Pendulum Cycle Theory: MLB chase experiment

[keel44]

It is all about profit per time for you. You have been using your semi-arbitrage for 64 days, right? You could say 2 months. My way could easily get you 1.5 x 5 = 7.5 units. Your way gave you 10 units.

Let us project out for 6 months of baseball. Your way could get you 30 units, but let us cut back due to your incredible streak and say 20 units 20u x $30 = $600. You have met your baseball goal!!

My way could get you 22.5, but let us cut back due to your incredible streak and say 10 units 10u x $45 ($40) = $450 or $400. You still met your baseball goal easily and safely!!

[arpeggiomeister]

I get where you are coming from and I like it.





I am going to sound a little rogue here but I am going to stick
with the money management system I laid out despite the fact it
entails more risk. This is not a slight to you in anyway. I like
what you came up with and anyone who is following this thread should
take notice of your work and follow it.





The reason I am sticking with the more dangerous route is that I
am out to prove a point. I have been told repeatedly by experts and
others that the martingale system and all of its variations are
garbage. The mere mention of a chase system in some circles and
people treat me as though I sacrifice kittens to Satan.





I made an easy 22% in the NBA this year with a similar strategy.
It was 7 tiers deep and my picks were posted before the games just as
I have been doing here. I am going to easily hit 40% in the MLB. If
I decide to increase my unit size for the underdog and over/under
then I have already blasted past that mark. I will have a thread for
the NFL where my target is just under 20%. I think it came out to
something like 19.7% and has hit over the past 10 years with zero
losses. That is astounding considering how terrible chase systems
are supposed to be.





The bottom line is that I am using a system that is not supposed
to work to make 100% gains a year. I am doing this publicly so
people can see that there is more to it then just luck. Not only can
I explain why it is working, but I can also tell you why other chase
systems like the Sports Cash System crash and burn. The system is
not deep enough (it's 4 tiers deep) to survive the cycles. Second,
he jumps from team to team and even sport to sport. This randomizes
the results so that the boom and bust cycles are no longer providing
the edge that I have demonstrated in these experiments. Jon Morrison
from SBC was much closer to getting it right but his system was too
shallow as well.






I do not know squat about baseball. I could not tell you the
names of 10 players off the top of my head. I am achieving this
strictly by looking at the odds being placed on the teams and
analyzing what I think is happening in the collective public
psychology to create those numbers. Making the leap from point
spreads to money lines was a little daunting but it seems to be
working well. That means it will work for any team sport. I think
the system will actually work better on professional sports vs
college because they are more “efficient”. The “efficiency”
simply tells me that the boom and bust cycles are operating faster
which is much more chaser friendly.





There may be pro handicappers making 100% a month or faster. That
does not matter to me. This is not a pissing contest. Can I get
rich making 100% a year? Absolutely!!! Using this system takes me
less then 30 minutes a day to create plays, and that is for 3
different systems. Most of my time has been spent balancing out the
arbs to see which game has the best return.





The bottom line is that this works. For the novice to
intermediate sports bettor who does not want to spend 60 to 70 hours
a week crunching data this will make you money. If you want to reach
the next level by all means you should work on your handicapping
skills but if you have the patience and discipline this system will
get you there over time without taking over your life.

[keel44]

Can you explain a little bit what you do for the nba? Follow the best team .... chase for 7 games?

[arpeggiomeister]

Everything wins again. Isn't it amazing how cocky you feel when
you are winning? It is like you forget the times when you are in a
losing streak and wondering if you are going to be able to pull out
of it. The psychology of this game is utterly fascinating. I would
love to think that I am above it, but I see the same reactions within
myself that I am trying to take advantage of from the public.





Today is apparently Rays day. They are still at the bottom of the
power rankings so they are our underdog. They also scored 12 runs so
they are our under play. TB does not fit the profile of your typical
cellar dwellar team. I choose the bottom ranked team expecting to
get plus odds. I am looking for the team that everyone has written
off. For being at the bottom of the power rankings TB is getting a
hell of a lot of respect. I rarely see them getting plus odds at
all. At -110 again today I will ride them but will be forced to
abandon them if it creeps any higher then -120. The idea is to get
plus odds so you can chase deep. -110 will add up quick in a chase
and we will do well to 7 tiers. We have not needed any depth for a
while but that is an illusion. You want about 10 tiers to play it
safe with the underdog chase. You also want to be out before the end
of August. We are well on pace for the second criteria but the first
one has me a bit nervous.





Today's Plays:





Underdog Chase

TB -110

$11.00

O/U Chase

TB U/8 EV

$10.00

Semi-Arbitrage

NYM +155	$153.75
ATL -1.5 +125	$174.25 ($64.06)

[arpeggiomeister]

Can you explain a little bit what you do for the nba? Follow the best team .... chase for 7 games?

