My comment about "almost always wins" was not intended
sarcastically. For me, if someone claims that they do well, AND
they perform accordingly in a public contest, then their credibilty
goes up.
Here are the top 10 finishers from Tiger's "Spring Fling
II":
name bets wins ratio profit % profit ===================================================== 1 pelotapete 88 20 4.4 121.8 69.2 2 Daniel I 87 21 4.1 124.8 71.7 3 TR 88 22 4.0 106.4 60.5 4 steve r 88 21 4.2 101.6 57.7 5 Perry 88 19 4.6 100.8 57.3 6 Chris A 88 19 4.6 93.8 53.3 7 Craig G 88 20 4.4 91.6 52.0 8 George Z 75 18 4.2 84.8 56.5 9 Bar 88 15 5.9 79.6 45.2 10 hefty5k 88 16 5.5 65.8 37.4
On the face of it, Daniel I looks like the winner, but there were
some bonus TigerBucks involved which made a tiny differnce.
I think that in that particular contest the standout handicapping
picks came through with a vengeance, and therefore most contestants
did very well. But the fact remains that picking 1 out of 4.4
winners - if done consistently - WOULD definitely translate to
winning "almost all the time".
So spelling, grammar, puntuation, and logical organization aside,
pelotapete deserves some respect.
