last season he guaranteed not just to win, but to beat 58% on personal plays. I took him up on it and it was close at the end (very close) but he did just beat it.
    •Since I’ve been with him, no losing years (below 52.4%)
  • jammerjammer Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    and finally a response from Sharp himself...

    I got the response back from Sharp... very detailedbut thats the way he is most of the time...



    XXXXXX, I know you know this, but I take the issue of honestly grading plays accurately and very seriously. It is one of the reasons why my following is consistently strong – I report my record accurately and account for the losses truthfully. As you can see here, I share when I have losses or wins accurately: http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/Sharp_Records.html

    Having been with my service several years, I am sure you have grown accustomed to my recaps, discussing why we lost or won on certain weeks, and sharing strategy with you. You also have seen how I adapt to the changing market, by inventing new strategies and plays to take advantage of certain situations, such as my Unders subset plays or my Overs lean plays. Last year was a prime example: The hit-rule change really affected the Unders, as scoring was at an all-time high during the time when those hits started to be enforced. After several weeks of studying the pattern, I reported my findings to you guys in a lengthy email and tweaked the program to account for these rule changes. After the tweaks to the program, the Unders hit 64% (with zero losing weeks) to finish the season. So I am constantly looking for ways to improve and beat the linesmakers, but I have never, ever tried to “win” by faking a record.

    The Oklahoma Sports Monitor monitored me in 2009. I received help sending in the plays being it was my first season with a monitor. Unfortunately, my “help” was not always on the ball and a few plays were missed. Another problem was in grading the totals. As you know, I have 2 play types: Computer plays (straight out of my computer program and having absolutely nothing to do w/ handicapping) and my Personal plays, which is 100% my own handicapping (and having nothing to do w/ the computer). Being monitored as “Sharp Football Analysis”, there was no way to distinguish the totals from my computer program vs. the totals plays I made from own handicapping (and thus are my as personal plays). Because the record was not separated properly in 2009 by Ruth, in 2010, I had them separately track my computer plays vs. my personal plays.

    As for 2009 tracking, my computer totals hit 60%, going 25-17. The Sports Monitor had the score 24-19 for 56%. The difference is quite simple – In 2009 I released 43 computer totals and 2 personal plays that were totals plays. These 2 personal play totals were sent to clients as personal plays (one was Wk 1, Pit/Ten Over). Both these “personal plays” lost. These were not from the renowned Overs program, just my own handicapping, and I make that ABUNDANTLY clear to my clients as you know. (I don’t bet my personal plays as strong as my computer’s totals, and I recommend to you guys to similarly bet the computer totals much stronger, and for good reason: My computer’s totals have hit 65% over 5 years, including 83% from the overs. No knock on my own handicapping for personal plays, but even though my personal plays are averaging 59% over 5 yrs, I can’t compete w/ a computer hitting between 65 and 83% over 5 years.)

    Thus in 2009, those 2 personal play losses were credited to my totals record per the Sports Monitor in 2009, even though they are not computer total losses, they are personal play losses. There was 1 other computer total that I won that year but they graded as a push. So that is the difference between the correct 25-17 (60%) computer totals record and their incorrect 24-19 (56%) record. My actual 2009 record for all plays (computer + personal plays), as you know, was 54% as my personal plays had a down year in 2009. The Sports Monitor graded me at 52.2%. This difference was off by just a handful of plays. 3 of which were the totals in question, and the others being a few plays (some wins, some losses) that were not submitted to them, thanks to failure of my “help”.

    Heading into 2010, I parted ways with the “help” that sent in plays for me in 2009. I also planned to part ways with Ruth altogether. Over the summer, I told them why I was planning to skip the 2010 season with some recommendations/criticisms for their service. I simply was frustrated w/ the way the service was run, the manner in which they required plays to be submitted, and the amount of oversight it took on my end and even then, the grading was still not always accurate. I could get into specific “back and forths” if you want, suffice it to say it was tedious and should not have happened.

    However, in a huge gamebreaker for me, Ruth assured me that if I wanted to stay on board, I could be a “tester” during the pre-season for a new software they were using to submit the plays. This software would be automated and save a lot of time on my end and their end, ensure lines would be set for each game at time of submission, and eliminate the grading mistakes and issues. It sounded great. Because of that, along with the tremendous deal (discount) I was given, I rejoined in 2010. However, there was no testing ever done, and despite my frequent requests and questions, the “software” was never created. So each time I submitted a play, I had to type out my service name, play type (computer or personal), rot #, side, line and play “weight”. Being that I release throughout the week, as early as Tuesday, and I have a fair amount of plays each week, it became way too time consuming for me to personally do this submittal process prior to each and every release. Had I known it was going to be the same old process, I would have never joined in 2010. But each time I asked about the program, the answer I received was “we’re working on it, should be soon”.

