Posted:
#26
this thread is mean 
0
Look in the Mirror - You are the Public
Posted:
#27
Lines are usually never a 50/50 coin flip....usually the odds are shaded towards one team because of the public idea of what fair odds are. The key is determining what you believe are the true odds of winning or what the true odds of covering are. Once you come up with that number you can compare that to what the odds are and see if value exists.
The point i am making is this...math has no memory and doesn't care where the public is. Math is 1 of those things that does whatever it wants wherevever and anytime it wants. It really doesn't matter what the public thinks unless you believe someone is on the take. If someone is it would certainly shift the probability big time. If not its just another random event based on a million mathematical factors.
Just keep in mind that most if not all games are not 50/50 propositions. Yes they will either win or lose...but by no means are these games 50/50. Come up with your own numbers and allow the math instead of emotion or opinion to make the decisions for you. If you allow this to happen your chances of success will improve 10 fold. gl
0
Posted:
#32
Hey Guys - I was originally making two points:
1) We (you & I) are the public on all these plays. We make up the percentages when we see that XX% is on a given team. We are the same people who are doing all the researching, watching all the games, making all the opinions, and building sportsbooks & hotels in Vegas. We aren't smarter than the PUBLIC, we are the public.
2) We need to stop all the bashing of posts when we "tail" guys, and their picks dont win money. These guys are just trying to help (and boost their egos - seriously), and show to everyone on here that they can pick some winners. Nothing wrong with that, just dont blindly tail, and then get pissed if you lose the money you are risking. And, if you do lose, dont come into a thread & tell the guy his picks were terrible, or he's stupid. I mean, who is more stupid, a guy who lists the games he likes, or the guy BETTING money on teams (and games) that he has no clue about, following some poster on a Covers message board with some naked, big tited lady as an avatar. - you guys are living the fantasy island dream.
Then, a disagreement occurs when I say that it is "It is tough, almost impossible to play multiple games every day and win money." I stand by that - it is tough for most. Then I get a college guy explaining "standard deviation" to me.
Well, I was a college guy once too, before I started a statistical analysis company & sold it, to what folded into the Gallup Company more than 15 years ago, in a multi-million dollar deal. So, please college guy, dont try to explain standard deviation, and tell me that the more games you bet, the better opportunity you have to win money in the long-term. That is just wrong, and if you can afford it long enough, you will find that out. Plus, as a prime example, if more was better, parlay players would be living in the bigger houses, not the poor house. And, when you get as old as I am, you will have enough experiences to know I am right on this. There are nights when there is good value in multiple games on the board. But, there is not multi-game value every night. (I actually thought I saw a Sulferboy post actually identifying that.) Plus, there is not going to be VALUE on every college bowl game, or every March madness game - again, you can not win money betting multiple games every night just to have the action. In the short term, and on some nights, you will win, but over time, this is a losing formula.
One last note for the college guys out there trying to make money wagering - its fun! It's exciting! And, you, just like everyone of us other former cool college guys, living away from home, enjoying the "crazy" life, will find out that you DONT know more than everyone else, and when you get some more life experiences with gambling, you will see. So, please dont lecture us old guys about this activity & how to make money.
Just QUIT all the hate on the guys who are posting plays, and, like mentioned in another post, quit the copycat playing, and betting teams from conferences that you know nothing about.