The NBA system is so simple it is stupid, but it is deadly
accurate. I find the top ranked team in the ESPN power rankings. I
chase that team using a 7 tier grand martingale system. That is
basically it. The NFL system is exactly the same but only 5 tiers
deep.





There are a couple exceptions to take note of. The first is that
teams will change on the rankings from time to time. You must follow
these changes. However, you must not abandon your current chase
until it has finished out. If the Broncos are sitting at #1 and you
are on your 2^nd tier and the Seahawks take over that spot
you must finish your chase with the Broncos before switching to the
Seahawks.





The second exception is an exception to the first exception. lol
If there is a major injury that grossly affects the team such as the
Packers losing Aaron Rodgers abandon the chase. At this point you
are in survival mode and must do anything and everything to keep
yourself in the game. I was put in this situation last year,
although I did not have the system I am showing you now. I was
chasing the Packers when they lost Aaron Rodgers. I pulled out of it
by going all in on a 15 point teaser. I came out smiling but it
created a bad precedent that would eventually kill my 2013 season. I
got away with that move too many times and started to feel
invincible. Whenever you start getting that feeling you need a
reality check. That is why I mentioned it in my last post.





Anybody viewing this might say that this is really dumb...
...until you start to analyze why it is working. When I put the
pieces together I just about fell out of my chair.






This whole system depends on the point spread doing exactly what
it was designed to do; scare people away from betting the favorite.
People tend to over-react to what they see. When the #1 ranked team
is winning the spread gets pushed higher and higher. This is the
boom. The public is all over this like white on rice. When this
darling team loses ATS the public gets burned. This is the bust. It
is at this time that the team becomes undervalued. These are bubble
phenomenon and it is exactly how the point spread keeps things
balanced. The system is beautifully simple and incredibly accurate
so is it any surprise that the system that can profit from it is also
incredibly simple. The system I have presented uses the cycles
created by the point spread system itself to win money. That is why
I feel this is a better way to go then finding some trend and hoping
to hit better then 52.4% of the time. The people who are able to do
that will outpace me for certain, but this system is consistent and
pulls much larger returns then any mutual fund I have ever heard of.
It is simple and is unlikely to change. The bookies can not
safeguard against this without changing the point spread system
itself. If they try they will create anomalies so profitable that
the sharps will take them to the cleaners.





The eureka moment was when I started to study the average duration
of these cycles. Most of them are so short that it is no wonder
nobody has seemed to recognize them for what they are. What we are
interested in is the average duration of a losing streak for the #1
ranked team in the power rankings. The largest average streak in the
NFL is 4 games. For the NBA it is 6. There are a few anomalies that
will be larger but we are talking about averages so you cut out the
most extreme streaks.





I set up a 5 tier system and back tested the NFL for 10 years. I
chose the #1 ranked team for the beginning of the season and stuck
with that team for the entire season. Not a single loss!!!! I did
the same thing with the NBA. I had one loss in 2007 on the San
Antonio Spurs. I am willing to bet if I go back and do that test
again and change teams every time the power rankings change that loss
will be eliminated. Even if it is not, it is ample evidence that the
system does work. I do not need to win 100% of the time. I only
need to win more then I lose. The true test for any martingale
variation is can it double your money before losing? This system
produces 22% returns. 4 winning seasons in a row will double your
money if you compound your profits. 1 loss out of 10 years tells me
it is working.

[posey]

Very interesting post. Thank you for your indeep thoughts.

[BarstoolProphet]

Keel , maybe you could do an actual dollar figure for your style of MM , just as he has done in post#174. just for the first 15 days so we can see at least 2 groups. I too seem to only recoup losses and can not seem to go positive with yours.

thanks.

[BarstoolProphet]

Arp, I hope this works for you and you do not need to set up an account or any other crazy stuff. But here is an Excel file that will help you on your Arbitrage.

http://www.filedropper.com/rlroi

I tried copying into Google docs but the formulas did not transfer. Let me know if this helps. Its quick and dirty. All You do is input your odds. Both Underdog and the -1.5 RL odds , no need to input any other numbers. I did not lock anything so do not change anything unless you want. Its yours. The rest is done for you.

The left 3 columns give you the best game to choose from for that day. Or at least the Highest ROI given the odds. Column C , choose the highest then find its corresponding odds in Column E. Then you can see what % you need to put on each side in order to get an equal return , regardless of the outcome. Expect for a Home team win by 1 . lol

[BarstoolProphet]

https://www.sendspace.com/file/yu1aqo

Click in blue box to download from sendspace.
try this , that other one looks like crap.

