[SparJMU]

To the experts on here who mention time, dedication, self-education, etc. I have a realistic question and would sincerely appreciate honest feedback. I ask this question specific to myself, but I am not trying to be self-absorbed as I think my situation will apply to a lot of different readers.

I am still a young man in my 20's. I know I am not the smartest guy out there, but as far as the standard benchmarks are concerned I am not in too bad of shape. Things such as grades, SATs, and IQ tests would indicate I have some potential. I would like to think that I have dedicated a lot of time and energy to sports betting. I have spent a lot of time on this site trying to pick up somes tricks of the trade, and I have managed to make about $15,000 over the last year or so. I have picked some winners. I have messed with CPs (although I am currently losing with them somehow). I have tried to find some +EV teasers. And I have messed with some steam chasing. So I think I am covering the basics at this point. But as of right now I believe I have hit a wall in my development, and my question is this......

At this point, aren't I lacking the resources and technical skills that I need to take that next step? I do not have a database that will allow me to do significant research. I do not have the resources to develop a "model" that may turn me into an actual handicapper who can win over large volumes. In regards to the model not only would I not know how to create a winner, but I wouldn't even know where to find the relevant data that needs to be included. I think I understand what you are saying when you say that it takes dedication and self-education, but is it possible that the resources simply aren't available to us? Sure 95% of the people gambling aren't going to put in that time and dedication, they simply want a quick thrill. But what about that small percentage like myself who want to put in the effort and want to get to that next level? I would argue that they simply don't have the resources that they need to develop into a long term winner.

[Firefox14]

To the experts on here who mention time, dedication, self-education, etc. I have a realistic question and would sincerely appreciate honest feedback. I ask this question specific to myself, but I am not trying to be self-absorbed as I think my situation will apply to a lot of different readers.

I am still a young man in my 20's. I know I am not the smartest guy out there, but as far as the standard benchmarks are concerned I am not in too bad of shape. Things such as grades, SATs, and IQ tests would indicate I have some potential. I would like to think that I have dedicated a lot of time and energy to sports betting. I have spent a lot of time on this site trying to pick up somes tricks of the trade, and I have managed to make about $15,000 over the last year or so. I have picked some winners. I have messed with CPs (although I am currently losing with them somehow). I have tried to find some +EV teasers. And I have messed with some steam chasing. So I think I am covering the basics at this point. But as of right now I believe I have hit a wall in my development, and my question is this......

At this point, aren't I lacking the resources and technical skills that I need to take that next step? I do not have a database that will allow me to do significant research. I do not have the resources to develop a "model" that may turn me into an actual handicapper who can win over large volumes. In regards to the model not only would I not know how to create a winner, but I wouldn't even know where to find the relevant data that needs to be included. I think I understand what you are saying when you say that it takes dedication and self-education, but is it possible that the resources simply aren't available to us? Sure 95% of the people gambling aren't going to put in that time and dedication, they simply want a quick thrill. But what about that small percentage like myself who want to put in the effort and want to get to that next level? I would argue that they simply don't have the resources that they need to develop into a long term winner.

Spar,

You remind me a lot of myself with this post, except, you obviously know more at this point and time. But your question intrigues me because this is where I fear I will "end up" after learning some basic strategy and knowledge. I'm interested in some responses.

[luegofuego]

He doesn't remind me of you at all. You have no shot, and your sorry excuses for efforts are embarassing, firefox. If you had any shot, you would have been well on your way through research on your own, like I did and like many others did. Lots of people didn't have a hand to hold, but we still did our best to dig around ourselves and since you haven't done that already (instead resorting to essentially begging to get spoon-fed in one thread and asking for a list of mathematic formulas "like poisson and kelly" to base a model out of in the other), one must conclude there is no hope for you.

[Firefox14]

He doesn't remind me of you at all. You have no shot, and your sorry excuses for efforts are embarassing, firefox. If you had any shot, you would have been well on your way through research on your own, like I did and like many others did. Lots of people didn't have a hand to hold, but we still did our best to dig around ourselves and since you haven't done that already (instead resorting to essentially begging to get spoon-fed in one thread and asking for a list of mathematic formulas "like poisson and kelly" to base a model out of in the other), one must conclude there is no hope for you.

I think you need a hug...

[luegofuego]

Maybe I should pathetically beg for one from complete strangers?

[Firefox14]

Maybe I should pathetically beg for one from complete strangers?

Hahahahahaha. Now that was funny!

[hotspotwager]

wow, this thread continues to hold my interest...so Firefox, as you read in my previous post, I am sympathetic to your 'cause'.
Tell me what you have learned/position evolved since your intitial post?
thanks

[Firefox14]

wow, this thread continues to hold my interest...so Firefox, as you read in my previous post, I am sympathetic to your 'cause'.
Tell me what you have learned/position evolved since your intitial post?
thanks

Honestly, I haven't learned anything I didn't already know. Growing up, I was always told there are no "dumb" questions, so I ask them. Unfortunately, not everyone has your view point, and some people jump at the chance to "shoot people down", but it's all good; I'm not bothered by it.

