What is up with the Feist updates?

Thanks, Jim, we all know how to count.


I see you've become VERY good at counting, but not so good at expressing your opinion.


I keep looking for your comments and analysis about the picks people have posted. I assume that if the picks were bad, for instance, you would point out some flaws in the analysis and even give your own viewpoints, maybe even backing it up with a prediction of your own.


Mostly, all I can see on this forum are posts by you which reiterate the results of someone's pick.


That's really not hard to do, and is pretty unimpressive.


For example, if WildBill gives STL -10.5 as his play of the week, I can easily determine on my own whether or not that pick came through.


You see, I just look at the score, which was 15-14, and I subtract the Giants score from the Rams' score, which leaves me with one.


Then I take that number and compare it to the spread, which was 10.5. Is 10.5 bigger than 1 or less than 1? If it's greater than one, I then decide that STL failed to cover the spread and therefore the pick was incorrect. If it's less than one, I now see that STL covered the spread and the pick was correct. We all appreciate your help in doing this work for us, but it's pretty elementary stuff.


I saw a lot of your posts that tallied everyone's wins and losses for them, which was very nice of you, but not very helpful. In addition, I looked for your posts from BEFORE the games started where you pointed out the flaws in the analysis of each pick, and I looked especially hard for the part where you give your own picks and the reasons for them. I couldn't find those posts.


Could you point me to those posts? I'm sure they're extremely helpful. If you never actually posted anything about the picks before the games were over, I'd like to refer to you a thread below (started by Craig R. I believe) about the value of taking credit for picks after the games are over. To summarize that thread , it doesn't really matter whether or not we believe you when you take credit for a pick after the game is over, it's just that it doesn't contribute much to our discussion of the games. When you gleefully point out someone's pick was incorrect, it's a subtle implication that you are taking credit for having had the OTHER side of that pick.


If you really think these picks are bad, you should give your comments as to why. I have a strong feeling that some of these picks mirrored your own even though you so happily jump on the poster for getting it wrong, AFTER the game is finished and having never given your opinion on the game.


Your best posts have been the ones about the new coaches and your recent one about betting against huge dogs. You bring up

interesting ideas that merit further discussion. In fact, those were GREAT posts. Whereas your other posts like the one

titled "Cal failed to cover.... by ALOT" are just useless and childish.


If you actually were to give feedback on the picks BEFORE the game, you'd have a lot more credibility. You don't even

have to lay it on the line and make some picks, you would only need to provide a thoughful and intelligent analysis of a game to be a positive contributor to this forum. I have yet to see you do that.


But, I have a feeling that your main goal in participating in this forum is to gain credibility not by showing what you know, but by highlighting where others are wrong, and possibly drive some business to your pay service that way. Believe me, it's not working.


natedogg (7-8 after getting hammered last weekend. OUCH! Still a small sample though.....)


PS: I see you dodged my question below. Is it true or not that your pay service is 0-11 at scalf suggests? If so, maybe you could benefit from a friendly exchange of ideas and opinions provided for by this forum. Post some of your picks and your reasons and perhaps the contributors will have some good feedback for you.

To be honest, I think it is kind of fuuny and I kind of like what he is doing. I think there are some people who post here who think they are pretty good handicappers but in reality they are not. Feist is kind of bursting their bubble. Granted, he may also be trying to hype his service by subtly showing how bad some people are doing. Also, I might be a little bit more upset if my picks had been on the losing side instead of the winning side. Lets be honest, if someone is posting his picks here, they obviously think they know something about picking games. I am not trying to be an a**hole right now, but there are a fair number of people, who, in my opinion, are not that good at picking games yet they are posting picks here. They also provide no analysis, they just list their picks. This is a waste of time for everyone who reads this forum. It can be especially harmful to someone who may be just starting out betting games and is coming here to look for information and insight. I think there are some very good posters and handicappers here and there are some who should go away. Feist, rightly or wrongly, is just sticking the needle to those that he thinks (IMO) are not that good or dont know what they are talking about. Just my thoughts....Big Al

the real feist?????does not make sense to me unless he ran into mason...remember mason defended him...still, i cannot believe any big time hustler tote would post here...jmho...gl

I have to agree with Alec, I think Feist is just having a bit of fun pointing out other peoples misfortune.. Not exactly the best feeling when you are the one who's down, but not really hurting anyone either (Unless some of you other guys are wanting to start a pay service)..