[keel44]

Keel , maybe you could do an actual dollar figure for your style of MM , just as he has done in post#174. just for the first 15 days so we can see at least 2 groups. I too seem to only recoup losses and can not seem to go positive with yours.

thanks.

There is no need for an exact dollar amount.

Plays 1 thru 6 (5w 1L) raise a little
plays 7 thru 12 (4w 2L) raise more
plays 13 thru 18 (5w 1L) raise a little more
plays 19 thru 24 (4w 2L) raise again

Keep in mind that so far, this would not be profitable flat betting 18W - 6L around -15 units here. My way is down too, but not nearly as much because I want 6 wins in a group to win just 1 unit.

plays 25 thru 30 (6w 0L)

I have 1 unit profit here. I made up all the previous losses. My real intention for my strategy is to have many plays on the same day. We have only 1 play a day here so 30 plays to get 1 unit in 1 month. I will take it every time, but remember, this started off slowly -- a negative pace early on.

plays 31 thru 36 (6w 0L) already another unit
plays 37 thru 42 (6w 0L) +1
plays 43 thru 48 (6w 0L) +1
plays 49 thru 54 (6w 0L) +1
plays 55 thru 60 (5w 1L) raise a wee bit
plays 61 thru .......

+5 units for me in 2 months using only 1 play a day. It was safe and easy. Early on was fairly bad, but fairly common. After play 24, I am logically guessing I would be down in between 6-7 units---based on a 33 unit bankroll, this is not too bad.

[BarstoolProphet]

"The largest average streak in the
NFL is 4 games. For the NBA it is 6. There are a few anomalies that
will be larger but we are talking about averages so you cut out the
most extreme streaks."

This is precisely the lightning strike Keel was referencing. You can not simply "cut them out" or ignore them. They exist, and are bankroll killers.

The "best" system is one that prepares for them and can recover from their wake of destruction.

[keel44]

Sorry, using it for these bets, do not bode well for many plays on the same day. You won't have enough bankroll when this get dicey. I was thinking in terms of chases.

[keel44]

"The largest average streak in the
NFL is 4 games. For the NBA it is 6. There are a few anomalies that
will be larger but we are talking about averages so you cut out the
most extreme streaks."

This is precisely the lightning strike Keel was referencing. You can not simply "cut them out" or ignore them. They exist, and are bankroll killers.

The "best" system is one that prepares for them and can recover from their wake of destruction.

I will tell you that following/fading one team will spell disaster for the MLB or NBA. Teams go on streaks, sometimes long ones. Last year in the NBA, the Pacers were at the top of the power rankings in mid season. They had (2) 9 game losing streaks ATS thereafter. Things happen -- especially with point spreads. I say it is better to jump around from team to team at certain spots.

[keel44]

I gotta say for your type of bets here ARP, I like your money management better than mine. I like mine for chases. I would play to win a half unit instead of a whole one here, to be safe. You should easily get your ROI with 26 chase wins.

[BarstoolProphet]

Ok Arp I ran several statistical models to achieve your goal , and then some on MLB.

You have your bankroll of $930 and are going to do a 5 game arbitrage parlay. Here is the best approach. Your max tier is 5 and is set at $480.

This is what needs to happen. Take the BK of $930 and make it only a 4 tier with a max of $240. But you now have 2 cycles that can be made. $450 for cycle one and $450 for cycle 2.

Tier 1 = $30
Tier 2 = $60
Tier 3 = $120
Tier 4 = $240

Parlay the entire amount on game 5 as well, do not calculate simply for just 1 unit. continue to run it and it works out to be about 1.28 unit once the 5 games are won in a row.

Now if you lose the 4th tier , you still have "half" of a bankroll to continue with. To start an entirely new cycle.

Now lets say that you play the entire MLB season 6 months. Do not lose any cycles , ROI about 90-96% .
However, in the event you do lose a cycle , you still can obtain your goal and end up with about 43% ROI.

This limits the risk slightly less than your approach. You lose 5 tiers its over. 0% ROI and no bankroll. Keels system is by far the least risk of them all, yet it will never yield the 40% you seek.

But given the win % of 83.3% or greater. the odds of losing two 4 tier cycles in one year is VERY slim. Whereas compared to the odds of losing only one 5 tier cycle.

Food for thought.

[arpeggiomeister]

I will tell you that following/fading one team will spell disaster for the MLB or NBA. Teams go on streaks, sometimes long ones. Last year in the NBA, the Pacers were at the top of the power rankings in mid season. They had (2) 9 game losing streaks ATS thereafter. Things happen -- especially with point spreads. I say it is better to jump around from team to team at certain spots.

