My view on POTM candidates

[mathdotcom]

Mathdotcom - With more frequent posting would easily be front runner, but has not been power posting very often. Unfortunate and so will be lucky to make semi-finals in Nicky's elimination method.

KingRevolver - Not a bad poster, but could use some fine tuning. I would like to see more variety from this guy. The bringing sexy back vid alone makes him a top 5 contender easily.

IntegrityKid - Guy is a little obsessed with this parlay business, but we like the contribution he is making. He is the next Slickfazzer. Would also like to see him stir the pot more other than being on defensive about his participation on the forum.

Deuce - The guy hasn't posted anything of value, but the fact that he is so blatantly a stiff makes his contribution to June invaluable.

Monkeyf0cker - See above. The hypocrisy of this guy is hilarious. Insults Nicky constantly for being a square, but does not want to have a contest with him. He says the opportunity cost of $5k is too high. Um. If Monkey were to win the contest, he would earn a 100% ROI over however long it takes to make 500 plays (even though Nicky offered to reduce the # of plays). Classic that this guy does not consider a contest based on picking teams at certain prices to be a proper handicapping contest. This is like determining who is a better fighter by having a chess match. Also funny that he enters the threads that are sure to be the most ridiculous only to complain that he is searching for quality handicapping information and is bitter it was not in said thread. He is in my top 5 just for the farce he creates.

pavyracer - Has actually fallen in the rankings, due to his recent surge of angry posting. We are not pleased with you pavy.

betplom - very solid poster, with posting in all key areas: forum fighting, sports posting, off topic topics. He is in my top 5.

onthewhat - a little bit too obsessed with Nicky but that's okay.

tacomax - oozes sarcasm as much as he oozes from his genital sores

Bread - what a barreled in fukk.

Honorable Mentions:

Nicky - Starts controversy, shares valuable information, good story telling, keeps jj at his best

jjgold - Enough said.

Brock Landers - This guy has not been posting, and we all know why, but the situation surrounding it is too classic not to mention. Thanks Brock!

[mathdotcom]

Also sad that chi archie has been surprisingly quiet. Is he having girlfriend issues??

[AMBlai01]

I now know a lot about you to take the time to come up with all of this....

[mathdotcom]

Blai I am very smart, it took maybe 95 seconds to type

Not like your gorilla ass hunched over a keyboard with two index fingers pointed out (and tongue out) looking for keys.

[MonkeyF0cker]

Can you calculate the expected growth on 500 plays at ONLY a 1% edge @ -110, bad@math.com? It's 105.6537%. You're a fukkin moron. Change your name.

Until you can prove that 100% >= 105%, I'd suggest you shut your fat face...

[Bread]

Blai I am very smart, it took maybe 95 seconds to type

Not like your gorilla ass hunched over a keyboard with two index fingers pointed out (and tongue out) looking for keys.

LOL!!



Amby go get a haircut ya hippy!

[bobbyfk]

what about me?

[betplom]

what about me?

You are one of the top selections for the braces wearing division of POTM.

[englishmike]

You are one of the top selections for the braces wearing division of POTM.

Lot more competition in that division of late....

[betplom]

Lot more competition in that division of late....

EngrishMike, you're still around eh?

I figured the SBR kiddies had run you off by now.

Hopefully you stick around for more than 3 months of the year this time.
Silly cunt.

[englishmike]

I'm glad we're still solid.

[mathdotcom]

Can you calculate the expected growth on 500 plays at ONLY a 1% edge @ -110, bad@math.com? It's 105.6537%. You're a fukkin moron. Change your name.

Until you can prove that 100% >= 105%, I'd suggest you shut your fat face...

Did you forget to read the part about Nicky being amenable to lowering the number of plays? Too much fat around your eyelids I guess. (I also doubt you have any edge, but if you do, then you should amass such a lead on Nicky at the 100 play mark that you can then implement a mercy rule).

[mathdotcom]

bobby I have seen your name but somehow you always fall under my radar

[donjuan]

Did you forget to read the part about Nicky being amenable to lowering the number of plays? Too much fat around your eyelids I guess. (I also doubt you have any edge, but if you do, then you should amass such a lead on Nicky at the 100 play mark that you can then implement a mercy rule).

I probably shouldn't get involved here but isn't the whole point of the contest to prove who is a superior handicapper? Lowering the number of plays is counterproductive to the reason for the contest and the opportunity cost is too high if a reasonable number of plays are involved.

[MonkeyF0cker]

Did you forget to read the part about Nicky being amenable to lowering the number of plays? Too much fat around your eyelids I guess. (I also doubt you have any edge, but if you do, then you should amass such a lead on Nicky at the 100 play mark that you can then implement a mercy rule).

Ever heard of sample size?

[mathdotcom]

Ever heard of sample size?

So what you're saying is you're not very confident you can win over a sample of 300 plays. Good to know.

If you are better than him, it would still be a +EV contest, just like your 1% edge is only an expected value.

Even if the contest was only 1 play, you should still be willing to participate, though of course it would not settle who is better.

