[hutennis]

Why do I have to go even that far?

Just post freeking thing way before lines open. Thats it.

[matthew919]

That's your responsibility to make sure that question like that don't even arise.

To be clear, it's not my responsibility to do anything. I'm out. This was fun though.

[chunk]

I think that it's fair to say that anyone posting consistent winners on a public forum is going to be noticed. I think it's also fair to say that any record tracking shenanigans will be called out by someone.

[hutennis]

To be clear, it's not my responsibility to do anything. I'm out. This was fun though.

Yes it was. And it still is. For me anyway.

So much for welcomed independent verification, I guess.

To be clear, it's not your responsibility to do anything UNLESS you are making a claim that you want to be taken seriously.
And if you do, then it is your responsibility to prove it.

[hutennis]

I think that it's fair to say that anyone posting consistent winners on a public forum is going to be noticed.

True, providing that it is a true, PROPERLY verified winning record and not some made up crap.

I think it's also fair to say that any record tracking shenanigans

or possible attempt of record tracking shenanigans

will be called out by someone.

Agree.

[LT Profits]

or possible attempt of record tracking shenanigans

I don't get what your problem with Matt is here, he posted his plays and his lines well in advance over those 80 plays in his thread, so there is really no need to question his record keeping. I get that you want to see what his model has before the openers come out, but no need to question his easily verifiable record at this site.

[hutennis]

I don't get what your problem with Matt is here, he posted his plays and his lines well in advance over those 80 plays in his thread, so there is really no need to question his record keeping.

How do I know? I was not there. Am I supposed to take your word for it too?
And why is that a problem all of a sudden to start posting UNQUESTIONABLY clean plays?
What's the big deal?

I get that you want to see what his model has before the openers come out, but no need to question his easily verifiable record at this site.

Yes, there is a need. There is always a need to question anything. That how world works.
Plus, it is not easily verifiable at all if he has a habit of posting predictions after the lines are open and, apparently does not even understand what's wrong with that.

[MonkeyF0cker]

LOL. Thats funny.

First. I have Never said so. It is not a conformation bias for a change, but another good old staple of irrationality - "straw man"
If you can beat the argument - dream up a distorted version of an argument a attack that.

Second, We are not talking financial markets here, but if you wish...

The entire quant finance community is rushing to move offices around the world closer and closer to where exchanges are not b/c they are counting additional milliseconds it takes them to get NEW information and their edge depends on it, But b/c they want to be closer to public libraries where they can get hold of 10 year S&P charts.

Yeah, right. Nice try.

Look, It does not take that much, really.

Ahh, yeah. I forget. Sports markets are nearly as efficient as financial markets in the mind of a dope. LOL.

Ever heard of dependent variables? The models aren't built from magic, genius. They are indeed based on historical information. The latency issue gives an additional advantage over others and it's usually for high frequency trading algorithms which are borderline unethical.

[hutennis]

Ever heard of dependent variables? The models aren't built from magic, genius. They are indeed based on historical information. The latency issue gives an additional advantage over others and it's usually for high frequency trading algorithms which are borderline unethical.

The models aren't built from magic. They are indeed based on historical information. That' very true.
Who in a right mind would ever argue with that. But the point is missed yet again.

OK Here is the kicker again!

Player does not get paid for simply building a model. If the objective is to get paid simply building model is not enough.
Player gets paid ONLY if the model he builds OUTPERFORMS models he compete against!

So the question is not whether or not I ever heard of dependent variables.
The question is whether or not those who build models you ( meaning player) compete against ever heard of dependent variables or anything else you (meaning player) may know and whether or not they know how to use this information at least as well as you do.
I would have to go out on a limb and say yes, they are at least as good as you (meaning player) are on both counts.

And in this case the next logical question is "Where is the beef?"

[MonkeyF0cker]

The models aren't built from magic. They are indeed based on historical information. That' very true.
Who in a right mind would ever argue with that. But the point is missed yet again.

OK Here is the kicker again!

Player does not get paid for simply building a model. If the objective is to get paid simply building model is not enough.
Player gets paid ONLY if the model he builds OUTPERFORMS models he compete against!