Keel, I was in the game running an experiment at the time the Pacers had their streak. They were not number one at that time. I believe they were either #4 or #5 at the time of the streak. I made it through that time with flying colors. I think you can further protect yourself against something like this if you were to simply take a top ranked team on a 3 to 4 game losing streak ATS and chase them. If you jump from team to team you lose the effect that is causing this in the first place. They are all bubble phenomenon. There are a few long streaks but most are extremely short. The thing that will guide you is to analyze the psychology behind the numbers. If a team goes on a long win streak ATS it is more likely that this will be followed by a long losing streak. Why? Because the public does not let go so easy in this case. The 2007 Patriots were a prime example of this. If it were not for their one win ATS against the Steelers that season would have been done for. In order to function at all you must cut the extremes out and prepare for them in other ways. Mainly you must find ways to filter out the circumstances that would create such a streak. My experiments are working. I have done the homework and seen the results with my own eyes. The "lightning strikes happen" so few and far between that the best way to protect yourself against them is to cut your bankroll in half and keep it in reserves. The system collectively makes 100% a year. If you bust it would take a full year to get back to where you were. In my research I had zero failures in the NFL and one failure in the NBA in 2007. At that pace you would have spent 2008 recovering and then doubled your money 5 times since. If you are keeping half in reserves at the beginning of each season then your bankroll will only double 2.5 times during that time. In my opinion it would pay you to hang it all on the line early on until you reach $10,000. Once you reach that level you can become conservative because you have built something worth protecting. Everybody's risk tolerance is different. Some people may get defensive at $1,000 or $2,000 while others might wait until $50,000 or $100,000. That is a personal decision. $10,000 is my number. At 100% per year it will take me 2.5 years to reach that number starting with $2,000. I am looking to do exactly that starting this fall with the NFL. When I reach $10,000 I have different strategies that I plan on using that are far lower risk then chasing systems.

[arpeggiomeister]

Ok Arp I ran several statistical models to achieve your goal , and then some on MLB.

You have your bankroll of $930 and are going to do a 5 game arbitrage parlay. Here is the best approach. Your max tier is 5 and is set at $480.

This is what needs to happen. Take the BK of $930 and make it only a 4 tier with a max of $240. But you now have 2 cycles that can be made. $450 for cycle one and $450 for cycle 2.

Tier 1 = $30
Tier 2 = $60
Tier 3 = $120
Tier 4 = $240

Parlay the entire amount on game 5 as well, do not calculate simply for just 1 unit. continue to run it and it works out to be about 1.28 unit once the 5 games are won in a row.

Now if you lose the 4th tier , you still have "half" of a bankroll to continue with. To start an entirely new cycle.

Now lets say that you play the entire MLB season 6 months. Do not lose any cycles , ROI about 90-96% .
However, in the event you do lose a cycle , you still can obtain your goal and end up with about 43% ROI.

This limits the risk slightly less than your approach. You lose 5 tiers its over. 0% ROI and no bankroll. Keels system is by far the least risk of them all, yet it will never yield the 40% you seek.

But given the win % of 83.3% or greater. the odds of losing two 4 tier cycles in one year is VERY slim. Whereas compared to the odds of losing only one 5 tier cycle.

Food for thought.

Thanks for your input. I have used this strategy before. I just suggested something similar to Keel but it was on a per year basis. If I lose half of my bankroll I then start again. It would take a full year to recover the loss if I can hit my targets of 40% in the MLB, 20% in the NFL, and 22% in the NBA. It is important to note that I do not play out the entire season. I am looking to exit before the season is done. The semi-arbitrage is not my primary strategy. It was supposed to be a control experiment and the over/under is the main strategy that ties in closest to my theory. I need to complete 100 bets to hit 40%. I will hit that target some time in August. It is a grand martingale so it is fairly easy to calculate the profit. If at bet 100 I encounter a loss I can continue to chase until it resolves. I have achieved 65 bets so far. I am paper trading this and the $3,000 bankroll I set for it has not been threatened to date. I have yet to risk over $1,000 in this chase. I expect to hit my target without any trouble. The semi-arbitrage was a shock to me because I was expecting it to fail but it is performing the best of any of these experiments. Unless I can uncover a psychological reason created by public bias as to why this is working then I maintain that it is a dangerous strategy. The streaks I have had defy the odds. I should be losing one out of every 6 bets yet I am winning a much higher rate. After my streak of 34 bets before losing I am now on a new streak where I have won 8 in a row. Technically speaking I have actually won 10. There were a couple of days where I placed 2 bets instead of one. I count them in my chase as only one because my bet amount for both combines is only one tier of my betting system. I want to see how this plays out. If it is truly random then it should return to the mean and actually swing in the other direction aka losing 1 out of 5 or less before balancing out at the expected rate of one loss in every 6 bets. I have done experiments with craps, roulette, and blackjack and I have observed some pretty large streaks but they always return to the mean eventually. If this is a random event we will see it before the end of the season. If it continues to defy the odds through the end of the regular season then it warrants further investigation. There is a cause for every anomaly in sports betting. The public is reacting to something. It is simply a matter of figuring out exactly what that is.

