[Optional]

Because they stand to make more money by not moving the line. If you are a professional bettor, you know if you bet $500 on a game and the line moves 1 point, you have destroyed all your value. Better to wait until you can get money down and hope that the number is still there.

So a person that bets thousands per game just waits to see what is available when they can bet as much as they want. Then they hit what is there to hit. If they can make what they want, they will bet it earlier.

I guess if they are so sharp that they can see the value no one else can, that holds.

[Roger T. Bannon]

I guess if they are so sharp that they can see the value no one else can, that holds.

Yes, that is why they are professionals. But not all of the line moves take out value, some of it gets created. The easiest stuff they just consider to be bad lines that were not available to them. But since early action is not as sharp as later action, they can pick up some value when the opener was actually right but it moved 2.5 points with some overvaluation of a certain team.

[chilidog]

I have a model built on Wisdom of Crowds that works really well as a 1st step filter in sports betting. When I combine it with line moves and a psychological bias, it works amazingly well over the past 435 plays spanning to when I first came up with the idea last July 30, 2019. I was really looking forward to seeing how it runs for a full season in any pro sport but I won't get that chance until next year.

While we're on hiatus, I'm wondering how I can apply this to the stock market. It is a different beast, but not that much so. The problem I see right now is that the market isn't acting normal, given the circumstances due to the virus. When I see stocks with an abnormal trading volume (like USO) plummeting so much, it's so obvious that's a buy because we know it'll rebound. But while that's pretty much guaranteed money at some point in time, it's not a normal situation. Of course oil is going to drop when the demand is so little.

I have little experience with stock market beyond basic investing of ETFs and dividend stocks, so I'm learning as I go along.

[Roger T. Bannon]

I have a model built on Wisdom of Crowds that works really well as a 1st step filter in sports betting. When I combine it with line moves and a psychological bias, it works amazingly well over the past 435 plays spanning to when I first came up with the idea last July 30, 2019. I was really looking forward to seeing how it runs for a full season in any pro sport but I won't get that chance until next year.

While we're on hiatus, I'm wondering how I can apply this to the stock market. It is a different beast, but not that much so. The problem I see right now is that the market isn't acting normal, given the circumstances due to the virus. When I see stocks with an abnormal trading volume (like USO) plummeting so much, it's so obvious that's a buy because we know it'll rebound. But while that's pretty much guaranteed money at some point in time, it's not a normal situation. Of course oil is going to drop when the demand is so little.

I have little experience with stock market beyond basic investing of ETFs and dividend stocks, so I'm learning as I go along.

The stock market is something different from sports betting. People mostly try to catch swings. It is mostly based on nothing. Much of the accounting and such is fraudulent. The Federal Reserve controls stock market levels to a large extent.

In sports, the best team usually wins and there are no any huge market delusions you have to deal with.

[gojetsgomoxies]

some great points.........

that is interesting that large bettor might wait and hope the number is still there to be bet on larger volume. i'd say "no" in many cases

also, interesting as to what is an opener............... i've wondered that too.

it was noted perhaps in different context.......... basically one of the biggest difference in sports betting vs. stock market is "irrational exuberance"... also, stock market is not "zero sum" game (betting is "negative sum")

be careful on USO, it can go to zero and stop trading......... lots of good beaten down stocks to buy these days. just make sure they don't go bankrupt. things like chevron, exxon, schlumberger are probably fine

[Roger T. Bannon]

it was noted perhaps in different context.......... basically one of the biggest difference in sports betting vs. stock market is "irrational exuberance"... also, stock market is not "zero sum" game (betting is "negative sum")

The difference between the stock market and sports betting is that the stock market has an upward trajectory due to the growth of the economy and stocks go up as well. The trouble is in determining when they have gone up too much. But historically, you could just flip coins with stocks and make 10%.

If you flip coins with sports bets, you lose 100% and more.

However, it is far easier to have an edge with sports betting so if you do have an advantage you can make much more in percentage terms but the expenses of betting are extremely high due to the vig.

You do get overvaluations and undervaluations in teams and that is where the edge is if you can find it. Those valuations are quickly corrected unlike with the stock market where overvaluations can become huge and persist for long periods. Also, you are not dependent on other people's perceptions in sports betting so the real result is your return whereas other people's opinions of what the result will be in the long term is your result with stocks.

[KVB]

I was refraining from getting into the discussion because Bannon can be right but also so wrong.

