Don't give two shits about you Bateman but your 100% right about this dickbag. Posting lame ass videos from mommy and daddies condo....#ballin....spewing his dumb shit like he's got a clue how to cap....He has the bankroll of a 16 year old who works at Dominos....$30-$100 plays and playing the board???? it's unreal....
-
Comment -
Anyone that wears sunglasses at night is a certified douchebag. Case closed.Comment -
Lol, I love it.
Megatron, you not only 'give a shit about Bateman' you follow him around like a puppy dog, licking his nuts and nuzzling in for treats.
You two play off of one another like Starsky and Hutch, or maybe a better analogy would be if we throw in Minet123 and call you the Golden Girls. You bet like them, whine like them and I am sure you smell like them. That is.....unless you three donkeys are actually one loser....that makes more sense.
The record speaks for itself boys.....keep following, or fading if you prefer, I certainly would love that. Let's keep comparing notes and see how we all do....oh wait, neither of you losers has the balls to keep a thread.....or when you do you quit as soon as you go negative.
Good job fellas.Comment -
Pizzas? He didn't tell you? He closes $7,000,000 deals while bass fishing. Dude has half of a country as his territory. You do know he has a sick condo, a 3 series and a sex starved girlfriend right?Comment -
Lol, Bator, if I took all the shit you said over the course of your tenure at SBR and gave a one paragraph synopsis it would be pretty damn funny too. The thing is bud, you need to come up with new material.
Your imagination must be shot from the drugs and attempted suicides.
Oh, and PS....if you don't think I closed that deal while on vacation, you must be an idiot. I work for a corporation that does tens of millions in sales per year and I look after major accounts. Yes, I got word that I got an account (and yes, in fact it was the biggest deal I have closed with my current company) while I was fishing.
I understand that you don't understand holidays....see, all you have to do is pay a buddy to take over your paper route when you are out of town (like you ever leave Jersey) and you are good to go. Not so simple with a real job bud...the fact that I still do business when on holidays (while not always ideal) is something that people like me cannot avoid.
Thanks for checking in again. I guess you 'unblocked' me. Curiosity got the best of you again I see.
Night donk.Comment -
*yawns*
Ok Master Patty, have a good night and see you when you troll me tomorrow. I will post my record for you as usual....
Oh, and 'your' should be 'you're' or 'you are'. I am sure that your paper route doesn't require any understanding of the English language, so please do not take offence.Comment -
Where the FK are the moderators? This is seriously stupid with the non stop personal attacks. What is the point of trying to be cool on an Internet forum?Comment -
OK guys, I am going to grade the Angels bet as a loss....they are down 4-0 and cannot get anything going....if it changes I will correct my record when I get up, but I seriously doubt that happens.
255598284-1 8/7/14 5:55pm $89.25 $75.00 $164.25 Win 8/7/14 7:10pm MLB Baseball 970 Cincinnati Reds -119* <small>vs</small> Cleveland Indians (T House - L must Start H Bailey - R must Start) 255598284-2 8/7/14 5:55pm $228.50 $150.00 $257.00 Win 8/7/14 7:15pm MLB Baseball 972 St. Louis Cardinals -157* <small>vs</small> Boston Red Sox (B Workman - R must Start A Wainwright - R must Start) 255577640-1 8/7/14 2:49pm $82.50 $75.00 $157.50 Win 8/7/14 3:00pm ATP Tennis 128 I.Dodig Games Won +3½ -110* <small>vs</small> D.Ferrer Games Won 255554897-1 8/7/14 10:07am $81.00 $75.00 $0.00 Loss 8/7/14 8:00pm Reduced Basketball 653 Chicago Sky +8 -108* <small>vs</small> Minnesota Lynx 255548252-1 8/7/14 4:29am $75.00 $90.00 $0.00 Loss 8/7/14 2:10pm Reduced Baseball 953 San Francisco Giants +120* <small>vs</small> Milwaukee Brewers (J Peavy - R must Start W Peralta - R must Start) 255548252-2 8/7/14 4:29am $75.75 $75.00 $150.75 Win 8/7/14 9:40pm Reduced Baseball 973 Kansas City Royals -101* <small>vs</small> Arizona Diamondbacks (J Guthrie - R