[arpeggiomeister]

Everything covers again. The Semi-Arbitrage is developing another
streak that is defying the odds. I have hit 8 in a row when I should
be losing 1 out of 6. I have been very aggressive and risked $200 of
my bankroll in an anti-martingale. This means I am betting that $200
plus the profit each time I win. If lost I would only have $100 left,
but I have won 4 times in a row since doing this and have come very
close to doubling that $200. My account now stands at $492 and
change. I need $8 to cap it off which is what I am attempting to do
today. If I lose today I will have enough left over to chase the
loss. If I win then I will start the $200 anti-martingale again.
This would leave $300 in my account if I lose. I am going to
continuously ratchet this up to see how far I can push it. This is
very poor money management and I do not recommend that anyone do it.
I have justified it because when you have a little you have little to
lose. I am going to see if I can compound this thing over $1,000.
That would be a remarkable 500% ROI since I started the BR with $200.





We have a new underdog today on ESPN. ARI has gained the honor of
worst team in the power rankings.





SEA scored 10 runs so we will start a new under chase with them.





Today's plays:





Underdog Chase

ARI +110

$9.09

O/U Chase

SEA U/7.5 -110

$11.00

Semi-Arbitrage

CLE +130	$22.00
LAD -1.5 +150	$20.24 ($8.36)

[arpeggiomeister]

The semi-arbitrage covers and the other two lose.





My ballsy move paid off and my $200 is now $500. I am keeping
$300 in reserves and trying again with $200. My target is now $700.
With each progressive win I will add the profit to the risk amount of
the next bet. It will take 4 wins with this progression and a
smaller 5^th bet to cap off the full $200. If I reach my
goal I will then ratchet it up again start with $300 aiming to bring
the bankroll to $1,000. This is poor money management but I want to
see how far I can push this strategy.





Today's Plays:





Underdog Chase

ARI +130

$22.38

O/U Chase

SEA U/8.5 -105

$32.55

Semi-Arbitrage

NYM +161	$90.34
ATL -1.5 +115	$109.67 ($35.78)

[keel44]

Something I bought years ago. Maybe you have heard of it, but it pertains to you. It could be interesting.

DR. JAY'S INFALLIBLE BASEBALL SYSTEM SYSTEM-1.pdf

Dr. Jay's Spreadsheet.xls

[arpeggiomeister]

The semi-arbitrage and under bet cover. The underdog loses
bringing us to tier 3 for today. The Cubs exploded on the score
board but are not playing today. DET only scored 9 but they are the
next highest. I will take them today. If they do not cover I will
probably switch to the Cubs to finish the chase.





Today's bets





Underdog Chase

ARI +125

$49.18

O/U Chase

DET U/8.5 -115

$11.50

Semi-Arbitrage

TOR +135	$117.00
OAK -1.5 +140	$119.49 ($44.31)

[arpeggiomeister]

Something I bought years ago. Maybe you have heard of it, but it pertains to you. It could be interesting.

[ATTACH]70255[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]70257[/ATTACH]

Thanks for the heads up. Have you tried this? A little tough to follow since he is calculating odds in British. His decimal of 2.25 is a game of +225 I am assuming. If that is the case then the examples he is giving are a bit padded. This makes the profits look better. +225 does come along but not every day. +165 is the highest I am seeing today. Very interesting concept though. This is similar to what I was doing in the NFL I did something I called a parlay matrix. I will need to look deeper into this to see how well it works. I would also be interested to know if the concept can work for the NHL Thanks again for the heads up. My hands are full with what I am doing but I would really like to see an experiment done using this concept.

[BarstoolProphet]

I have already done this system. and every variation of it. 2 team 3 team 5 team , none of which, results in positive ev. If you want, I too have the same spreadsheets for any of the above listed.

I was excited about doing this once again , once I saw you on it. Because it needs to be beatable at the lowest level, before you can even consider the higher levels.

Bad news, I went back and tested everything I have worked on in the past 3 years. And with Arp's and Keels strategies ,,,,,nothing worked. I will repeat this again........NOTHING WORKED.

I was pleased to see someone try this and have success. I also was pleased to have a different approach to the way that I was betting it. But again,,,,NOTHING WORKED.

The reason people came down on you ARP was because it is really a simple principle to why these betting strategies do not work. All of them the Labby , Martinagale or any betting system out there will not overcome the Negative EV. I have tried and tried.

The basic concept is simple. If whatever betting solution that you have , can not be beat straight up for a postive EV, then there is not a single system out there that will overcome that for you.

