The Betting Assassin – Final Review
I have had a good read through the manual. It is short, straight to the point and well written which is about the only good thing I can say about it. In my opinion this guy tries to cover too many sports but has no big answers on any of them.
Basketball and Baseball:
Uses progressive staking of 3 bets. For me progressive staking is a big no no as in the end you end up hitting your worse nightmare wiping previous profits out and usually more.
Soccer:
What he suggests is looking for tight games and then trading. i.e. Laying OVER 2.5 goals before the match and then Backing OVER 2.5 goals after the first 5 minutes and so on if no goal has been scored… It may work out for most games but it is time consuming and you have to bet an many games to make some sort of decent profit and at some point someone would score on the first few minutes and you would easily lose any profits previously made.
Tennis:
He suggests to back favourites where the difference in odds is higher than the points suggested. A very poor way to find the winner of a tennis match in my opinion. If it was that easy I wouldn’t be writing this review.
Horse Racing:
The idea is to look for clear favourites the night before racing which are also heavily tipped by the newspaper tipsters. You then back those favourites the night before and then lay them at lower odds the next day. The idea is that many people place their selections based on the mornings paper selections hence moving the price down. This is a very old method that is found for free all over the internet. It will work on many occasions but is not profitable long term.
To summarize the author has a good use of the jargon but really all he’s done is taken a set of random criteria and moulded them into something that looks like a system. We all know that if you put a set of criteria together and apply it to any sporting event, if you apply it enough times eventually some will look viable.
I cannot see anybody being completely happy if they have paid good money for this, quite frankly what he has produced isn’t any better than I could produce after an hours work on the computer researching sporting facts.
Rating 1/5 – Very poor in my opinion. Not reliable enough to use in the long-run and one to avoid.
