[danshan11]

Turn Win%
1 49.7% 11 49.3%
2 53.5% 12 51.2%
3 53.6% 13 51.3%
4 49.4% 14 48.2%
5 54.1% 15 51.8%
6 51.2% 16 53.3%
7 50.1% 17 52.3%
8 48.9% 18 49.8%
9 50.6% 19 49.8%
10 51.9% 20 51.7%

this tells me a couple things
1 easy to be a winning tout easy peasy just create 20 twitter accounts and 4 or so will kick ass and win
2 when I am at 53% and think I am the best capper EVER after 500 games, I am clueless

what do you guys think? I also did one at 20000 spins and it came back at 50.36%

[KVB]

Yes, everyone knows that tout strategy.

This does not belong in the think tank, in my humble opinion.

[danshan11]

your opinion is rarely humble, who cares if touts do it, the moral of the story is we have to make sure we are aware wins and losses definitely do not tell the whole story at all! So when we are analyzing our plays we got to be very careful not to put too much weight into wins and losses and put more focus on making sure we actually have an edge because it is very possible your wins and losses are lying to you about your talent level.

[KVB]

Yes Dan, that's why ROI, average line error, z scores, and other tests can help us handicap the handicappers.

That might be better for this sub forum.

Exposing tout games is better for another sub forum I'm sure.

I just posted some info related to ROI involving plays that have been posted and tracked in the Forum. It's relevant to current selection being made.

Don't mistake frankness for not being humble.

My opinion is always humble. There are many ways to handicap, we all can keep learning, and often my "opinion" is just information being shared.

For this thread, you asked what I thought and I told you.

[danshan11]

what is average line error?

[danshan11]

Also ROI is wins and losses so the same thing there, Z calculators I dont like it either because it gives a maybe type opinion, I need more assurance than that I am betting lots of my money everyday on the belief I have an edge.

[KVB]

what is average line error?

Say the book closes with Pittsburgh -7 in the NFL.

Say the game ends with Pitt winning by 10 points. The book's line error would be 3, it's the difference from reality.

Now, say I had Pitt winning by 11 points. My line error would be 1.

I always say that the goal in creating a forecast or line is to be able to reflect reality better than the line the bookmaker can hang. If you can forecast reality better, you will win.

Average line error can tell you if you are closer to reality than the book. If you are beating the line error of the book, you will likely beat the sport.

This also counts for pricing, like a NFL -3 (-105) moving to -3 (-130) or whatever.

[KVB]

Also ROI is wins and losses so the same thing there, Z calculators I dont like it either because it gives a maybe type opinion, I need more assurance than that I am betting lots of my money everyday on the belief I have an edge.

No and no.

ROI is not wins and losses.

Not at all. In fact, it's very nature is such that takes the wins and losses out of the picture to determine a bettor's talent.

Z scores can tell us whether or not we are likely to see the performance continue or if it really is outside of the expectation, which likely won't continue.

[danshan11]

your ROI is a reflection on whether you won or loss
what is the ROI on 4 losses ?

[danshan11]

Say the book closes with Pittsburgh -7 in the NFL.

Say the game ends with Pitt winning by 10 points. The book's line error would be 3, it's the difference from reality.

Now, say I had Pitt winning by 11 points. My line error would be 1.

I always say that the goal in creating a forecast or line is to be able to reflect reality better than the line the bookmaker can hang. If you can forecast reality better, you will win.

Average line error can tell you if you are closer to reality than the book. If you are beating the line error of the book, you will likely beat the sport.

This also counts for pricing, like a NFL -3 (-105) moving to -3 (-130) or whatever.

I have to 100% disagree with that strategy score of the game and result is irrelevant, our goal is to be better than the closing line not the game line, the game line can do anything, ie weather change at half time, injuries early, WE CANT care about game results that would be a mistake in capping in my humble opinion, LOL JK

[KVB]

I have to 100% disagree with that strategy score of the game and result is irrelevant, our goal is to be better than the closing line not the game line, the game line can do anything, ie weather change at half time, injuries early, WE CANT care about game results that would be a mistake in capping in my humble opinion, LOL JK

Oh boy. If you are creating a line that better reflects reality than the book can hang, you will beat the sport.

In that statement is built in so much more, including performance against the closing line.

Not sure you understand what the actual goal here really is, or what it means.

