View New Posts
123
1. Originally Posted by sharpcat

First off beating the closer generally refers to beating the no-vig line which would not be enough to allow you to scalp your bet.
where in the op post did he define btcl to be beating the no-vig line but not being arbable? clearly you're MISSING the pt if you think btcl means taking +15 -110 instead of +14.5 -105. no one would be stupid enough to call that btcl, btcl means you're clearly beating the no-vig end line by some measure, at -104 pricing at pinny and -103 pricing at matchbook, clearly you do not need to beat the no-vig closing price much in order to arb.

2. Originally Posted by trixtrix
where in the op post did he define btcl to be beating the no-vig line but not being arbable? clearly you're MISSING the pt if you think btcl means taking +15 -110 instead of +14.5 -105. no one would be stupid enough to call that btcl, btcl means you're clearly beating the no-vig end line by some measure, at -104 pricing at pinny and -103 pricing at matchbook, clearly you do not need to beat the no-vig closing price much in order to arb.
I'm with Sharpcat. Trixtrix missed the point of the thread. NO one was talking about arbitrage here. Arb opportunities are VERY HARD to find simultaneously (meaning, make the 2 bets at the same time), if the bets aren't made at the same time you are "betting" that the line will move enough to get an arb bet in, which is risk, and actually isn't arb because of that...

again, you missed the point of the thread 100%

3. The OP was not asking for an explanation of "how BTCL could be profitable?" he was stating that his position is that he does not buy into the theory of the no-vig line representing the exact implied win probability of every game therefore he dismisses the idea that getting a line at +103 when the no-vig price is +100 is +EV long term.

Nobody needed you to come here and point out the simplistic idea of scalping wagers, that if given 10 minutes with the mentally challenged guy that works at my local mcdonalds I could teach him to do. Whats funny is how you arb players always brag about your risk free money transactions but never seem to mention all the times a line moves against you forcing you to scalp for a loss.

I am done with this argument because PokerJoe had a pretty good and interesting discussion going here, which had absolutely nothing to do with arbitrage.

4. Originally Posted by Shonner
I'm with Sharpcat. Trixtrix missed the point of the thread. NO one was talking about arbitrage here. Arb opportunities are VERY HARD to find simultaneously (meaning, make the 2 bets at the same time), if the bets aren't made at the same time you are "betting" that the line will move enough to get an arb bet in, which is risk, and actually isn't arb because of that...

again, you missed the point of the thread 100%
or it could be you did not think hard enough, if you btcl you do not need to find arb SIMULTANEOUSLY, you just need to arb the old line against closing line. saying you have to find arb SIMULTANEOUSLY means you missed the crux of my entire argument

btcl= arbs in different pts in time

5. Originally Posted by sharpcat
The OP was not asking for an explanation of "how BTCL could be profitable?" .
sure he was, one of his pts was that "we do not get paid to btcl, we get paid to beat the spread", that pt is INVALID

we CAN get paid to btcl, we CAN get paid to beat the spread, there are multiple ways to bet an +ev opportunities

ps: i like what you did there, when you cannot attack my arguments anymore you resorted to name calling "arbers are scumbags bla bla bla", nice try

6. Originally Posted by trixtrix
sure he was, one of his pts was that "we do not get paid to btcl, we get paid to beat the spread", that pt is INVALID

we CAN get paid to btcl, we CAN get paid to beat the spread, there are multiple ways to bet an +ev opportunities

ps: i like what you did there, when you cannot attack my arguments anymore you resorted to name calling "arbers are scumbags bla bla bla", nice try
I think what you are missing is that everyone here would agree that by arbing one of your two bets is going to be -EV.

Nothing wrong with arbing but every poster who contributed to this thread are intelligent people and I respect all of them and know for a fact that you are not pointing out anything special that anyone was unaware of.

What the PokerJoe was referring to is the idea that many have that if the pinnacle no-vig line is +/-100 and you were able to get +105 on either side it would be a profitable play because you are betting a play that theoretically has a 50% probability of winning but only need to win 48.78% of the time. Clearly if you were able to get +105 on one side and -105 on the other you would not have a arb situation but many would argue that the +105 is profitable.

