Bet $200 on the O's first game, if I lose, I will bet the O's to make up for my $200 and a $100 profit, if they lose the 2nd game I will bet to make up all that I lost and a $100 profit, and if they lose the 3rd game and on and on.....
No way will KC win 4 in a row!!
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Bet $200 on the O's first game, if I lose, I will bet the O's to make up for my $200 and a $100 profit, if they lose the 2nd game I will bet to make up all that I lost and a $100 profit, and if they lose the 3rd game and on and on.....
That's just another Martingale. Your format is used all season in 3 and 4 game series, and YES, it does fail. If KC does win the first 2 in Baltimore, what happens to your confidence in games 3 and 4 at KC with no knowledge of the matchups and a ton of money at risk to make $100.00? Methinks you eat your losses and pursue something else.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
That's just another Martingale. Your format is used all season in 3 and 4 game series, and YES, it does fail. If KC does win the first 2 in Baltimore, what happens to your confidence in games 3 and 4 at KC with no knowledge of the matchups and a ton of money at risk to make $100.00? Methinks you eat your losses and pursue something else.
Or bet KC to win the world series at 3/1 and then bet the O's the first game and in any other favorable spot. ha ha gets complicated from there...tough for me to figure out too. Any other theories out there?
Or bet KC to win the world series at 3/1 and then bet the O's the first game and in any other favorable spot. ha ha gets complicated from there...tough for me to figure out too. Any other theories out there?
martingales are never safe (and boy I learned the hard way).
I don't think the Royals will sweep but I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility, they just swept the Halos and in the playoffs it's a matter of getting hot.
GL with your chase.
martingales are never safe (and boy I learned the hard way).
I don't think the Royals will sweep but I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility, they just swept the Halos and in the playoffs it's a matter of getting hot.
Bet $200 on the O's first game, if I lose, I will bet the O's to make up for my $200 and a $100 profit, if they lose the 2nd game I will bet to make up all that I lost and a $100 profit, and if they lose the 3rd game and on and on.....No way will KC win 4 in a row!!
Think agsin
Quote Originally Posted by magiccarpetride:
Bet $200 on the O's first game, if I lose, I will bet the O's to make up for my $200 and a $100 profit, if they lose the 2nd game I will bet to make up all that I lost and a $100 profit, and if they lose the 3rd game and on and on.....No way will KC win 4 in a row!!
Trust your hunch, none of these guys have PhD's in math or stats so they have no idea if this 4 step martingale is an effective bet or not,
on the surface it seems highly improbable, but even moreso if you throw $500 on betfair and hedge out in game once bal gets a lead.
also degen betters like key element always focus on the losses and trolling others for thinking in a way that isn't in a narrow minded scope they approve of. the primary concern here is that non stats guys like him invoke a theory meant for blackjack where past results are mutually exclusive to the future betting contract (which can NOT be hedged in real time), where in baseball that is not true. I know 2 people who use martingales/hedge systems in baseball to great effect.
Trust your hunch, none of these guys have PhD's in math or stats so they have no idea if this 4 step martingale is an effective bet or not,
on the surface it seems highly improbable, but even moreso if you throw $500 on betfair and hedge out in game once bal gets a lead.
also degen betters like key element always focus on the losses and trolling others for thinking in a way that isn't in a narrow minded scope they approve of. the primary concern here is that non stats guys like him invoke a theory meant for blackjack where past results are mutually exclusive to the future betting contract (which can NOT be hedged in real time), where in baseball that is not true. I know 2 people who use martingales/hedge systems in baseball to great effect.
Trust your hunch, none of these guys have PhD's in math or stats so they have no idea if this 4 step martingale is an effective bet or not,
on the surface it seems highly improbable, but even moreso if you throw $500 on betfair and hedge out in game once bal gets a lead.
also degen betters like key element always focus on the losses and trolling others for thinking in a way that isn't in a narrow minded scope they approve of. the primary concern here is that non stats guys like him invoke a theory meant for blackjack where past results are mutually exclusive to the future betting contract (which can NOT be hedged in real time), where in baseball that is not true. I know 2 people who use martingales/hedge systems in baseball to great effect.
You asked me not to post in your thread anymore. I didn't, although you posted some pretty ridiculous shiit. Now you have chosen to take the cheap shot angle in someone else's thread. You continue to embarrass yourself by accusing others of not having a PhD in math yet you show you know nothing about odds and probability by semi-condoning a system that is a proven failure. You won't last long around here with a super-gambler-businessman avatar and nothing else going for you. Hit the bricks, punk.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
Quote Originally Posted by flash_diamond:
Trust your hunch, none of these guys have PhD's in math or stats so they have no idea if this 4 step martingale is an effective bet or not,
on the surface it seems highly improbable, but even moreso if you throw $500 on betfair and hedge out in game once bal gets a lead.
also degen betters like key element always focus on the losses and trolling others for thinking in a way that isn't in a narrow minded scope they approve of. the primary concern here is that non stats guys like him invoke a theory meant for blackjack where past results are mutually exclusive to the future betting contract (which can NOT be hedged in real time), where in baseball that is not true. I know 2 people who use martingales/hedge systems in baseball to great effect.