must Start V Nuno - L must Start) 255548252-4 8/7/14 4:29am $90.00 $75.00 $165.00 Win 8/7/14 1:00pm ATP Tennis 104 J-W.Tsonga Games Won +4½ -120* <small>vs</small> N.Djokovic Games Won 255548252-5 8/7/14 4:29am $82.50 $75.00 $82.50 Cancelled 8/7/14 2:15pm ATP Tennis 107 R.Gasquet Games Won +3½ -110* <small>vs</small> A.Murray Games Won 255548252-6 8/7/14 4:29am $200.00 $100.00 $300.00 Win 8/7/14 1:00pm ATP Tennis 114 Grigor Dimitrov -200* <small>vs</small> Tommy Robredo 255548252-7 8/7/14 4:29am $157.50 $150.00 $307.50 Win 8/7/14 6:30pm ATP Tennis 119 M.Raonic Games Won/J.Benneteau Games Won Over 22½ -105* 255548252-8 8/7/14 4:29am $101.25 $75.00 $0.00 Loss 8/7/14 6:30pm ATP Tennis 124 T.Berdych Games Won -2½ -135* <small>vs</small> F.Lopez Games Won 255548252-9 8/7/14 4:29am $78.75 $75.00 $153.75 Win 8/7/14 7:45pm ATP Tennis 131 M.Cilic Games Won +4 -105* <small>vs</small> R.Federer Games Won
Recap (16 days):
Today's Record: 8 - 4 + $435.25
Overall Record: 147 - 109 + $2931.25Comment -
255655110-1 8/8/14 12:32am $82.50 $75.00 Pending 8/8/14 1:00pm ATP Tennis 103 J-W.Tsonga Games Won +3 -110* <small>vs</small> A.Murray Games Won 255655110-2 8/8/14 12:32am $93.75 $75.00 Pending 8/8/14 2:15pm ATP Tennis 124 G.Dimitrov Games Won -2 -125* <small>vs</small> K.Anderson Games Won 255655110-3 8/8/14 12:32am $90.00 $75.00 Pending 8/8/14 7:00pm ATP Tennis 145 M.Raonic Games Won/F.Lopez Games Won Under 24 -120* 255655057-1 8/8/14 12:30am $68.00 $50.00 Pending 8/8/14 7:05pm Reduced Baseball 902 Pittsburgh Pirates -136* <small>vs</small> San Diego Padres (I Kennedy - R must Start V Worley - R must Start) 255655057-2 8/8/14 12:30am $75.00 $75.00 Pending 8/8/14 7:05pm Reduced Baseball 915 Detroit Tigers/Toronto Blue Jays Over 8½ +100* (A Sanchez - R must Start R Dickey - R must Start) 255655057-3 8/8/14 12:30am $81.00 $75.00 Pending 8/8/14 8:10pm Reduced Baseball 918 Houston Astros -108* <small>vs</small> Texas Rangers (M Mikolas - R must Start B Oberholtzer - L must Start) 255655057-4 8/8/14 12:30am $86.25 $75.00 Pending 8/8/14 10:05pm Reduced Baseball 921 Minnesota Twins/Oakland Athletics Over 7 -115* (K Gibson - R must Start S Kazmir - L must Start) 255655057-5 8/8/14 12:30am $127.00 $100.00 Pending 8/8/14 4:05pm Reduced Baseball 925 Tampa Bay Rays -127* <small>vs</small> Chicago Cubs (C Archer - R must Start T Wada - L must Start) 255655057-6 8/8/14 12:30am $50.00 $56.50 Pending 8/8/14 8:10pm Reduced Baseball 930 Kansas City Royals +113* <small>vs</small> San Francisco Giants (M Bumgarner - L must Start J Vargas - L must Start) Comment -
Lol I'm not sure why though clowns are attacking one of the best callers here.... Someone obviously don't like making money. D2D keep up the work, some of us actually enjoy making money!Comment -
Those***Comment -
Please. Dude loses whatever profit he makes the next day because he is an action junkie and has to bet everything on the board. The size of his wagers make no sense. If he has a bankroll of $10,000 like he says he does, making $50 a day is not killing it. Like I said a blind monkey throwing 25 darts at a board could hit 50%. A Colombia grad looked at this thread and laughed; basic statistics dictate he will be down over the course of a year. It's math dumbs dumbs not spray tan science.Comment -
BOL today D2D. Always need to wish the good people on this forum a good luck. Cash em. If you hit 6 of 9 i'll post a vid personalized for D2D.Comment -
Comment -
Ok, today we are going to talk statistics.
First off, I would like to say that I agree with the statement above, a blind money could hit 50%, although it would take a while for it to all average out. I am going to throw out the monkey (sorry monkey, back to your cage) and I am going to use a coin when talking today.
As I am sure you all know a coin will come out at 50% heads and 50% tails (although it has been statistically proven that heads does come out at 50.001% here in North America, probably due to the weighting of our coins). Today we will throw out the .001% and assume that both come in at 50%. Everyone will quickly realize that you will not hit 5 heads and 5 tails on every attempt, this is because this is still random.
