better a 60% winner (42/27) or 56%(254/201)

[facasto]

I'm curious.
Lot of people following 60% with 69 bets
only 20/30 reading thread 56% with 455 bets

Am I idiot following 56%?
IMO very very better 54% on 1000 than 80% on 10.
What do you think?

[topgame85]

You make a very good point a lot of people don't realize this though

[daggerkobe]

I'm curious.
Lot of people following 60% with 69 bets
only 20/30 reading thread 56% with 455 bets

Am I idiot following 56%?
IMO very very better 54% on 1000 than 80% on 10.
What do you think?

That's your problem right there.

Tail no one.... fade everyone.

[InTheHole]

If I was to tail with those stats (if I has to)...I'd take the 56% assuming all were -110

[facasto]

These stats are here (Ncaa BB forum); and -110 is assumed (ATS), even if easy find -105, -107, -108 elsewhere

[Sinister Cat]

Statistically, the 56% winner is slightly better (slightly less likely to have gotten that record purely by chance).

[facasto]

And today He/She is 4/2 so far (Maryland +2.5 remaining).
Probably i'm stupid, but I trust him/her (56% on 500 bets) more than a 80% winner on 10/20 bets

[frostno98]

And today He/She is 4/2 so far (Maryland +2.5 remaining).
Probably i'm stupid, but I trust him/her (56% on 500 bets) more than a 80% winner on 10/20 bets

It's consistency vs streaky.

Long term 56% is better.

It's not uncommon for somebody to go on a 80% run based on limited amount of plays here. In the long run, maintaining 80% is impossible as nobody here has yet to do it. Trying to get around or slightly over 60% is very probable if your good at what you do.

[Doc JS]

As Sinister Cat has already stated, the larger the sample size the less likely the results are due to random chance.

[Doc JS]

Tail no one.... fade everyone.

Except Pavy and his EPL picks!!!! Tail Pavy and his EPL picks!!!! And you (and your bankroll) will be glad you did!!!!

[reno cool]

epl? whats that? european ping pong league.

but no, op is right

[Dark Horse]

better a 60% winner (42/27) or 56%(254/201)

Z-score for 42-27 = 2.41
Z-score for 254-201 = 2.48

The Z-score for smaller sample sizes is subject to greater fluctuation.