[KVB]

your ROI is a reflection on whether you won or loss
what is the ROI on 4 losses ?

...An investor starting with 10K and betting $100 would have $10,741. To them they would have a return of 7.41% since July 20th.

But I prefer to call that a return on capital (ROC). The truth is, I made 210 separate 1 unit plays and am up 7.41 units over that time. At $100 per bet, I churned that 10K more than twice, risking a total of $21,000 to go up 7.41 units.

If we divide the units won or loss by the total bets made (7.41/210 or $741/$21000) we get a true ROI or return on investment of about 3.5%.

This can actually be one of the best ways to judge a gambler or methodology over time. Remember, I risk the same unit on every play. Some bettors risk to win 1 unit on favorite prices and only risk a unit on dogs. This should be taken into account when trying to assess the gambler based on ROI...

This example is only 210 plays, but the point is made.

[danshan11]

KVB, you are joking right?

[danshan11]

if you are not joking please explain how ROI is not a reflection of wins and losses directly?

[danshan11]

Oh boy. If you are creating a line that better reflects reality than the book can hang, you will beat the sport.

In that statement is built in so much more, including performance against the closing line.

Not sure you understand what the actual goal here really is, or what it means.

this is just plain wrong, the actual game score is in no way reflective of anything but who won or loss. Please do not use the game score to decide anything you do next time.

example if I have 2 dice and roll them 100 times and I average 8
what would a fair over under be on my next roll?
I think the over under should be 6 but you think it should be 8 based on using what happened as a factor.

[danshan11]

No and no.

ROI is not wins and losses.

Not at all. In fact, it's very nature is such that takes the wins and losses out of the picture to determine a bettor's talent.

Z scores can tell us whether or not we are likely to see the performance continue or if it really is outside of the expectation, which likely won't continue.

Z scores are good for huge sample size but by the time we get to a big sample size we are broke if we dont have an edge

[KVB]

if you are not joking please explain how ROI is not a reflection of wins and losses directly?

It has nothing to do with wins and losses. In the example above, wins and losses are not even discussed.

It's about the profit or loss per units risked.

I don't even track wins and losses when tracking baseball plays. I track the amount of money or units churned and the profit and loss therein.

[KVB]

Oh boy. If you are creating a line that better reflects reality than the book can hang, you will beat the sport...

This can't get any more basic.

You need to put your thinking cap on and understand why this is not "just plain wrong."

You want to discuss mathematics and I'm not sure you understand the basic concepts of what's happening here and how those mathematics are influenced.

[danshan11]

It has nothing to do with wins and losses. In the example above, wins and losses are not even discussed.

It's about the profit or loss per units risked.

I don't even track wins and losses when tracking baseball plays. I track the amount of money or units churned and the profit and loss therein.

ROI is a direct reflection on wins and losses.
what is your ROI on 4 losses 0-4?

[danshan11]

This can't get any more basic.

You need to put your thinking cap on and understand why this is not "just plain wrong."

You want to discuss mathematics and I'm not sure you understand the basic concepts of what's happening here and how those mathematics are influenced.

are you drunk dude, I am being serious, you are talking really really strange.

ROI is 100% based on wins and losses.
what do you think the over under is on a dice roll if the last 100 rolls I averaged 8?

[danshan11]

maybe I am drunk I really just don't get it!

[KVB]

Dude, read the post on how to calculate ROI, I put it above. Then you can answer your own question about the ROI on 4 losses.

What don't you get? A line is hung, it is not meant to predict a score, but if you can predict the score of game better than that line does, even though that's not the line's purpose, you will go a long way toward winning long term, period.

In most markets, you will then likely beat the closing line, since you seem to really like that metric.

When measuring average line error, it is one of the times where the final scores are taken into account, that's how it's measured.

Otherwise, often times, we shouldn't read too much into the final score, just to beat the market at the error.

[danshan11]

Dude, read the post on how to calculate ROI, I put it above. Then you can answer your own question about the ROI on 4 losses.

What don't you get? A line is hung, it is not meant to predict a score, but if you can predict the score of game better than that line does, even though that's not the line's purpose, you will go a long way toward winning long term, period.

In most markets, you will then likely beat the closing line, since you seem to really like that metric.

When measuring average line error, it is one of the times where the final scores are taken into account, that's how it's measured.

