 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
Oh I realize that I may be passing up +EV opportunities, but I just don't have the discipline to maintain a high level of scrutiny when it comes to making a selection over the course of a season. By the end of the year I would be reaching and thus may make wagers that aren't truly +EV selections. I also don't have the stones to lay off of an entire week if I can't find a +EV game. So that is why I stick to the best play of the week.Originally Posted by KVB
|
This post was nominated 1
time
. To view the nominated thread please click here.
People who nominated: KVB
|
Knowing yourself is very important.
Sounds like you have that wisdom and what to do about it.
The biggest problem with most in here is that you are afraid to wager. How many of you wager "Games of the Year", which are the easiest games to make money on? You are afraid to tie up what little money you may have for a long time. Here is an example using a college game. Right now Oregon is getting 1 1/2 points at USC. Now does anyone think that Oregon is going to be a dog when game time rolls around? Anyone at all? So the worst you can do is take Oregon plus the points now and then grab USC plus the points in November for a potential middle that pays 20/1. No one will. You guys will use a million ecuses but the truth is that you are too afraid to tie your money up for that long. There are a lot of guys giving out a lot of theories in here. Some are very good. Some are not so good. The bottom line is simple. You cannot be afraid to wager. Too many people in here, including most of you, wager "NOT TO LOSE" and that philosophy is a loser going in.
Go back to your hole BigDaddy.
Scared money isn't the biggest problem at all, not even close.
But it is a problem and you do make a decent point. You really do and lot can be discussed about it so it's a good post.
Now go back to your hole.
Personally, I think the NBA is the hardest to beat. You have to consider the number of possessions or variances in scoring. For example, a game like soccer (3 goal average) and hockey 5.5 goal average) are going to have the highest variances compared to expected results since there are only 3-6 typical "scoring impacts". NBA games have 150+ possessions which impact score.
How many plays does the typical NFL game have? I would imagine less than 150 but I could be wrong. I don't know, I see more posters that have winning NFL records than NBA records. However, that could be sampling bias since NBA has far more games and NFL has far fewer.
You can objectively compare sports. Feed closing odds into a formula that handles fls, and calculate logloss (moneylines) or RMSE (spreads/totals) against actual results.
Last edited by HeeeHAWWWW; 05-10-19 at 06:38 AM.
please elaborate on that Joe.
i posted a video on here years ago explaining the importance of setting your own lines to avoid using the opener as an anchor because you will never truly gauge 'value' based on line moves, ya dig?
going to grab a random mlb game as example. one second please.
i see Ari opening at 140. lets you say like the D Backs today and see that 140.
it is now at 136. you like Arizona even more? you feel like you are getting 'value' based on the anchor (opener)? you could have the team you like at an even better price!
however, some modeler setting his own lines feel like Ari should be 132. how is he feeling?
does that make sense? if a bettor fails to even attempt to assign a true number (odds) to a team he is already behind the curve. that was my point.
continuing on that anchor example. Apple knows their i-phone is not worth $1K
but they know early adopters and keeping up with the joneses peeps will plunk down whatever they ask
price point will slowly work its way down having more people enter at lower purchase points
eventually it will, in theory, reach a price that more reflects its true value
It is a matter of focus. If you can create a fairly accurate line, this could be the way to profitability regardless of whether or not you beat the closing line. The fact is that to be profitable your wagers must perform better than the implied odds of your wagers and again, that is regardless of whether or not you beat the closing line.
Now, in a previous post I wrote that I do not consider starting pitchers when making a baseball selection. I wrote it as bait to get a discussion started but a discussion never happened because I imagine that anyone that saw that post thought it was stupid, did not believe it, thought no way can that be done etc. But it is true and in a nutshell here is why.
If you create a line for MLB do you need to consider starting pitchers? Absolutely. Starting pitcher is probably the most important element of creating a line for MLB and to create a line you must absolutely consider the starting pitchers. Here’s where I start to part company with the create a line world. What value does considering the starting pitcher give you? Now, if you have a way of determining pitchers that are either undervalued or overvalued, then you might have something but you wouldn’t necessarily need to create a line for that. My point is, the starting pitchers are so important that it is hard for me to believe that their value is not already reflected in the line fairly accurately. Which of course is where problems come up for some that focus on creating (and/or beating) the line. If your pitcher estimate is not as good as what is already in the line, you will have a tendency to be on the “wrong” side of the line even if you beat the close.
Here is my focus. This is simplified for illustration purposes only. Let’s assume only 5 factors for MLB. Starting pitchers, offense (as a whole), defense (as a whole), criteria D and criteria E. I don’t consider starting pitchers, offense or defense because I know that those items are going to be fairly reflected in the line. However criteria D and/or some combination of E have an effect on the line that is either under or over appreciated by the line. Again, the way to be profitable is for your wagers to perform better than the implied probability of your wagers. My selection is based on criteria that determines that the line will be skewed one way or another. So I don’t need to create a line because all the other major criteria will already be reflected in the line whether it be -150 for a good pitcher or +150 for an inferior pitcher. It is the skew that I am expecting, not a specific line.