You asked me not to post in your thread anymore. I didn't, although you posted some pretty ridiculous shiit. Now you have chosen to take the cheap shot angle in someone else's thread. You continue to embarrass yourself by accusing others of not having a PhD in math yet you show you know nothing about odds and probability by semi-condoning a system that is a proven failure. You won't last long around here with a super-gambler-businessman avatar and nothing else going for you. Hit the bricks, punk.
You asked me not to post in your thread anymore. I didn't, although you posted some pretty ridiculous shiit. Now you have chosen to take the cheap shot angle in someone else's thread. You continue to embarrass yourself by accusing others of not having a PhD in math yet you show you know nothing about odds and probability by semi-condoning a system that is a proven failure. You won't last long around here with a super-gambler-businessman avatar and nothing else going for you. Hit the bricks, punk.
best write up of the year
Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:
You asked me not to post in your thread anymore. I didn't, although you posted some pretty ridiculous shiit. Now you have chosen to take the cheap shot angle in someone else's thread. You continue to embarrass yourself by accusing others of not having a PhD in math yet you show you know nothing about odds and probability by semi-condoning a system that is a proven failure. You won't last long around here with a super-gambler-businessman avatar and nothing else going for you. Hit the bricks, punk.
Ok guys, after reading all your comments and doing more research on all the players, data and stats, I decided not to double up if I lose. I will just go with my gut feeling. Taking into consideration all the stats I gathered it looks like a 50 - 50 chance on any of these teams.
So I'll go with Baltimore. It's the team with the most homeruns, KC is the team with the least homeruns, Batimore is at home, and so since I do like hometeams, I have made up my mind and gamble on Baltimore. Whatever it is, it is.
Thanks for the time you guys took to write your comments. THEY were useful and helped me decide on my team.
Good luck to you all. Peace and stay healthy.
Ok guys, after reading all your comments and doing more research on all the players, data and stats, I decided not to double up if I lose. I will just go with my gut feeling. Taking into consideration all the stats I gathered it looks like a 50 - 50 chance on any of these teams.
So I'll go with Baltimore. It's the team with the most homeruns, KC is the team with the least homeruns, Batimore is at home, and so since I do like hometeams, I have made up my mind and gamble on Baltimore. Whatever it is, it is.
Thanks for the time you guys took to write your comments. THEY were useful and helped me decide on my team.
You asked me not to post in your thread anymore. I didn't, although you posted some pretty ridiculous shiit. Now you have chosen to take the cheap shot angle in someone else's thread. You continue to embarrass yourself by accusing others of not having a PhD in math yet you show you know nothing about odds and probability by semi-condoning a system that is a proven failure. You won't last long around here with a super-gambler-businessman avatar and nothing else going for you. Hit the bricks, punk.
lol. The first thing you must learn about probability is that a Martingale system is based upon mutually exclusive events like coin flips. Perhaps a book on conditional probability might help you. I recommend, an introduction to statistics. A typical logical fallacy is to attack the person and not the fact. Sorry you have never passed a single exam in stats but the fact stands!
Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:
You asked me not to post in your thread anymore. I didn't, although you posted some pretty ridiculous shiit. Now you have chosen to take the cheap shot angle in someone else's thread. You continue to embarrass yourself by accusing others of not having a PhD in math yet you show you know nothing about odds and probability by semi-condoning a system that is a proven failure. You won't last long around here with a super-gambler-businessman avatar and nothing else going for you. Hit the bricks, punk.
lol. The first thing you must learn about probability is that a Martingale system is based upon mutually exclusive events like coin flips. Perhaps a book on conditional probability might help you. I recommend, an introduction to statistics. A typical logical fallacy is to attack the person and not the fact. Sorry you have never passed a single exam in stats but the fact stands!
lol. The first thing you must learn about probability is that a Martingale system is based upon mutually exclusive events like coin flips. Perhaps a book on conditional probability might help you. I recommend, an introduction to statistics. A typical logical fallacy is to attack the person and not the fact. Sorry you have never passed a single exam in stats but the fact stands!