    So I started the season sending in plays myself. However, when looking over her updates early in the year I discovered some plays were not graded properly while others were missed altogether. It was 2009 all over again. It then became a weekly chore to “double check” the grading and email back and forth with Ruth (who is not very responsive to emails at times) to get the play correctly graded. Some examples: I would send in 9 plays on a certain week and she would grade only 7. I would send in 6 computer plays and 4 personal plays and she would have the count at 4 computer plays and 6 personal plays. Things like that. As you know, I release plays both early (Tues/Wed) and late (Sat/Sun) throughout the week, so she would receive upwards of 5 emails per week to Ruth. They lost track of some. They also would not grade teasers or 1st half bets, even though these are WA play types that I release on occasion when there is an advantageous reason to do so. So the teasers and 1st half bets I released last year did not show up on the record at all.

    Eventually in 2010 it got to the point where I no longer cared what her service graded me at because of how inept it was run and how much time it took to submit each play. So I would send in plays when I had spare time (early in the week) and skip sending them in when my time was limited (usually later in the week). Prior to you contacting me, I couldn’t even tell what you my record is per their grading, as I stopped opening Ruth’s weekly updates and checking her work, literally starting mid-October. My time was better spent handicapping rather than checking for her mistakes (they were frequent) and dealing with the clean-up. This is exactly why there are fewer plays recorded there, and is 100% the reason why my actual record for plays I sent you and my clients is so different than what they have graded this past season.

    Just now I went back and reviewed my plays there and wasn’t surprised. For the 2010 regular season: Ruth graded 136 computer plays. I gave out over 160 to clients. Ruth graded 96 personal plays. I gave out over 100 to clients. In addition, since I was not checking both the grading of plays as well as Ruth putting plays into wrong categories, unfortunately their record for 2010 is completely wrong.

    Their record for the playoffs is wrong as well. They have my computer plays at 2-0 and my personal plays at 2-1, for an overall record of 4-1 in the 2010 playoffs. While I’d love to claim that record, I actually released to clients 18 plays in the playoffs and hit 56%. I had a losing week in the WC round and went 8-3 (73%) from the Div round thru the SB. Again, they have fewer plays than I released to clients(same as what happened in their regular season record tally), but this time their win percentage is higher than what I actually achieved.

    I am not worried about the record there. I originally understood Ruth to run a clean shop as a very respectable tracker. I since heard they take extra money from certain handicappers and falsify records. I don’t know how rampant it is, I just know from what I heard online. I only joined their service in the first place because I understood it to be the most reputable monitor. My personal experience with them is far less sparkling. Between my experiences there over 1.75 years as well as my newfound knowledge that even their records aren’t 100% trustworthy (and what is the point of being monitored by someone who isn’t 100% trustworthy?) I don’t plan to return. My aim is to find a new monitoring service for the Fall that is trustworthy (with an easier play submission interface), and someone to help send in the plays for me, as it is a complete waste of my time (and thus my client’s time) and should be outsourced.

    Sorry for the lengthy response that was somewhat delayed – I recently had surgery and am now catching back up on things, and with my downtime, was able to research everything you asked in detail. Hope you are having a great offseason and I hope we are able to see NFL in the fall! Be safe till then!

    Best,
    Sharp
  • RightAngleRightAngle Admin
    edited October 2011
    This thread had been soft deleted due to rules 7 & 9, but I restored it because I am curious myself as to how it plays out.

    Anyone with first hand experience using this service?

    Are grading lines widely available at time of release?
    Any transparent recordkeeping?
    What day/time do they release plays?
    How do they do against the closing line?
    Do their releases influence the market?

