I don't think you understand the intent of this thread. The "upsets" and percentages play a vital role. The percentages are monitored to see what side Vegas is willing to side on. For example if you have Kansas City -7 1/2 favorite over Oakland with 90% of the bets on KC, yet the line is moving in favor of KC to -6 1/2. You can logically come up with one of two conclusions.
Either "A", Vegas is willing to take a side and let the money flow in on the other team. In the above example, one can be lead to believe that Vegas likes Oaklands chances of staying within 6 1/2 of KC. Which is why they are willing to let the bets sides go that far above 50/50.
Or "B", someone with alot of "weight" is taking a large investment on Oakland which causes the line to move even though most of the small fish are on KC. Either way, it is an attempt to find a edge in a betting situation. No different than looking at games that were played months ago for an indication of how a game that has yet to be played will turn out. Is it fool proof? Not by a long shot, but neither is any system that regular bettors like you and I use.
No, I understand the system perfectly....it's simply a 'reverse line movement' system. I wasn't knocking the system at all, but it's not a new concept...reverse line movement can be very profitable if you're getting accurate percentages and there is enough volume to make those percentages actually mean something.
When I asked about the "upsets," it was in the context of NHL plays, which is where younggun said they occur the most (let's make that clear...he said the NHL had the most upsets, so I wasn't talking about anything other than the NHL when I asked the question). The games he has used in the NHL have been -130 or less, so those aren't really 'upsets' when you see favs at -200 or more almost every night in the NHL...which is why I asked what he meant by upsets and brought up that the plays he's used aren't based on anything but the percentages (which mean less with such less volume of plays). Usually, when using the word 'upsets' it has more to do with the line than the percentages wagered on each side...if he meant 'upsets' simply based on the public, and majority of bets on one side, and the other side winning the game, that's a different usage of the word upset and I would, at least, then understand what he meant by 'upsets.' (which is why I simply asked a question)
He also then said that the NHL was the 'most profitable' in this system...even though there were only 5 NHL plays posted until that point, and they went 3-2...so I simply asked what he was basing his "NHL is the most profitable" opinion on, and if he had other posted plays in this system to show me. I assumed since he said the NHL was most profitable, that he was basing it on more than a handful of games and would have some data to show more proof.
Again, it's a reverse line movement concept, one that I (and most others on here) understand quite well. My only point in all of this was, as VK pointed out as well, that the percentages mean less in the NHL, again, due to the little volume that you see there. That was it, nothing more, nothing less. I never once put the reverse line movement system down, and think it can be valuable in certain sports...the NHL is, more than likely, not one of them.
:shake:
