Delusional or what?

Originally Posted by MonkeyF0cker

So, now it's only 95% of hands and EVERY hand that anyone plays is HU?

LOL.

Okay, guy.

P.S. - Seeing the flop does not necessitate having any advantage in terms of probability of winning the hand at showdown. How are you ALWAYS so wrong?

Whether the subject matter is politics, poker, sports betting or anything else, there is no bigger ASSBAG in this forum than MonkeyFocker.

He will only post to criticize as he's full of piss and vinegar.

Bitterness like that can only come from a lifetime of FAILING.

Originally Posted by andywend

Whether the subject matter is politics, poker, sports betting or anything else, there is no bigger ASSBAG in this forum than MonkeyFocker.

He will only post to criticize as he's full of piss and vinegar.

Bitterness like that can only come from a lifetime of FAILING.

Not everyone can be a gentleman as Justin7. He answered politely in private to about 30pms about sports betting regardless of my stupidity.

I noticed too that monkeyf and math treat most of their posts like it's a pissing contest, resorting to sarcasm and arrogance to prove they are smarter, better, richer, but most of the times they probably are. Even though their attitude can be disappointing, their contribution to this forum is immense and deserve respect as bettors if not as how they conduct debates on forums.

Regarding the topic and the ban of hutennis, I actually enjoy his posts and the debates he starts. Too bad though that the big names are sick and tired of replying to his posts.

they are not sick and tierd.
They simply dont have good arguments.

Personal experience, personal opinion, wishful thinking and alike are not arguments.

What I say here is very much in tune what some of the best traders, scientist and thinkers of our generation found to be correct. My delivery method is a huge suspect, thats given. But the message is correct.

If I have to chose whose opinion to trust, best of the best or some random guy on a public forum whose words i have to just trust or whose status i have to respect for some unsubstantiated reason, my choice is easy.

Not only it is easy. It is also rational.

Rational choices are not very popular among sportbettors, apparently. I'm sure books like it a lot.

The thing with smart people is that they are still people. Some are extremely polite and some are extremely rude. Some are good people, some are bad. Some are generous, some are greedy. Like I said in another thread, in the end, we are all the same.

Originally Posted by hutennis

they are not sick and tierd.
They simply dont have good arguments.


Personal experience, personal opinion, wishful thinking and alike are not arguments.


What I say here is very much in tune what some of the best traders, scientist and thinkers of our generation found to be correct. My delivery method is a huge suspect, thats given. But the message is correct.


If I have to chose whose opinion to trust, best of the best or some random guy on a public forum whose words i have to just trust or whose status i have to respect for some unsubstantiated reason, my choice is easy.


Not only it is easy. It is also rational.


Rational choices are not very popular among sportbettors, apparently. I'm sure books like it a lot.

HOLY SHIT.


Game opens at CRIS at Team A -120, Team B +100


No injuries, lineup changes, referees, weather updates are announced.


Steam move results in Team A +100, Team B -120 at CRIS


AcmeRecSportsbook.com still has Team A -120, Team B +100


Why is betting Team B +100 at AcmeRecSportsbook.com better than betting Team A +100 at CRIS?


You have said that the rec book would boot you for betting the Team B +100...why would they care if no one can set a more accurate line than the oddsmakers?


You have been asked this exact question at least 3 times and have been unable to answer, yet you refuse to acknowledge that it is a 'good argument'.

i am convinced hutennis' posts are generated by randomly selecting words out of a dictionary

He can be entertaining though.

Sorry, too many adult beverages last night.

Yeah, just ban hutennis already, he must be the most obvious troll ever to post on a forum.

Originally Posted by Justin7

If you get MonkeyF0cker and Mathdotcom to agree, I'll revoke the HTT suspension. But in general, I find his posts more harmful than helpful, and deliberately so. The idea of HTT was to remove drivel... Less crapage you'd see in PT.

I'm fine if he stays.

Originally Posted by andywend

Whether the subject matter is politics, poker, sports betting or anything else, there is no bigger ASSBAG in this forum than MonkeyFocker.

He will only post to criticize as he's full of piss and vinegar.

Bitterness like that can only come from a lifetime of FAILING.

