Thanks for the info Gen, I would think that a static model wouldn't make sense and a dynamic, or your model, that takes into account changing variables would prove in the long run to be more effective.
Except that General's model is not dynamic -- at least not as he describes it. Changing a static model daily does not make it dynamic. A dynamic model evolves on its own. For decades they tried to make static rule-based algorithms for playing chess. The idea was that humans know best and a computer should just be a very fast human doesn't work. It was only when they applied Minimax that computers got good at chess -- better than humans.
Quote Originally Posted by Russ-SVTF150:
Sometimes I find it is tough to avoid stats though, like a football team being say 8-1 ats and their o/u being 7-2, how could you not take that team and the over??? Like in last night's MNF game Pitts hadn't lost a home MNF game since like '92 or something crazy like that..... again thanks to all for the info and discussion
All that info is freely available and you can still get free drinks in a vegas sports book. If betting were as easy as looking at the team's last 10 games against the spread and o/u, Vegas books would close their doors.
Quote Originally Posted by Russ-SVTF150:
Thanks for the info Gen, I would think that a static model wouldn't make sense and a dynamic, or your model, that takes into account changing variables would prove in the long run to be more effective.
Except that General's model is not dynamic -- at least not as he describes it. Changing a static model daily does not make it dynamic. A dynamic model evolves on its own. For decades they tried to make static rule-based algorithms for playing chess. The idea was that humans know best and a computer should just be a very fast human doesn't work. It was only when they applied Minimax that computers got good at chess -- better than humans.
Quote Originally Posted by Russ-SVTF150:
Sometimes I find it is tough to avoid stats though, like a football team being say 8-1 ats and their o/u being 7-2, how could you not take that team and the over??? Like in last night's MNF game Pitts hadn't lost a home MNF game since like '92 or something crazy like that..... again thanks to all for the info and discussion
All that info is freely available and you can still get free drinks in a vegas sports book. If betting were as easy as looking at the team's last 10 games against the spread and o/u, Vegas books would close their doors.
Except that General's model is not dynamic -- at least not as he describes it. Changing a static model daily does not make it dynamic. A dynamic model evolves on its own. For decades they tried to make static rule-based algorithms for playing chess. The idea was that humans know best and a computer should just be a very fast human doesn't work. It was only when they applied Minimax that computers got good at chess -- better than humans.
Quote Originally Posted by Russ-SVTF150:
Sometimes I find it is tough to avoid stats though, like a football team being say 8-1 ats and their o/u being 7-2, how could you not take that team and the over??? Like in last night's MNF game Pitts hadn't lost a home MNF game since like '92 or something crazy like that..... again thanks to all for the info and discussion
All that info is freely available and you can still get free drinks in a vegas sports book. If betting were as easy as looking at the team's last 10 games against the spread and o/u, Vegas books would close their doors.
somebodies got a personal vendetta here
Quote Originally Posted by magyarsvensk:
Except that General's model is not dynamic -- at least not as he describes it. Changing a static model daily does not make it dynamic. A dynamic model evolves on its own. For decades they tried to make static rule-based algorithms for playing chess. The idea was that humans know best and a computer should just be a very fast human doesn't work. It was only when they applied Minimax that computers got good at chess -- better than humans.
Quote Originally Posted by Russ-SVTF150:
Sometimes I find it is tough to avoid stats though, like a football team being say 8-1 ats and their o/u being 7-2, how could you not take that team and the over??? Like in last night's MNF game Pitts hadn't lost a home MNF game since like '92 or something crazy like that..... again thanks to all for the info and discussion
All that info is freely available and you can still get free drinks in a vegas sports book. If betting were as easy as looking at the team's last 10 games against the spread and o/u, Vegas books would close their doors.
Look at all the cult members coming to their grand poobah's defense? It's adorable (and also kind of sad).
What's sadder is you knocking on the door the whole time begging everyone to look outside at you. You're either lonely or have an unhealthy hard-on for the General.
If you actually read the replies that have come your way, most aren't defending anyone... they're just telling you to stfu. Which you really should, because you look much sadder than anyone you're trying to shame.
