I repeat learn math or never ever bet sports

[KVB]

Roscoe that could have been a money management issue.

Raising your bets after unusual success will kill you when you eventually revert back to the normal "win percentage".

In that example they may have been lettings some things ride, or fail to adjust while keeping their investments (bets) big.

We see it in sports all the fukkin time.

[SlickFazzer]

KVB,

good stuff.

someone can be a great handicapper but a terrible bettor.

[Roscoe_Word]

Roscoe that could have been a money management issue.

Raising your bets after unusual success will kill you when you eventually revert back to the normal "win percentage".

In that example they may have been lettings some things ride, or fail to adjust while keeping their investments (bets) big.

We see it in sports all the fukkin time.

Oh yeah, definitely KVB.

Was wondering if anyone got that book.................

[KVB]

KVB,

good stuff.

someone can be a great handicapper but a terrible bettor.

Also, you don't need to be much of a handicapper to do well if you are a good bettor.

Betting can be more important than handicapping, in my opinion. Especially if it's talented and skilled betting.

...

...

[StackinGreen]

KVB is the man.

[GunShard]

Gun:

Is this still a viable trend to unload on, or has it been exposed?

I say bet on the divisional underdog with a decent quarterback. So far it hasn't been exposed. We'll see this upcoming week 1 if it still hits over 60%

[flyingillini]

Wow! KVB is up there with the Justin7's , Ganchrow's, good work!!

[Roscoe_Word]

Anybody know how to do this math? I don't, but it could be another "tool" for us.

+1.5 (+137) +269
-1.5 (-153) same vig as -309 (just used a random heritage line)

What line has less vig...or are they =?

[d2bets]

Anybody know how to do this math? I don't, but it could be another "tool" for us.

+1.5 (+137) +269
-1.5 (-153) same vig as -309 (just used a random heritage line)

What line has less vig...or are they =?

Are you comparing +137/-153 with +269/-309?
If so, the +269/-309 has slightly less vig. Not by much.

SBR has this tool: https://www.sportsbookreview.com/bet...ge-calculator/

[Roscoe_Word]

Are you comparing +137/-153 with +269/-309?
If so, the +269/-309 has slightly less vig. Not by much.

SBR has this tool: https://www.sportsbookreview.com/bet...ge-calculator/

Ahh....the arbitrage calculator. I was all around it but couldn't quite get it.

Yep, I went to the book and was comparin a run line's vig to a money lines vig.

Thank you, brother.................

[StackinGreen]

I say bet on the divisional underdog with a decent quarterback. So far it hasn't been exposed. We'll see this upcoming week 1 if it still hits over 60%

What's your definition of "decent"? Not a bad angle.

[d2bets]

What's your definition of "decent"? Not a bad angle.

It's whatever you want it to be.

[GunShard]

This is a good article to read. College football has the best ROI on the moneyline, ATS and totals. Followed by the NFL on the moneyline and ATS. Baseball is has the worst ROI. Don't bet on baseball.

https://www.sportsbettingdime.com/guides/finance/best-sports-to-bet-on/

[SlickFazzer]

Great stuff here guys.

Reminds me when Ganchrow and Justin7 used to post content.

[Roscoe_Word]

[SlickFazzer]

Might take an online stats and probability course in preparation for next year.

[jjgold]

I am never wrong Fazzer

Good idea

[GunShard]

I'm keeping track of my bets if I faded the public top 5 most bets games and this is what I got for Week 1:

SEA +6.5 WIN
CLE +1.5 WIN
CHI +6.5 WIN
NYJ +6.5 LOSE
ATL +5.5 WIN

[OldBill]

math if used properly in NFL can show you when you have a bad line


last night MNF seattle +6.5 was simply an over reaction to R wilson coming back to seattle

here's what i acme up with using last years standings Seattle was 395 PF 366 PA = +29 points over 17 games = +1.7 points

add in +6.5 seattle is now +8.2

Denver was 335 PF 322 PA = +13 points divide by 17 games = +0.7 PPG 0.7 -6.5 or 6.5 - 0.7 = -5.8 now we add negative number to positive number to get diff between 2 teams or 2 points on a 0 line graph actually is 14 points


Seattle +8.2 - - - - - - - -.0- - - - - -Denver -5.8 so subtract the 5.8 from 8.2 seattle is +2.4 points better and they won game by 1 point denver was stupid trying a 64 yarder kick in that spot should have tried to get 5 yards on 4th down with two time outs result wide right and i collect every ticket

even if they scored a TD seattle still covers the spread but with short on time i think they kick a long FG of maybe 50 or less and win by 2 points

[Machba]

2+2 will always = 5.5

[OldBill]

2+2 will always = 5.5

+2 + a (-2) = 4 points diference but +2 + (-3.5) = 5.5

[GunShard]

I noticed different websites that track public money can show completely different stats.

One website has 70% of the public on SEA+8.5 HOU+9.5.
While on the same game on a different website has 80% of the public on SF-10.5 DEN -9.5

If I fade both websites I get these bets. Let's see how well these fade the public bets do in Week 2:

LAC +4.5
JAX +4.5
ARI +6
TEN +10

There's also DAL +8.5 but a backup quarterback is starting. Hard to bet on a backup quarterback.

[slayer14]

JJ will be a made man in Vegas i believe

[WireWire]

The responses in this post

[povis]

All I need is fade math

[povis]

There are some good math trends bet on black fade Asians in combat sports go small in first 2 weeks in major sports.