So the question is not whether or not I ever heard of dependent variables.
The question is whether or not those who build models you ( meaning player) compete against ever heard of dependent variables or anything else you (meaning player) may know and whether or not they know how to use this information at least as well as you do.
I would have to go out on a limb and say yes, they are at least as good as you (meaning player) are on both counts.

And in this case the next logical question is "Where is the beef?"

I guess you don't understand that an entire quant industry cannot survive without making money. People are doing it - even in far more efficient markets than sports. That's where the beef is, genius.

[hutennis]

I guess you don't understand that an entire quant industry cannot survive without making money. People are doing it - even in far more efficient markets than sports. That's where the beef is, genius.

I don't understand why you swaying into world of quant finance all the time.
And again, I don't doubt that some people make money. Why should not they.
Thats not a question. The question is how many out of 100.
And as far as world of finance is concern by what means.
I' mean if you are fee taker and charge people 2/20 it is kind of hard not to make money.
Trading? Not so much. I have personal friends who are heage fund managers. One is quant, another in energy.
Have not heard anything exciting as far as trading profits for a long time.

[mcuni]

OVERS:
LAA/BOS - was o9.5 +100, now o10.5 -110
STL/CIN - was o7.5 -105, now o8 -105
CWS/OAK - was o7 +105, now o7.5 -110
UNDERS:
TEX/TOR- was u10 -115, now u9.5 -115
BAL/TB - was u8.5 -115, now u8.5 +100
NYY/SEA - was u8 -115, now u7.5 -115

Well done!

Here's a pop quiz: I have two estimates of an unseen parameter, call the estimates x1 and x2. Each estimate was drawn from a separate distribution centered on the true value of the unseen parameter. One of the distributions, however, has a slightly higher variance than the other. Lets say v1 = 1.1*v2, for the sake of argument. The two estimates that you draw differ by a "large" amount (for the sake of stupidity, lets just say |x1-x2| = 2*(sqrt(v1)+sqrt(v2) ). In which segment of the number line would you guess the true parameter lies?

I believe that 95% of time true x will be somewhere in between (given the distributions are normal and sigma are roughly the same). So what you are saying is that one doesn't need to bet on every single game whilst bookmaker actually does it (providing odds) and that is one's advantage over bookmaker. Since your forecasts may not be accurate enough, statistical laws state that you can measure the probability of a certain outcome being in a certain range. And if the range is large enough (2 standart deviations for example) then chances that probability is inside are high. Right?
I noticed that you use a universal range of 1.3 runs to measure that range. How did you come to exactly this number? Is it balance between amount of bets and performance?

How do I know? I was not there. Am I supposed to take your word for it too?

Your position is not constructive. Though if not your point of view, there would never be such a lively discussion here, so your contribution is definitely nonzero.
As for "taking one's word" - that is what all of us do when we learn. At school you take teacher's word when he tells you that the Earth is round or that 2+2=4. Why not try learning from this thread instead of insulting others with ungrounded suspicions?

[hutennis]

Your position is not constructive. Though if not your point of view, there would never be such a lively discussion here, so your contribution is definitely nonzero.
As for "taking one's word" - that is what all of us do when we learn. At school you take teacher's word when he tells you that the Earth is round or that 2+2=4. Why not try learning from this thread instead of insulting others with ungrounded suspicions?

Oh boy! I really hope that if you'd think just a little bit more, you'd see how unbelievably bad your analogy is!

And btw, Earth is not round. It is spherical.

[MonkeyF0cker]

I don't understand why you swaying into world of quant finance all the time.
And again, I don't doubt that some people make money. Why should not they.
Thats not a question. The question is how many out of 100.
And as far as world of finance is concern by what means.
I' mean if you are fee taker and charge people 2/20 it is kind of hard not to make money.
Trading? Not so much. I have personal friends who are heage fund managers. One is quant, another in energy.
Have not heard anything exciting as far as trading profits for a long time.

I guess we have our answer then. If you cannot draw parallels between applying quant strategies in financial markets with quant strategies in sports markets, you don't have much to offer as far as insight. Not only is it not impossible as you've said over and over again, but the proof is staring you in the face - in a far more efficient market no less.