Quote Originally Posted by magyarsvensk:
Look at all the cult members coming to their grand poobah's defense? It's adorable (and also kind of sad).
What's sadder is you knocking on the door the whole time begging everyone to look outside at you. You're either lonely or have an unhealthy hard-on for the General.
If you actually read the replies that have come your way, most aren't defending anyone... they're just telling you to stfu. Which you really should, because you look much sadder than anyone you're trying to shame.
What's sadder is you knocking on the door the whole time begging everyone to look outside at you. You're either lonely or have an unhealthy hard-on for the General.
If you actually read the replies that have come your way, most aren't defending anyone... they're just telling you to stfu. Which you really should, because you look much sadder than anyone you're trying to shame.
Exceptional insight...well said J-U
Quote Originally Posted by Johnny-Utah:
What's sadder is you knocking on the door the whole time begging everyone to look outside at you. You're either lonely or have an unhealthy hard-on for the General.
If you actually read the replies that have come your way, most aren't defending anyone... they're just telling you to stfu. Which you really should, because you look much sadder than anyone you're trying to shame.
Great night hitting 2 ties. Overall profit for the night +4.28 units.
TOR@NYI OVER 5.5 1.82 (-124) - WIN $182
PHI@CHI OVER 5.5 1.84 (-118) - LOSE $100
NAS ML 1.68 (-147) - WIN $168
SJ@BOS TIE 3.93 (+293) - LOSE $100
VAN@DAL TIE 3.93 (+293) - LOSE $100
DET@MTL TIE 3.97 (+297) - WIN $397
NYR@NJ TIE 3.81 (+281) - WIN $381
Overall cost of bets: $700
Overall winnings: $1128
Overall profit: +$428, +4.28 units
2014-2015 NHL Season Record to Date: 30W - 25L
Starting Bankroll: $10,000
Current Bankroll: $14,075
Total Profit in $: +$1,475
Total Profit in Units: +14.75 units
'another' 2 TIE WINS, great night of value, @ +297 & +281 your form shines, as does your unit count. congratulations on gaining the winning edge. cappin' TIES takes a time consuming effort....good job all the way around
Quote Originally Posted by GeneralSharp:
Great night hitting 2 ties. Overall profit for the night +4.28 units.
TOR@NYI OVER 5.5 1.82 (-124) - WIN $182
PHI@CHI OVER 5.5 1.84 (-118) - LOSE $100
NAS ML 1.68 (-147) - WIN $168
SJ@BOS TIE 3.93 (+293) - LOSE $100
VAN@DAL TIE 3.93 (+293) - LOSE $100
DET@MTL TIE 3.97 (+297) - WIN $397
NYR@NJ TIE 3.81 (+281) - WIN $381
Overall cost of bets: $700
Overall winnings: $1128
Overall profit: +$428, +4.28 units
2014-2015 NHL Season Record to Date: 30W - 25L
Starting Bankroll: $10,000
Current Bankroll: $14,075
Total Profit in $: +$1,475
Total Profit in Units: +14.75 units
'another' 2 TIE WINS, great night of value, @ +297 & +281 your form shines, as does your unit count. congratulations on gaining the winning edge. cappin' TIES takes a time consuming effort....good job all the way around
It's basically a robotic betting system. My models, as I stated multiple times, are updated daily. Dynamic is changing variables. For example, if you just take stats from a stat site on goals scored, your data is flawed. Simply being, if you don't account for lineup changes, injuries, etc... you are using flawed data. That is why I keep my own database.
vg assessment, a boxscore-daily-upgraded database is a tool of the trade, essential when handicapping the NHL. valued commentary.
Quote Originally Posted by GeneralSharp:
It's basically a robotic betting system. My models, as I stated multiple times, are updated daily. Dynamic is changing variables. For example, if you just take stats from a stat site on goals scored, your data is flawed. Simply being, if you don't account for lineup changes, injuries, etc... you are using flawed data. That is why I keep my own database.
vg assessment, a boxscore-daily-upgraded database is a tool of the trade, essential when handicapping the NHL. valued commentary.