You clearly missed the whole purpose behind this thread, I notice that you dislike me and enjoy taking shots at me but you need to pick a better spot because you are not grasping what the OP was describing in this thread. You can twist his words any way you want but the everybody is aware of what he was getting at.

7. Back on topic here

I both agree and disagree.

I believe that over a large sampling that the closing number is a very accurate indicator of a teams true implied win probability but this does not mean that every single game is going to be accurate.

I do not think that betting every game that you can beat Pinnacles no-vig line is an intelligent approach but over a large sample of your wagers I agree that a good indicator of your accuracy in your prediction of the outcome would be how consistently you beat the closing number.

8. Originally Posted by sharpcat
I think what you are missing is that everyone here would agree that by arbing one of your two bets is going to be -EV.

Nothing wrong with arbing but every poster who contributed to this thread are intelligent people and I respect all of them and know for a fact that you are not pointing out anything special that anyone was unaware of.

What the PokerJoe was referring to is the idea that many have that if the pinnacle no-vig line is +/-100 and you were able to get +105 on either side it would be a profitable play because you are betting a play that theoretically has a 50% probability of winning but only need to win 48.78% of the time. Clearly if you were able to get +105 on one side and -105 on the other you would not have a arb situation but many would argue that the +105 is profitable.

You clearly missed the whole purpose behind this thread, I notice that you dislike me and enjoy taking shots at me but you need to pick a better spot because you are not grasping what the OP was describing in this thread. You can twist his words any way you want but the everybody is aware of what he was getting at.
dude, dislike you? lol, i don't really know you outside of this thread, why would you think i dislike you? lol, indifference != malice; i believe you were the ones taking shots at me the whole thread by calling arbers names (the fact i'm not an arber makes the situation even more hilarious), nice try at making me look like the bad guy.

just b/c you have intelligent posters in this thread does NOT mean they don't make mistakes. (lol at the appeal to authority argument here) if you btcl you should be able to arb at least ON average (that's all you need to profit), otherwise you are not beating the closing line according to my definition. noticed my definition of btcl before you tried to twist the argument.

op made statements (ie: we do not get paid to btcl, we get paid to beat the spread) that clearly demonstrated he did not think through the entire argument, you did not either, now you're trying to backtrack. it's fine to be wrong, dude, does not mean i dislike you in any way, shape, or form.

notice i posted the following about 5 posts prior:
"justin is arguing there is close to 100% correlation between BTCL and market efficiency, some of you are arguing there's close zero% correlation between the two concepts, it might be that the truth is somewhere in the middle

but that does not in any way invalidate the btcl concept."

if that's what you (or op) is trying to state it's fine, but you need to define it more clearly. that's my pt.

9. Originally Posted by Justin7
If your model wins, but doesn't BTCL, your bankroll will accumulate. Your bets will grow. Eventually, your non-BTCL model becomes BTCL, because it is shaping the market. I don't believe in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, or a non-BTCL winning model. Winning players rarely disagree on the right side of a game at a given price. I've studied thousands of players. I have NEVER seen a player profile where the player was a winner with at least 1000 plays, and wasn't BTCL. If you are winning without BTCL, you're lucky. Your model will fail at some point going forward. Been there, done that.
Most important part.

Originally Posted by Data
Again, it is a by-product, not the goal like many state.
Obv. Shipping dimes is most important.

10. Trix you are imagining just one scenario that being that the OP was referring to simultaneously being offered 2 different lines and you are going even further by assuming he is referring to BTCL so much that the play has now become an arb situation. BTCL means beating the no-vig line, beating the no-vig line does not always mean that the line can be scalped. Probably some 90% of the time you beat the closing number it is not enough to arb.

If Pinnacle is offering 7 at (-105/-105) the no-vig line is 7 (+100) if I get -7 (+104) this is not scalpable with +7 (-105) but many believe that they would have a 2% edge an EV of +\$2 on -7 (+104). In the rare scenario that you point out you are correct one could guarantee a profit though many will disagree with this method assuming that of the 2 bets it is unlikely that both are +EV and you would therefore profit more long term by taking whichever number is off.