[hutennis]

I guess we have our answer then. If you cannot draw parallels between applying quant strategies in financial markets with quant strategies in sports markets, you don't have much to offer as far as insight. Not only is it not impossible as you've said over and over again, but the proof is staring you in the face - in a far more efficient market no less.

Looks like you want to read only what you want to read, which makes it kind of senseless to keep on going with all this.
Although, maybe there is some glitch in your computer and you simply don't see the whole post.
So i'll just quote it out for you one more time in hopes that you will see it.

I don't doubt that some people make money. Why should not they.
That's not a question. The question is how many out of 100.

So it is possible. By what means it is? that's another very good question.
As it applies to the world of sports, my contention is that it is possible by being faster and smarter in obtaining and analyzing new information and not by regurgitating what is already known and thus priced in and reflected in opening odds.

[MonkeyF0cker]

What you fail to understand is that lines are not moving solely on new information, just as bid/ask spreads are not moving solely on new information.

If you're now willing to admit that it's possible, then you don't have much of an argument anymore.

Good riddance.

[hutennis]

What you fail to understand is that lines are not moving solely on new information, just as bid/ask spreads are not moving solely on new information.

If you're now willing to admit that it's possible, then you don't have much of an argument anymore.

Good riddance.

I don't know where you got that idea.
To me new information is everything and anything in any way related to odd's value after the opener is posted.
I don't know what else can it be and how can anything be added to that definition.
I do know though, that none of the new information has anything to do with old, pre opener information
Old information is dead by now, sucked out dry, totally used up and priced in, with a rare exception when something significant heppened a few second prior to posting.
Anyone claiming to win using only pre opener data (historical information) is either lair or delusional until and unless he demonstrates
it with very hard evidence.

In this sense your constant comparison of financial and sport markets is bogus, b/c there is no openers in financial markets.
Money is being traded in finance always and non stop.
Obviously, opening number on any exchange does not count. It is purely symbolic.

[MonkeyF0cker]

I don't know where you got that idea.
To me new information is everything and anything in any way related to odd's value after the opener is posted.
I don't know what else can it be and how can anything be added to that definition.
I do know though, that none of the new information has anything to do with old, pre opener information
Old information is dead by now, sucked out dry, totally used up and priced in, with a rare exception when something significant heppened a few second prior to posting.

So, you've never seen anyone bet on a game without having valuable information? You've never been to a casino sportsbook? I guess that explains a lot. Or do lines move on limit bets by coincidence? And you think every opener is precisely fair value at that point in time? Wow. On top of that, there's no possible way that sports markets could be manipulated. LMAO. Jesus. You're dense.

Anyone claiming to win using only pre opener data (historical information) is either lair or delusional until and unless he demonstrates
it with very hard evidence.

You're the only one that's delusional. And nobody's going to give you evidence to something that should be obvious to a third grader and something that anyone with an IQ above 3 could prove on their own accord. A line move in American sports at 2AM EST when everyone's asleep can ONLY be because of new information. LMAO. And you think others have the onus of proof.

In this sense your constant comparison of financial and sport markets is bogus, b/c there is no openers in financial markets.
Money is being traded in finance always and non stop.
Obviously, opening number on any exchange does not count. It is purely symbolic.

LOL. Ahh, yes. No openers in finance. LMAO. How many options are trading after hours?

[hutennis]

So, you've never seen anyone bet on a game without having valuable information? You've never been to a casino sportsbook? I guess that explains a lot. Or do lines move on limit bets by coincidence? And you think every opener is precisely fair value at that point in time? Wow. On top of that, there's no possible way that sports markets could be manipulated. LMAO. Jesus. You're dense.

You're the only one that's delusional. And nobody's going to give you evidence to something that should be obvious to a third grader and something that anyone with an IQ above 3 could prove on their own accord. A line move in American sports at 2AM EST when everyone's asleep can ONLY be because of new information. LMAO. And you think others have the onus of proof.

What's wrong with you?