As far as openers. He's right and wrong. Sometimes we hit where we can, sometimes we avoid the early lines and not destroy value or tip a hand, sometimes we buy them one way only to get a better number the other. Sometimes we trickle in, there's so much more involved but I do know many that wait just becausese of the amounts to get down. After all an individual can do better than Warren Buffet as he might take months to buy into and sell out of a position while most traders can do it much more quickly without affecting the market.

Some markets, with the limits, simply aren't worth the time to generate opinions. That is true.

I have posted and tracked at SBR probably thousands of plays by now that, in the tracking, beat the closer on average that were both low limit openers, value investing, and plays that waited for more information and higher limits.

But there are some statements here that need to be corrected and some that are just contradictions.Talking about how a bettor won't see much movement betting close to the close but then how lines move on a college football Sat are a a bit contradictory, but I see the point he's trying to make.

Bannon, you have quite a way to go in the sports betting world if you don't realize these statements are simply not true...

In sports, the best team usually wins and there are no any huge market delusions you have to deal with.

Of course there a delusions, much of which creates value to those who can view the market with deeper analysis.

And this one is far off too...

...Those valuations are quickly corrected unlike with the stock market where overvaluations can become huge and persist for long periods. Also, you are not dependent on other people's perceptions in sports betting so the real result is your return whereas other people's opinions of what the result will be in the long term is your result with stocks.

Exuberence can exist for a long time in sports. But more importantly, to say a sports bettor is not dependent on other people's perceptions makes absolutley no sense. You seem to think there is one way to handicap, a correct way, and that knowing who will win or not, or even who will cover or not, is just something you arrive at.

Beating the close is of really no importance at all. All that matters is that you are right in your analysis. If you are then you will win...

You can't even begin to consider the outcome of your analysis without first comparing it to the market to even see if there is value in a bet.

That's what we do. If you think professional bettors got to where they did with some system to predict who will win regardless of the market price then I suppose it explains how with all this talk of the crowd you completely ignore the fact that we're dealing with a market based on public perception.

It's like you read a book or two and think you figured it out.

I don't know what to make of it. The half right half wrong and contradictory posting is strange to me. It's such a partial understanding but what you don't get is a bedrock of it all.

Good Luck.

[KVB]

Nasher and Bannon, in the volume betting strategies I have I would much rather go through a stretch of beating the market and lose than losing to the market and winning money.

Data shows it's it's more significant of the overall health of the strategy, for many strategies in volume betting.

That said, my tracking often shows the losing money periods tend to go with losing to or beating the market while the winning bets or money periods will nearly always correlate with beating the market.

It could be a sign of health for my personal handicapping that I don't, as seen in the SBR tracking, go through many periods where I am winning money and bets and not beating the market close, although there are short term blips there.

This is data driven analysis of my own bets.

[Roger T. Bannon]

I don't know what to make of it.

This was your strongest statement and I would stick with it.

I did not say professionals do not bet openers at all. I said they largely do not bet openers. And I said, there are professionals and then there are professionals. I think you might use the word "We" a bit freely.

I was making a generalization for a basic example of Wisdom of the Crowd. A group of largely square bettors will produce a better line than a person setting lines can make. That is a fact.

As for "exuberance" in the betting market. No, there is no "exuberance." Predictions for sports are very good and there are only adjustments that need to be made on a weekly basis. There is nothing close to exuberance. There are overvaluations.

You have zero dependence on other people's opinions in sports betting. You only have to worry about the outcome. Other people's perception has no bearing on the outcome of a bet unless you are basing your bets on line movements in which case you are not sharp so your outcomes are irrelevant as you are simply a follower.

As for using market analysis to evaluate your betting, as I said it is a useful measuring stick. However, it is not necessary. If you are handicapping the first week of the American football league or whatever that league was called, you have a chance at a massive edge. If the line moves against you, it does not matter. If lines move against you, it does not mean you have a bad bet. If it happens consistently, you are probably not going to win but that is a measurement of your skill and you have to have skill for it to matter.

[Roger T. Bannon]

You can't even begin to consider the outcome of your analysis without first comparing it to the market to even see if there is value in a bet.

And just to cut off another confused response, yes if you have a market you will by definition have a price. Without a price, you have no bet. Not any part of the equation here.

[MeanPeopleSuck]

However, it is far easier to have an edge with sports betting so if you do have an advantage you can make much more in percentage terms but the expenses of betting are extremely high due to the vig.

I think the vig is barrier most reasonably bright, motivated gamblers can overcome. A player only needs to win 51.2% of their bets to break even at a -105 shop.

Where it gets hard is after those first couple euphoric years when your name is mud (and known and shared), you're getting tossed out or bet limited to absurd numbers left and right, harrassed by accusations of syndicated action or multi accounts, and lately this freakin' horrible trend to attack profitable accounts because sites are changing their rules to say they only cater to "recreational players."