Spot on. As always.

Well, looks like my ban is lifted and I can crap up HTT a bit more with my useless trolls felled with nonsense nobody can benefit from.
So, here we go!

Originally Posted by jgilmartin

HOLY SHIT.

Game opens at CRIS at Team A -120, Team B +100
No injuries, lineup changes, referees, weather updates are announced.
Steam move results in Team A +100, Team B -120 at CRIS
AcmeRecSportsbook.com still has Team A -120, Team B +100
Why is betting Team B +100 at AcmeRecSportsbook.com better than betting Team A +100 at CRIS?

What we got over here is a classic instance of “pretended knowledge”, or what Nobel Prize laureate and father of behavioral physiology Daniel Kahneman calls “What you see is all there is” cognitive illusion. In your case it is “What I know is all there is”
It is extremely common and a great source for all kinds of problems.

We, as human beings, just love to simplify, to make up story from the little we know but do not allow for what we don’t know.
Furthermore, after story is made up it becomes our baby. We love it, cherish it and protect it.
The dreadful conformation bias kicks in and we start looking only at the information that confirms our beloved story.
Anything disconfirming is ignored.
So, in all likelihood, the argument that oddsmakers are way more sophisticated bunch that you give them credit for and thus a lot more
than just “injuries, lineup changes, referees, weather updates” is going into setting the odds, in other words, there is something you don’t know
that is crucial for making the right decision whether -120 is equal to +100 or not and whether it is all just steam and shit, will be promptly rejected and may be even ridiculed.
Go ahead. I don’t mind. I’m sticking with Nobel Prize guy though.

You have said that the rec book would boot you for betting the Team B +100...why would they care if no one can set a more accurate line than the oddsmakers?

They would care because they are not oddsmakers. Their job is to promptly follow oddsmakers.
And, in unlikely event that Nobel prize guy is right and you are wrong, we can say that this time they did not do their job too well,
allowing bunch of steam chasers to take advantage of them and beat them to the number.
I think they may not like being taken advantage of too much and may boot.
Ridiculously farfetched assumption, I understand, but still…

You have been asked this exact question at least 3 times and have been unable to answer, yet you refuse to acknowledge that it is a 'good argument'.

As we can see, your argument is truly great! Untouchable!
I did my best though. I’m sure my best is not good enough either.
After all, who needs all this physiological bullshit, albeit established by some of the smartest people in a world
with a single goal of protecting us from ugly mistakes that inevitably cost us a boatload of money?
Who gives a crap that money saved is money earned?

Hutennis, if you cannot give people over here what they really want – a magical formula that will allow them turn garbage into gold -
What is the point in posting? Why are you here?

Good question. After all, whom people who put all these banners up like more? Those who search for magic formulas or those who try to spread and absorb money saving ideas? Why am I getting banned again? Trolling?

Originally Posted by hutennis

Good question. After all, whom people who put all these banners up like more? Those who search for magic formulas or those who try to spread and absorb money saving ideas? Why am I getting banned again? Trolling?

Rest assured that Justin7 who is the moderator of this forum did not ban you for sharing as you put it "money saving ideas". He doesn't like bookies more than you do and he would rather help people save money than feed to them illusions that make the bookies rich.

The think thank was probably created for people that claim or believe that you can have success with math models that use statistics, probabilities etc. If you don't agree with such beliefs maybe that's why you were banned. If some guys have a sub-forum about soccer it doesn't help if some guy comes and says "soccer sucks. American football rules." The same with the think tank, if you are against what the think tank stands for, then your posts are by definition off topic and disrupting normal on-topic discussion and maybe that's why you were considered a troll.

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,^[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response^[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.^[4]

I like your posts, I like the debates you start, but I can understand why you were considered a troll and temporarily banned. My suggestion would be that you can start a topic of your own and post only there and ask permission that it would be accepted in the think tank sub-forum. You can write there responses, opinions even about other posts from other topics, but this way, not creating off-topic interventions that could disrupt the discussions.

Originally Posted by allin1

Rest assured that Justin7 who is the moderator of this forum did not ban you for sharing as you put it "money saving ideas". He doesn't like bookies more than you do and he would rather help people save money than feed to them illusions that make the bookies rich.

