 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
LOLOriginally Posted by MonkeyF0cker
Do you remember Quigley Down Under?
Elliott Marston (lays dying): You said you did not know how to use it! (pointing to a Colt revolver)
Matthew Quigley: I said I didn't have much use for one. Didn't say I didn't know how to use it.
Funny and almost believable. You admit to doing no research in your previous post. So, how exactly can you state that there is no use for something if you haven't done it yourself?
You can't have it both ways.
I've done a lot of research on why sportsbetting research is useless. And I do trust my sources.
Some of the best in a world.
Hutennis, who is a better tennis player, me or Federer?
Why argue with mr 200 posts?
true
just baffled how someone could be smart enough to turn on a computer but not smart enough to understand ... anything
I'll know it when I see open line on your match.
Do you think it maybe inefficient? Misleading maybe?
Do you think I need to do a preliminary research?
So you currently are unable to make any prediction about whether Federer would beat me in a tennis match?
Currently, I don't need to, but I can assure you, I'll be able to properly react to an available information when it becomes relevant.
You have a great future in politics ahead of you
I will not accept if nominated and will not serve if elected.
And again, WHY ARE YOU HERE THEN?
Here's the line:
Federer -30000
Mathy +20000
Who wins?
What if the line is:
Federer +100
Mathy -120
Who wins?
Are you assuming the market is "efficient?"
I'll take Federer +100 every time.
If you want to lay 30000 to make a buck you can do it.
Nice prediction. Good bet.
Good luck sweating accidental missteps by Roger in every 2nd set.
You need only one unfortunate in 30000 sets.
That aside, what is your point?
If the purpose of this hypothetical is to prove that future can be predicted you failed.
Gotta do better than that.
Last edited by hutennis; 06-21-12 at 11:43 PM.
Hey, what the hell! Lets predict!
I'll give you a great tip on prediction future results.
Very accurate and takes only second to come up with.
Predict that player (team) posted in a odds table with number =< -1000 will win.
I predict you will have an amazing win/loss record.
There is another great one.
Have you heard about guy who predicted market direction based on who won a Super bawl?
His record is untouchable! 18 out 19 or something like that.
Now, you can legitimately reverse it. Predict who will win a Super Bawl based on market direction in a previous year.
If he did it, what stops you from doing the same thing? It just can't be random. Odds against him being just lucky astronomical.
I dont even wonna think about z score.
You will kill Vegas. For sure.
I, personally, prefer the first one though.
You can be right like 100 times a day.
Last edited by hutennis; 06-22-12 at 12:22 AM.
Oops. Mathy is actually Nadal and they're playing on clay. Thanks for playing.
The point is that the opening line doesn't tell you anything. Everything else does.
Okay. You've proven that you know nothing about statistics (or even have any common sense).
You can go away now.
Justin please ban hutennis and wantitall4moi from the think tank. They constantly troll posts and never back up any of their anecdotal crap that they post with hard evidence. Those that have been doing this for years can reasonably work out who knows what they are talking about and who doesn't. All of the evidence that they have posted either suggests that they are lifetime losers or that they are intentionally hijacking the think tank. I'd lean to the former.
Last edited by Duff85; 06-22-12 at 12:57 AM.
18 out of 19 on a coin flip is 1in 25000 with a z score of 3.944399.
Ok, maybe it is not that much.
Scratch that second one then.
But you have to admit, the first one is a beautiful!
Can't say anything about that one, can't you?
You should read books on a subject more often.
It's all there.
Or you want me to copy/paste supporting Wikipedia pages on every point I make?
There is no trolling here. I just speak my mind on relevant issues.
If you can destroy my arguments - do it!
Plus banning me is a bad business decision.
Look at the number of views in this thread!
Think!
Last edited by hutennis; 06-22-12 at 12:50 AM.
What? That teams with ML's of -1000 win a lot?
LOL? Guess what? That doesn't mean you're going to make money betting them.
Here's something almost equally as intriguing: The odds that your mother gave birth to you are fairly high.
Although, I'm not quite sure which end you came out of...
FINALLY!!!!!
It takes a sarcasm to drive a point home!!!!
Future cannot be predicted if purpose of prediction is making money.
Odds applied make making money a random (unpredictable) event.
Of course, you can try making money betting on predictable events, like where the sunrise will be tomorrow morning, East or West.
Good luck finding takers on that bet.
That's simply not niceHere's something almost equally as intriguing: The odds that your mother gave birth to you are fairly high.
Although, I'm not quite sure which end you came out of...
Last edited by hutennis; 06-22-12 at 01:10 AM.
Your point was that teams that should win more often than not are typically priced higher than those that shouldn't win as often? Gee. That's really insightful. Here's another shocking revelation: No matter what price they're at, there is no guarantee that they'll win that particular game.
You obviously don't know a thing about statistics (or markets for that matter). It's about the probability of a certain outcome occurring. There is no crystal ball.
You can go away now.
Last edited by MonkeyF0cker; 06-22-12 at 01:28 AM.
Nice try.
LOL. Nice counter.
You can't even admit when you've (badly) lost an argument. No wonder you can't admit to how much money you lose betting sports.
Hang your head in shame.
And get lost.
I hope that I'm not being sarcastic when I ask this question. Are any of you guys truly handicappers of the game? I enjoy the banter, but sometimes it seems as though it's one guy and ghosts trying to create a pile. Nobody has to give anything up, but there are some things that can be discussed that actually would be meaningful to some of the knuckleheads like me who actually can win once in a while.
Yeh. Sure.
Apperently, playing super dummy is all you got left.
In your situation, it is a great strategy, though.
A little embarrassing, but gets the job done.
Smart move.
Good.
Define a true handicapper as you see it
then, please.
Attacks markets (even major markets) at given odds.
What weapons does he use to win in this attack?
If you have actually been there as you have claimed many times, you know that there is no short answer to the question. Furthermore, given your posting history, there wouldn't be a satisfactory answer no matter how elaborate the response.
I guess it depends on what you consider a satisfactory answer.
if by satisfactory you mean confirmatory to your existing POV then you are right.
Answer may not be satisfactory at all. It depends on what your POV is.
that does not seam to be rational though. The goal should be to destroy not to confirm.
WHY ARE YOU HERE?
How many times do I have to ask that before you answer?
Reply With Quote