[MeanPeopleSuck]

I have a model built on Wisdom of Crowds that works really well as a 1st step filter in sports betting. When I combine it with line moves and a psychological bias, it works amazingly well over the past 435 plays spanning to when I first came up with the idea last July 30, 2019. I was really looking forward to seeing how it runs for a full season in any pro sport but I won't get that chance until next year.

While we're on hiatus, I'm wondering how I can apply this to the stock market. It is a different beast, but not that much so. The problem I see right now is that the market isn't acting normal, given the circumstances due to the virus. When I see stocks with an abnormal trading volume (like USO) plummeting so much, it's so obvious that's a buy because we know it'll rebound. But while that's pretty much guaranteed money at some point in time, it's not a normal situation. Of course oil is going to drop when the demand is so little.

I have little experience with stock market beyond basic investing of ETFs and dividend stocks, so I'm learning as I go along.

Interesting post. I pm'd you.

[StackinGreen]

Although I don't find most of the back and forth worth it here anymore, for obvious reasons I've stated in previous posts, I'd love to spin off this last topic if chili and Mean are interested. I've been studying markets for years but have really gotten into the nitty gritty of the relationship between the Fed/bonds/stocks and commodities markets for the last couple of years, and it's super interesting but crazy and obviously has the most money in it, and to be made, legally and without cap (but overly taxed here and there, too, depending on who you are).

[MeanPeopleSuck]

Although I don't find most of the back and forth worth it here anymore, for obvious reasons I've stated in previous posts, I'd love to spin off this last topic if chili and Mean are interested. I've been studying markets for years but have really gotten into the nitty gritty of the relationship between the Fed/bonds/stocks and commodities markets for the last couple of years, and it's super interesting but crazy and obviously has the most money in it, and to be made, legally and without cap (but overly taxed here and there, too, depending on who you are).

Definitely. Sounds fascinating. I'll pm ya.

[gojetsgomoxies]

be careful on USO..... it might disappear one day, like some of the the big VIX ETF's did.... exxon, chevron, royal dutch etc. will still be around in 2 years.

one of the most successful investors of all-time (george soros) i think played the wisdom of crowds and then finds an opportune time to go against that....... something along the lines of moving averages would capture alot of this. but when george goes long oil, he structures it to get the most high volume, oil-leverage possible

[gojetsgomoxies]

would love to have a stock market themed thread in this forum.... or maybe at least 2 (ideas and trading for a start)

but no fan-boyish stuff.......... pro or anti-trump comments only in relation to the stock market

a pretty high volume but very anal-retentive investment board won't let you mention the word "trump"

[PharaohUB]

A bit off the subject, but I found fascinating many years ago while I was in an IBM management class. We were given the following exercise.

“NASA Exercise: Survival on the MoonScenario: You are a member of a space crew originally scheduled to rendezvous with a mother ship on the lighted surface of the moon. However, due to mechanical difficulties, your ship was forced to land at a spot some 200 miles from the rendezvous point. During reentry and landing, much of the equipment aboard was damaged and, since survival depends on reaching the mother ship, the most critical items available must be chosen for the 200-mile trip. Below are listed the 15 items left intact and undamaged after landing. Your task is to rank order them in terms of their importance for your crew in allowing them to reach the rendezvous point. Place the number 1 by the most important item, the number 2 by the second most important, and so on through number 15 for the least important.”

Then we randomly divided in groups of 5 and asked to repeat using a group consensus approach (wisdom of the crowd). Needless to say, I found some of the suggestions good and others not. But, we hammered out a list. Then we were given a scoring sheet and we computed our individual score and the team score. I was surprised that the team score was better than mine. The instructor then asked for a show of hands of those who had a better individual score than the team. No one in the class of 30 raised their hand. He said no one rarely does.

Here is a link to the quiz (1^st page), the correct answers (2^nd page), and the scoring method (3^rd page).

https://www.humber.ca/centreforteach...onExercise.pdf

I learned a valuable lesson that day.

Not sure what this proves.

If 80% of your population is stupid and 20% is smart, and you were to score this way... then the stupid people would do better on the test, because stupid people decided the scoring for the test. It doesn't mean their answer is better.

[aston]

Not sure what this proves.

If 80% of your population is stupid and 20% is smart, and you were to score this way... then the stupid people would do better on the test, because stupid people decided the scoring for the test. It doesn't mean their answer is better.

(1) diversity of opinion;
(2) independence of members from one another;
(3) decentralization;
(4) a good method for aggregating opinions.