This is similar to the post where I wrote that I do not consider the jockey when making horse race selections. The jockey is a well known factor and should be fairly included in the line. Of course if you know something more personal about the jockey this may give you an edge but I assume that most do not and that it would be few and far between.
I learned very early on to look at things differently. When I was starting out and I tried to discuss what I was looking for when making horse race selections to an old-timer, he told me I couldn’t do it that way especially since I told him I didn’t know the jockey on my selection. He had over 30 years of experience and he began to tell me the things I tried the previous year that failed for me. I asked him if he was profitable and he was reluctant to say but he finally admitted that he was not but that he knew the game well and it was a very tough game. Here was his problem IMO, he did not have 30 years of experience, he had one year of unsuccessful experience repeated 30 times. I on the other hand took my one year of unsuccessful experience and did not repeat it. I recognized that doing what everyone else was doing was probably not the way to profitability. This does not mean that someone cannot do those same things better and therefore be profitable, it just meant to me that I needed to look for a different way, which I did. It is the concept that I use for all my wagering activity.
I hope this gives someone something to think about. Again, if you are profitable doing what you are doing, continue doing it. If not, you might consider looking at things differently. Good luck.Joe.
|
|
i have no trouble briefly transforming this nfl thread into mlb, or the sports betting market as a whole. it is the nearest thing we have to natural selection, minus the offspring. one of Gaunch's lines that stuck with me the most when i first joined SBR was something like "there is a sever penalty for being wrong". he was setting up one of those 22,000 word posts he used to write, premise being market is efficient because being wrong means eventually being broke. there was a time i would just write those words as if they were mine.
ideally we would operate in a world where the sportsbook's only job is to provide a marketplace where we could have daily arguments on the results of independent events and those arguments would be measured in dollars. i think that holds true for 90%+ of sports betting. certainly books need to turn profits and will look to maximize. but their intent should be to bring people together that vote with their dollars, hold the money in good faith and move the proceeds to the winner, collecting their fee for providing a meeting place.
when we look at the last 10 seasons of mlb, faves are down about 275 Units, an average loss of 27.5 per season. over 23K+ games faves win 58% of the time. a number that remains consistent season after season after season. anyone care to wager what that unit total would like if we deduced the no vig line for those games?
that is the world in which we ply our trade. to me, connecting dots, the market is efficient, the books are not out to get me, but they are truly talented at setting lines that generate action and make it nearly impossible for average bettors to succeed long term.
and i am sorry i missed that thread Joe! i've made 214 mlb side plays this season and have looked at the starting pitchers exactly zero times. sometimes a name will catch my eye, like seeing Darvish listed as cubs starter the other day. didn't know he was still in mlb and certainly did not know he was in chicago. and i see parallels between us, as i do not follow traditional approaches unless the prove profitable. the guy capping horses for 30 years and not changing a losing approach is the opposite of us. i enjoyed that story.
where you and i split ways is on criteria. going on to add Criteria D and E is the start of something good, maybe. i am of the mind that by game time 100% of knowable information about a contest is known and accounted for in the line. why should i waste my time working on a model, tweaking it, tracking and adding data to refine and grinding away (that was my approach for years, it worked, just too taxing)? i'll (we all would) have a fuller life if i let the people with the best information do the work for me.
built an entire system around in this in mlb. keep in mind it is now a work in progress so i would expect (hope for) even better results moving forward. but to be playing this angle for 5 seasons and be +Units given the numbers on the faves listed above, i feel pretty friggn good about things.
in summary
i believe in efficient market theory applied to sports betting
being wrong means eventually being broke
the people that survive long term send us signals from line open to line close
if we get a better number than the rest of the market consistently, we will win (i guess i'll save CLV for another day)
ufc + Believe, props on your posts. Need more like that in Think Tank forum.
I'll offer up one follow-up to UFC's post. Let's consider the difference between KNOWLEDGE + HANDICAPPING. To the lay-man, these terms sound inter-changable.
If you're knowledgable, you should be a good handicapper. If you're a successful handicapper, of course you must be knowledgable. Not necessarily. Handicapping is an information game. Sorting thru the information, determining what triggers your decision.
Very big difference. In sports, think about broadcasters. Many of them are VERY knowledgable about personnel. Are they good handicappers that will scare a bookie? The basic answer to that is absolutely NOT.
The subject being discussed is about the nfl and bigdaddykidtoucher is talking about low limit ncaaf future plays. Just another reason he finished in bottom 10 of beat the prick contest last season.
NFL is beatable if you are disciplined with your plays. It is the most efficient betting market in North America so people who can consistently beat the closing number will turn profits in long term.
Reply With Quote
semibluff gave u21c3f6 1 Betpoint(s) for this post.