I will say this though, If in fact you do have a positive EV. Again betting straight up and yielding a Positive Bankroll in the end. (big enough sample of course.) Because honestly , your success here , although great, will turn for the worse. Just the laws of variance .

But if you do win and are positive, the only thing that can be considered is the Kelly Critriean(sp) to yield even higher results. But you had better be PosEV. Sorry to be a downer here, but after 2 nights of heavy testing this , my results came back negative. And I was sad once again.

I find it funny that this Brit and I had the same exact ideas , even down to how to select the games. haha. And I have never read about anyone doing anything even close to this until now. But My spreadsheet is exactly like his but with American odds. His is only for 3 games though. I have done it for 2 . 3, 5 and even 7 games. Nothing worked.

[posey]

@arpeggiomeister:
SBR offers an odds converter: http://www.sbrforum.com/betting-tools/odds-converter/

[keel44]

You are indeed correct on everything Barstool. The thing I can't seem to shake is the fact that teams don't live up to expectations and teams exceed expectations.

Take the Red Sox this year. The expectations on them for this year were/are high. If you were to ride the Red Sox all year long, they would have to win 100-110 games for you to have a decent profit because of the juice. It seems to me you should "fade" a team like that because it is if things go sour for them, even a little, you got some nice odds.

It seems the "edge" is more easily revealed for teams with "no-brain er" expectations. I mean if Boston were a 94 win team, you wouldn't win or lose that much whether you ride or fade them.

[arpeggiomeister]

Semi-Arbitrage and underdog chase cover. Under loses. ARI score
10 so I am going with them today. I am abandoning Detroit because
they scored 9 instead of 10. I was going to take the CUBs on the
under first but the ARI over is fresh so that is what I am going
with.





Today's Plays:





Underdog Chase

ARI +149

$6.71

O/U Chase

ARI U/7.5 -115

$36.23

Semi-Arbitrage

CUBS +143	$140.58
WAS -1.5 +145	$139.43 ($61.60)

[arpeggiomeister]

I have already done this system. and every variation of it. 2 team 3 team 5 team , none of which, results in positive ev. If you want, I too have the same spreadsheets for any of the above listed.

I was excited about doing this once again , once I saw you on it. Because it needs to be beatable at the lowest level, before you can even consider the higher levels.

Bad news, I went back and tested everything I have worked on in the past 3 years. And with Arp's and Keels strategies ,,,,,nothing worked. I will repeat this again........NOTHING WORKED.

I was pleased to see someone try this and have success. I also was pleased to have a different approach to the way that I was betting it. But again,,,,NOTHING WORKED.

The reason people came down on you ARP was because it is really a simple principle to why these betting strategies do not work. All of them the Labby , Martinagale or any betting system out there will not overcome the Negative EV. I have tried and tried.

The basic concept is simple. If whatever betting solution that you have , can not be beat straight up for a postive EV, then there is not a single system out there that will overcome that for you.

I will say this though, If in fact you do have a positive EV. Again betting straight up and yielding a Positive Bankroll in the end. (big enough sample of course.) Because honestly , your success here , although great, will turn for the worse. Just the laws of variance .

But if you do win and are positive, the only thing that can be considered is the Kelly Critriean(sp) to yield even higher results. But you had better be PosEV. Sorry to be a downer here, but after 2 nights of heavy testing this , my results came back negative. And I was sad once again.

I find it funny that this Brit and I had the same exact ideas , even down to how to select the games. haha. And I have never read about anyone doing anything even close to this until now. But My spreadsheet is exactly like his but with American odds. His is only for 3 games though. I have done it for 2 . 3, 5 and even 7 games. Nothing worked.

I know the explanation about how the Martingale fails against negative EV. Here is the kicker. I have said this many times but it is worth repeating. Sports is not random. It appears that way but it is not. The purpose of the point spread and odds is to get people to bet the other side of the game. The reason why most people fail to hit above 50% is because the point spreads and odds are designed to keep balance. That is why when you discover a statistical edge and press it that it usually will disappear. People are pressing it so they press the odds in the other direction. The problem with this line of thinking is that people are looking at each game as an individual event, separate from all others. It is the independent trial argument, only sports are not independent. Each win or loss has a psychological effect on the betting public. Their decisions are made based on those emotions. The Semi-Arbitrage is working for the moment but I was expecting this to fail. It was supposed to be a control to my main experiment which is the over/under chase. That is not going to fail. The reason it is not going to fail is because every result affects the odds on the next game as I explained before. They act in bubble patterns, not randomly. The reason it is usually so hard to detect is because you have two different cycles (two teams) colliding. The bubbles typically cycle out so fast that they never become recognized for what they are. I will respond with a fresh post and recommend a new group of tests for you. This is getting long and I do not want my main point to get lost in the shuffle. I appreciate your thoughts and analysis. I am going to point you in a new direction and see if your same tests still fail or if the results change entirely.