The discussion is whether or not BTCL is an indicator that you are on the right side of the line or not.

Originally Posted by trixtrix
i'm surprised at the level of incomprehension in this thread, for the last time: BTCL != market efficiency

if you can BTCL, then you are guaranteed risk-free profit EVEN if the market you're betting on is strongly INEFFICIENT

the opening post confuses one theory w/ another, and therefore invalidates the whole argument before it began.

market efficiency concept is NOT the same as BTCL concept, even if there could be correlation between the two
It is not a matter of incomprehension everybody in this thread IMO is fully aware of arbitrage, it is you who miscomprehended the topic that was being discussed.

I apologize that I misunderstood this post and did not realize that you were referring to arb play but regardless arb play is not the topic.

11. Originally Posted by sharpcat

It is not a matter of miscomprehension everybody in this thread IMO is fully aware of arbitrage, it is you who miscomprehended the topic that was being discussed.

I apologize that I misunderstood this post and did not realize that you were referring to arb play but regardless arb play is not the topic.
what did i "misunderstand"? i pointed out btcl != market efficiency, do you agree w/ this statement or no?

Originally Posted by sharpcat

Probably some 90% of the time you beat the closing number it is not enough to arb.
this is incredibly wrong

12. Ah a post where we can really give praise to Matchbook for a change, when suddenly 50k pop up on one side of a market it is a pretty helpful steam indicator xD

13. Originally Posted by Shonner
so are you basically saying that you should throw capping models out the window and just try to BTCL?

like Data said, if you have a game capped at +3 and the line is +7, you should take the +3. but what if you take it at +7 and the line closes at +8? like mentioned, it's still good value (according to your capping).
No. If you have a good model, you will BTCL. It is a consequence of doing it right. You can also BTCL by chasing steam (without modeling) or picking off rogue numbers. This is a winning play also... You're still BTCL, but not using a model.

If you capped a game at +3 and the line is +7, your model is probably wrong. If it closes at +8, your model is definitely wrong, and will lose on that play. If your model opposes market movements with regularity (or 50% of the time for most players), your model is probably bad, not much better than coin flipping.

There exists one correct "number" for a game. Winning players are good at finding it. The market will move towards that number. If you are opposing winning players (by taking plays that fade BTCL), you are either 1. Smarter than the whole world, or 2. Going to lose. My money is on #2.

14. Well yea, but you''d still have to define closing number...let's say Pinny has team A +108 5mins before the start of a game, and Greek isn't much impressed and keeps hanging -110 on the other side...who has the sharp closing number?
I mean one of them offers a +ev bet, in a world where a true value line always exists, but who?

15. Originally Posted by trixtrix
this is incredibly wrong

I said probably because I do not have exact numbers to support this but since you are so sure that this number is wrong do you have a database or any hard evidence to support your "with out a doubt" theory or are you just talking out of your ass. What is the exact ratio of beating the no-vig to beating the line enough for an arb? Please show me your evidence that makes you so sure that this is incredibly wrong.

I am talking simultaneously here not anticipating a line move and than betting the other end 2 hours later, and am referring to profitable plays also not these middles where you think you are making a wise guy move but are really getting 10-1 on a middle that is only going to hit 5% of the time.

16. are we going to use javascript code to express our opinions now?

17. Originally Posted by sharpcat
I think what you are missing is that everyone here would agree that by arbing one of your two bets is going to be -EV.
False. It's completely possible that both bets are +ev.