GL -
0
Posted:
#33
great thread
also, i love how these idiots believe that like the distribution on a single game is 90% sometimes.......look at the source, who is giving you those #'s, the books!!!...those morons don't ever stop to think that they are releasing bs percentages trying to get you to fade and go on the wrong side.... also, if you look at the covers threads, a lot of time it will say like 90% on one side but how the fck can that be, bc 3 out of every 7 threads are picking the 10% side and as you said, the covers posters are THE PUBLIC
0
Posted:
#34
Quote Originally Posted by kashl2008:
great thread
also, i love how these idiots believe that like the distribution on a single game is 90% sometimes.......look at the source, who is giving you those #'s, the books!!!...those morons don't ever stop to think that they are releasing bs percentages trying to get you to fade and go on the wrong side.... also, if you look at the covers threads, a lot of time it will say like 90% on one side but how the fck can that be, bc 3 out of every 7 threads are picking the 10% side and as you said, the covers posters are THE PUBLIC
for instance i know 3/4 of these fckheads got their bradley pick just by looking at the percentages, and look at what is happening to bradley
0
Posted:
#37
Quote Originally Posted by kashl2008:
for instance i know 3/4 of these fckheads got their bradley pick just by looking at the percentages, and look at what is happening to bradley
And what abou the so called fuckheads on TCU? If you capped the game at all or anyone else in that matter clearly BRAD was the right play. But you cap in the fact that BUTLER is going to have there best shooting night of the season away from home on there 3rd straight road game along with fact that you have a powerhouse in OHIO ST on deck where your former coach happens to be. Oh and did i mention that BRADLEY has not lost to a HORIZON conf opponent in 18 straight games at home. CLEARLY BRADLEY WAS THE RIGHT SIDE BUT YOUR THE DUMBASS THAT MORE THAN LIKELY TAILED WHEN YOU SAW SOME VERY CREDIBLE CAPPERS ON IT. I feel bad for a lot of people on here cause this play did not come through due to the fact this was by far my strongest play of the season with the points mentioned above. PUB percentages had nothing to do with this one and it doesnt with a lot of games. Yes i do factor it in but it is to a very small part of what i do when i cap.
0
Posted:
#38
One thing i have noticed, if you ever look at the percentages of people betting (the main page Consensus) the "general public" is a big winner everyday. Look at the NBA today the "general public" won 6 out of 9 games. Now look at reality, Vegas would not be building 2 billion dollar casinos and your wouldnt have a ocean of sportsbooks if the "general public" is winning everyday. I have a small pool of people who i take bets from, they do their research, follow "cappers" , but you know what they win a little bit here and there but over time they lose alot more. I eat about 50% of all bets sometimes more and i am doing very good so far (if only would stop playing college BB so much). BOL to all 
0
Posted:
#39
Quote Originally Posted by jennado:
Hey Guys - I was originally making two points:
1) We (you & I) are the public on all these plays. We make up the percentages when we see that XX% is on a given team. We are the same people who are doing all the researching, watching all the games, making all the opinions, and building sportsbooks & hotels in Vegas. We aren't smarter than the PUBLIC, we are the public.
2) We need to stop all the bashing of posts when we "tail" guys, and their picks dont win money. These guys are just trying to help (and boost their egos - seriously), and show to everyone on here that they can pick some winners. Nothing wrong with that, just dont blindly tail, and then get pissed if you lose the money you are risking. And, if you do lose, dont come into a thread & tell the guy his picks were terrible, or he's stupid. I mean, who is more stupid, a guy who lists the games he likes, or the guy BETTING money on teams (and games) that he has no clue about, following some poster on a Covers message board with some naked, big tited lady as an avatar. - you guys are living the fantasy island dream.
Then, a disagreement occurs when I say that it is "It is tough, almost impossible to play multiple games every day and win money." I stand by that - it is tough for most. Then I get a college guy explaining "standard deviation" to me.
Well, I was a college guy once too, before I started a statistical analysis company & sold it, to what folded into the Gallup Company more than 15 years ago, in a multi-million dollar deal. So, please college guy, dont try to explain standard deviation, and tell me that the more games you bet, the better opportunity you have to win money in the long-term. That is just wrong, and if you can afford it long enough, you will find that out. Plus, as a prime example, if more was better, parlay players would be living in the bigger houses, not the poor house. And, when you get as old as I am, you will have enough experiences to know I am right on this. There are nights when there is good value in multiple games on the board. But, there is not multi-game value every night. (I actually thought I saw a Sulferboy post actually identifying that.) Plus, there is not going to be VALUE on every college bowl game, or every March madness game - again, you can not win money betting multiple games every night just to have the action. In the short term, and on some nights, you will win, but over time, this is a losing formula.
One last note for the college guys out there trying to make money wagering - its fun! It's exciting! And, you, just like everyone of us other former cool college guys, living away from home, enjoying the "crazy" life, will find out that you DONT know more than everyone else, and when you get some more life experiences with gambling, you will see. So, please dont lecture us old guys about this activity & how to make money.