[BarstoolProphet]

I will be here. Just to let you know , I by no means wanted to come across negative. I just want to help. Thats what we have this forum here. Looking forward to this.

[posey]

Really enjoying this discussion. Pls keep it going. Very interesting.

[arpeggiomeister]

I have already done this system. and every variation of it. 2 team 3 team 5 team , none of which, results in positive ev. If you want, I too have the same spreadsheets for any of the above listed.

I was excited about doing this once again , once I saw you on it. Because it needs to be beatable at the lowest level, before you can even consider the higher levels.

Bad news, I went back and tested everything I have worked on in the past 3 years. And with Arp's and Keels strategies ,,,,,nothing worked. I will repeat this again........NOTHING WORKED.

I was pleased to see someone try this and have success. I also was pleased to have a different approach to the way that I was betting it. But again,,,,NOTHING WORKED.

The reason people came down on you ARP was because it is really a simple principle to why these betting strategies do not work. All of them the Labby , Martinagale or any betting system out there will not overcome the Negative EV. I have tried and tried.

The basic concept is simple. If whatever betting solution that you have , can not be beat straight up for a postive EV, then there is not a single system out there that will overcome that for you.

I will say this though, If in fact you do have a positive EV. Again betting straight up and yielding a Positive Bankroll in the end. (big enough sample of course.) Because honestly , your success here , although great, will turn for the worse. Just the laws of variance .

But if you do win and are positive, the only thing that can be considered is the Kelly Critriean(sp) to yield even higher results. But you had better be PosEV. Sorry to be a downer here, but after 2 nights of heavy testing this , my results came back negative. And I was sad once again.

I find it funny that this Brit and I had the same exact ideas , even down to how to select the games. haha. And I have never read about anyone doing anything even close to this until now. But My spreadsheet is exactly like his but with American odds. His is only for 3 games though. I have done it for 2 . 3, 5 and even 7 games. Nothing worked.

I have heard every argument there is as to why Martingale Systems do not work. It all boils down to the gambler's fallacy which is the belief that one outcome, or series of outcomes, will somehow effect the future outcomes. We know this is not true in games of random chance. You can have red come up 20 times in a row on the roulette wheel and the odds of spinning black on the 21rst are exactly the same. Rolling dice is the same deal, flipping a coin, playing blackjack using basic strategy, etc. Anything with what we call a negative EV will fail in a martingale system. I am not arguing that. I have done massive tests that confirm this to be true. What I am arguing is that sports betting is not a random game, it is a psychological one. This changes the dynamics entirely.Let's take a look at the Patriots 2007 season.

NE covers the spread on every game until they face the Colts in
Week 9. The spreads grow progressively bigger as they continue to
win. This is not perfectly linear because different teams are
stronger or weaker then others but if you look at the body of work as
a whole you can see the spreads rising continuously. Though the
Colts beat the spread it was not until week 12 against the Eagles
that the bubble truly pops.





What are the factors that contribute to this?

• The public was making easy money so the point spreads got
  larger and larger.
  
• The Pats had a bull's eye painted on them. It was the Eagles
  that figured out how to beat them. The rest of the league started to
  copy their model but it was the Giants that pulled it off.

Now I ask you, are these results in anyway random? Absolutely
not. This is a perfect bubble complete with a double top for any of
you who know anything about technical analysis.





This is absolute proof that the outcome of one game clearly affect
the odds of the next. If the Pats beat the Colts by a touchdown
would the spread against the Bills have been higher then 15.5? You
bet you ass it would have been!!!






So how does this affect chase systems? It means if you use them
in the proper way that a positive EV is created. The positive EV
does not show itself as a statistical advantage such as winning 56%
of the time. The advantage is created by the almighty point spread
itself, in the manner in which it maintains balance. The positive EV
reveals itself by maintaining balance between losses and wins. There
are large cycles and small cycles, but none of them are random. If
the theory is correct then it is a matter of finding the short cycles
and creating a chase system to take advantage of it. If I knew that
a certain team was going to win 1 out of every 5 times like clockwork
it would not matter then I am only winning 20% of the time, a chase
system would be profitable despite the fact that this is considered
to be a negative EV. Is that really negative though if you know the
odds are high that you will not hit a losing streak of 5 or more in a
row?





The reason why the math guys have such a hard time comprehending
this is because they are locked into the paradigm that each trial is
independent and has no bearing on the next. I have thouroughly
demonstrated that this just simply is not the case.