In conclusion, to further illustrate my point, I've read several articles of people who have mentored beginning cappers into world reknowned cappers. However, the general response to my thread has been that, "Mentors are absurd"!

On another note, I do not want to avert the attention to my old threads, but rather want to view the reactions to spars response. His question is much more interesting.

[Vastey]

As I think, the most trouble is that you should study to bet every day, maybe, every minute.
Sure, some very_good_capper may teach someone for some bases, he knows, But this "student" should work hard to make his own system, to keep statistics, to do something else. As for me, betting is not scienc, but it's way of the live: work+hobby.

[u21c3f6]

Firefox14, below is something that I responded to another poster some time ago (with some updates). It is about a “concept” that I use for making wagering selections that has worked very well for me over the years. This response only scratches the surface and there are probably points that would need to expanded and/or clarified but here goes:

First, I do not subscribe to over information. That is not to say that anyone is wrong if they compile tons of data, I just don't do that. What I do is just different than what might seem logical. There is more than one way to look for an edge in gambling. Compiling tons of data is one way and using limited data in certain situations is another way (the way I do it).

In horse racing if you ask me who do you think will win the race, I would look at the tote board and pick the horse with the lowest odds. Not sophisticated, but if there was a contest to pick the most winners from each of a set of races, selecting the favorite in each of those races would give you the greatest chance of selecting the most winners compared to everyone but the very best handicappers and even then it would be close. Of course playing the favorite in each race is a losing proposition because the odds returned are not enough to make up the effect of the track take. So the answer is to find those situations where the horse you are betting on is for some reason not bet to its proper odds or underbet. If it is underbet enough, you should be able to show a profit. After looking at all kinds of races (maidens, claiming, allowance etc) I discovered different situations for the different classes of races that can create over and underbetting. Some situations only work in some of the classes and different situations work in the other classes.

Here's an example of a situation, it is a couple of minutes to post, a player looks up at the tote board and notices that both the #1 and #3 horses are co-favorites at 2-1. The player looks at the records and notices that the #1 is superior. It may have finished up close in better classes, it may have a better jockey/trainer combo etc. Whatever the reason (and one must know the various reasons that the public bets), the player “knows” that on paper the #1 should beat the #3 and so the player places the bet on #1. The player watches the race in disbelief as the #3 easily beats the #1. The player looks at the records again and again decides that the #1's record is better and should have beaten the #3.

I on the other hand would have bet the #3 and here is why. First you must believe (and it is true) that the public is an expert. The public gets it right more often than any individual handicapper could when making a selection for each race (there may be very, very, very few exceptions). Since the public is expert, I know, that they know, that the #1 looks superior. If the #1 looks superior, what is the chance that the #1 is underbet? None IMO. It can't be underbet in this situation because on paper it clearly looks superior. What is the chance that the #3 is underbet? A very good chance because the #1 looks superior and even better yet, it is at the same odds as a horse that looks inferior making it look like the #1 is an overlay when in reality it is an underlay. It of course does not mean you will win every time in this situation. It just means that you have a better chance of making a wager with a +EV and that is what makes profits.

There was a thread a few days ago where someone wrote that they “handicapped” Orlando at -15 but the line was only -6.5. I almost responded to that thread (as well as other past threads) with this concept. My point would be that if Orlando was that superior, then they shouldn’t be only -6.5. So what is the chance that the line is “underbet”? None IMO, thereby making the +6.5 the “better” selection and more likely to be +EV. Of course that can only be proven after you have selected a valid sample of wagers that validates that those selections have +EV results. Sometimes the answer is the opposite of what you think! For the record, I do not approach sports betting this way. Most of my sports betting involves some sort of hedge but still with the “concept” that in certain situations the lines are either underbet or overbet in relation to each other which creates the opportunities to create +EV hedges (which are not what I refer to as arbs).

I’ll leave it here for now. There is just too much to write about. Hopefully you get the “concept” and it will give you something to think about when creating your “models”. Regardless of how you go about it, good luck.

Joe.

[Cheme82]

To the experts on here who mention time, dedication, self-education, etc. I have a realistic question and would sincerely appreciate honest feedback. I ask this question specific to myself, but I am not trying to be self-absorbed as I think my situation will apply to a lot of different readers. I am still a young man in my 20's. I know I am not the smartest guy out there, but as far as the standard benchmarks are concerned I am not in too bad of shape. Things such as grades, SATs, and IQ tests would indicate I have some potential. I would like to think that I have dedicated a lot of time and energy to sports betting. I have spent a lot of time on this site trying to pick up somes tricks of the trade, and I have managed to make about $15,000 over the last year or so. I have picked some winners. I have messed with CPs (although I am currently losing with them somehow). I have tried to find some +EV teasers. And I have messed with some steam chasing. So I think I am covering the basics at this point. But as of right now I believe I have hit a wall in my development, and my question is this...... At this point, aren't I lacking the resources and technical skills that I need to take that next step? I do not have a database that will allow me to do significant research. I do not have the resources to develop a "model" that may turn me into an actual handicapper who can win over large volumes. In regards to the model not only would I not know how to create a winner, but I wouldn't even know where to find the relevant data that needs to be included. I think I understand what you are saying when you say that it takes dedication and self-education, but is it possible that the resources simply aren't available to us? Sure 95% of the people gambling aren't going to put in that time and dedication, they simply want a quick thrill. But what about that small percentage like myself who want to put in the effort and want to get to that next level? I would argue that they simply don't have the resources that they need to develop into a long term winner.