Just QUIT all the hate on the guys who are posting plays, and, like mentioned in another post, quit the copycat playing, and betting teams from conferences that you know nothing about.
GL -
The more games you bet when you have +EV, assuming you're betting a percentage of your bankroll complimentary to having a low risk or ruin based on the odds of the bets your making at +EV, you will have a less variance than making 1 play or 1 big play per day.
Secondly, parlays are not a ticket to the poorhouse necessarily. If your a 55% and abover handicapper at -110, 3 team parlays paying 6-1 (not to mention if you can find better odds) will actually make you more money in the long run with the same amount of risk. However, if you're a losing player, parlays are a quick ticket to the poorhouse. any parlay above 3 teams is also a ticket to the poor house, unless its a round robin parlay in 3's.
0
Posted:
#40
Quote Originally Posted by GAMBLE_4heisman:
The more games you bet when you have +EV, assuming you're betting a percentage of your bankroll complimentary to having a low risk or ruin based on the odds of the bets your making at +EV, you will have a less variance than making 1 play or 1 big play per day.
Secondly, parlays are not a ticket to the poorhouse necessarily. If your a 55% and abover handicapper at -110, 3 team parlays paying 6-1 (not to mention if you can find better odds) will actually make you more money in the long run with the same amount of risk. However, if you're a losing player, parlays are a quick ticket to the poorhouse. any parlay above 3 teams is also a ticket to the poor house, unless its a round robin parlay in 3's.
0
Posted:
#41
Quote Originally Posted by GAMBLE_4heisman:
The more games you bet when you have +EV, assuming you're betting a percentage of your bankroll complimentary to having a low risk or ruin based on the odds of the bets your making at +EV, you will have a less variance than making 1 play or 1 big play per day.
Secondly, parlays are not a ticket to the poorhouse necessarily. If your a 55% and abover handicapper at -110, 3 team parlays paying 6-1 (not to mention if you can find better odds) will actually make you more money in the long run with the same amount of risk. However, if you're a losing player, parlays are a quick ticket to the poorhouse. any parlay above 3 teams is also a ticket to the poor house, unless its a round robin parlay in 3's.
0
Posted:
#42
Quote Originally Posted by guyhi:
One thing i have noticed, if you ever look at the percentages of people betting (the main page Consensus) the "general public" is a big winner everyday. Look at the NBA today the "general public" won 6 out of 9 games. Now look at reality, Vegas would not be building 2 billion dollar casinos and your wouldnt have a ocean of sportsbooks if the "general public" is winning everyday.
Dont confuse sports gambling with building Vegas. The biggest wagered game of the year is the superbowl, and that only had $96 million on it for all of Nevada. Regular NFL games id be surprised if it was above $1 million, NBA a quarter of that. And thats with people taking both sides. Casino's make peanuts on sports gambling.
Looking at consensus sites like sportsbook.com or wagerline, only tell you the % of bets on 1 side of another, not a monetary figure. So you really dont know how the book is divided on a particular game. Generally its a good indicator but books will not reveal the amount of $$$ on each side that ppl are taking with them.
Also anyone who uses statistics to cap sports has never taken a meaningful statistics course. I have a masters in econometrics, including theory of regression modeling, non-parametric econometrics and financial econometric modeling. Trying to estimate specific game lines involves a tremendous amount of data, significantly more than we gamblers generally tend to use.
First off i dont believe there is a super model that is generating all these lines, i think there is a model that pumps out a base estimate, and then subjective selections by humans readdjusts the line to reflect certain qualitative characteristics of sports.
You could set up a regression equation with a helluva lot of dummy variables to possibly try to estimate a line with qualitative characteristics (ill get back to you when ive finished my model, lol), but to be honest i think a large part of the line comes from subjective human interaction.
Statistics is more useful in Pro Sports than college sports, because for the pros there is a bigger sample pool which reduces a lot of variation in the parameters of the model. Sufficiet to say, the line that comes out in pro sports is generally a very 'fair' line, but because the variations in the outcome of sports is so large, we gamble. Could you imagine if a OJ Mayo always shot 42% from the field, always scored between 20-23 points, 4-5 rebounds, like everyday. Well your variance would be small, the line would reflect that and you would end up with somewhat of a 50/50 game.