    Thanks.
  • increasedoddincreasedodd Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    Sorry Eddie, I don't usually post these, and certainly don't want to advertise anything here, but do wonder if these results are legit as they seem pretty darn strong. Like you - I am curious...
  • billcomptonbillcompton Banned
    edited October 2011
    I haven't used this service but I have been doing some research on these guys for the past two weeks and everything points out to scam. About a week and a half ago when I looked up this domain's records at whois.com, it showed that it was created only summer of last year. I actually sent them an email last week asking about their presence prior to that date and I didn't get a response. Now when I do a whois check, everything is blocked. They cleverly signed up for the privacy/proxy to block the stats. My conclusion is that increasedodd and jammer are same person who owns the site. Since he is clever enough to sign up for the private domain registration, I am guessing he is careful enough to use different ip addresses for posting. I am guessing both ips are with in 100km of each other. Ed, care to check?
  • ContrarianContrarian Banned
    edited October 2011
    "His totals are off the chart. I am telling you, his overs plays are without loss the last 2 years. He didn't give them out in 2008 until late in the season when he started charging for palys. I bet them in 2007 when he posted them online and in 2009 and 2010. He went 21-1 in 2007, 4-0 in 2009 and 6-0 in 2010 in his strongest over plays. That's 31-1, and it's no BS."


    Sounds legit, #balleralert
  • increasedoddincreasedodd Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    I'm in Boston and also have an IP in Romania for betting purposes. I've posted on the forums for over a decade. I too am of the opinion the numbers ar too good to be true, but it certainly is not my site. I've been posting picks here (and they've been losing)
  • billcomptonbillcompton Banned
    edited October 2011
    Why Romanian IP. Why not Canadian? Most scams come from eastern europe. You joined, feb 2011, how is that a decade? 10 months is not 10 years. Sounds like you are a Romanian with a Boston IP.
  • increasedoddincreasedodd Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    Why Romanian? Because I bought a UK one and for some reason the proxy guys sent me a Romanian one. Why not Canada? Because some places don't take Canadians.

    I did not say this forums. I said the forums.

    I any case, Eddie knows I don't own that site and I don't really care what you think.
  • bkeillerbkeiller Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    I have only been with Sharp for the playoffs last year and all of this year so I cant really make a recommendation. There is a lot of NOISE with the selections and it can be sometimes difficult to follow what works and what doesn't (ie he has computer plays, personal plays etc) but for the most part he is legit. He is on twitter and he posts the selections there once they kick and they are always the same as the site. I could not tell you what the true record is as I dont keep meticulous records on it but I could tell you that he doesn't seem to post one thing and claim another.

    Also, I have only been on this site a short time but I have been on another forum that RAS is on and have made nearly 700 posts. If they want to check out my credentials I am happy to oblige.
  • jammerjammer Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    I haven't used this service but I have been doing some research on these guys for the past two weeks and everything points out to scam. About a week and a half ago when I looked up this domain's records at whois.com, it showed that it was created only summer of last year. I actually sent them an email last week asking about their presence prior to that date and I didn't get a response. Now when I do a whois check, everything is blocked. They cleverly signed up for the privacy/proxy to block the stats. My conclusion is that increasedodd and jammer are same person who owns the site. Since he is clever enough to sign up for the private domain registration, I am guessing he is careful enough to use different ip addresses for posting. I am guessing both ips are with in 100km of each other. Ed, care to check?

    Wannu put your money where your mouth is? Didn't think so. A guy asked a question. I am a member over at LVA and saw some info on the subject and copied and pasted it over here, trying to help the guy. Again, you wannu put your money your mouth is? Again, didn't think so. Thanks for your 2 cents.
  • GoatsGoats Head Moderator
    edited October 2011
    billcompton, I have no dog in this fight, but I can tell you "increasedodd" has nothing to do with that site. He was posting over at SSB (the site I formerly ran for Stanford Wong before Ed purchased it) in the early 2000's.

    Guys, please leave out the conspiracy theories and debate that site/service on merit (or lackthereof). Personal attacks and accusations will not be tolerated.

    Thank you.
  • thecaptain12thecaptain12 Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    This year he finally started putting his plays on the site for all to see instead of just saying, " I went 6-1 this week." Now i will say I followed him when he was a free blog and did well. Even paid for a season and that did well. I asked him several times to do what RAS does and post everything so we can see history. He said he was worried about someone "figuring out" what he is doing.

