Question for Sports betting Math geeks

[CHUBNUT]

Your mathematical or whatever you call it model indicates a team -120 in a match, the books average price is +100 and you pat yourself on the proverbial back by securing +104 therefore nailing a rarely seen although hypothetical +EV bet.

My question is, its obvious that your position is in the minority and the logic is that you dont know something thats appears common knowledge. In that case your model seems highly flawed as it dosent take in critical info, on the other hand the paradox is buying into line movement and latest info makes your model redundant.

I'm sure that sharp Austin 7 will have a viable answer.

[roasthawg]

Assuming that the market is basing it's decisions off of readily available knowledge and that your model uses all of this readily available knowledge when making its lines then the hope is that your model can find bad lines.

If the market is controlled by only those with access to relevant information that is not readily available to the public then it is tough to win.

[CHUBNUT]

Assuming that the market is basing it's decisions off of readily available knowledge and that your model uses all of this readily available knowledge when making its lines then the hope is that your model can find bad lines.

If the market is controlled by only those with access to relevant information that is not readily available to the public then it is tough to win.

Thats my point, how can you assume your model by yourself alone is more predictive than the rest of the Worlds view. surely by any logic it is YOU who is missing vital info, making the hypothetical +EV a nonsense.

[jgilmartin]

Thats my point, how can you assume your model by yourself alone is more predictive than the rest of the Worlds view. surely by any logic it is YOU who is missing vital info, making the hypothetical +EV a nonsense.

Your position seems to ignore the possibility of betting openers.

[roasthawg]

Thats my point, how can you assume your model by yourself alone is more predictive than the rest of the Worlds view. surely by any logic it is YOU who is missing vital info, making the hypothetical +EV a nonsense.

If the market is a reflection of a large collection of individuals who are for the most part making plays based on readily available information then all you have to do is be better than the majority... if the information being used is readily available then it's a fair competition.

If inside info rules then your point is valid. Doesn't matter how good you are if you don't have access to vital information.

[CHUBNUT]

To reiterate, I'm talking about a persons specific mathematical model pointing out +EV betting propositions. What makes his individual model make the rest of the Worlds models wrong. What I'm really getting at here is that any mathematical model that gives +EV advantage to a 2% market is missing some critical info.

[Justin7]

The biggest, best and brightest players don't bet until game day (or very late in the week). They don't cast their vote until they bet. If you vote before them, the voting world at that point is wrong.

[TPowell]

honestly who cares what your model says? If you beat the closer, you made a good play. I do believe some sharps bet very early based on their numbers and THEN come back later and do an evaluation of injuries/line movement and make more plays

[CHUBNUT]

The biggest, best and brightest players don't bet until game day (or very late in the week). They don't cast their vote until they bet. If you vote before them, the voting world at that point is wrong.

Thats all very good but surely your ploy manifests to either you missing out on the best possible price (as in the market going against you.) hence making your model a mockery. Or the price drifts, which would indicate your model is on the wrong end of the latest info which in turn would suggest your model is compromised.
This is the problem with 99.9% of posts relating to +EV betting models on this Forum, their not dynamic only historic.

[CHUBNUT]

honestly who cares what your model says? If you beat the closer, you made a good play. I do believe some sharps bet very early based on their numbers and THEN come back later and do an evaluation of injuries/line movement and make more plays

You obviously dont win money betting from what your post suggests. People on here endlessly talk about betting models that give +EV bets, they are also obsessed with the nonsense of beating the closing line. The suggestion that anyone with a clue would bet early and make more plays later only shows your naiveness to the reality of profitable betting.

[TPowell]

You obviously dont win money betting from what your post suggests. People on here endlessly talk about betting models that give +EV bets, they are also obsessed with the nonsense of beating the closing line. The suggestion that anyone with a clue would bet early and make more plays later only shows your naiveness to the reality of profitable betting.

nonsense of BTCL?

[Justin7]

Thats all very good but surely your ploy manifests to either you missing out on the best possible price (as in the market going against you.) hence making your model a mockery. Or the price drifts, which would indicate your model is on the wrong end of the latest info which in turn would suggest your model is compromised.
This is the problem with 99.9% of posts relating to +EV betting models on this Forum, their not dynamic only historic.

