[dj_destroyer]

This journal will be to test the handicapping theory that if one can systematically obtain positive expected value, you have a successful betting system. I will try to do this in several ways including but not limited to: situational analysis, trend forecasting, predicting line movement, beating the closing and/or generally obtained line, various distributions/rankings, and any other tip, trick, tool or method that is deemed accurate and efficient in obtaining positive expected value. Full Kelly will incorporate the odds into the sizing of wagers; starting bankroll is 5k. Hope you enjoy math!

0-0
$5000
$0

Play: Drexel -3.5 [-107] 2.32% -116.00 to win 108.41
Win Probability: 52.81%
Expected Growth: 0.05%

Play: Jets [+138] 10.87% -543.50 to win 750.03
Win Probability: 48.32%
Expected Growth: 1.63%

[YouMama]

how do u come up with the bet sizes?

[dj_destroyer]

how do u come up with the bet sizes?

I use a sport-specific formula consisting of various indexes and metrics derived from my aforementioned capping techniques to calculate my win probability. I then apply full Kelly Criterion to these probabilities.

[MonkeyF0cker]

This doesn't belong here.

[dj_destroyer]

This doesn't belong here.

The sub-heading for the "Handicapper Think Tank" is Handicapping theories, betting systems, tips, tricks, odds and math which is all covered in my introductory post.

[mathdotcom]

What is the difference between what you're doing and recording the results of coin flips to test the theory that you can't profit betting heads/tails if they're dealt at -110?

[dj_destroyer]

What is the difference between what you're doing and recording the results of coin flips to test the theory that you can't profit betting heads/tails if they're dealt at -110?

A little bit of mojo and a lot of knowledge.

[MonkeyF0cker]

Go away.

[dj_destroyer]

Play: Wizards/76ers U185.5 [-108] 3.05% -152.50 to win 141.20
Win Probability: 53.39%
Expected Growth: 0.09%

[samserif]

The sub-heading for the "Handicapper Think Tank" is Handicapping theories, betting systems, tips, tricks, odds and math which is all covered in my introductory post.

I see numbers but I don't see math.

[dj_destroyer]

I see numbers but I don't see math.

I have crafted a different formula for each different sport that I wager in, based on what I said in my first post. These calculations are done in an excel spreadsheet and then I just plug the values into Kelly Criterion. Hope this helps.

[Rich Boy]

Dont think systems are allowed in the think tank

And without showing how you come up with your win probability this thread is pointless

[dj_destroyer]

Dont think systems are allowed in the think tank

And without showing how you come up with your win probability this thread is pointless

Why is everyone a police officer? If you don't want to read, move on. Besides, the moderators define a system as any type of betting that doesn't care what the spread or money line is. This isn't a system as it does take into account the spread/money line. It's mostly an experiment that is open to debate and discussion. We should all collaborate and share ideas about the application of probability theory to sports betting.

[dj_destroyer]

0-0
$5000
$0

Play: Drexel -3.5 [-107] 2.32% -116.00 to win 108.41
Win Probability: 52.81%
Expected Growth: 0.05%

Play: Jets [+138] 10.87% -543.50 to win 750.03
Win Probability: 48.32%
Expected Growth: 1.63%

1-1
$4564.91
-$435.09

Play: Wizards/76ers U185.5 [-108] 3.05% -152.50 to win 141.20
Win Probability: 53.39%
Expected Growth: 0.09%

[sharpcat]

This thread does not belong in the think tank.

First off you are not discussing any of the logic behind how you are making your picks.

Second you seem to have a problem understanding the difference between EV and EG.

Third you are past posting plays long after the line has moved in your favor. Wizards U185.5 was not available since 4:10 p.m. and you posted this play at 11:39 p.m. after the line had dropped all the way to 182.5.


Mods move this thread to the service plays forum!!!!

[dj_destroyer]

This thread does not belong in the think tank.

First off you are not discussing any of the logic behind how you are making your picks.

Second you seem to have a problem understanding the difference between EV and EG.

Third you are past posting plays long after the line has moved in your favor. Wizards U185.5 was not available since 4:10 p.m. and you posted this play at 11:39 p.m. after the line had dropped all the way to 182.5.


Mods move this thread to the service plays forum!!!!

I'm simply tracking the results right now. If anything comes of it, I'll for sure go through each formula with you but it'll simply be a waste of time otherwise. I also try to post plays here as quick as possible as to when I make them, at the current line given.

[buby74]

It is a waste of time posting picks in this forum. We are interested in your approaches and formulas not tracking your daily progress. You might have an ok approach that could be improved by discussion on this forum. But I guess we will never find out.

[dj_destroyer]

OK, I will (time permitting) go through various metrics, techniques, methods, etc. as I move along and open them up to debate and criticism. We can chip away at it.

[MonkeyF0cker]

How about you just die instead?

[dj_destroyer]

Play: Evansville -4.5 [-110] 3.63% -165.71 to win 150.65
Win Probability: 54.11%
Expected Growth: 0.12%

[dj_destroyer]

Play: Milos Raonic to win ATP Australian Open 2012 [+6552] 1.05% -47.93 to win 3140.37
Win Probability: 2.54%
Expected Growth: 0.73%

[dj_destroyer]

I was originally only going to post wagers above 2% but I'm going to change that to 1% to allow for more plays to build a bigger database quicker, as well as already having included the Raonic pick which was below 2%.

