 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
Originally Posted by MD
umm well I'll start with "EG" isn't even a metric haha, I was waiting to see if anyone would figure that out but nope.
lol you dumbass. They really need that digging the grave emoticon.
Also, alpine you're dumbass. You just supported a guy who is using a made up metric, nice work.
until next time you clowns
I was very wrong. Its not a misunderstanding. You really are just that dense.
No wonder you can't gamble with real money.
What does EG stand for?
Expected growth. Here's a thread from seven years ago about that thing I made up last night:
http://www.sportsbookreview.com/foru...on-part-i.html
Pretty good job making that up. What are the chances?
lol!! damn you love that shovel.
You found a thread with the words expected growth in it and that's your evidence? haha.
I can tell you have never been to college or at least took a class that required any level of critical thinking.
"EG" is not a real metric you dumbass haha, jesus christ lol. That is also why "EG" doesn't mean "expected growth". Unlike ROI, which means one thing no matter where you go in the world and any investor would know exactly what you're talking about. "EG" is not an economic or financing term lol, just stop.
Last edited by brooks85; 12-20-14 at 11:03 AM.
What does investment mean to you. If I have 10k, and use it to make 3 bets of 10k each, each returning 10k, is my ROI 300%, 30k from 10k, or 100%, 30k from 30k in bets. Really simple question.
So instead of actually addressing why you think ROI is superior to EG, you're just going to pretend that something which clearly exists does not exist? I thought I "made it up"? I suppose it's easier to keep deflecting than to admit yourself that you lack the knowledge to argue your point effectively. Enjoy continuing to make a moron out of yourself, you may be setting a record for most easily-disprovable posts in a row.
Bump for truth.
probably should be saying bankroll growth as a metric and not eg.
curious to why FFF thinks kelly is a half truth. Even if you bet half kelly, that means you believe 100 percent in it.
I wasnt trying to say BTCL is the only thing to make a profit.
I was saying BTCL would be the only way I would assess a gambler/tout to follow. I can maximize my BR. No need to know if the tout is doing the same with his.
ROI and EV is all nonsense.
Just pick winnerz guyz.
Brooks will never answer a question to clarify what we are even trying to discuss. It's been going 3 pages now
i'm curious as to how one can improve their approach to bet staking, beyond kelly.
Brooks is afraid to answer questions. He has 10000 posts, and pretty much all of them are "lol your an idiot dummy lol."
|
|
Bump for truth.
You cant really. Kelly is it. It's been proven. Only thing to improve profits is calculating your edge better. Unless im not grasping something obvious.
Increasing volume by finding more things to wager on.
Bankroll growth includes variance, while expected growth does not.
Someone who hits a 20 teamer that they bet their house on is going to have the most bankroll growth, but the smallest expected growth.
Im still waiting for him to give me some info on Bt sport HD as well
Eddie Alvarez tweeted a pic with the next MW champ
eg is a per bet calculation right? what is the math if I want to give a metric of eg of all my bets in a spread sheet say 1000 bets? How could I quantify that?
Sure, Kelly works for what it was intended for. Half truth an analogy for perverting it somewhat for sports betting. When you use a quarter/half, its undermining and ruining the advantages of the original system. How much, I don't know. Feel its significant enough to just use common sense instead, depending on your sense. Also, its a system designed for the same odds an infinite number of times. That doesnt apply here, and further perverts the advantages of the original system. How much, I dont know. But when you plug numbers into big dogs/faves you can see some qualities that aren't applicable to a variety of odds. Dont have too much time to elaborate now, but hints at ruining the system for varieties of odds somewhat. Also, it assumes we know the edges every single time. Not knowing for sure further perverts the advantages of the system. What are you left with. A system that applies to something else that approximates bet sizes less ideally than some peoples common sense.
And a very good lesson as well. Was an eye opener for me. Winning is your by far your best protection against losing. Bet your big edges heavily.
More to think about here probably, but last minute capping today, and very short on time all around.
|
|
Yes Jibbby. He is an inspiration to rape survivors everywhere.
By the way I think Brooks is doing a good job of holding his own. You go dog!!!!!
Not exactly sure, but one of my things is that I'll bet an edge of 10% that I KNOW is an edge of 10% more heavily than a 15% with a large degree of error. It reduces potential gains slightly, but more valuably reduces potential losses. Thus (instinctually, no firm math) telling me that will give me better growth overall. And not covered by Kelly, which is designed only for known edges. Advantage:common sense. IMO.
|
This post was nominated 1
time
. To view the nominated thread please click here.
People who nominated: PunisherIND
|
I just dont see how a tout would push his eg as a metric? Since e(g) you have already decided a bet size? wouldn't bankroll growth be more accurate to quantify your results.
For another day...will check it later.
Another idea is that if you do a partial Kelly system, doing say, Quarter kelly on small edges, and half kelly on your rarer big edges may work out more in your favor. Taking advantage of both the idea of minimizing overall damage , which seems more likely to come from an accumulation of losses on frequent small edge bets, whilst maximizing your big gains on big edges, but in a more stable overall quarter kelly system.
If I recall correctly, 1/2 Kelly has 50% the volatility with 75% the EG of full Kelly.
i cant calculate my edge well at all so i plan to stick to quarter kelly. I dont care about sub optimal bankroll growth. I just dont want to go bust
IF you bet half kelly every time, and at the same odds and edges. Id GUESS, that if you did half kellys on your big edges in a quarter kelly system, you'd get much less of that volatility, and slightly less of the eg.
EXACTLY why Kelly doesnt work in the first place. The math doesnt care. The kelly system is just fine playing russian roulette! We're not.
HOWEVER, the best wat not to go bust is by WINNING LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY BEFORE YOU LOSE LOTS OF MONEY. That knowledge is the great gift of Kelly.
Reply With Quote
Dwil125 gave MD 1 Betpoint(s) for this post.
