Results vs expectation in DNB market.

[hutennis]

2 way market and 3 way results.

What would be a proper way to reconcile?

TY.

[skrtelfan]

divide the draw in half

[hutennis]

divide the draw in half

Why in half?

[skrtelfan]

well that wasnt a good way to phrase it a better way is to just ignore the draw. if odds ar home team 50% away 20% draw 30%, home team should be 71.4% favorite in draw no bet, 50/70.

[hutennis]

Yeah, sure. Thats how DNB odds are derived.

BUt then you have, let's say, 27 games and your record is 12 wins, 10 draws and 5 losses.

Having 71.4 expectation for favorite you took in every game, you should have 20 wins and 7 losses.
So again, how do you reconcile this with actual results?

[buby74]

As it is DNB then ignore the draws you actually went 12-5 which is 70.6%

The tougher question is... given that you think team A would win 71.4% of games against team B if played to a result what is the actual percentage of games that will be a draw. For EPL soccer I use theformla D=30%-1.4%R where D is the percentage of draws and R is the ratio of outright winning chances of the favorite and underdog (or power ratings).

So got your example R is 71.4/28.6 = 2.5 so the percentage of draws is 26.5% the fav woud win 52.5% and the underdog 21% of the time.

[hutennis]

As it is DNB then ignore the draws you actually went 12-5 which is 70.6%

Aha, so ignoring draws is actually OK. TY

The tougher question is... given that you think team A would win 71.4% of games against team B if played to a result what is the actual percentage of games that will be a draw. For EPL soccer I use theformla D=30%-1.4%R where D is the percentage of draws and R is the ratio of outright winning chances of the favorite and underdog (or power ratings).

So got your example R is 71.4/28.6 = 2.5 so the percentage of draws is 26.5% the fav woud win 52.5% and the underdog 21% of the time.

Is not a draw %% is already established by 1X2 odds?

71.4% for DNB favorite came from 50% for fav and 20% for dog. That leaves us already known 30% IP for draw.
Your formula in fact is changing underlying percentages from 50/30/20 to 52.5/26.5/21 and I can not see a reason for that.

What do you think?

[indio]

What the $#&* are you asking? You want to know 2 way and 3 way odds for an expectation of 12 wins for team A, 5 wins for team B, and 10 draws in 27 games? That's just basic math. If we work on a market of 100.00 for sake of example you have :

3- way

A.: +125
B.: +440
draw: +170

in a 2 way line, that's equivalent to :

A. -240
B. +240

If you want to figure with a 2.5% hold, then you'd have A. +119, B +426 , draw +163 on a 3-way, or A.-277, B +226 on a 2-way.

You want to "reconcile" ? Just put $100 on each of the 27 games, and you've bet $2700. After 27 bets, you'll get back $2700 on every bet type. If you do it with the vig lines, you should get approx. $2630 back on every bet. (i rounded slightly on the lines with hold, giving us a very slight imbalance)

The only reason I'm wasting my time even responding to this, is I'm eagerly anticipating some sarcastic and swarmy response, as I can't think of another reason you would pose a question this simple unless you're already preparing for some condescending diatribe in an effort to give yourself another false aura of enlightenment. And I do enjoy reading your butchering of the English language, like one might enjoy watching a monkey skating on a pond.

[u21c3f6]

Yeah, sure. Thats how DNB odds are derived.

BUt then you have, let's say, 27 games and your record is 12 wins, 10 draws and 5 losses.

Having 71.4 expectation for favorite you took in every game, you should have 20 wins and 7 losses.
So again, how do you reconcile this with actual results?

If I understand what you are asking correctly, based on the approximations above, you would need a sample of about 40 games for 20 wins and 7 losses. The 12 wins and 5 losses is a good approximation for 27 games.

Joe.

[hutennis]

@indio
I asked a simple question.
Gentleman who answered it did not have any problem neither comprehending nor answering.