Otherwise, often times, we shouldn't read too much into the final score, just to beat the market at the error.

you literally said nothing and proved nothing. you get ROI by adding the profits from wins and the losses from losses, how is not directly related to wins and losses. PLEASE EXPLAIN

there is no such metric except your made up metric. You love all these crazy things that prove nothing, some crazy what did you call it "line error metric" LMAO that is hilarious and literally has zero relevance to anything. Broncos played good last week so they won by 12 and spread was 2 so this week if they are a 3 by line error metric they will now win by 13, SMH now that is funny, wonder why you come up with these predictions of 47 to 38 when the total line on the game is 48. "Bet line error" now that is a funny one. What history or results do you have of this bet line error algo?

[KVB]

...This does not belong in the think tank, in my humble opinion.

I tried guys, I tried.

Guy just won't listen.

Just wants to argue.

Like I always say, it's not that bettors don't know things, it's just that so much of what they know is wrong.

[danshan11]

what am I arguing about? I am asking you to explain your points and you refuse.
what am I saying that is wrong, please be specific, I am here to learn and if I hurt your feelings I apologize, I just feel that you are completely wrong on this and other things, you are using the tout talk when you say "i tried guys" and imply you have some great knowledge, it just sounds like garbage tout talk. you lost track of the subject. the subject is wins and losses mean nothing

[danshan11]

and for ROI what I do is
add up what I bet and add up what i won
and hmmm how do i get what i won if it does not include wins in it????

[jbayko]

and for ROI what I do is
add up what I bet and add up what i won
and hmmm how do i get what i won if it does not include wins in it????

If by “wins and losses” you mean the amount of money you won and lost, then yes, ROI is directly related. But when most people say “wins and losses”, they are referring to W-L(-P) record, and that is definitely not directly related to ROI. Are we taking the same language here?

[semibluff]

this is just plain wrong, the actual game score is in no way reflective of anything but who won or loss. Please do not use the game score to decide anything you do next time.

example if I have 2 dice and roll them 100 times and I average 8
what would a fair over under be on my next roll?
I think the over under should be 6 but you think it should be 8 based on using what happened as a factor.

If you set the line at 6½ the Over ought to be -140 and the Under should be +140. If you want to offer me -120 on the Over i'm definitely interested.

[danshan11]

just ask KVB in his super pink highlighter insight fund for dice rolls he has it at 8 -105 because the last roll was 8

[semibluff]

just ask KVB in his super pink highlighter insight fund for dice rolls he has it at 8 -105 because the last roll was 8

At 8 the Over should be +210 and the Under should be -210.
At 6 the Over should be -210 and the Under should be +210.

[danshan11]

LOL what?

[danshan11]

If by “wins and losses” you mean the amount of money you won and lost, then yes, ROI is directly related. But when most people say “wins and losses”, they are referring to W-L(-P) record, and that is definitely not directly related to ROI. Are we taking the same language here?

I think I dont know what ROI is let me explain and you folks tell me if I know what ROI is

W 100
L 100
P 0
wl% 50%
bet 100 per game at just for argument sake at +100
I bet 20,000 won 10,000 and lost 10,000 so I am even my ROI is 0%


now tell me how would I come up with an ROI that did not involve wins and losses?

[danshan11]

ROI is pure luck it has absolutely nothing to do with skill. the 20 1000 rolls sim I did proves that.

you can figure your ROI out on each of those 20 rolls of 1000 and see that your ROI varies according to your wins and losses, where KVB I think is getting confused is when you say I win 60% of the time that can be deceptive alone because you could be betting heavy favorites and you could be winning at 60% but your ROI could be negative because of the big faves BUT ROI and WINS and LOSSES can be luck and are not good indicators of sharp sports betting. you can obviously see from the 20 1000 rolls that 4 guys of the 20 were very sharp, this to ME and only me PROVES that wins, losses, and ROI are not to be used to gauge skill. That crazy measure of line error or whatever, I dont think that is a good thing to use BUT I could be wrong it might be, but I think my (I know simplified) dice example kinda proves my point on that line error idea BUT I am open to hearing more about it and would love to see some facts that prove it as valid.

[HeeeHAWWWW]

ROI is pure luck it has absolutely nothing to do with skill. the 20 1000 rolls sim I did proves that.

Nah. Go play with a binomial calculator, that's more useful than small-run sims.

[danshan11]

nah what? what would I be trying to learn from a binomial calculator relevant to this thread?