Quote Originally Posted by flash_diamond:
lol. The first thing you must learn about probability is that a Martingale system is based upon mutually exclusive events like coin flips. Perhaps a book on conditional probability might help you. I recommend, an introduction to statistics. A typical logical fallacy is to attack the person and not the fact. Sorry you have never passed a single exam in stats but the fact stands!
lol. The first thing you must learn about probability is that a Martingale system is based upon mutually exclusive events like coin flips. Perhaps a book on conditional probability might help you. I recommend, an introduction to statistics. A typical logical fallacy is to attack the person and not the fact. Sorry you have never passed a single exam in stats but the fact stands!
are you an actuary?
Quote Originally Posted by flash_diamond:
lol. The first thing you must learn about probability is that a Martingale system is based upon mutually exclusive events like coin flips. Perhaps a book on conditional probability might help you. I recommend, an introduction to statistics. A typical logical fallacy is to attack the person and not the fact. Sorry you have never passed a single exam in stats but the fact stands!
nah I am a mathematician by degree. It irks me to hear amatuer betters talk about martingales when baseball progressive betting is actually a sub-martingale system which can be profitably modelled to great success considering the guys who run the vegas books don't do any math and use an excel spreadsheet and don best feed to set odds lol. (mostly just taking pinnacles odds)
Quote Originally Posted by BirdsOnBat:
are you an actuary?
nah I am a mathematician by degree. It irks me to hear amatuer betters talk about martingales when baseball progressive betting is actually a sub-martingale system which can be profitably modelled to great success considering the guys who run the vegas books don't do any math and use an excel spreadsheet and don best feed to set odds lol. (mostly just taking pinnacles odds)
nah I am a mathematician by degree. It irks me to hear amatuer betters talk about martingales when baseball progressive betting is actually a sub-martingale system which can be profitably modelled to great success considering the guys who run the vegas books don't do any math and use an excel spreadsheet and don best feed to set odds lol. (mostly just taking pinnacles odds)
Likewise (re: math background before engineering in grad school then to business school) and former trader (for many years), I have my own approach for calculating odds. It's not overly convoluted. I didnt want to get too cute in my first season of MLB wagering.
I am always interested in hearing what the "quant jocks" are up to. I haven't looked much into what you're describing above. perhaps I should put something thought into it.
Quote Originally Posted by flash_diamond:
nah I am a mathematician by degree. It irks me to hear amatuer betters talk about martingales when baseball progressive betting is actually a sub-martingale system which can be profitably modelled to great success considering the guys who run the vegas books don't do any math and use an excel spreadsheet and don best feed to set odds lol. (mostly just taking pinnacles odds)
Likewise (re: math background before engineering in grad school then to business school) and former trader (for many years), I have my own approach for calculating odds. It's not overly convoluted. I didnt want to get too cute in my first season of MLB wagering.
I am always interested in hearing what the "quant jocks" are up to. I haven't looked much into what you're describing above. perhaps I should put something thought into it.
Likewise (re: math background before engineering in grad school then to business school) and former trader (for many years), I have my own approach for calculating odds. It's not overly convoluted. I didnt want to get too cute in my first season of MLB wagering.
I am always interested in hearing what the "quant jocks" are up to. I haven't looked much into what you're describing above. perhaps I should put something thought into it.
Pretty simple. I use non-bayesian machine learning tactics to produce simulations of games from a corpus of previous pbp data and mix in a lot of tradition actuarial player matchups with basic t-tests and correlations.
I pay a group of people minimum wage to collect stats no one else has, bat angle in the strike zone and of course fx data from GD2 server. delta height of ball vs bat barrel (height difference is much more important that horizontal position of ball since the bat covers less of it) and most importantly swing timing and where the hands are during the swings. Often I pick up on bad batting habits long before the public and bet large on overhyped lineups.
When you have this data you are miles ahead of anyone else. sports betting is 95% data munging, 5% analysis imo.
all of this stuff is pretty familiar though if you are an ex quant and its great to meet you!
Quote Originally Posted by BirdsOnBat:
Likewise (re: math background before engineering in grad school then to business school) and former trader (for many years), I have my own approach for calculating odds. It's not overly convoluted. I didnt want to get too cute in my first season of MLB wagering.
I am always interested in hearing what the "quant jocks" are up to. I haven't looked much into what you're describing above. perhaps I should put something thought into it.
Pretty simple. I use non-bayesian machine learning tactics to produce simulations of games from a corpus of previous pbp data and mix in a lot of tradition actuarial player matchups with basic t-tests and correlations.
I pay a group of people minimum wage to collect stats no one else has, bat angle in the strike zone and of course fx data from GD2 server. delta height of ball vs bat barrel (height difference is much more important that horizontal position of ball since the bat covers less of it) and most importantly swing timing and where the hands are during the swings. Often I pick up on bad batting habits long before the public and bet large on overhyped lineups.
When you have this data you are miles ahead of anyone else. sports betting is 95% data munging, 5% analysis imo.
all of this stuff is pretty familiar though if you are an ex quant and its great to meet you!
Hot Forum Topics