You gave me a totally irrelevant calculations and then went on this irrelevant garbage rant:

The only reason I'm wasting my time even responding to this, is I'm eagerly anticipating some sarcastic and swarmy response, as I can't think of another reason you would pose a question this simple unless you're already preparing for some condescending diatribe in an effort to give yourself another false aura of enlightenment. And I do enjoy reading your butchering of the English language, like one might enjoy watching a monkey skating on a pond.

What the $#&* is wrong with you?

[easyliving]

DNB is my favorite type of bet in soccer and it usually when I bet the highest. It minimizes your risk and allows you to bet larger amounts.

[buby74]

Aha, so ignoring draws is actually OK. TY



Is not a draw %% is already established by 1X2 odds?

71.4% for DNB favorite came from 50% for fav and 20% for dog. That leaves us already known 30% IP for draw.
Your formula in fact is changing underlying percentages from 50/30/20 to 52.5/26.5/21 and I can not see a reason for that.

What do you think?

30% for a draw is quite high for such a big favourite (at least in EPL) as the percentage of draws goes down when the two teams are mismatched. If you were actually getting Ip of 30% for a draw that is probably a better bet than DNB! I was answering a slightly different issue to yours as i have struggled with converting my power ratings to 1X2in soccer which isnt a problem with American sports.

[Thremp]

This thread should be linked every time you comment on anything.

[hutennis]

This thread should be linked every time you comment on anything.

Yes, if proper way to carry arguments well established since at least ancient Greece is just an inconvenient nuisance for you,
then yes, you are expected and will try to bring in all kinds of straw man-ish bullshit and ad hominem crap.

For someone who understands that arguments are independent and it does not matter whether the opponent is short or tall, white or black,
thin or fat, liberal or conservative, has one eye, cripple, has other than english native language, makes less or more than you this year and what questions he might have asked on different subjects etc.
it would be impossible to pile up irrelevant things as you suggest.

Moreover, you have no idea why I asked what I asked in a first place. You are just assuming what you want to assume.

[Thremp]

Oh. Well I would like to imagine that an inability to perform basic calculations on probability would somehow weigh in on a discussion of implied probability and Bayes Theorem, which you so frequently indulge in.

Ironically (or not), your post is the exact thing you're trying to mock me for, since I am specifically pointing out your remedial math and logic skills, which are quite pertinent. (Then again you think arguments are independent. Whereas based on my poster power ranking, I can easily conclude you would lose virtually every argument to M0nkeyF0cker.)

[hutennis]

Oh. Well I would like to imagine that an inability to perform basic calculations on probability would somehow weigh in on a discussion of implied probability and Bayes Theorem, which you so frequently indulge in.

Ironically (or not), your post is the exact thing you're trying to mock me for, since I am specifically pointing out your remedial math and logic skills, which are quite pertinent. (Then again you think arguments are independent. Whereas based on my poster power ranking, I can easily conclude you would lose virtually every argument to M0nkeyF0cker.)

Ironically or not, you are specifically pointing nothing.
Next time I'm in argument you are welcome to weigh in with something more substantial than condescending one-liners.

[allin1]

(Then again you think arguments are independent. Whereas based on my poster power ranking, I can easily conclude you would lose virtually every argument to M0nkeyF0cker.)

some say hutennis is actually M0nkeyF0cker just creating traffic in the think tank

[Thremp]

hutennis,

I'm saying that someone who has such a limited understanding of the subject will rarely, if ever, have anything useful to add. That sort of disclaimer is specific and useful. I'm sorry you don't even know that there are three outcomes to a DNB or that multiplying a percentage by the number of events and then rounding doesn't actually give the expected wins/losses.

All these things are groundbreaking to you. But are covered in an intro stats book. Or freely available on the internet.

[hutennis]

hutennis,

I'm sorry you don't even know that there are three outcomes to a DNB or that multiplying a percentage by the number of events and then rounding doesn't actually give the expected wins/losses.

Where did you get it?

Can you place a quote please.