[veriableodds]

Without talking specifics of or about models, bankroll management, ect ect
This is a simple basic form of +ev? Or is it not?
1. Games that are typically wagerd on with no spreads like mlb, hockey, soccer ect. Only taking teams with a minimum 40% chance of winning.
Team-A model says team-A has a 47.2% chance of winning with odds of +129. That would mean your expected value would be 8%, even though your break even is achieved at .94?? conclusion being if I bet this same scenario risking .47 each time over 100 wagers risking 47 total my ev would be 8% of 47= 3.76 ev profit???

2. Same model chance as above for winning but the line is +105 which doesn't come close to beak even so therefore it's a no bet?? conclusion wagers appear to only have value based off the payout the line is offering??

3. Spread games like NBA, NCAAF, NFL, ect ect
Using the typical 91% (.91) payout . Team whatever, whoever has a 46% chance of winning model says they should loose by 2, but they are getting +6 from the books giving a value of 4 points. If the total -over/under- of a game is say 200 , would that now be a 54% chance of winning for team-a 46+ the % of perceived points in game?? 54% + .91 payout giving a +ev of 3.14%????

4. Totals,. Models suggest score of 8.75 while the line is 10 so would that not then be 62.5% for game to go under given the 1.25 discrepancy?? So that would +ev of 19.3% (62.5 +.91%) payout????

Any thoughts on these, does anybody wager like this??

[pologq]

do you strictly bet based on formula? just asking

[Roscoe_Word]

I'd say if your model calculates the probable winning % accurately, then your +EV perspective (what I'd call an overlay) would grind away a profit.

I guess the key word is "IF".

If that's the case, you might have found the Holy Grail. (Don't know if Monty Python's boys were successful.)

I tried the (+EV) or (OVERLAY) method which, needless to say, got croaked.

My rudimentary programming skills were no match for the books.

My humble opinion: This "thing of ours" is 60% art and 40% science.

[veriableodds]

Sorry guys I absolutely just have no extra time these days.
Really just using theory, mixed with league trends . If I just took the 50ish 60% ish wagers that not only wouldn't be worth the time or money, as there would be hardly any wagers. No I don't just wager on the formula, I data crunch looking for discrepancy been doing it for years. Hardly been doing anything wagering last 3 years. Got alot of these ideas from the oddjam YouTube videos where they beat the pinnacle on the lines

[pologq]

it is interesting what you posted. makes me think.

[Nate rasta]

I always feel like I have a better angle on my local teams. Local radio local sports news ect.

[jjgold]

killer sports you can make your own trend models if you learn sdql formulas and actually not that hard

[pologq]

I always feel like I have a better angle on my local teams. Local radio local sports news ect.

same. good point too.

[veriableodds]

using strictly +ev only elimination of any + line for teams that do not have atleast a 40%+ chance of winning
oct 13 nhl based on simple models
Philadelphia 51.2% @ +120 = 12.64 value
dallas 46.4 @ +120 = 2.08 value
objective is to wager only positive outcomes
will post these atleast i can keep track

[Waterstpub87]

The thing about "I follow my local teams", I have an edge, is that is actually a lot harder than building a model.

I really have no clue how people win without either : 1. Math Modelling, 2.More of a trading approach(chasing steam, following odds ect.)

When you are incorporating qualitative information, like reports of people not getting along in the locker room, the key question is how much is that worth? and is that information already incorporated. If you weight it too much, you introduce more error than information, too little, its same. On top of that, you can't have a decent sample size.

My brain does not work that way.

On the original question, you miss a lot of value on large dogs. Consider the difference between something at 50% being off 4% (54% chance priced at 50%), vs something at 20%(24%chance priced at 20%). Many times in sports betting, or other markets, things that are low probability have a tendency to be priced less efficiently.

Refusing to touch anything under a 40% strikes me as someone who is afraid of bankroll (No offense intended). If you're well capitalized, you can lose a few in a row for those eventually large hits.

Another point while I am thinking of it. There is a behavioral effect on the largest dog on the board for a day. Many unsophisticated bettors tend to bet the largest favorite on the board, and include this in parlays, which I've always assumed would cause the largest dog to be inefficiently priced, as there is "artificial" demand on the other side.

[jjgold]

unabated odds gives you legit edges on their screen

Not saying it works but this method better than any

[veriableodds]

The thing about "I follow my local teams", I have an edge, is that is actually a lot harder than building a model.

I really have no clue how people win without either : 1. Math Modelling, 2.More of a trading approach(chasing steam, following odds ect.)

When you are incorporating qualitative information, like reports of people not getting along in the locker room, the key question is how much is that worth? and is that information already incorporated. If you weight it too much, you introduce more error than information, too little, its same. On top of that, you can't have a decent sample size.

My brain does not work that way.

On the original question, you miss a lot of value on large dogs. Consider the difference between something at 50% being off 4% (54% chance priced at 50%), vs something at 20%(24%chance priced at 20%). Many times in sports betting, or other markets, things that are low probability have a tendency to be priced less efficiently.

Refusing to touch anything under a 40% strikes me as someone who is afraid of bankroll (No offense intended). If you're well capitalized, you can lose a few in a row for those eventually large hits.

Another point while I am thinking of it. There is a behavioral effect on the largest dog on the board for a day. Many unsophisticated bettors tend to bet the largest favorite on the board, and include this in parlays, which I've always assumed would cause the largest dog to be inefficiently priced, as there is "artificial" demand on the other side.