In general pro sports has a smaller variance than college, hence why you get ppl saying things like i cant believe UW-GB is -12. Look at the recent stats and there is no way you can make that line. Look at historical facts, historically how has a team fared like Idaho State after facing 4 big schools and is now on the road in a tough environment. How do they fair? I bet thats where u get ur -12 from.
Now add to the fact that historically UW-GB has been good at home, maybe that adds 1-2 points to the line, Idaho State has been bad (or something). How can u model this?? Its so subjective, even if you use dummy variables in your model, you can manipulate the model until u finally got a estimate that says -12. But does that mean u use that model for other schools? How about other conferences? Bigger conferences have more well known players which means their variance of their performance is prolly smaller. With 300 college basketball teams, is there 1 model that estimates all of the lines?
If i was going to estimate this model (maybe some of you want too, ive already spent too much time writing this, for those not interested stop reading), and you guys know how to use Excel or RATS or MATLAB or whatever stats software you know, your company has or your school has available. I would do compile the data for college bball like this:
1. Find data on each player, record their shooting %'s, the amount of points they score per their team total, the amount of pts they score, their ft%, ft attempts, playing minutes. Compile that for 6-8 players who have significant time, maybe 2-4 if its a midmajor and they run a motion offense where 3 guys sit around and set picks and 2 guys account for 40-50% of the scoring.
2. Then do the same for their defense statistics, you might have to use historical data for the team if its the beginning of the season (hence why you see 'sharp' lines at the end of the season, while now you see a lot of 'soft' lines).
3. Now you have to set up ur dummy variables, regarding if its a neutral court, away/home etc. You could set up 3 different models each looking at a different venue. Perhaps you want to setup a type of scale, like if its neutral court of Texas v Villanova at MSG, maybe instead of making it 0.5 for texas where 1 denotes home and 0 denotes away, you make it 0.25 for Texas and 0.75 for Villa. Very subjective i know.
4. From your data u have mean and deviations of the various aspects of the sport, so do a monte carlo simulation (basically a random number generator). The software with generate random numbers with the specified mean and deviation you found from the data. Then do say 1000 repitations and u get an estimate for each teams points for and against, compare with each other to estimate a line. You can also include subjective logic at this stage. Like say its princeton vs UAB, where UAB likes to run and princeton is more methodical in their offense, perhaps you have to give more weight to ur estimates of princeton than UAB. Or you might have to do some digging to see how historically teams like UAB do against teams like Princeton (this could be very tedious)
I imagine this is basically what EA SPorts games do when they simulate outcomes, and their simulations are vastly better for Pro's than college.
5. Another thing you would have to consider from the model is the structure of your error terms. The structure of your error terms will dictate which estimation method (there are a few) you will use to estimate your model. So say you think you should model for a player who is hot or cold, then players performance in time t will somewhat depend on how they faired in time t-1. In other words their performance today will depend on how well they played yesterday. You can model for that by including an autoregressive regressor (variable) in your error term, i wont go further than this. But it would be pretty interesting to try to model this stuff.
0
Posted:
#43
AHHHH yeah....I almost forgot. The 'ole Expected Value metric.
Again, my original statement was that it is tough, almost impossible to win money making multiple plays every night. I was not suggesting to make 1 play or 1 big play every night. I was suggesting that you have to pick your spots.
Obviously, if you have a +EV, and good discpline with the bankroll, over time, this will gain you money. So, for all those sports gamblers out there on the forum, could you please explain how you get a POSITIVE EXPECTED VALUE while you are handicapping?
Sports gambling is not a dice, cards, slots, or a roulette game. In those games there are finite outcomes with mathematical predictable results. Not so much in sports handicapping -
So, unless you are going to say, "Well, historically, I hit 53% of my games (which by the way is over a large sample of games), and that means the more games I bet, the more games I will hit correctly", then this whole idea of a +EV is smoke & mirrors.
