Why does everyone else seem to be winning? Or. . . why do I lose tailing bettors with winning records?
Here you are, you're profitable beating MMA for a few bucks. Maybe it's cheeseburger money, maybe it's significant to your lifestyle. Either way, MMA is only once a week, if you're lucky.
You want to make money 7 days a week, not 1 day a week! It's the middle of the NBA season, but you don't know anything about NBA. Next thing you know you find your way into the NBA section of your favorite gambling forum, and wouldn't you know, there's 10 guys there who are up 20 units or so this season. Well, they must be doing something right! Just start tailing their bets and you've got an extra money source!
But, wait! Why stop at NBA, there's probably some guys beating soccer and baseball. I've just got to tail winners and I'll get rich fast.
So, you start tailing, and suddenly these guys aren't doing so hot. They're break-even or maybe even losing!
Why is this? Why do they start losing as soon as you start tailing?
The answer is SURVIVORSHIP BIAS!
Warren Buffet has a great analogy about a worldwide coin flipping contest. Everyone on earth is paired up and flips coins. The winner moves on to face another winner. Eventually, you get down to a handful of people. These people are praised in the media for being so successful. Some of them write books about the techniques they used to win.
Eventually a winner is crowned. He went absolutely perfect, did not lose once, beat the entire world! Why did he win? Because someone had to. The entire contest was set up for exactly that outcome.
So back to our forum example. We have possibly 100 people in the forum posting their picks every day. The guys who win post more and more picks, while the guys who start off losing are less and less motivated to post. Eventually half of the field has stopped posting. But now some of the guys who were winning start losing, and they're not up 10 units anymore, they're stuck 2 units, so most of them stop posting.
Eventually, you're left with the guys who have been lucky enough to continue winning all this time. But were their wins meaningful? Are there sample sizes significant, or have they just gotten lucky? How big of a sample size do you need? Without delving into the maths of it, the answer is, much longer than 1 season of any sport can tell you.
If you're going to tail someone, you should look into their methodology, and not simply their win/loss record. Is there a reason why they have an edge? Are they taking advantage of something that other people aren't? Or are they just flipping coins?
Here you are, you're profitable beating MMA for a few bucks. Maybe it's cheeseburger money, maybe it's significant to your lifestyle. Either way, MMA is only once a week, if you're lucky.
You want to make money 7 days a week, not 1 day a week! It's the middle of the NBA season, but you don't know anything about NBA. Next thing you know you find your way into the NBA section of your favorite gambling forum, and wouldn't you know, there's 10 guys there who are up 20 units or so this season. Well, they must be doing something right! Just start tailing their bets and you've got an extra money source!
But, wait! Why stop at NBA, there's probably some guys beating soccer and baseball. I've just got to tail winners and I'll get rich fast.
So, you start tailing, and suddenly these guys aren't doing so hot. They're break-even or maybe even losing!
Why is this? Why do they start losing as soon as you start tailing?
The answer is SURVIVORSHIP BIAS!
Warren Buffet has a great analogy about a worldwide coin flipping contest. Everyone on earth is paired up and flips coins. The winner moves on to face another winner. Eventually, you get down to a handful of people. These people are praised in the media for being so successful. Some of them write books about the techniques they used to win.
Eventually a winner is crowned. He went absolutely perfect, did not lose once, beat the entire world! Why did he win? Because someone had to. The entire contest was set up for exactly that outcome.
So back to our forum example. We have possibly 100 people in the forum posting their picks every day. The guys who win post more and more picks, while the guys who start off losing are less and less motivated to post. Eventually half of the field has stopped posting. But now some of the guys who were winning start losing, and they're not up 10 units anymore, they're stuck 2 units, so most of them stop posting.
Eventually, you're left with the guys who have been lucky enough to continue winning all this time. But were their wins meaningful? Are there sample sizes significant, or have they just gotten lucky? How big of a sample size do you need? Without delving into the maths of it, the answer is, much longer than 1 season of any sport can tell you.
If you're going to tail someone, you should look into their methodology, and not simply their win/loss record. Is there a reason why they have an edge? Are they taking advantage of something that other people aren't? Or are they just flipping coins?