Like I've said before, if people are coming here and just betting other people's picks exactly as they are posted, then that's their own problem... Most people like to hear the discussion and get some viewpoints on their own picks.. For example, I think a few people dissuaded me from taking Baltimore this weekend because of some impressive stats about the Pack at home that I was not aware of.. That's not to say that somebody came right out and said, "I'm betting Packers".. They just posted some stats that I may or may not have found useful, and left me to make up my own mind..


There is no question that some people here are better handicappers than others, that's why I come here.. to learn and discuss.. Who really cares about whether or not Feist wins or loses, or what his record is.. or what anyone's record is for that matter.. All I care about is making some cash at the end of the year..


Having said that, the posting of picks without any discussion whatsoever is just as useless as Feist posting how you did... But does it really hurt anyone??.. Nah.. Just ignore it if it bugs you

No shit... I agree wholeheartedly. No big time tout/capper would be posting the shit that he posts on here. Do you think his email address is feisty@yahoo (or whatever the hell he says it is?) So he knows the name of some handiscammer that touts his picks and has the name recognition to grab your attention... Come on here people. Stop paying attention to this moron.


Just my thought.


-CW


PS. I love Seattle on the run line (7:24 pm EST). /images/smile.gif LOL.

Big Al has it right for the most part. It is meant to be humerous. There are dozens of Jim Feist’s in this country. Promoting a sports betting service is not my thing. Leave those touts alone. What good is lot of careful analysis if someone goes 1-5, 1-9 or some other awful thing frequently? Really if somebody gets ticked about the results of their picks (I notice that scalf, Craig, Big Al, WB, or Rounder07 didn’t get too upset) being identified I think they’ve got a very big ego problem. What the hell would they post them for if they don’t want somebody to see how they did? It would seem to me that if someone laid a stinker and had it pointed out for all to see that next week (I try to point out good and bad) that someone would try real hard to make sure that that someone didn’t repeat themselves (unless you’re … well /images/smile.gif ). I also pointed out the scalf and Rounder07 had good weeks. I’m sure Natedog will get his chance to point out my crummy picks one of these weeks.


For this week I spent a grand total of 15 minutes making my picks. I won’t mention any other games I was interested in but I passed on them because I didn’t take the time this week to study the things I needed to study. I noticed that the offenses seem to do a lot better this past week. However, I do go over the stats and follow the NFL closely. I try to do it with no pre-conceived ideas or to support a pre-conceived notion. I have a fairly good idea about each team and I try to establish my own kind of offensive, defensive, and special teams rating for each team. I also take into account when a teams stats might be better than the team actually is. For instance the Packers had 20 sacks and Ghia-Whatever-funky-name-he’s-got had 9 of them going into yesterday. I know that can’t continue so I try and take that into account as well. I kind of let it come to me instead of me going to it if that makes any sense. Since 3 of my picks are history for this week I’ll talk about the Deadskins vs. Cowgirls game tonight. Dallas looks somewhat better on paper and they have arguably a better ‘D’ than the skins. There are some intangibles that I’m betting on and to be honest I know that I could be all wrong about the way I’ve analyzed them:


1) I think Tony Banks is a major disappointment at QB for his career. He fumbles way too much and throws too many interceptions especially at the wrong time. However, he is capable of playing a very good game and he is going to be highly motivated to have one because of his shabby treatment by the Cowboys in the pre-season


2) The Deadskins were totally embarrassed as a team on their earlier Monday night appearance by the Packers. This will provide some special motivation for them because they don’t want it to happen again. Kind of like posting your picks, going 1-5, having some smart ass point it out for all to see, and coming back next week to show all including the smart ass that yes you can really pick the games.


3) Marty Schottenheimer for all of the criticism he’s received is an excellent motivator and I just don’t see these two teams being that far apart from each other so he can have an effect on this game.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Jim Feist updates. As far as I'm concerned, props to JIM.


Rounder07

Personally, I'd rather see somone contribute something useful rather than point fingers at the OBVIOUS. My only point was that Feist could be one of the most valuable and respected contributors to this forum if he toned down the attacks and actually provided a little insight into the picks BEFORE they go bad.


That was my main point, and it really didn't have anything to do with the fact that my picks were bad this week. If I had a good week, I'd still be annoyed by the childish tally posts.


In his response to this thread, there was some good stuff about Monday's game. I'd like to see more of that kind of thing. Very good stuff.


natedogg

Sounds Fair