I miss the best price is most games if I don't blast the openers. But, I won't cast my vote until I can bet in the volume I want.

If a line moves against you, there are two causes. Inefficiency in your model, and new information. There will frequently be new information when you bet openers. Even with these causes, a model that BTCL 70% of the time (regardless of when you bet it) is going to win on straight betting.

[djiddish98]

How relevant is the first move of the line then to the model success picture? If your model can predict the first move of a line, would you call THAT a successful model, merely because it agrees with other sharps who presumably bet openers?

It seems odd to compare the output of your model given X to the closing line given X+Y+etc.

[bztips]

As usual, the argument rests entirely on your belief (or lack thereof) in exactly how "efficient" you think sports betting markets are.

Those like Justin believe that the line on literally every game (at least in the big 4 betting markets) reflects strong efficiency, ie., the line by definition moves towards efficiency in each and every game. If this is your belief, then beating the closing line becomes paramount, in fact it's really the ONLY thing you should care about.

Those like me believe in the efficiency argument only at a more macro level, ie, I believe that there may be certain contests where the line does NOT move toward efficiency, and if your model can identify those then you can be successful.

Some, like Data, go even further and suggest virtually no belief in efficient markets. (Hope I'm not putting words in Data's mouth.)

[CHUBNUT]

How relevant is the first move of the line then to the model success picture? If your model can predict the first move of a line, would you call THAT a successful model, merely because it agrees with other sharps who presumably bet openers?

It seems odd to compare the output of your model given X to the closing line given X+Y+etc.

I think your posting exactly what my argument is, if you have a model then line movement doesnt come into it, blah blah blah. As usual Justin 7s view is apparently " I have a model that produces +EV bets but I dont take that as concrete because I have no faith in it"

"I miss the best price is most games if I don't blast the openers." How laughable is that statement. In other words, I have no confidence in my opening price model to bet all games but if I "blast the open" then logically I'm at the mercy of any further info. Considering the "openers" can be Sunday night in NFL, that leaves a whole week of uncertainty for a "PRO" to endure.
I would love to give this joker a tick over his best price as it would certainly give me a +EV bet wait a minute, isnt that another nonsense, both sides being +EV

[CHUBNUT]

As usual, the argument rests entirely on your belief (or lack thereof) in exactly how "efficient" you think sports betting markets are.

Those like Justin believe that the line on literally every game (at least in the big 4 betting markets) reflects strong efficiency, ie., the line by definition moves towards efficiency in each and every game. If this is your belief, then beating the closing line becomes paramount, in fact it's really the ONLY thing you should care about.

Those like me believe in the efficiency argument only at a more macro level, ie, I believe that there may be certain contests where the line does NOT move toward efficiency, and if your model can identify those then you can be successful.

Some, like Data, go even further and suggest virtually no belief in efficient markets. (Hope I'm not putting words in Data's mouth.)

This post certainly adheres more to what the majority of what Bettors find. Outside these sad bettors is this unique band of gifted professionals who constantly post their success on these Forums in terms of mathematical gobbledegook rather than betting reality. I'm willing to prove my point in hard cash rather than fictional nonsense on an internet forum, just post your willingness and I'll guarantee you the best possible price at any time and save all you sharps the worry of line shopping.

[jgilmartin]

I'm willing to prove my point in hard cash rather than fictional nonsense on an internet forum, just post your willingness and I'll guarantee you the best possible price at any time and save all you sharps the worry of line shopping.

To clarify, is this your point?
1. BTCL is meaningless
2. If your model's fair line differs from the current market price, your model is wrong

[Justin7]

"I miss the best price is most games if I don't blast the openers." How laughable is that statement. In other words, I have no confidence in my opening price model to bet all games but if I "blast the open" then logically I'm at the mercy of any further info.

Do you really not get this?

NCAAF. You have two choices. Bet a side. 1k at 10% EV on the opener. Wait until Wednesday and the line moves a full point against you. Bet 10k at 6% EV.

The big players (with far better models than I use) have a similar problem: should they bet 10k (or 30k, or whatever you think the NCAAF market is on Wednesday) at 10% EV, or 200k on Saturday at 5% EV?

