Games and puzzles have always fascinated me. I enjoy figuring out solutions to complex problems, and I enjoy writing out those solutions. When I was about six years old, I learned the rules for tic tac toe. While my friends were drawing lines and marking their x's and o's, I was figuring out the optimal strategy. I figured out where to mark my x if I played first, If I played second, I figured out where to mark my o as a function of where my opponent placed an x. I never lost a game of tic tac toe.

When I was about twelve I started unlocking the secrets of blackjack. I used an office calculator (personal computers did not exist then) to working out the expectations - I removed the dealer's upcard and two player cards, and figured out what the player's expectation was for standing, hitting, or doubling down. Unfortunately, before I finished, Dr. Edward Thorp beat me to the punch with his book Beat the Dealer, the first book on card counting. The first thing I did when I got Thorp's book was examine the numbers in his tables 4a to 4j, which duplicated the work I had been doing. Thorp's numbers agreed with my own, so I knew that he was giving us the real goods. Some people doubted that blackjack could be beaten, but I was convinced that Thorp presented a winning system in his book. I learned his ten-count, and then had to wait until I turned twenty one so that I could use my new skill in Nevada.

The game keeps changing, so there is always need for a new book. When Thorp wrote his book, blackjack was dealt from a single deck, and about the only rule variation was whether the dealer stood or hit on soft seventeen. I still remember when four-deck blackjack came to Las Vegas -- it was like a whole new game. I needed four-deck strategy numbers and they did not exist in any of the blackjack books available at the time, so I worked out my own numbers on computers at college. I needed surrender numbers and they also were not available in books, so I worked out my own. I needed numbers for splitting pairs when you were not allowed to double after splitting, and so worked out my own. Thirteen years after Thorp's book appeared, I published a blackjack book of my own. I've since published a couple more books and software for analyzing blackjack, and have a website devoted primarily to blackjack - bj21.com.

Then I figured out video poker, and wrote software analyzing it and then a book explaining the strategy generated by the software. I analyzed pai gow poker to come up with the optimal strategy for dividing a seven-card hand into two hands of five cards and two cards, and wrote a book on that game. I also wrote a book on betting horses. Along the way I played many casino tournaments, learning the details of tournament strategy by playing against the pros and developing a few ideas of my own. That also culminated in software and a book.

I've always been fascinated by sports betting. What fascinates me most is the mathematics of prop bets. Should I bet a team to have fewer than 8.5 season wins at -170, or should I take the same team to have fewer than 8 wins at -110? One of those bets is better than the other, and I enjoyed the process of figuring out which is the better one. My interest in sports betting culminated in a book titled Sharp Sports Betting, and this website.

In the summer of 2004, I turned over administration of SSB to a frequent poster (and current NFL host) who goes by "Goats" so that I could study the casino game of craps. A skillful shooter can get the edge in his favor. I wrote a book explaining how to build the necessary skill at tossing dice, and how to apply that skill in a casino, including what bets to make. I see my future as publishing books written by other people rather than writing another book of my own.

When my wife told me we should go to Vegas to "check it out," I had no idea that I would soon begin a long career as a sports handicapper. After we accidentally discovered blackjack on a trip to the Bahamas, we planned our first trip to Vegas to play some blackjack and I was immediately drawn to sports betting. I remember my first bet was a $5 moneyline bet on the Chicago Cubs to win @ Arizona. (I no longer bet bases by the way.) When that fall rolled around, I began to follow lines in college football and found myself taking issue with some of them for a variety of reasons. When basketball season started, I noticed that I was able to identify lines that were off in my mind as well. After a year or two of following lines and betting while in Vegas, my wife again showed her gambling support by buying Stanford's book for me for valentine's day. I liked the mathematical way that Stanford put to the concept of EV when it came to matching up two teams. I used that model and my knowledge of college sports and began to post at SSB in the free pages. And the rest is history. I was very successful my first season posting college basketball picks and was then able continue the following season in college football.