    Agree about the overs they hit at a sick rate, but few and far between. Still say he is a reasonable price and a pretty good guy as I have dealt with him several times and he is pretty cool. I actually would love to be him. No joke
  • CaptainBCaptainB Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    Yes, increasedodds/Sean has been around the forums for a long time and I'm sure he just wants info. That having been said, reading the owner of that site's lengthy description should set off some serious red flags. Every tout in the world says "I hit 65% on my plays" but when you check the monitoring of the vast majority of them, they're barely better than flipping coins, and they have all sorts of excuses for why their monitored record wasn't as good. (Certain plays weren't included, they didn't pay the monitor enough for a good record, whatever.) Excuses are like armpits, we all have them and they all stink.
  • speculatorspeculator Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    Why don't you take my plays, I am 2-2 YTD, the picks are free. I think that I am going to win this yr. Believe me, 99.5 % of bettors cannot beat the spread. My pick this wk is Car -2.5 at home.
  • TotallyTiltTotallyTilt Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    So this guy tweeted that he is 60-12 lifetime? Plugging those numbers into a Binomial Distribution function and giving him a generous 55% win rate, it spits out .999999915. That result tells us that a 55% handicapper has a 99.9999915% chance of winning 60 games *or fewer* over any 72 game stretch. In other words, there's only a .0000085% chance a he's a 55% handicapper or worse.

    I we assume he's a 60% handicapper, that number "drops" to .999994997, meaning there's only a .0005003% chance he's 60% or worse.

    Conclusion: either this guy's the greatest handicapper ever to live, the luckiest handicapper ever to live, or he's lying.
  • bkeillerbkeiller Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    Just an FYI update in case some are curious. Sharp went 5-1 on his personal plays at 1 unit each. His computer sides went 1-1 at 1 unit each. His computer Unders went 2-3 at 1 unit each and his Computer Over Leans went 2-1 at 1.5 units each.
  • tribecalledjefftribecalledjeff Senior Member
    edited October 2011
    Cute how he has 4 different play types. That way one is always hot and marketable.
  • jmjm Senior Member
    edited September 2014
    I looked around and couldn’t find anything recent, so I figured I’d post.

    I joined this year and he appears to be more transparent than what others posted a few years back. He’s posting his picks on twitter after kickoff and his picks range from 0.5 units to 1.5 units. He releases NFL games later in the week and had a bunch of plays Saturday/Sunday. His CFB starts this week (but haven’t released anything), so I can’t comment on it yet. He’s only released “personal plays” and I believe his “computer plays” are CFB only (but I’m not entirely sure). My biggest concern was something I faced with predictionmachine.com (and other sites) where they break up their picks into different buckets then tout them up when a specific bucket does well.

    He provides a “money back guarantee” on his personal plays. If they don’t hit 58% in a month, then you get that month prorated.

    He has some insightful things on his website and blog and I think I’ll be happy with the service.
  • mjc257mjc257 Senior Member
    edited September 2014
    Cute how he has 4 different play types. That way one is always hot and marketable.

    I bought his service for one year because I was curious. I thought it was a waste for this reason. I had no fucking clue how to separate all his stuff. He'd put out team totals, teasers, etc. I just thought it was a disorganized mess.

    Just my opinion of course. I know that many people have been happy with his service and I know he had some sick years with overs.
  • Joe DogsJoe Dogs Member
    edited September 2014
    I was a 1st half NFL season subscriber with Warren Sharp,a few years back....And I didn't hang around for the second half.I realize You can't rate a service on only a half of season of plays,but in that short time that I was with his NFL service I found it to be average at best. It could have been an off year,but I found his totals plays were less than spectacular at that time as well.....As for his college plays and totals,I have no Idea,Its a seperate package entirely.....I enjoyed Sharps podcast every week with ''Crackman",when they would break down the NFL card,other than that Id pass on this service.
  • white broncowhite bronco Member
    edited September 2014
    As a poster noted above, there are many different play types, including sides, totals, teasers, personal plays, computer plays, first halves, team totals, weather and injury plays. His previous year records show win rates of 72%, 64%, 66%, 53%, 58%, 57%, 55% and 55%.

    Since 2006, he shows a record of 1258-912, a win rate of 58%. This is despite apparently releasing all his plays near game day (he released four plays this morning according to his website).

    I checked his Twitter just now and it says he joined in August of 2009. I had never heard of him until recently. It's interesting to note that the 72%, 64% and 66% years all pre-dated his arrival on Twitter.

    I've never subscribed to his service and know nothing about it, but he claims to work with several syndicate groups. It's hard to believe they would let him release plays at such high volume to clients for peanuts.

    Has anyone else used the service?
  • Dr. HDr. H Senior Member
    edited September 2014
    Fraud imo.
  • bumpobumpo Senior Member
    edited September 2014
    Dr. H wrote: »
    Fraud imo.

    +1...
  • white broncowhite bronco Member
    edited September 2014
    Dr. H wrote: »
    Fraud imo.

    Any reason?
  • kdogkdog Senior Member
    edited September 2014
    Any reason?

    Uh, the post above his? Written by you.
Sign In or Register to comment.