The top of the betting pyramid is dominated by big bettors with the best models. The longer you wait, the more of them that will dominate the market.

[durito]

Justin,

Any idea why limits (pinnacle specifically) are so much higher this year? Pre-uiega they'd only take 10k ncaaf thursdays, 20k on sat. Since then it's been as low as 5k up till sat morning when it would go to 10(was like this last year). Now they are taking 30k on Thursdays?? On every game, with some at 50?

[Monte]

It's just a feeling, but Pinny seems to grow even larger fast.
They have been the first to come out with the last Rangers/Yankees line (and a $30k limit only ~15mins after the opener), earlier than Greek and BM, my impression is that they either feel very confident with their lines atm, or make a shitload of money in the soccer biz and just want to show their muscles in the U.S. markets too.

[Pokerjoe]

Your position seems to ignore the possibility of betting openers.

No. Openers are not independent of market forces. Generally, they are the result of them, in that they are the continuation of where markets on the teams involved previously settled. That's pretty much what the opening line is: a summation of past markets, and anticipation of the future market.

[Pokerjoe]

This post certainly adheres more to what the majority of what Bettors find. Outside these sad bettors is this unique band of gifted professionals who constantly post their success on these Forums in terms of mathematical gobbledegook rather than betting reality. I'm willing to prove my point in hard cash rather than fictional nonsense on an internet forum, just post your willingness and I'll guarantee you the best possible price at any time and save all you sharps the worry of line shopping.

If it's gobbledegook, though it may be numerical, it isn't mathematical.

If you think it's gobbledegook merely because it's numerical, you aren't mathematical.

[skrtelfan]

The biggest, best and brightest players don't bet until game day (or very late in the week). They don't cast their vote until they bet. If you vote before them, the voting world at that point is wrong.

Maybe true in certain cases but there are when a number is just completely wrong it will be quickly corrected regardless of whether the best and the brightest bet the mistake or not. Even the above average and the somewhat sharp can pick off obviously wrong numbers.

[jgilmartin]

No. Openers are not independent of market forces. Generally, they are the result of them, in that they are the continuation of where markets on the teams involved previously settled. That's pretty much what the opening line is: a summation of past markets, and anticipation of the future market.

While I can certainly agree that past markets have an effect on future opening lines, I took the OP in a different context. When he refers to a market price as the "rest of the Worlds view", I interpreted this as meaning a line that had been adjusted by the people betting into it. What I was getting at is that I don't believe openers represent the "rest of the Worlds view".

[WendysRox]

Your mathematical or whatever you call it model indicates a team -120 in a match, the books average price is +100 and you pat yourself on the proverbial back by securing +104 therefore nailing a rarely seen although hypothetical +EV bet.

My question is, its obvious that your position is in the minority and the logic is that you dont know something thats appears common knowledge. In that case your model seems highly flawed as it dosent take in critical info, on the other hand the paradox is buying into line movement and latest info makes your model redundant.

I'm sure that sharp Austin 7 will have a viable answer.

Why do you assume that you are wrong and not the sheep (oops) I mean public?

[MonkeyF0cker]

Do you really not get this?

NCAAF. You have two choices. Bet a side. 1k at 10% EV on the opener. Wait until Wednesday and the line moves a full point against you. Bet 10k at 6% EV.

The big players (with far better models than I use) have a similar problem: should they bet 10k (or 30k, or whatever you think the NCAAF market is on Wednesday) at 10% EV, or 200k on Saturday at 5% EV?

The top of the betting pyramid is dominated by big bettors with the best models. The longer you wait, the more of them that will dominate the market.

Here you go again. Every line moves linearly, huh?

Blasphemy.

[Pokerjoe]

While I can certainly agree that past markets have an effect on future opening lines, I took the OP in a different context. When he refers to a market price as the "rest of the Worlds view", I interpreted this as meaning a line that had been adjusted by the people betting into it. What I was getting at is that I don't believe openers represent the "rest of the Worlds view".

I understand, and don't disagree. But I think it's useful to use the language of continuums, in that to some extent openers are just a continuation of a team's previous close, with obvious (you might even say "vanilla") adjustments. So the market is more constant than might appear, and maybe should not be seen as ending when a game begins.