[Roger T. Bannon]

In the case of the Bsims experience, you had IBM employees doing a NASA exercise. You did not have stupid people doing an exercise with stupid answers. There were correct answers with a ranking. The IBM employees scored better as a group than individually on this complex task. A lot of them thought they had a lot better answers. But the group scored higher.

That is an example of Wisdom of the Crowd but not enough people to call it an official result. Nonetheless, the crowd was smarter than Bsims expected and he was not as smart as he expected.

[Bsims]

That is an example of Wisdom of the Crowd but not enough people to call it an official result. Nonetheless, the crowd was smarter than Bsims expected and he was not as smart as he expected.

Precisely. Presumably it was a lesson, and it was a lesson well learned (although humbly). I am considering making another run and working on baseball simulations again this year (it has been about 5 years since I last tried this). My natural instinct (and the likely approach) is to go it alone. However the lesson learned would be to try to find some like minded individuals, and put together a group to work on the project. Reluctantly, I would have to conclude the team could produce better results than I could alone.

[chilidog]

Precisely. Presumably it was a lesson, and it was a lesson well learned (although humbly). I am considering making another run and working on baseball simulations again this year (it has been about 5 years since I last tried this). My natural instinct (and the likely approach) is to go it alone. However the lesson learned would be to try to find some like minded individuals, and put together a group to work on the project. Reluctantly, I would have to conclude the team could produce better results than I could alone.

I was really looking forward to this year's MLB season because I came up with my idea at the end of July last year and it did really well for the remainder of the year. I wanted to get a full season's worth of data for each sport, but looks like that'll have to wait until the 2021 seasons, since who knows what's going to happen this year (like maybe the virus will create anomalies that wouldn't normally exist in a regular season).

[probetharout]

Because they stand to make more money by not moving the line. If you are a professional bettor, you know if you bet $500 on a game and the line moves 1 point, you have destroyed all your value. Better to wait until you can get money down and hope that the number is still there.
So a person that bets thousands per game just waits to see what is available when they can bet as much as they want. Then they hit what is there to hit. If they can make what they want, they will bet it earlier.

I am new here to the forum, but an advantage bettor based out of Las Vegas. This is actually very true. Watching my DBS screen and studying college basketball totals overnight for a very long time, there is a lot of manipulation and market setup that takes place overnight - sharp/professional bettors are usually betting against the side of value simply because there is more +EV on the entire turnover to do so once more outs are available to bet at the next day.

It doesn’t take much money to move the opener overnight so it’s worth spending a couple hundred books to move a total overnight in the opposite side of the value and then getting 10-20x your overnight bet amount on the opposite side once all the outs have the line available. Majority of books are retail shops just copying and pasting the next morning at 9:30am EST, so you then take advantage of better overall expected value because you’re able to get more down from retail shops posting inefficient market values because they’re copying market making books prematurely.
If you’re betting overnight lines for value, that’s fine because the lines are always softer. But, if you’re looking to get lots of money down, it’s not necessarily the best time to expose information.

A top-tier professional bettors look for the most OPTIMAL time to get in, and that’s a combination of getting a good price + a good amount of money down. If you go in to early, you don’t have enough money down, but if you wait too long, you don’t have enough of an edge.

[Roger T. Bannon]

I am new here to the forum, but an advantage bettor based out of Las Vegas. This is actually very true. Watching my DBS screen and studying college basketball totals overnight for a very long time, there is a lot of manipulation and market setup that takes place overnight - sharp/professional bettors are usually betting against the side of value simply because there is more +EV on the entire turnover to do so once more outs are available to bet at the next day.

That is an interesting observation. I would doubt that is true based on what I see but I have never looked at CBB totals so it could be happening there. I kind of doubt it but I can't argue against it.

[Roger T. Bannon]

It doesn’t take much money to move the opener overnight so it’s worth spending a couple hundred books to move a total overnight in the opposite side of the value and then getting 10-20x your overnight bet amount on the opposite side once all the outs have the line available. Majority of books are retail shops just copying and pasting the next morning at 9:30am EST, so you then take advantage of better overall expected value because you’re able to get more down from retail shops posting inefficient market values because they’re copying market making books prematurely.
If you’re betting overnight lines for value, that’s fine because the lines are always softer. But, if you’re looking to get lots of money down, it’s not necessarily the best time to expose information.

So now that I think about this, it still does not make a lot of sense to me because overnight lines do move pretty quickly in the right direction and in the case of really off lines they move extremely quickly in the right direction. The best lines do not tend to make it to the point that they raise the limits.