So, for the benefit of the forum, could you please take a few games on tonight's card, or tomorrow's card, and explain to everyone how to handicap them to find a +EV, so that we will know which games to play?
My guess is that this forum is a bunch of guys looking to get a couple winners each night, and they are focused on the week to week results. They are not patient enough, nor disciplined enough in their bankrolls, to look at things in the long term. But, I am looking forward to your explaination on obtaining a POSITIVE EXPECTED VALUE.
0
Posted:
#47
i've looked over this sight for a couple weeks and have learned who bet too many, who is solid, who has good information,who is getting hot,
and those that are are lost. I have added my info trying to help.
Definitely the public. There is good info to be shared. You take want you want from it and ultimately make your own decision on what to play. I hope I can contribute and be helpful making everyone more profitable. I appreciate everyones continued effort handicapping and will continue being the PUBLIC!!!
God Bless Us All.
0
Posted:
#48
Had some thoughts while reading through this thread but NFL Crazy blew my mind.
But seriously, are we the public? I think Jennado makes some great points, but I'm never quite sure who the public is.
Is it the people who rarely wager, who watch sportscenter every once in awhile, who read the lines while skimming through the paper during coffee break, see big name teams like Indiana -3 at home against Cornell, and think 'you gotta be kidding, easy money?"
Or is it people on this board, who spend hours looking at stats, wake up thinking about who to bet, and post their plays on wagerline?
Maybe we are all the public, in some respect. Or maybe we use the term "Public" to define what we think would be a trap play or sucker play. But just this week, didn't Gonzaga -4, Arizona -6 and Butler -2 all look like "Public" plays? And didn't they all win easily? Just like Indiana vs. Cornell? and Indy vs. TCU?
Thoughts anyone
But seriously, are we the public? I think Jennado makes some great points, but I'm never quite sure who the public is.
Is it the people who rarely wager, who watch sportscenter every once in awhile, who read the lines while skimming through the paper during coffee break, see big name teams like Indiana -3 at home against Cornell, and think 'you gotta be kidding, easy money?"
Or is it people on this board, who spend hours looking at stats, wake up thinking about who to bet, and post their plays on wagerline?
Maybe we are all the public, in some respect. Or maybe we use the term "Public" to define what we think would be a trap play or sucker play. But just this week, didn't Gonzaga -4, Arizona -6 and Butler -2 all look like "Public" plays? And didn't they all win easily? Just like Indiana vs. Cornell? and Indy vs. TCU?
Thoughts anyone
0
Posted:
#50
Quote Originally Posted by jennado:
One last note for the college guys out there trying to make money wagering - its fun! It's exciting! And, you, just like everyone of us other former cool college guys, living away from home, enjoying the "crazy" life, will find out that you DONT know more than everyone else, and when you get some more life experiences with gambling, you will see. So, please dont lecture us old guys about this activity & how to make money.
Are you fucking kidding me?
First off don't even act like you know me, don't belittle me into some assumed category. I pay my way through school, pay my bills, my rent, my car, my insurance, groceries and everything. I balance capping and a full-time job and 18 hours of school a semister. So no, I'm not like every other 'cool' college guy and living the 'crazy' life. I've been on my own since I was 17 and instead of settling into a shithole life of bagging groceries I've worked my ass off to have a life for myself. So to hell with your brazen and altogther irresponsible assumptions about me the 'omg like crazy college kid'.
And this 'you don't have the life experiences'/better than though bullshit is just as irresponsible. I know two 8 year olds I used to play with at the chess club who could whip my ass day in and day out. My age and experience had no bearing on whether or not I could win.
This good ole' boy we been around longer logic is failing left and right. If you need proof of this just look to poker and how it is being dominated by the younger generation. My generation in capping I believe will be the first one to come close to cracking the bank, with the sheer amount of information shared on the internet, I can know more about a team in one day than you could know about them in a lifetime.
If you want to come at me with a valid, logical arguement then so be it, but this straw man bullshit is irresponsable and down right rude.
Don't make the assumption that since I'm a college kid I must be crazy and will blow all my money and I won't make the assumption that your old ass should move on to bingo.
0
Hot Forum Topics