When seen this way, such that the market has a continous estimation of the Redskins and a continuous estimation of the Cowboys, when those teams play, the estimations converge at that point, but don't stop there.

Seen this way, market estimations of relative team strength become more like stock prices, but with major and overt signal events (the games).

[jgilmartin]

I understand, and don't disagree. But I think it's useful to use the language of continuums, in that to some extent openers are just a continuation of a team's previous close, with obvious (you might even say "vanilla") adjustments. So the market is more constant than might appear, and maybe should not be seen as ending when a game begins.

When seen this way, such that the market has a continous estimation of the Redskins and a continuous estimation of the Cowboys, when those teams play, the estimations converge at that point, but don't stop there.

Seen this way, market estimations of relative team strength become more like stock prices, but with major and overt signal events (the games).

Interesting perspective, and a rather sensible approach, actually.

[Justin7]

Justin,

Any idea why limits (pinnacle specifically) are so much higher this year? Pre-uiega they'd only take 10k ncaaf thursdays, 20k on sat. Since then it's been as low as 5k up till sat morning when it would go to 10(was like this last year). Now they are taking 30k on Thursdays?? On every game, with some at 50?

I don't know for sure. I would speculate that a lot more people are playing at Pinnacle now than 3 years ago.

[durito]

I don't know for sure. I would speculate that a lot more people are playing at Pinnacle now than 3 years ago.

They are higher today than they were pre uigea. This after they'd pretty much gone down every year a little. 50k on sun belt games?

[CHUBNUT]

This thread has morphed into all the rest of the nonense on here with posters claiming all sorts of things which cannot be proved. While I certainly accept that there is thousands of bettors out there with more knowledge than me I find it hard the way some posters ply their supposed successful trade.
My own personal experience is that one can have a model that beats openers but must be statistically based, however you need to jump ship early as you/I have no idea of the info coming in. Considering I've had plenty of accounts closed while not trying to scalp/trade, betting in 100s, it surprises me posters have no problem stating on here that they consistantly beat the opener for bets in 1K-10K without some sort of pull.
The obvious smart observation with all this is posters are just posting what they would like to happen as opposed to what really happens. The reality is its easier to talk nonsense with math, beating openers, beating closers, line movement, trends and any other great sounding jest. When are posters going to pass on all this and get back to the epitomy of beating bookmakers, hard work finding situational match ups that give one side an advantage. Only after that can you put good tactics in number selection and stats into the mix and create good bets.
And then get your accounts closed.

[Firefox14]

Do you really not get this?

NCAAF. You have two choices. Bet a side. 1k at 10% EV on the opener. Wait until Wednesday and the line moves a full point against you. Bet 10k at 6% EV.

The big players (with far better models than I use) have a similar problem: should they bet 10k (or 30k, or whatever you think the NCAAF market is on Wednesday) at 10% EV, or 200k on Saturday at 5% EV?

The top of the betting pyramid is dominated by big bettors with the best models. The longer you wait, the more of them that will dominate the market.

Justin7,

If I interpret your post correctly, when you say 1k at 10% even, you're meaning 100 dollars. 10k at 10% is 1,000 dollars, and 200k at 5% is 10,000 dollars. If this is true, you are betting the same team the whole way through?

[Justin7]

Justin7,

If I interpret your post correctly, when you say 1k at 10% even, you're meaning 100 dollars. 10k at 10% is 1,000 dollars, and 200k at 5% is 10,000 dollars. If this is true, you are betting the same team the whole way through?

Yes, same team. The longer you wait, the less your ev%, but the greater your profit if you have a monster bankroll. Bill Walters does not bet overnights, unless he is manipulating them.

[Firefox14]

Yes, same team. The longer you wait, the less your ev%, but the greater your profit if you have a monster bankroll. Bill Walters does not bet overnights, unless he is manipulating them.

Okay, so if I understand it correctly, this is an example of what you are talking about.

Sunday 49ers -3 (+100) Bet 100
Wednesday 49ers -2 (+100) Bet 1,000
Friday 49ers -1 (+100) Bet 10,000

And if the line moves for your original bet?