Have you read Justin's book?

He explains how to build a model and gives you different ideas of things to look for and how you can improve that model by looking at things you believe might be important. You make changes to the model and then see how it performs, validating or not your assumptions.

He also covers prop bets which are simpler to handicap than big sports sides and totals.

[Data]

We live in a society where people pay to learn information. People attend college to attain a degree, master their field of expertise, and then use that experience in the work-force. However, with stock trading, many on this site simply say, "You're on your own, Figure it Out, Develop your own thinking". It's a shame there isn't a step by step process to becoming a good stock trader, much like in college when you're taking progressive classes to more readily acquire knowledge in a sequential manner. No wonder why no one chooses to do this for a living! And with crazy math calculations that often bewilders the average individual, the churn rate seems astronomical. So this is for some of the more successful stock traders out there. I ask, "If I was a child, a protege, and you had to give me a crash course in stock trading, and it was your job to teach me all the skills to be successful, could you do that? Is their a system, a teaching methodology that will create undoubted success?

Here, I fixed it for you. There are plenty of books about trading, less so about handicapping. The financial benefits that can be extracted from those books are shared between the publishers and the authors.

[hotspotwager]

firefox,
Make no mistaKE...THIS IS NOT A CHARITY OR 'HELP' FORUM!!
don't be taken in by the veneer..everyone here is looking out for number one..that's it!!
good luck

[Firefox14]

Thanks guys. I've already ordered some books. The first, but definitely not the last, step.

[Wrecktangle]

FF, believe it or not, this forum is a gold mine of info.

Buried in the archives of Tank forum alone is enough info to get you well above the average punter, turn you into a decent modeler, gain you useful db info, etc.

Then if you branch out into each sport forum, you'll find more chaff, but still a lot of info that can help.

DO NOT VENTURE INTO PLAYERS TALK, because as they used to say on the old explorer maps: "Here be Dragons".

[hotspotwager]

nice post wrectangle....so FF, is it same to say you may have evolved a bit, appeared willing to do some work, and already you are met with a ten fold 'nicer' approach by others..
can you share with me what this has shown you?
thanks

[hotspotwager]

so where do you stand now, ff?

[dwaechte]

The comparison to classes/teachers is absurd unless you're paying someone to teach you.

Buy an education on using data for predictive purposes and then start bitching if it's still too hard.

[Peregrine Stoop]

most of the education we pay for is silly stuff forced upon us

[That Foreign Guy]

most of the education we pay for is silly stuff forced upon us

Yes and no. While I use almost none of my direct university education in my day to day life, it was valuable in teaching me how to think (problems can be defined mathematically, how to construct an argument / narrative, how to evaluate arguments / methods, etc) and served as a certificate to guarantee a certain basic level of general aptitude to my first couple of employers.

[Wrecktangle]

Something to think on regarding education:

I got into a number of numerical areas due to my interest in understanding sport: decision theory (multiple attribute utility theory - MAUT, and Analytic Hierarchy Process - AHP), data mining, optimal methods, signal theory, game theory (partially), neural networks, Bayesian stat, non-gaussian stat (i.e. methods to deal with frequency distributions that are "unknown" to the general world of Statistics - points dist in football is a good example).

Most of these areas I learned on my own, easy to do since the internet is with us today, harder pre-1994. All of these areas I put on my resume as I gained at least a good working knowledge in them to where I could use them in a working environment and certainly convince anyone in an interview I knew what I'm talking about. I estimate this has enhanced my earning power from $20K to $30K PER YEAR over the years. One job I got due to my knowledge of decision theory alone.

Of these areas, I only had one short course in MAUT (which my employer at the time paid for), everything else I learned on my own in applications to sport.

My point is this: sports statistics can be very useful to your personal bottom line whether or not you can forecast winners. Frankly, as the market progresses, the value will be pounded out of the market and you will be left with a powerful set of methods that you can use in life regardless of what happens in sport.

I say this as I sit in my San Diego Beach condo (2nd home), watching folks walk up the beach as I am directly on the sand after driving here in my BMW 330ci.

[dwaechte]

most of the education we pay for is silly stuff forced upon us

Then don't pay for that shit. If you want paper credentials, then you're right. If you want actual practical skills, such as the case in this thread, then: either learn it yourself, or if you don't have the discipline to do so, pay for specific regimented training in exactly the area you want to learn.