18. Originally Posted by Justin7
No. If you have a good model, you will BTCL. It is a consequence of doing it right. You can also BTCL by chasing steam (without modeling) or picking off rogue numbers. This is a winning play also... You're still BTCL, but not using a model. If you capped a game at +3 and the line is +7, your model is probably wrong. If it closes at +8, your model is definitely wrong, and will lose on that play. If your model opposes market movements with regularity (or 50% of the time for most players), your model is probably bad, not much better than coin flipping. There exists one correct "number" for a game. Winning players are good at finding it. The market will move towards that number. If you are opposing winning players (by taking plays that fade BTCL), you are either 1. Smarter than the whole world, or 2. Going to lose. My money is on #2.
Anytime you make a play at a WA number, you're stating you're smarter than the whole world.
Points Awarded:
 Justin7 gave Thremp 2 SBR Point(s) for this post.

19. Hey everyone, I'm pretty green to this topic, but I seem to understand the jist of what you're saying. What does it mean however, if the line stays the same, but the line within the line changes. For example: Browns alternate from +3 -110 to +3 +100? Is their value in this, and is this in someway an indication of a more weak, unsure line?

20. They're both the same thing with regards to this argument.

21. Originally Posted by Justin7
If you capped a game at +3 and the line is +7, your model is probably wrong. If it closes at +8, your model is definitely wrong, and will lose on that play. If your model opposes market movements with regularity (or 50% of the time for most players), your model is probably bad, not much better than coin flipping.
Injuries aside, the line moves in the wrong direction almost half the time. In NBA that is, I know nothing about NFL but it must be close to 50% too.

Originally Posted by Justin7
There exists one correct "number" for a game. Winning players are good at finding it.
On average they are but on any given game there likely to be a significant subset of them being on the wrong side. If the things were the way you picture them the sharps would win almost every time.

Originally Posted by Justin7
The market will move towards that number. If you are opposing winning players (by taking plays that fade BTCL), you are either 1. Smarter than the whole world, or 2. Going to lose. My money is on #2.
3. On that given game you are with the minority of the sharps, say, with 45% of them.

22. Originally Posted by Thremp
Anytime you make a play at a WA number, you're stating you're smarter than the whole world.
Close, hence my earlier point that only about 1% of bettors can succeed in creating profitable models.

23. Data,

A good model gets market reinforcement a lot more than 50% of the time. If the market moves in agreement with your picks, it is basically saying "The other big, winning players feel the same as you do". If you're right 70% of the time, you'll do very well. If it's close to 50%, you will lose with certainty in the long run.

These are not opinions -- these are facts.

24. Originally Posted by Data
Close, hence my earlier point that only about 1% of bettors can succeed in creating profitable models.
I think it is much less than 1%. Maybe 1% of all sports bettors are winning players. Of those, maybe 1 in 10 have a good model.

25. Originally Posted by trixtrix
or it could be you did not think hard enough, if you btcl you do not need to find arb SIMULTANEOUSLY, you just need to arb the old line against closing line. saying you have to find arb SIMULTANEOUSLY means you missed the crux of my entire argument

btcl= arbs in different pts in time
i'm not quite sure you understand what arb betting is. it's locking in a profit with no risk involved. you keep talking about "zero risk" and zero risk is only obtained when you lock 2+ bets in simultaneously that has +EV by exploiting the weaknesses in the market - you guarantee profit. example giants +3 +102 and cowboys -3 +104 = arb bet. i dont think you truly understand what arb betting is. any wagers placed at different time may result in an arb, but there is risk involved if you can't arb the closing line. like someone posted earlier, what all those bets you plan to arb which you can't because the line doesn't turn enough?

26. Originally Posted by trixtrix
or it could be you did not think hard enough, if you btcl you do not need to find arb SIMULTANEOUSLY, you just need to arb the old line against closing line. saying you have to find arb SIMULTANEOUSLY means you missed the crux of my entire argument

btcl= arbs in different pts in time
the more i read this the more i realize it makes no sense. zero.

27. Originally Posted by trixtrix
or it could be you did not think hard enough, if you btcl you do not need to find arb SIMULTANEOUSLY, you just need to arb the old line against closing line. saying you have to find arb SIMULTANEOUSLY means you missed the crux of my entire argument

btcl= arbs in different pts in time
if i am understanding this correctly you are saying you can create arb opportunites at 2 different times based on old lines and new ones. that's not arbitrage because when you place the "old" wager there is no guarantee the closing line will move and give you an arbitrage opportunity to lock in a guaranteed profit. id bet on 95%+ of bets you won't get an arb opportunity by blindly betting early lines and praying the line moves in your favor.