My handicapping style is sort of old school I suppose. I don't use any databases or keep track of particular angles. I use a simple matchup formula based on my knowledge of the teams and the situation. I use key statistics to rate teams throughout the season that changes as the season progresses. My simple theory is that oddsmakers can not get every line correct, and I try to identify the lines that are incorrect, and give you a reason why.

Why should you pay for picks? I have always told people not to follow a handicapper blindly. Sports betting is extremely volatile. You should pay for picks so that you have additional information to make a wager that you might not have initially thought of, or to bolster your own opinion of a game. What most people don't realize is that you should also use picks to stay away from games that you were going to bet the other way.

The boss said, "Write a biography," so here is my life story. I turned 60 a week ago. Fezzik once told me that he didn't think much of any handicappers over 50 or under 30. Buyer beware. Then again, maybe we should wait until he turns 50 and ask again. I grew up in the generation that didn't trust anyone over 30. I don't feel the same way now. I received my Ph.D. in social sciences in 1971 and I made Full Professor at age thirty-eight. For a decade or more I taught research design and graduate multivariate statistics but gradually became attracted to philosophical hermeneutics and the human sciences of interpretation. I've published three books and over 75 scholarly articles and book chapters, none of which have anything to do with handicapping sports, though many center on the problems of multiple interpretation and the sciences of divergent rationalities that provide a frame for the ways in which I see, interpret, and make predictions. I've lectured at Universities in China, Finland, South Africa, Australia, and Canada. More relevant to my handicapping, I played basketball in high school and for two years in college, and I became sports editor for my college newspaper. I also worked for two professional sports franchises and was immersed in locker room sports culture where I learned a great deal about the vicissitudes of motivation and the form cycles related to the curve of athletic performances. I am not a sports fan per se. My interest in sports is entirely economic.

I began wagering on sports in 1974 when a graduate student of mine informed me he was working his way through graduate school by booking bets and I became curious. In the 1970's and early 80's, I was immersed in the wagering 'culture' in one of the three largest cities in the U.S. and had intimate contact with both the Jewish and Italian 'shops' in the city. It took me more than a decade to become a consistent winner.

I use the name OVERLAY for obvious reasons. I limit my wagers to situations and patterns that provide value opportunities. I only wager on what I believe I understand. That's why my wagering is limited to the NFL, NBA, March Madness, and Graded Stakes races. I believe I understand how these sports work as businesses as well as contests, and almost all of my research over the past 20 years has centered on patterns of motivation. There are many ways to win (and lose) at this game and the ones I understand the best are motivation and momentum. Humans are not machines and understanding the ebb and flow of performance cycles is one way to create an advantage. For me handicapping is a science and an art and a highly creative endeavor. Statistics are important but always must be contextualized and interpreted. Data doesn't speak. I am what horse handicapping guru Marc Cramer once called 'a kinky handicapper.' Most of the statistics I use a 'normal' person wouldn't even begin to consider.

The season-by-season history of my public selections on SSB is recorded elsewhere on the website. Over the six seasons here making selections on the NFL and NBA, the last four as a host in both sports, my record is 520-426 against WA lines, somewhere around +50 Units and right at 55%. Going forward, I anticipate 53-55%. I have a positive record on weighting selections, so the % is normally a bit higher when I recommend a higher % of bankroll on a play. I rate my plays from 1-4% of bankroll. I expect to have a losing season about once every five or six years and I expect to exceed 58% about that often as well.

I usually give an early selection or two on Tuesday or Wednesday in the NFL, though not always. I rarely make a play later than Friday afternoon, though occasionally I will recommend a play on Sunday morning if a line is moving favorably in my direction. In the NBA, I make the majority of my plays by noon Eastern time.

I like the collegiality and sense of community of SSB. Hosting is very demanding and, at times, downright stressful. Other people are counting on me. I don't want to let them down. I know how to handle my bankroll, but I worry a lot about subscribers who may not have as much experience with the streakiness of sports wagering. You really have to keep your wits about you. On the other hand, I feel as if I've learned from the feedback I've received and have researched a few new ideas each season that originated from e-mails or queries on the hosted page. I'd be surprised if subscribers didn't feel as if they improved their game each year, even in 'down' seasons.