Now, in simplistic terms, what does happen in the long run in statistics is that the larger your sample size is, the better chance that you will be closer to your expected value or average.
This is a simple theory and is known as Regression Toward the Mean (it used to be regression TO the mean, but in the last 30 years somebody realized that over any sample size you will still not always get TO the mean, simply TOWARDS it).
From Wikipedia:
'In statistics, regression toward (or to) the mean is the phenomenon that if a variable is extreme on its first measurement, it will tend to be closer to the average on its second measurement—and, paradoxically, if it is extreme on its second measurement, it will tend to have been closer to the average on its first.[1][2][3] To avoid making incorrect inferences, regression toward the mean must be considered when designing scientific experiments and interpreting data.[4]
The conditions under which regression toward the mean occurs depend on the way the term is mathematically defined. Sir Francis Galton first observed the phenomenon in the context of simple linear regression of data points. However, a less restrictive approach is possible. Regression towards the mean can be defined for any bivariate distribution with identical marginal distributions. Two such definitions exist.[5] One definition accords closely with the common usage of the term “regression towards the mean”. Not all such bivariate distributions show regression towards the mean under this definition. However, all such bivariate distributions show regression towards the mean under the other definition.
Historically, what is now called regression toward the mean has also been called reversion to the mean and reversion to mediocrity.
In finance, the term mean reversion has a different meaning. Jeremy Siegel uses it to describe a financial time series in which "returns can be very unstable in the short run but very stable in the long run." More quantitatively, it is one in which the standard deviation of average annual returns declines faster than the inverse of the holding period, implying that the process is not a random walk, but that periods of lower returns are systematically followed by compensating periods of higher returns.'
OK, so that takes care of the first part of today. It is a simple theory and basically says 'the larger the sample size, and the more you test, the more accurate (closer to the mean) you will come.
The second thing we need to talk about is statistical significance. When it comes to coin flipping there is NO shortage of information out there on the internet, so here I will post an article by Adam Sugano for you to read:
'Statistically significant is a phrase that many people throw around to add a little gravitas to their arguments, but I often wonder how many of these people actually understand what this phrase means. Some of the more frequent explanations I hear are that it means the p-value is small, or it signifies an important outcome to take note of, or it is an outcome that is most likely not occurring by chance. All of these responses are true, but having a fundamental understanding of the mechanics that lie beneath this phrase is essential for anyone responsible for conducting A/B tests, multivariate tests or pretty much any situation where analytics are being leveraged to defend an idea or hypothesis.'
Last month, my blog post focused on the concept of hypothesis testing in statistics. Namely, defining what is meant by the null and alternative hypotheses, and why it is important to define these before any data have been collected. This month I will focus on how to interpret the results of your study after your hypotheses have been defined, the data collected and the results analyzed.
Let’s consider the following situation:
You have a friend who claims he has the ability to correctly predict the outcome of a coin toss more than 50% of the time. As a rational person you, of course, are skeptical, but you also realize that the only way to settle this assertion is to put your friend to the test and begin flipping coins. Wisely, however, you remember reading my last blog post on Marketing Forward about the importance of defining your hypotheses upfront before any data has been collected. So, you write the following on a piece of paper:
Null Hypothesis: My friend can only correctly predict the outcome of a coin flip 50% of the time
Alternative Hypothesis: My friend can correctly predict the outcome of a coin flip more than 50% of the time
Your friend agrees with your hypotheses and then you two begin a discussion around choosing an alpha level. The alpha level (α) is very important when it comes to statistical significance because it is the dividing line between what will be deemed statistically significant and what will not be deemed statistically significant. In a lot of ways this can make the phrase statistically significant seem rather arbitrary, which is why it is important to always choose your alpha level before any statistics are calculated. A typical alpha level is 5% or 0.05. What this means is that if the result of your experiment could only happen by chance less than 5% of the time, then the result is defined as being statistically significant. Similarly, if an alpha level of 1% or 0.01 is chosen (a stricter test) then statistical significance can only be claimed if the result should only happen by chance alone less than 1% of the time. But because your friend is so confident in his supernatural ability to correctly predict the outcome of a coin flip he is willing to meet that higher burden of proof and allows you to set the alpha level at 1%.
A visual way to understand the process described above would be as follows:
We all know there is natural variability involved with flipping a coin, but done repeatedly, we expect to arrive at a proportion of heads or tails that is very close to 50%. However, if your friend can truly predict the outcome of a coin flip at a rate significantly better than 50%, we are willing to reject the null hypothesis and conclude he does have some sort of supernatural gift or ability. But, we are only willing to give him this statistically significant designation if he lands in the top 1% (because we chose an α-level of 0.01) of the distribution shown above.