However, it might be possible that a person could come out ahead in a fishing expedition with these lines and just see what sticks and maybe there is something there but it is not likely to be a whole lot better than if you just stayed pat and waited. But maybe so since you can sit on the particular games and bet them as soon as the limits go up.

The point about bonus books putting out the line a bit too early is true enough but still they are moving off Bookmaker lines so no real disadvantage as compared to Bookmaker unless they are moving lines too slowly which is something altogether different.

There is definitely market manipulation that goes on in college basketball but from what I have seen, it takes place after limits go up and they immediately bet the other side. Right Angle Sports is the top offender in this category with college basketball. So definitely not consistent with what I have seen but could be some value.

[chilidog]

Although I don't find most of the back and forth worth it here anymore, for obvious reasons I've stated in previous posts, I'd love to spin off this last topic if chili and Mean are interested. I've been studying markets for years but have really gotten into the nitty gritty of the relationship between the Fed/bonds/stocks and commodities markets for the last couple of years, and it's super interesting but crazy and obviously has the most money in it, and to be made, legally and without cap (but overly taxed here and there, too, depending on who you are).

Dunno how I missed this, but I'd absolutely be interested in this. Without sports right now, I've thrown myself into the stock market and find it incredibly interesting. Very emotional market, just like sports. Probably a more efficient market than sports, given the massive amounts of money thrown around, combined with the lack of a stigma involved from gambling. Probably much harder to find an edge, but it's been fun just learning so far.

I think paying attention to the psychological aspect of reading the market (much like with sports betting) is key to this. Still just playing around with spreadsheets at this point, although I'll open a free account at ThinkorSwim pretty soon to start virtual trading.

[StackinGreen]

Yeah, PM me there are certain sectors I'm good in but mostly I have long term plays (3,5, and 10 years).

[KVB]

...As for "exuberance" in the betting market. No, there is no "exuberance." Predictions for sports are very good and there are only adjustments that need to be made on a weekly basis. There is nothing close to exuberance. There are overvaluations.

You have zero dependence on other people's opinions in sports betting. You only have to worry about the outcome. Other people's perception has no bearing on the outcome of a bet unless you are basing your bets on line movements in which case you are not sharp so your outcomes are irrelevant as you are simply a follower...

Of course there is exuberance in betting, that's what March Madness and college basketball on the Saturday before the Super Bowl is all about.

Shit, I can bet an opener, move a line, and create exuberance.

It is not true that there is zero depoendance on other's opinion in sportsbetting. Whether or not you have a bet entirely depends on whether or not the market has an offer you want.

That market is comprised of nothing more than the opinions of the bettors and the books manipulation.

You are missing fundamentals of the market here, real basic concepts. You are betting into other's opinions.

That's what a line is.

lol.

[KVB]

...I was making a generalization...

I wasn't responding to your generalizations, they are based on fundamentally wrong precepts. It's the precepts I was correcting.

[Roger T. Bannon]

Of course there is exuberance in betting, that's what March Madness and college basketball on the Saturday before the Super Bowl is all about.

Shit, I can bet an opener, move a line, and create exuberance.

It is not true that there is zero depoendance on other's opinion in sportsbetting. Whether or not you have a bet entirely depends on whether or not the market has an offer you want.

That market is comprised of nothing more than the opinions of the bettors and the books manipulation.

You are missing fundamentals of the market here, real basic concepts. You are betting into other's opinions.

That's what a line is.

lol.

No, you cannot create any "exuberance" at all. You can move a line a point and create value on the other side. That is not exuberance.

There is no hysteria in the betting market. In the stock market, you get massive overvaluations. Those can continue for months or years because there is no correcting mechanism. You cannot develop massive exuberance with a football team because they play a game every week and the results are what they are in addition to the fact that the value of a team is already very close to correct value.

You have zero concept of the difference between financial markets and betting markets.

[paulll]

Nice piece of work I see here. Good job guys

[StackinGreen]

You guys are still back and forth-ing with Bannon?

[Roger T. Bannon]

You guys are still back and forth-ing with Bannon?

Some people are actually interested in this sort of thing which you clearly weren't. Both you and chilidog flunked the course so you two can team up on the stock market.

[chilidog]

������

[StackinGreen]

Some people are actually interested in this sort of thing which you clearly weren't. Both you and chilidog flunked the course so you two can team up on the stock market.

Both our and your comments speak for themselves, Roger.

������

Chili, yeah, I don't know sometimes around here.

[Roger T. Bannon]

Both our and your comments speak for themselves, Roger.

Agreed. The first intelligent comment you have made in the interactions I have had with you. Hopefully, I will not have any others.