Play: South Florida [+121] 1.17% -53.41 to 64.63
Win Probability: 45.89%
Expected Growth: 0.02%

Play: Illinois State [+137] 1.03% -47.02 to win 64.42
Win Probability: 42.79%
Expected Growth: 0.01%

Play: Missouri State [+231] 1.33% -60.71 to win 140.24
Win Probability: 31.14%
Expected Growth: 0.04%

Play: Panthers [-108] 1.53% -69.84 to win 64.67
Win Probability: 52.66%
Expected Growth: 0.02%

Play: Nuggets [+145] 1.00% -45.65 to win 66.19
Win Probability: 41.41%
Expected Growth: 0.01%

[kfranz31]

i havet ried several systems myself....and i look forward to some one with a new formula...u never know til you try if it works and makes money go with..good luck hope this works

[dj_destroyer]

Play: Samford [+135] 9.48% -449.19 to win 606.41
Win Probability: 48.00%
Expected Growth: 1.21%

[dj_destroyer]

Play: Jets [-104] 2.24% -106.14 to win 101.09
Win Probability: 52.31%
Expected Growth: 0.05%

[dj_destroyer]

Play: Pacers -3 [-105] 1.54% -72.97 to win 69.50
Win Probability: 51.97%
Expected Growth: 0.02%

[dj_destroyer]

1-1
$4564.91
-$435.09

Play: Wizards/76ers U185.5 [-108] 3.05% -152.50 to win 141.20
Win Probability: 53.39%
Expected Growth: 0.09%

Play: Evansville -4.5 [-110] 3.63% -165.71 to win 150.65
Win Probability: 54.11%
Expected Growth: 0.12%

Play: South Florida [+121] 1.17% -53.41 to 64.63
Win Probability: 45.89%
Expected Growth: 0.02%

Play: Illinois State [+137] 1.03% -47.02 to win 64.42
Win Probability: 42.79%
Expected Growth: 0.01%

Play: Missouri State [+231] 1.33% -60.71 to win 140.24
Win Probability: 31.14%
Expected Growth: 0.04%

Play: Panthers [-108] 1.53% -69.84 to win 64.67
Win Probability: 52.66%
Expected Growth: 0.02%

Play: Nuggets [+145] 1.00% -45.65 to win 66.19
Win Probability: 41.41%
Expected Growth: 0.01%

3-6
$4199.95
-$800.05

Play: Milos Raonic to win ATP Australian Open 2012 [+6552] 1.05% -47.93 to win 3140.37
Win Probability: 2.54%
Expected Growth: 0.73%

Play: Samford [+135] 9.48% -449.19 to win 606.41
Win Probability: 48.00%
Expected Growth: 1.21%

Play: Jets [-104] 2.24% -106.14 to win 101.09
Win Probability: 52.31%
Expected Growth: 0.05%

Play: Pacers -3 [-105] 1.54% -72.97 to win 69.50
Win Probability: 51.97%
Expected Growth: 0.02%

[dj_destroyer]

Play: CS Northridge -8 [-111] 3.64% -152.88 to win 137.73
Win Probability: 54.33%
Expected Growth: 0.12%

Play: 49ers [+146] 2.36% -99.12 to win 144.72
Win Probability: 42.05%
Expected Growth: 0.08%

[CanuckG]

Care to explain this formula because doubt anyone cares what your picks are if they don't know how you came up with them

[dj_destroyer]

Care to explain this formula because doubt anyone cares what your picks are if they don't know how you came up with them

Which is different from your thread, how?

[Rich Boy]

How come you are not tracking what the line closes at? That will show if you are getting good numbers or not

[dj_destroyer]

How come you are not tracking what the line closes at? That will show if you are getting good numbers or not

The closing lines aren't always the sharpest. If I trust my capping techniques (which I do) then all I need to know is that I'm getting a +EV opportunity. If I notice the line goes away from my bet, I just add more wagers.

[Jaug]

The closing lines aren't always the sharpest. If I trust my capping techniques (which I do) then all I need to know is that I'm getting a +EV opportunity. If I notice the line goes away from my bet, I just add more wagers.

The closing line is the sharpest. The closing line has the highest limits at pinny. The closing line is not interesting to the big players as it is sharp.

[dj_destroyer]

The closing line is the sharpest. The closing line has the highest limits at pinny. The closing line is not interesting to the big players as it is sharp.

It's also seen the most amount of action... so it's easy to assume it's the sharpest; and most often it is. But there's also sometimes when a sharp player wants the reverse line movement, for various reasons.

I mean I don't track the closers per se but I'm always watching lines and watching games and comparing everything. But when comparing the closers to my lines specifically, I feel that micro-tweaking will probably hurt me in the long run; I just have to stay the course as long as I maintain in good faith that it's +EV.

[CanuckG]

Which is different from your thread, how?

Don't have a formula but we're winning...you have all these % people wanna know about.