[jjgold]

Why do the most successful well known gamblers just talk about a number not analysis of a game

[J. v. Neumann]

I know my answer comes far too late, but for those who will still read old topics in the future...

KVB... Yes we can all guess/estimate so said edge...Wait... First is a sporting event a random(Chaotic) event.. YES

No. Sport events are signal + noise. In soccer the noise is dominant.

What I am saying is What math is use to predict random (Chaotic) events

Wrong question. Take a really "chaotic" event, throwing a (fair) dice (can be treated as a true random variable): probability for a six: p(6) = 1/6, so if someone's offering you 6.3 (+530) take it, because 1/6 * 6.3 = 1.05 > 1, so you will make 5 % in the long term. Absolutely computable by simple math even though "chaotic", i.e. truly random.

Furthermore, there are common misconceptions being recognizable here, so here are some basic rules:

1) The sharp bettor does not have to predict the winner.
2) The bookie does not have to do better predictions than the bettors.
3) The job of the bookie is not to make every bettor to lose as much as possible.

[J. v. Neumann]

This was from the financial industry instead of sportsbettin. I once listened to (audio book) The Rise and Fall of Long Term Capital.

The put together a syndicate of PHd's in chemistry, mathamatics and physics to form a hedge fund.

They came out swinging and made profits of 40-50 % for their clients for the first few years.

Then they hit the biggest losing streak in financial history. They were losing tens of millions a day for about 2 months.

The FEDs and fellow Wall Street heavy hitters had to come in and shut them down.

It's impossible to make predictive models for the financial market as reliable as sport models. While the latter are artificial worlds with a very limited amount of rules with all important data being accessible, modeling the former would require a world machine. Nobody can predict market crashes, wars, pandemics etc., and even without such extreme events it's impossible to model all the influencing physical and psychological entities. There are no such extreme events in sports except unexpected losing or winning streaks, unbelievable wins of underdogs etc. - but with the big difference that their outcome probabilities can be nearly perfectly modeled, too.

At sports betting risks are perfectly quantifiable, the real gamblers are at Wall Street.

[jjgold]

Great post J Newuv

[mjsuax13]

https://www.math-salamanders.com/online-math-quiz.html

[Waterstpub87]

This was from the financial industry instead of sportsbettin. I once listened to (audio book) The Rise and Fall of Long Term Capital.

The put together a syndicate of PHd's in chemistry, mathamatics and physics to form a hedge fund.

They came out swinging and made profits of 40-50 % for their clients for the first few years.

Then they hit the biggest losing streak in financial history. They were losing tens of millions a day for about 2 months.

The FEDs and fellow Wall Street heavy hitters had to come in and shut them down.

Long Term Capital managements problem was more of what the industry terms "Style Drift". Pretty common problem with hedge funds. When they are small, they could focus on fixed income arb ect, what they were good at. The problem is that they get more money, and now that market isn't big enough anymore. This led to them to pushing into markets that were riskier, which they had less of a handle on.

Its common for us as gamblers as well. How many of us can beat a sport/multiple sports, and then say to ourselves "I can beat this other market too" and expensively get disabused of that idea.

[Goat Milk]

Also, you don't need to be much of a handicapper to do well if you are a good bettor.

Betting can be more important than handicapping, in my opinion. Especially if it's talented and skilled betting.

i'm not following your video.

Utah +3
Dallas -3

In game, Dallas goes to +5 at some point, and Utah goes to +8 at some point. So why not just bet every single game live? What are the odds that a team, at -3, wins an nba game wire to wire? It's probably less than 10%. So you'll get that opportunity.

Today Argentina was -180 prior to the mexico game. Within 30 minutes, with the score still 0-0, they were +115, which happens all the time in soccer because people don't score that quickly in world cup games.

So based on your theory, if i just bet these things blindly, without any handicapping. I should be up huge. Why isn't everyone doing it then? Limits? I doubt it. Not when you can get money down at 20 different books in the States.

Remember when you were shocked when I got ATL hawks +1300 or whatever it was to win that game? You didn't believe I got that number, probably because you were shocked at what it was compared to the closing line.

If you're really looking for an edge, why are you playing games before they start, unless you're parlaying them, or unless you bet a dog at say +400, and you really think they're gonna come out hot right away, or vice versa.

[KVB]

...Remember when you were shocked when I got ATL hawks +1300 or whatever it was to win that game? You didn't believe I got that number, probably because you were shocked at what it was compared to the closing line....

You're an idiot.

Nobody was shocked you got Atl Hawks +1300, but a few of us now you were lying about the line.

That's the issue, you are lying about the lines you get, and doing it after the fact. Several of us have called you out on it, but don't troll you about it.

You just remain silent, because you know you keep getting caught lying about LIVE lines once games are over.

It is what it is. You are what you are.

Good Luck if you actually bet.

[KVB]

Why do the most successful well known gamblers just talk about a number not analysis of a game

Because we are conditioned to address what's relevant to success in the markets and equally conditioned to know what type of info, Chucky style info, that is not relevant to winning and correlated with losing to, at the very least, the vigorish.

It takes experience, patience, discipline, creativity and awareness to get to that level.

It's a game of numbers, and numbers is the game.

Players, coaches, teams, they all rotate while some things never change. This is true at all levels across NEARLY all sports.

Once you can accept this, you will understand what analysis is relevant and what may not be so relevant. Then you will understand not only the answer to your question, but why you asked it.