The exact value of this top 1% (rejection region) is dependent upon the number of coin flips your friend must try and predict. Let’s assume you guys both agree on 100 coin flips. In this case, the above graph can be updated with the following numbers.
This graph adds two new points of reference. The first is at the center of the distribution where P = 50% (‘P’ here is notation for proportion). This corresponds to what is assumed under the null hypothesis. Remember that in the null hypothesis we are stating that our friend has no predictive ability, and so his chances of predicting correctly should be centered at 50%. The other reference point is P = 62.9%, this percentage represents the 99th percentile of the distribution and is the dividing line between a statistically significant result and a result that is not statistically significant.
Well, after 100 flips of the coin your friend records an impressive (but not statistically significant) result of a 60% success rate. In this situation a 60% success rate corresponds to a p-value of .0228 or 2.28%. The p-value is always defined as the probability of getting a result as extreme or more extreme than what is observed, assuming the null hypothesis is true. In other words, if your friend’s ability to correctly predict the outcome of a coin toss is only 50%, there is still a 2.28% chance that his 60% success rate happened purely by chance alone. And since this percentage is higher than our alpha level, he does not fall into the rejection region and we fail to reject the null hypothesis. In other words, we do not see enough evidence statistically to believe his claim of supernatural coin flipping prediction ability.
An interesting note to mention, however, is that if the α-level had been set at 0.05 or 5%, the p-value of 2.28% would be less than the threshold required for statistical significance (5%) and we would have concluded that our friend does possess special predictive powers. This highlights the need to always specify an alpha level before proceeding with any statistical calculations as practitioners may be tempted to adjust their original alpha levels after results have been calculated in order to reach a statistically significant result.
To summarize, statistically significant is a phrase that has an inherent meaning and interpretation. But for those without a firm understanding of what is meant by the terms alpha level, p-value and null and alternative hypotheses, this phrase should be used a little less liberally until proper background knowledge is comprehended. Gaining this understanding will aid you when interpreting and defending the results of any statistical tests you have performed.'
So, now using mathematics (statistical formulas that are correct, there is no question about this...basic statistics), you tell me whether going 147-109 over 256 wagers is or is not statistically significant, when 50% would be the standradized mean....and please remember that I am not taking the fact that most wagers and not 50/50 propositions and that I bet +money as well as -money, but that I believe the mean of those two approaches 50% as well in the long run (ie, I am not just betting favourites) and that is obvious when looking at my rate of profitability.
If you would care to take it back further we can break out the 2000 wagers I have posted at SBR and averaged 55% while being profitable.
Anyway, as I always say, I am no better than anyone else.....but in my mind I have proven, time and time again that I CAN pick winners across multiple sports while betting high volume. My theory has been, and always will be, that high volume reduces variance, and as everyone knows (or should know) variance is an absolute killer in the world of sports wagering.
When it comes to my bankroll and the amount that I am betting.....(BR of $10k and wagers between $50 and $225) and the fact that I said I would be happy with a $50 per day profit (although I am at $140 per day right now) I still think that would be fantastic. To profit in one year on $10k an additional $17k would be great. And if that meant that next year my $27k would be worth $46k, and then $75k in year 3.....I think most of us would take that. $50 per day profit, with my BR is nothing to sneeze at.
Anyway.....that is all I have to say for now....to all of those that think high volume is ridiculous, that's fine....wager how you like, I have never tried to push anything on anyone. If I see an edge on a game I will bet it, that is how I work and it will not change.
Conclusion:
My style of wagering brings us as quickly as possible towards the mean, thus taking out the variance that most sports bettors see on a day to day basis. I can become statistically significant within a period of weeks where most bettors would take months, or more likely closer to half a year betting one game per day. Hitting 57.4% over 256 bets (or even better 54.5% over 2050 wagers) is NOT the work of a dart thrower, a monkey, a coin flipper or any combination of the 3.
Now that the work is over, enjoy your day everyone.....and GL.Comment -
This guy never stops bragging. I offered to bury the hatchet yesterday but it's back on. DOUCHEBAG.Comment -
Do you want to bury the hatchet and help each other or not?Comment -
Dollar is very advanced
takes it serious
Patrick bury hatchet here..good capping thread
you got other guys to go after nowComment -
ohh I know it hurts Bate
Your audience is getting thinner and thinner by each day
Comment -
Adding:
255681892-1 8/8/14 11:52am $60.00 $50.00 Pending 8/8/14 8:15pm ATP Tennis 164 R.Federer Games Won -4½ -120* <small>vs</small> D.Ferrer Games Won Comment -
Another note as I have had some texts about the NFL picks, there will be no NFL plays until at least the regular season.Comment
