mistercents

I do not know his exact record for his 30 dime picks, but I am sure it ain't very good, none of his picks are for that matter. In fact, if you had bet with him since the end of November, you would be down about 1000 dimes. Because he has been doing so badly lately, he no longer puts the amount of dimes won (or should I say lost) over a prolonged period. For example, even though he got the Super Bowl right, he kept claimimg X amount of dimes profit over the last 7 days. But because he has lost alot recently, he no longer shows that number. Don't worry, as soon as he gets a few back to back winning days, he will say X amount of dimes profit over the last X number of days. Lang is a loser, plain and simple as that.

One other thing, he mention on his website about his integrity, how it would have been unreasonable of him to release a 1000 or 5000 dime play on the Super Bowl. Throughout November and December, Lang had been upping his bets from 100 dimes, to 200 dimes to 300 dimes to 500 dimes because he kept losing and wanted to recover his money. Now he has the audacity to say he has integrity. He is a blowhard who doesn't know the difference between handicapping and a hole in the ground.

savage1

I agree with mistercents on his assessment of Loser Lang.
I have followed sports services since their inception in the 70's, and frankly I can tell you that until the fictitious movie was made about him, I never heard of him.
Since that time, I have monitored his monopoly money plays and rating system, which are designed only to try to show him always in the black and have ZERO to real money management.
He is up and down like everyone else, but as stated and more importantly, the fact that he uses play money with his absurd multiple dime ratings shows he is in simply to sucker folks into buying his picks.
He puts out a longwinded speech every day on his website and especially after losing days to try to assure folks that even though he is losing, that over the long haul he wins.
From my stated long experience of following cappers and leaving aside his rating system and just rating him overall in his ability to pick games, I would give him a grade C over the time I have followed him.
In all honesty I think there are far better cappers to follow and for that matter to fade over a period of time.
He in essence is just another guy like you and me who tries to pick games on his own;his knowledge and the manner in which he selects games is unspectacular, and you could do better just picking the games on you own or following someone else.
ps The fact that he has had or perhaps even still has a relationship with Stu Feiner, arguably one of the biggest liars and scamdicappers ever, is a signal to simply stay clear of this guy.

UTHUSTLER

so who would you fade savage1?

savage1

I personally don't fade anyone.
If you want to fade, why not check with the major monitoring services or simply the service thread in this forum and simply see which services have the worst record over time or at a particular moment or simply fade them;this could include Lang if he is going bad for at a certain time.
Sorry if that is too general;personally I think a better method over time is to simply check all the forums including this one. If you see just about everyone is playing a particular game or games, stay away or go against those picks.

husker

it's tough to fade most services. they are all about marketing, the games don't really matter. it's easier to market if they win, but not necessary. most are about 50% over time. most of the time a hot service cools off after you start to follow and the cold service goes on a hot streak after you start to fade.


UT, you should track lang's plays here and see how he does. that would give you (and everyone else) the answer to your question. everyone that wants to know how a capper does should do this.