[mathdotcom]

I probably shouldn't get involved here but isn't the whole point of the contest to prove who is a superior handicapper? Lowering the number of plays is counterproductive to the reason for the contest and the opportunity cost is too high if a reasonable number of plays are involved.

After 300 plays, the odds of the inferior capper losing are acceptably small, and should make up for opportunity cost.

[flyingillini]

[durito]

I thought Nicky wasn't a handicapper?

You idiots have confused me again.

[MonkeyF0cker]

So what you're saying is you're not very confident you can win over a sample of 300 plays. Good to know.

If you are better than him, it would still be a +EV contest, just like your 1% edge is only an expected value.

Even if the contest was only 1 play, you should still be willing to participate, though of course it would not settle who is better.

Do you know how to use a binomial distribution? Obviously not. He proposed 200 plays. If I have that same 1% edge on 200 coinflips and he has -1% edge on 200 coinflips, there is a 52.799% chance that I go 102-98 or worse. There is a 27.218% chance that he goes 102-98 or better. That's a guaranteed win? Tell me what that proves EITHER WAY exactly.

[reno cool]

Can you calculate the expected growth on 500 plays at ONLY a 1% edge @ -110, bad@math.com? It's 105.6537%. You're a fukkin moron. Change your name.

Until you can prove that 100% >= 105%, I'd suggest you shut your fat face...

that sounds high. what is it on 5%?

[reno cool]

even money bets going 253-248 you're going to double your br? Starting with a 1% bet. What am I missing?

[KingRevolver]

*fine tunes self*



Alright, Mathy. What should I do to switch thing up. Give me some advice.

[MonkeyF0cker]

that sounds high. what is it on 5%?

Yes. Sorry. Should have specified that it's based on 1 unit @ 5% of a $100k bankroll...

[mathdotcom]

Do you know how to use a binomial distribution? Obviously not. He proposed 200 plays. If I have that same 1% edge on 200 coinflips and he has -1% edge on 200 coinflips, there is a 52.799% chance that I go 102-98 or worse. There is a 27.218% chance that he goes 102-98 or better. That's a guaranteed win? Tell me what that proves EITHER WAY exactly.

jj hits 46.70%. If Nicky is as square then his edge over the bookmaker is -3.30%. And let's say your edge over the bookmaker is 1%. All that matters is your relative edge, which is 4.30%. Recalculate your numbers with N = 200, and with your edge as +4.30% and his -4.30%.

I agree if you are very similar handicappers then 200 plays would not give us much confidence, but if Nicky is as useless as you say he is, you're complimenting him by saying his edge is only -1%.

[mathdotcom]

Yes. Sorry. Should have specified that it's based on 1 unit @ 5% of a $100k bankroll...

Your opportunity cost of locking up $5k in a contest with Nicky would be the difference in return over 200 plays between having a $100k bankroll and a $95k bankroll. If I'm not mistaken you've calculated it as if locking up the $5k would be locking up $100k.

[MonkeyF0cker]

Your opportunity cost of locking up $5k in a contest with Nicky would be the difference in return over 200 plays between having a $100k bankroll and a $95k bankroll. If I'm not mistaken you've calculated it as if locking up the $5k would be locking up $100k.

I'm assuming that I'd be using that $5k to wager on each of those events just as I would be using the $5k to wager on those events in a contest. Certainly, not all of my plays would be included as bets in the contest and the amount dedicated to such a contest would mean that I would need to wager even less on those events that I chose for the contest as a portion of bankroll is already being appropriated for those events. Again, this was a minimalist example.

[Casperwaits]

**** you all. Go suck my dick.

[MonkeyF0cker]

If you want to look at it from another perspective in terms of opportunity cost... If I had a 3.477% cumulative edge on all contest wagers, my expected growth on $5k alone plus the difference in expected growth due to the portion of consumed bankroll being used in such a contest would exceed $5k in expected profit. This vantage of opportunity cost, again, doesn't account for other wagers that I may be betting.

[mathdotcom]

Fair enough but you are forgetting to calculate the $ benefit of beating Nicky...

[MonkeyF0cker]

While I certainly wouldn't mind doing so, the money is better put elsewhere. If I gambled with my heart instead of my mind, I'd have been broke long ago.

[BadNina]

All this math talk was hot.


Just an observation.

[pavyracer]

All this math talk was hot.


Just an observation.

Yeah...I had an erection when I started reading this thread and lost it when I saw Nina's avatar.

[reno cool]

This thing is all wrong.
First, Monkey may be a favorite to beat Nicky but the value is no where near = 5K. That would depend on the rules. (plus we don't really know that much about what Nicky's up to)
2. You're not doubling a 5K br with a 1% edge, at least you're highly unlikely to.
3. ?
4. contest is pointless pain in the ass.

[TheIntegrityKid]

Mathdotcom is fukkkin faggot ass mofo who is too busy playing with numbers instead of playing with pussy

Instead of being a pussy, go out and get some, fag!

I'll stir my dick in yo mouth biatch.... how bout that??? Don't answer, we already know you're BEGGING for it...