Sports Betting Dynamics - disproving the naysayers so far

How does that help? What I have noticed on this forum is that there are genuine people looking for pointers alongside smug know-alls who delight in ridiculing everything that is said. Saying my post 'isn't sensible' is dumb ... you need to explain yourself. All I can do is present the facts - a tippung service with nine wins out of 10. OK, here's a question. If ti acheived 99 out of 110 or 999 out of 1,000 (I know this won't happen) would that be good enough. When does a tipping service prove itself?

Well done Richiscoul.

When does a tipping service prove itself?

When the sample size is statistically significant and proofed.

You should be able to do the maths on that yourself.

So you are the expert ... when is it significant?

When you're on your super yacht in Antibes.

I've posted many times on how to calculate statistical significance.

There are various calculators online, learn to use one.

Clue: 9 out of 10 is not even close

But I am on my super yacht!!!
Can we call a truce please???!!! I think it is a valid question about when a system proves itself, if indeed it ever does.

The trouble I'm having, and hence my tone, is that if you're providing a tipping service, this stuff should be trivial to you.

I've got nothing against tipsters (although I have against spammers) and nothing against new posters (I've posted a lot of help on here over the years), but you can't have it both ways.

I'm not providing a tipping service. I'm reviewing a tipping service

Start with level stake profit.  Very old fashion but removes 'fictional' staking plans.....(i.e. "I recommend 1 to 3 stars)"

1 star lose
1 star lose
3 star lose
3 star win at 2/1 = down 3 pts
= chase