28. Originally Posted by Justin7
No. If you have a good model, you will BTCL. It is a consequence of doing it right. You can also BTCL by chasing steam (without modeling) or picking off rogue numbers. This is a winning play also... You're still BTCL, but not using a model.

If you capped a game at +3 and the line is +7, your model is probably wrong. If it closes at +8, your model is definitely wrong, and will lose on that play. If your model opposes market movements with regularity (or 50% of the time for most players), your model is probably bad, not much better than coin flipping.

There exists one correct "number" for a game. Winning players are good at finding it. The market will move towards that number. If you are opposing winning players (by taking plays that fade BTCL), you are either 1. Smarter than the whole world, or 2. Going to lose. My money is on #2.
thanks, i understand what you are saying.

basically, you think there is one way to be profitable - by beating the closing line - whether that is by developing a model that allows you to hit weak lines before the line adjusts (To close to the # your model created), or by chasing steam.

so basically ways to make money:

- BTCL
- wong teasers
- arbitrage (guaranteed profits, now what trixtrix was talking about)

29. Originally Posted by Justin7
Data,

A good model gets market reinforcement a lot more than 50% of the time. If the market moves in agreement with your picks, it is basically saying "The other big, winning players feel the same as you do". If you're right 70% of the time, you'll do very well. If it's close to 50%, you will lose with certainty in the long run.

These are not opinions -- these are facts.
Yes, same as with picking winners at 70% rate, you'll do very well. That's a fact too.

30. Originally Posted by Justin7
I think it is much less than 1%. Maybe 1% of all sports bettors are winning players. Of those, maybe 1 in 10 have a good model.
Finally, something we agreed on. I said "can succeed", certainly not all of them do.

31. Originally Posted by Shonner
if i am understanding this correctly you are saying you can create arb opportunites at 2 different times based on old lines and new ones. that's not arbitrage because when you place the "old" wager there is no guarantee the closing line will move and give you an arbitrage opportunity to lock in a guaranteed profit. id bet on 95%+ of bets you won't get an arb opportunity by blindly betting early lines and praying the line moves in your favor.
lol at the lecture of arbbing

if you btcl, you guarantee arb opportunities, it's not a difficult concept

this is b/c btcl are profited differently than market efficiency theory

1.) btcl profits from being able to arb the closing line
2.) market efficiency is letting people smarter than you set what they think the line should be, and then using that information

1.) and 2.) are NOT identical ways to make profit but they are likely correlated

ps: saying you don't comprehend a concept does not in fact invalidate it
pps: i think you're missing the cause/effect of the argument here, saying you cant guarantee arb opportunities when you place a bet is 100% true, but that's not at all what the thread is about. the thread is about achieving or the attempt to achieve btcl, hence if one is to argue that he can achieve btcl he can then guarantee arb opportunties w/ the old line

32. Originally Posted by trixtrix
if you btcl, you guarantee arb opportunities, it's not a difficult concept
I don't understand this, I think you are confusing arbitrage with middle ops, btcl and arb can be mutually exclusive

33. This seems too easy of a strategy to pick up cash. So you're saying that I can bet Raiders at +6 1/2 at + 104 at Pinnacle, and Chargers -7 1/2 at Bet Maker, and make a small profit? Unless of course the Chargers win by 7?

34. This misunderstanding of trix is just remarkable. You bet something at +100 (for 1u). Because you beat the closing line often enough, the average price you can play the other side for just before tipoff is +102 (say the line has moved to -110 your side/ +102 other side on pinny). If you buy off all of your plays, you will lock in a small profit. BECAUSE you btcl. If you don't btcl, then you can't do this. What he's saying isn't rocket science.. and it doesn't matter at all WHY the line moves the way it does, just that you predict accurately (on average) that it will.

35. clap clap, i'm buying you another orangutan tc

First 12345 ... Last
Top