Good points. this is just one angle/system/play/investment ect ect. the reason for no dogs under 40% is because it has no value sure dogs win but not long term the % chance of winning is a long-term calculation. All the other points your making can be each categorized as its own system. (if a nhl dog had a 43% chance, the line is +125 there is no value you would be in the red 3.25) focus here is long term profits. All your points are also great angles. I will post totals also when i see a goal+ adv compared to line but have not seen so far. for the 14th i see one play Montreal/41.5@+150

[str]

unabated odds gives you legit edges on their screen

Not saying it works but this method better than any

OK. Wait.

You just used the phrase " unabated odds gives you legit edges on their screen" .

And all I see in my mind is the video of you grabbing your crouch in cutoff sweat pants.

You're the greatest JJ.

[veriableodds]

unabated odds gives you legit edges on their screen

Not saying it works but this method better than any

Original coach just wow

[veriableodds]

The thing about "I follow my local teams", I have an edge, is that is actually a lot harder than building a model.

I really have no clue how people win without either : 1. Math Modelling, 2.More of a trading approach(chasing steam, following odds ect.)

When you are incorporating qualitative information, like reports of people not getting along in the locker room, the key question is how much is that worth? and is that information already incorporated. If you weight it too much, you introduce more error than information, too little, its same. On top of that, you can't have a decent sample size.

My brain does not work that way.

On the original question, you miss a lot of value on large dogs. Consider the difference between something at 50% being off 4% (54% chance priced at 50%), vs something at 20%(24%chance priced at 20%). Many times in sports betting, or other markets, things that are low probability have a tendency to be priced less efficiently.

Refusing to touch anything under a 40% strikes me as someone who is afraid of bankroll (No offense intended). If you're well capitalized, you can lose a few in a row for those eventually large hits.

Another point while I am thinking of it. There is a behavioral effect on the largest dog on the board for a day. Many unsophisticated bettors tend to bet the largest favorite on the board, and include this in parlays, which I've always assumed would cause the largest dog to be inefficiently priced, as there is "artificial" demand on the other side.

Admiration for the ideas going forward, keep up the good thinking. Use the force

[Waterstpub87]

Good points. this is just one angle/system/play/investment ect ect. the reason for no dogs under 40% is because it has no value sure dogs win but not long term the % chance of winning is a long-term calculation. All the other points your making can be each categorized as its own system. (if a nhl dog had a 43% chance, the line is +125 there is no value you would be in the red 3.25) focus here is long term profits. All your points are also great angles. I will post totals also when i see a goal+ adv compared to line but have not seen so far. for the 14th i see one play Montreal/41.5@+150

I hope you found it useful.

I disagree. Caring about the winning % of a single game is short-sighted thinking, again no offense intended. Its a question of how much value you generate over the bets you make. I would argue betting large dogs long term would be easier to generate value. Consider the example I gave. A 4% difference in 20% generates a 20% hold, a 4% difference at 50% gives 8%. Unless the probability scales, a similar mispricing will yield much more on underdogs.

I'm not trying to sell you on anything. I genuinely hope your system does well, and you make money. Personally, I get much more a rush when I rip them off for a large dog.

[TommieGunshot]

1. Yes, an 8% edge

2. A -3% edge.

3. It depends on the probability of the favorite winning by exactly 2 to 6 points. The edge will be far more than 3%

4. It depends on the probability of the score landing on exactly 9 or 10. A 19% is probably close.

For three and four, I always think it is best to use historical data. In this case "best" may not be the most accurate, but the best combination of accuracy and speed.

[veriableodds]

see post 9, and 12 has picks will grade them as 1u risk
philly, and dallas both won on the 13th +2.2u

Montreal/41.5@+150 is tonite 14th
15th Vancouver/57.2%/-120/+4.67
vegas/59.7/-135/+3.87
chicago/49.9/+145/+22
no totals as of yet

[stake1]

interesting stuff, models are great if you have a bankroll parlayed with strict money management. most guys are chasers and blow it all up

[slewfan]

The only numbers play I ever experienced as universally successful was counting cards in blackjack. Single deck, double deck and 4 deck shoe.

Sports betting's first hurdle is overcoming the vig. At the end of the season, this can be substantial. Whatever system you use after that, good luck.

[veriableodds]

#the 13th should be +2.4u I wrote 2.2
october 14th play lost -1u / t=1.4
the 15th was 2-1 chi, vegas won. Vnc lost (+4.19 -3 = 1.19) total= +2.59

so +2.59u heading into the 17th
nhl
nyr/61.5/@-210/=+2.86 of value
lak/55.1/@-105/+7.44
car/67.9/@-165/+9.45
no totals yet

[veriableodds]

18th plays
vnc/51.4/+110/7.94
bst/56.4/-105/9.98
nsh/61/-150/1.87

so im not going to be able to keep up with these,so when i can i will update and add picks consider the plays just spot plays

[veriableodds]

17th and 18 plays 3-3 (5.04 - 6.0u = -0.96u) (+2.59 - -0.96= +1.63

19th
stl/62.5/@-129/+11 value

[beefcake]

I like the way you think odds.Slot of us stiffs are just in it for the fun and have 0 time to grind out a profit.More power to you if you do.Good luck!

[JohnGalt2341]

I like the way you think odds.Slot of us stiffs are just in it for the fun and have 0 time to grind out a profit.More power to you if you do.Good luck!

I concur. When I first discovered SBR, I figured around half the threads would be similar to this one. Not quite.

[veriableodds]

the 20th
nhl
wsh/56.7/+100/13.4
az/43.4/+145/6.33
bst/70.2/-195/6v
nyi/63.6/-126/13.8
car/50.8/+105/4.14
sj/nyr under 6.5/-115/18.55v - model shows 5.62 score giving a 63.4% under shot

[veriableodds]

So all the information needed to wager this -strategy- is in this thread no reason to update/keep record.
tonite would be nhl/minnesota/44.5/+135/4.57.. for the same game model shows 6.04 goals on the total line is 5.5 ov/un