Why you keep on referring to line movements, manipulations etc.?
Those things can only be done to something that already exist - open lines. Not an opening line, but live, open line.
There is no any point in time for opener. There is only ONE point in time for opener - the time when it was posted.
As soon as it posted, it becomes yesterday news, last year snow, water under the bridge.
It becomes irrelevant. It dies. And the open line is born. all be it at the same number.

Life of an open line is governed by new information and those who gather and analyze new information better than most can gain an edge and become winners. That's the reason why semi strong form is inefficient. I keep on saying that for an year now.
What is useless is gathering and analyzing old (historical) information which is done by models based on old (historical) information alone for the purpose of competing with opening lines.
There is no need for opening lines to be precisely at a fair value. They can be off by quite a bit and still be unbeatable.
If you claim that they are off by even a larger number, it needs to be demonstrated. Start posting your openers well before actual openers for the purpose of demonstration. Without it your claims are just fart in a wind.

LOL. Ahh, yes. No openers in finance. LMAO. How many options are trading after hours?

The fact that no new trades are being recorded does not mean that new information stopped being gathered and analysed, thus changing the price of an option even without actual trades. That's the reason why previous day closing price is unavailable for the next day open. Bid and ask have moved even no trades were recorded.

If you need to be explained this elementary concept, I don't think you have too many reasons to LYAO.

[djiddish98]

Life of an open line is governed by new information and those who gather and analyze new information better than most can gain an edge and become winners.

I'm trying to understand your definition of new information. Can you explain why there is line movement right after the line opens and 30 minutes before it closes and how it relates to new information?

[hutennis]

Right after line opens there comes new information - LeBron James may or may not be playing tonight due to concerns about his ankle twisted a bit during morning workout. Odds on Heat drop as a reaction.

30 min before close there comes new information - LeBron will be playing. Ankle is just fine. Odds on Heat go up.

Those who can obtain and properly react on this information before line changes will have a monstrous edge.

It is just one obvious example. There are countless variations. As many as there are reasons for new information, which is basically everything and anything in any way related to odd's value.

[djiddish98]

Right after line opens there comes new information - LeBron James may or may not be playing tonight due to concerns about his ankle twisted a bit during morning workout. Odds on Heat drop as a reaction.

30 min before close there comes new information - LeBron will be playing. Ankle is just fine. Odds on Heat go up.

Those who can obtain and properly react on this information before line changes will have a monstrous edge.

It is just one obvious example. There are countless variations. As many as there are reasons for new information, which is basically everything and anything in any way related to odd's value.

So for almost every single game, every day, there are significant roster announcements timed almost immediately after the line opens, as well as 5 minutes before tip-off?

[hutennis]

So for almost every single game, every day, there are significant roster announcements timed almost immediately after the line opens, as well as 5 minutes before tip-off?

How have "significant roster announcements" all of a sudden became "everything and anything in any way related to odd's value"?

[djiddish98]

How have "significant roster announcements" all of a sudden became "everything and anything in any way related to odd's value"?

It hasn't; I was pointing out that your example doesn't fit with the timing and consistency of the observed line movements I was referencing.

Is there another example of new information that is created immediately after the line opens for almost every single game, every single day?

[hutennis]

It hasn't; I was pointing out that your example doesn't fit with the timing and consistency of the observed line movements I was referencing.

Is there another example of new information that is created immediately after the line opens for almost every single game, every single day?

OK.

Some opinionated rich gambler (there is a shit load of them around) who believes, for some reason, that his model is better than odds maker's model sees an opener -130.
His model gave him -145. He decides that opener represents "great value" and places several limit bets in a few books.
Books don't know the reasons behind those bets and, while they work on figuring it out move their lines to -140 just in case.

Soon they realize that those bets where not from "smart money" and move odds back to -130.

How, just by watching line move, can you tell if it was roster related, money flow related or anything else related?
And how can you determine your correct actons at that point?
Should you jump on -140 before it becomes -150 or should you bet +130 before it goes back to 120 again?

[MonkeyF0cker]

OK.

Some opinionated rich gambler (there is a shit load of them around) who believes, for some reason, that his model is better than odds maker's model sees an opener -130.
His model gave him -145. He decides that opener represents "great value" and places several limit bets in a few books.
Books don't know the reasons behind those bets and, while they work on figuring it out move their lines to -140 just in case.

