2) Sans voir live report
Sans voir live was a new idea. It obviously came from the fact that in our game we are actually watching some pre-selected matches in live and with a specific Protocol and as long as there is an opportunity we are playing. We obviously study these matches when we look to see what we will play pregame. So we wanted to see what fish this live protocol catches and it needed to be recorded.
Thus, from the beginning until the well-known cessation of Coronation, they were chosen 218 match to watch live. These matches had "something", but they did not meet the criteria to play pregame (sans voir).
Finally, from 218 match, we were involved, that is, we played live, at 27 (About 1 in 8).
The average odds of these 27 bets were 12.92 at the time of selection. Difficult bets.
Pregame these 27 bets had average. performance in 8.83 "only".
From these 27 matches we played, we just won them 4 (14,8% success). So few that we remember our winning bets with their ... little name! The odds of the 4 winning bets were: 11.00 Xanthi, 25.00 the Wolves, 8.00 Budgegovice and 12.00 Bournemouth. In other words, we are talking about very, very difficult bets, I repeat. The average of their performance when we bet them was 14.00, while pregame was 11.50. Whatever.
We hurt 27 Units and returned 56 Units.
Profit 29 Units
Yield 107.4%
One can say (correctly) that the matches are few and the numbers are statistically significant, however we cannot be described as lucky and favored, because (as we see) there is a big negative series of 15 matches without a win. However, we agree that with more matches, the results are more statistically significant. One season alone is not enough.
Now, what was the fate of all these 218 bets chosen for live?
Finally, 34/218 passed (15,5%)
We were present from the 34 bets that passed as we said in just 4 bets! And we were present in 23 more "buckets". Nevertheless, our victory was clear.
Schematic:
The big circle is the total of the bets we watched, the small green is those matches in which the underdog finally prevailed and they would win if we played them pregame, while the small black circle is the "meze" that we got live.
If anyone was thinking of playing all of these now, and 218 pregame bets, what effect would it bring? To see this, we created the profile of a virtual player of "Mr. Pregame" (in short, Mr. Pre) and made a comparison with him. Mr. Pre played everything (and all 218 matches) from a Unit with the performance declared in the thread when the game was selected for the live by us. (most commonly on Bet365). The average performance of 218 matches was 8.76.
With 34/218 successes (15,5%) with an average return on profits 7.40, had returns 251.53 Units, that is, profit 33,53 Units and yield 15,3%. Fine!
We personally did NOT play everything and did not want to. But we would not recommend it to anyone. The reason is that Mr. Pre had a very high risk exposure playing all 218 matches with this great average performance. There have been (and it is logical) many periods of negative series up to 25 matches in a row defeats. And we're not just looking at the series, we're also looking at the drawdown. There was a period of 44 matches that were all buckets except for one match somewhere in the middle that was won.
The reality is that IF someone did this, they would have a large turnover and a yield of around 15,3% that would supposedly make them jealous and tipster, but I can't imagine a man with such a strong stomach putting a bunch of regular bets at risky bets having only had 1 success in the last 44 bets. You cannot play a regular bet on such matches. Your heart will be constantly trembling and betting psychology is a big deal.
Don't get me wrong, the matches weren't over. To be pre-selected, they had "something". We are talking about 218 bets with an average odds of 8.76 but that passed 34 so the average fair odds were in practice 6.41! That is an average advantage of approximately… 36%.
But for us it was not "the best of the best" (or "the bets of the bets!") To enter pregame sans voir. In other words, imagine what a strict choice we want to make in our game.
We achieved this with our game very low risk exposure. We only played in 12% of the matches. And even if we were only present at 11-12% of the bets they won, and even if 85% of the bets we played were "buckets", we won outright. You will also notice that we got the matches at significantly higher returns from what was pregame. This is also very important.
I also hold on to all this and that we should not be too upset if in the course some matches we have chosen live win without "catching up" to play, because it seems that only a small percentage of the winners if we are present, this can is enough to win the season.