You must latch on to the bubble patterns. Stop thinking about
statistics and start thinking about what the public is thinking.
Think about what the teams are thinking. A heavy underdog will feel
insulted and be more likely to come out with a chip on their
shoulder, yet the public will be all over the heavy favorite. That
is the perfect storm.





I recommend you go back and test again. Forget about percentage
wins. Look for the losing streaks. How big are they? Are they
clustered. Is there some factor that is a tell-tale that would help
you to avoid those losses.





The semi-arbitrage may fail before the season is out. It does not
follow the bubbles I just explained the way the over/chase and
underdog chase do. I am looking for some connection. Is there a
psychological reason these are hitting or is it just a random event?





This theory is still young. It may sound arrogant of me to say
this but I do not think I am right, I know I am. I know what bubble
patterns are. I know what I am seeing is bubble patterns. I see a
pattern of regularity and chasing systems are the perfect tool to
exploit these patterns.

[arpeggiomeister]

You are indeed correct on everything Barstool. The thing I can't seem to shake is the fact that teams don't live up to expectations and teams exceed expectations.

Take the Red Sox this year. The expectations on them for this year were/are high. If you were to ride the Red Sox all year long, they would have to win 100-110 games for you to have a decent profit because of the juice. It seems to me you should "fade" a team like that because it is if things go sour for them, even a little, you got some nice odds.

It seems the "edge" is more easily revealed for teams with "no-brain er" expectations. I mean if Boston were a 94 win team, you wouldn't win or lose that much whether you ride or fade them.

You are right on the money brother. Why is my underdog chase system working? Because people have written these teams off. Then they come out and punch the favorites in the mouth and remind them that even though they may not be the best in the league, they are professional players. They are there for a reason. Your line of thinking is exactly what I am doing with these chase systems.

[arpeggiomeister]

I would like to thank Barstool, Posey, and Keel for your contributions to this discussion. You have all brought some really good stuff to the table. It is nice to be able to share ideas and debate without the name calling and generally condescending exchanges I have experienced in the past. I truly believe in what I am presenting here but if you guys offer something that makes me have to rethink everything, or flat out admit that I am wrong then we have accomplished something worthwhile. Chase systems are not supposed to work. I am going against the grain and blazing my own trail. I am not some genius with all the answers, I'm just a yahoo with an idea. You guys are keeping me on my toes and making me look at what I am doing under a microscope. That is just plain awesome!!! Thank you.

[posey]

I have thought about something similar as well. Sports isn't roulette. There are patterns, definately IMO. In baseball those patterns aren't easy to recognize because there are so many players, pitchers, teams and games. But they are there.

[posey]

It doesn't fit too well to your thread or your methods, but I have thought about something like a chase on very good starting pitchers. The problem is, that I do not know how to implement it. Should one chase the pitcher himself or his starts itself, or should one chase different pitchers on different days. Maybe something like a F5 -0.5 chase or something like that.

[BarstoolProphet]

Arp, I most certainly see eye to eye with you on this. Two things that need to be considered. There is no argument that bubbles exist. But if you think that you are aware of when these present themselves, then this is no different than basic handicapping. You could exploit them without a chase system and remain in the black. The thing with chase systems is the Neg EV gets rolled over into the next bet. etc etc. so when you get to the D or E bet , the Neg EV or juice now accounts for like 25% of that bet total. Which now makes the break even point on that bet far more greater than an 52.4%. Based on -110 odds.

I like the examples you made with the casino games , but lets look at that NE case you made. I completely agree with the bubble you presented. But my question is how are you able to see it coming, and how do you expect a chase system to exploit it? Because whatever "filter" or logic you apply to week whatever, may have worked here. But would it had worked for lets say San Diego in the same week? My point is sure it payed off big time for ya in this case. But what happens in San Diego when that bubble never got any air and was flat?

The wins tend to never out way the big losses. Hence the NEG EV argument.

But lets do inject stats into it. NE on any given week,ATS, has the same exact odds as your coin flip. 50-50. Thats right. It will either cover or not cover. Those odds will always remain the same. Win or loss. period. Now the spread moving all over the map does not change that possible outcome. But I do see what you are saying about it not being an independent outcome. You are right that the odds made before an the outcome of the previous games did in fact give dependence on what will happen next week. I get that , but at what point to you pull the trigger on that?

All you have provided in that example (NE) is what know as the regression to the mean. And the probability that is correlated with it.

The NE Ex.is no different than if you did in fact see 20 straight reds and that black is due. We all have fell into that betters fallacy. But like I said the odds are still the same 50-50. I am with you on this debate. Just trying to find that edge just as you are. Most of what I say here , is just reinforcement to myself. Believe me, I get wrapped up in it just as much as you do.

More later. Have a great weekend guys. But we are on to something. Lets get it polished.