Soon they realize that those bets where not from "smart money" and move odds back to -130.

How, just by watching line move, can you tell if it was roster related, money flow related or anything else related?
And how can you determine your correct actons at that point?
Should you jump on -140 before it becomes -150 or should you bet +130 before it goes back to 120 again?

LOL. Now, that's hilarious. Yeah, there are a bunch of number crunchers in the back room trying to figure out if the whale has more information than them only to process the exact same information they had before. And somehow, you think there's a possibility they'll come up with a different answer? LMAO. Or do they call up the whale to ask him if he knows something that they don't? LOL. Not only do they do this with this whale, but every single time they get a bet? Brilliant.

You truly are a moron.

Yeah. Hard to tell if there's value after a line move when you've already figured out fair value on the game, genius. Guess what? There aren't major roster decisions or much of anything in the way of "new information" in the VAST MAJORITY of games. A rainstorm in China isn't going to affect the Miami Heat basketball game tonight.

[matthew919]

[hutennis]

LOL. Now, that's hilarious. Yeah, there are a bunch of number crunchers in the back room trying to figure out if the whale has more information than them only to process the exact same information they had before. And somehow, you think there's a possibility they'll come up with a different answer? LMAO. Or do they call up the whale to ask him if he knows something that they don't? LOL. Not only do they do this with this whale, but every single time they get a bet? Brilliant.

You truly are a moron.

Yeah. Hard to tell if there's value after a line move when you've already figured out fair value on the game, genius. Guess what? There aren't major roster decisions or much of anything in the way of "new information" in the VAST MAJORITY of games. A rainstorm in China isn't going to affect the Miami Heat basketball game tonight.

I don't believe you have figured out fair value of the game well enough to overcome the juice.
So stop saying you have as it is a proven fact.
Start posting your openers well before Vegas does, get to a statistically significant positive results by BTCL and then you personally
will have a case. In a absence of that you are just a carnival barker.

[MonkeyF0cker]

I don't believe you have figured out fair value of the game well enough to overcome the juice.
So stop saying you have as it is a proven fact.
Start posting your openers well before Vegas does, get to a statistically significant positive results by BTCL and then you personally
will have a case. In a absence of that you are just a carnival barker.

And give people like you an edge? Never.

[hutennis]

And give people like you an edge? Never.

Why not, just show that you have it (it should not take too long) and then take it away for ever!
That would be hell-like punishment for us, unbelievers!

Yeah, I don't think so.
All you can do is to bark out your wishful thinking bulshit.

[MonkeyF0cker]

And what is my benefit for this?

To educate a dumbass? Gee. Great trade-off.

[jgilmartin]

Hu, care to share how the profitable nature of betting steam doesn't completely destroy your theory that no one can create a better number than the openers?

[Carl-Haakon]

Hu, care to share how the profitable nature of betting steam doesn't completely destroy your theory that no one can create a better number than the openers?

The guy quoted an article arguing against his point of view as "conformation" for his point of view; do you really expect him to have thought about the subtler implications of his position?

[hutennis]

And what is my benefit for this?

To educate a dumbass? Gee. Great trade-off.

Your benefit is to prove you are not just a carnival barker.
Plus, there will be no educating at all.
I don't ask you share your secret knowledge, just to demonstrate that you in fact know what you are talking about.

[hutennis]

Hu, care to share how the profitable nature of betting steam doesn't completely destroy your theory that no one can create a better number than the openers?

What destruction are you talking about? Show me connection first!

Steam chasing is a post openers phenomenon. and does not require any handicapping skills at all.
It is a simple form of trend following based on a hope that trend is (and will stay) your friend, as they say.

Competition with opener, on another hand, is a pure handicapping and in order to stay pure (for the purpose of demonstration and verification of claims)it should not get any hints, such as knowledge of what the number you compete against is.

If you are able to come up with better than opener number, you don't really need to know, or should you care, what that number is.
It is just common sense.

If you need to pick on what your competition is doing first before you start making claims that you could have done even better, then you are simply a monday morning quarterback. Or texas sharpshooter. Whichever you prefer.