I'm resting assured.

The think thank was probably created for people that claim or believe that you can have success with math models that use statistics, probabilities etc. If you don't agree with such beliefs maybe that's why you were banned. If some guys have a sub-forum about soccer it doesn't help if some guy comes and says "soccer sucks. American football rules." The same with the think tank, if you are against what the think tank stands for, then your posts are by definition off topic and disrupting normal on-topic discussion and maybe that's why you were considered a troll.

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,^[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response^[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.^[4]

I like your posts, I like the debates you start, but I can understand why you were considered a troll and temporarily banned. My suggestion would be that you can start a topic of your own and post only there and ask permission that it would be accepted in the think tank sub-forum. You can write there responses, opinions even about other posts from other topics, but this way, not creating off-topic interventions that could disrupt the discussions.

First, outside of excellent Granch posts on essential math issues and similar by others, I have never seen anything here remotely resembling "on topic discussion".
Any attempt to start one is being promptly killed by very valid reason. No meaningful methods that work will be reviled or discussed in depth on a public internet forum. It's simply counterproductive.

Second and most important.
Dont take it the wrong way, but you dont seem to understand how things work.

The ONLY way to come up with working idea is to be able to defeat logically or, better yet, empirically, each and every argument on why this idea is wrong and should not work. Again this is the ONLY way. If you don't do that you will inevitably end up with a lot of eggs on your face and, in speculative markets such as SB, with a lot less money in your pocket.
All I do is supply arguments (they should be welcome, btw) that say why the ideas I see here are bogus and should not work.
That does not mean that they are, but unless you can defeat my arguments, they are.
So, there is nothing off-topic or disrupting here. Simply good old scientific approach that works forever.
If this is not being liked here, collectively, then don't kill the messenger and don't call yourself "an aspiring handicappers".
Because you are not. You are simply bunch of guys who like delusional, ignorant state of confused empty dreams.

P.S. You read my post with a bunch of thoughts on why jgilmartin is dead wrong and decided to reply with bunch of thoughts on why am I being banned. What about subject matter? Anything?

Originally Posted by hutennis

I'm resting assured.




First, outside of excellent Granch posts on essential math issues and similar by others, I have never seen anything here remotely resembling "on topic discussion".
Any attempt to start one is being promptly killed by very valid reason. No meaningful methods that work will be reviled or discussed in depth on a public internet forum. It's simply counterproductive.

Second and most important.
Dont take it the wrong way, but you dont seem to understand how things work.

The ONLY way to come up with working idea is to be able to defeat logically or, better yet, empirically, each and every argument on why this idea is wrong and should not work. Again this is the ONLY way. If you don't do that you will inevitably end up with a lot of eggs on your face and, in speculative markets such as SB, with a lot less money in your pocket.
All I do is supply arguments (they should be welcome, btw) that say why the ideas I see here are bogus and should not work.
That does not mean that they are, but unless you can defeat my arguments, they are.
So, there is nothing off-topic or disrupting here. Simply good old scientific approach that works forever.
If this is not being liked here, collectively, then don't kill the messenger and don't call yourself "an aspiring handicappers".
Because you are not. You are simply bunch of guys who like delusional, ignorant state of confused empty dreams.

P.S. You read my post with a bunch of thoughts on why jgilmartin is dead wrong and decided to reply with bunch of thoughts on why am I being banned. What about subject matter? Anything?

hutennis as I said I like your posts exactly for the reasons you mentioned. I love the debates, the arguments. I was just trying to guess why you got banned. It was a simple honest guess that can easily be wrong.


my reply was just for your remark about your ban and being accused of trolling. This thread already has a lot of posts about your ban so that's why I decided to make the off-topic post as an exception. I hope you didn't get me wrong, while others were shouting to get you banned I was the one who said I like your posts.

Please excuse my stupidity if it bothered you. I was just trying to find a solution for you to be welcomed on this sub-forum because I really don't want you to be banned again. You guys are way smarter then me, so there is no point in me posting on the subject matter. Sorry for the off-topic it's not like it will happen again and again and again. I will enjoy "in silence" from now on.