Next: account sans voir + sans voir live together
Sans voir live was a new idea. It obviously came from the fact that in our game we are actually watching some pre-selected matches in live and with a specific Protocol and as long as there is an opportunity we are playing. We obviously study these matches when we look to see what we will play pregame. So we wanted to see what fish this live protocol catches and it needed to be recorded.
Thus, from the beginning until the well-known cessation of Coronation, they were chosen 218 match to watch live. These matches had "something", but they did not meet the criteria to play pregame (sans voir).
Finally, from 218 match, we were involved, that is, we played live, at 27 (About 1 in 8).
The average odds of these 27 bets were 12.92 at the time of selection. Difficult bets.
Pregame these 27 bets had average. performance in 8.83 "only".
From these 27 matches we played, we just won them 4 (14,8% success). So few that we remember our winning bets with their ... little name! The odds of the 4 winning bets were: 11.00 Xanthi, 25.00 the Wolves, 8.00 Budgegovice and 12.00 Bournemouth. In other words, we are talking about very, very difficult bets, I repeat. The average of their performance when we bet them was 14.00, while pregame was 11.50. Whatever.
We hurt 27 Units and returned 56 Units.
Profit 29 Units
Yield 107.4%
One can say (correctly) that the matches are few and the numbers are statistically significant, however we cannot be described as lucky and favored, because (as we see) there is a big negative series of 15 matches without a win. However, we agree that with more matches, the results are more statistically significant. One season alone is not enough.
Now, what was the fate of all these 218 bets chosen for live?
Finally, 34/218 passed (15,5%)
We were present from the 34 bets that passed as we said in just 4 bets! And we were present in 23 more "buckets". Nevertheless, our victory was clear.
Schematic:
The big circle is the total of the bets we watched, the small green is those matches in which the underdog finally prevailed and they would win if we played them pregame, while the small black circle is the "meze" that we got live.
If anyone was thinking of playing all of these now, and 218 pregame bets, what effect would it bring? To see this, we created the profile of a virtual player of "Mr. Pregame" (in short, Mr. Pre) and made a comparison with him. Mr. Pre played everything (and all 218 matches) from a Unit with the performance declared in the thread when the game was selected for the live by us. (most commonly on Bet365). The average performance of 218 matches was 8.76.
With 34/218 successes (15,5%) with an average return on profits 7.40, had returns 251.53 Units, that is, profit 33,53 Units and yield 15,3%. Fine!
We personally did NOT play everything and did not want to. But we would not recommend it to anyone. The reason is that Mr. Pre had a very high risk exposure playing all 218 matches with this great average performance. There have been (and it is logical) many periods of negative series up to 25 matches in a row defeats. And we're not just looking at the series, we're also looking at the drawdown. There was a period of 44 matches that were all buckets except for one match somewhere in the middle that was won.
The reality is that IF someone did this, they would have a large turnover and a yield of around 15,3% that would supposedly make them jealous and tipster, but I can't imagine a man with such a strong stomach putting a bunch of regular bets at risky bets having only had 1 success in the last 44 bets. You cannot play a regular bet on such matches. Your heart will be constantly trembling and betting psychology is a big deal.
Don't get me wrong, the matches weren't over. To be pre-selected, they had "something". We are talking about 218 bets with an average odds of 8.76 but that passed 34 so the average fair odds were in practice 6.41! That is an average advantage of approximately… 36%.
But for us it was not "the best of the best" (or "the bets of the bets!") To enter pregame sans voir. In other words, imagine what a strict choice we want to make in our game.
We achieved this with our game very low risk exposure. We only played in 12% of the matches. And even if we were only present at 11-12% of the bets they won, and even if 85% of the bets we played were "buckets", we won outright. You will also notice that we got the matches at significantly higher returns from what was pregame. This is also very important.
I also hold on to all this and that we should not be too upset if in the course some matches we have chosen live win without "catching up" to play, because it seems that only a small percentage of the winners if we are present, this can is enough to win the season.
Next: account sans voir + sans voir live together
I have not been paid the maintenance amounts from 2016 onwards. Please make the payment immediately 
