As you may have noticed, the forum was offline for a period. We identified a security incident to Sportsbook Review Forum and took the site offline as a containment step while we investigated.
We wanted to make sure the system and site were restored and secured before bringing things back online and you will see that we are requiring all forum users to reset their password as a precautionary step.
If you have any questions, our moderators are around and happy to help where they can.
my argument is if closing line value is accurate and he shows he should get 2% ROI and if he is actually getting 6% roi over 1200 records it seems to me
A survivorship bias
B the line is not accurate
or maybe a combo
can we actually use closing lIne to estimate ROI or not?
Comment
danshan11
SBR MVP
07-08-17
4101
#7
nobody has an opinion on this, I am really curious the variation of CLV to ROI is curious at least
Comment
Bostongambler
BARRELED IN @ SBR!
02-01-08
35628
#8
Luck is where preparation meets opportunity.
Comment
danshan11
SBR MVP
07-08-17
4101
#9
yeah inspiring LOL
I am curious how a 2.5% expected ROI turns into a 6% actually ROI
Comment
Biff41
SBR MVP
07-23-14
1234
#10
The books are hiring math wonks and cappers who use the best statistical systems and come up with a reasonably accurate line. There may be a few (very few) cappers out there who combine statistics with other methods. Maybe a capper is good with the emotions or motivations of a team..maybe a capper has some psychic or remote view skills. Who knows but if it works it works.
Comment
danshan11
SBR MVP
07-08-17
4101
#11
the bettor seems to think the CLV is important and the article does not seem to try or know what is the explanation of this increased actual ROI
Comment
Biff41
SBR MVP
07-23-14
1234
#12
I am not a math guy but am just guessing that suppose a third of the bettors in his sample use a system that doesnt involve following changes in odds, they simply bet the team they think will win. The other 2/3 of sample bettors either have 2 systems one of which involves monitoring line changes or some of the second group make their decision solely based on line changes. So the group doing line change only capping would have to be weeded out to get a closer closing profit comparison.
Comment
danshan11
SBR MVP
07-08-17
4101
#13
it is only one bettor's record
Comment
danshan11
SBR MVP
07-08-17
4101
#14
the 1100 bets he reviewed are 1 bettors and he beat the line by 2.5% but was winning at 6%
Comment
danshan11
SBR MVP
07-08-17
4101
#15
I contacted Joseph B and he said the bettor is now at 2500 bets and everything is the same
all major markets and his ROI is roughly 6% and the expected ROI is still 2.6%
what the heck is going on here, I am so confused!
Comment
RangeFinder
SBR Hall of Famer
10-27-16
8043
#16
Originally posted by danshan11
the bettor seems to think the CLV is important and the article does not seem to try or know what is the explanation of this increased actual ROI
Very simple to explain. His sample size is not large enough. When he gets to over 10k events, his actual ROI will be much closer to his expectations if he his accurate with his line as compared to the books closing number.
Comment
danshan11
SBR MVP
07-08-17
4101
#17
2500 bets is not a good enough sample size?
Comment
RangeFinder
SBR Hall of Famer
10-27-16
8043
#18
Originally posted by danshan11
2500 bets is not a good enough sample size?
No, not even close. You need about 10,000 samples to determine whether or not there is an actual edge mathematically. Statistics 101.
Comment
danshan11
SBR MVP
07-08-17
4101
#19
Originally posted by RangeFinder
No, not even close. You need about 10,000 samples to determine whether or not there is an actual edge mathematically. Statistics 101.
man that PHD Joseph Buchdahl has in math is useless, he says the chance of that guy being lucky is 18 deviations off. he also said it is damn near impossible what he is doing by luck, I think he used 1 in gazillion 10 zeros!
what an idiot wonder how he wrote all those books and does all those statistic classes ???
