THREADS! MOOOOOOAR THREEEEEEADS! My Fourth Pickin'-Thread <3

[MartyFR]

Hard, do you think Nara's odds are high even with all the factors? Zako can still be Zako after all.

This one is not aimed at me, but I'll give my opinion.

Seen both her plays vs Piter and Pereira and she had no problem what so ever.

She's just a level too high for the others.

I think she'll make it in straight again

[ChasingInle]

Idiot! Bet Sweden live down 1.

Gay as hell! At least Sweden had the best looking player on the ice in Lundqvist, no?

[Hardcoar]

Yeah I do. I wouldn't bet on Zaks' at these odds, that's for sure.

[matt1216]

Idiot! Bet Sweden live down 1.

Really goof? There was no team in tournament that had a shot of getting more than 1 goal vs Canada

[Hardcoar]

It's a shame they didn't lose to Gulbis... that would've been f*cking hysterical!

[ChasingInle]

Hey kid guess who had a Canada future? It wan't you.

Really goof? There was no team in tournament that had a shot of getting more than 1 goal vs Canada

[Hardcoar]

Anderson 2-1 @ 6.34 – 3 units (Pinnacle)

[Hardcoar]

DogPooLove +5.5 @ evens – 10 units (Ladbrokes (live odds, available at time of writing!))
DogPooLove O. 19.5 @ 2.1 – 10 units (Ladbrokes (see above))

[Hardcoar]

Mr. Anderson +3.5 @ evens – 3 units (Pinnacle)

[matt1216]

Hey kid guess who had a Canada future? It wan't you.

Kid? Because that's original. Canada future +190 because that was hard to predict.

[Hardcoar]

oh yeah... Eat a dick nadal!!!

[Hardcoar]

Bachinger @ 1.73 – 4 units (Ladbrokes)

[Hardcoar]

Anderson 2-1 @ 6.34 – 3 units (Pinnacle)

FUXX

DogPooLove +5.5 @ evens – 10 units (Ladbrokes (live odds, available at time of writing!))
DogPooLove O. 19.5 @ 2.1 – 10 units (Ladbrokes (see above))

KEXX
KEXX

Mr. Anderson +3.5 @ evens – 3 units (Pinnacle)

KEXX

Bachinger @ 1.73 – 4 units (Ladbrokes)

KEXX

Total hits: 129
Total mishits: 168
Total stake: 1294u
Net yield: +203.809u
ROI: +15.75% (rounded)

[Hardcoar]

F. Mayer @ 1.57 – 3 units (Pinnacle)

[fitguy67]

Total hits: 129
Total mishits: 168
Total stake: 1294u
Net yield: +203.809u
ROI: +15.75% (rounded)

Outstanding results AND record-keeping.

Go to players talk and see all the "I'm hitting 58%" chest-thumping threads.

You, on the other hand have the right attitude toward the importance of hit-rate...don't even bother to calculate it. (It is an apparently-dismal, but absolutely irrelevant 43.4%)

It is your current ROI of more than 15% after about 300 plays (where anything over 3% long-term is considered outstanding) that is remarkable...

Try to keep this thread going till the 1000-play milestone is hit...i'm air-betting on the "ROI over +3% after 1000 plays" prop.

[Hardcoar]

I considered it but figured it's not really that interesting and it doesn't take my genious to work it out given the sum of wins and losses respectively.

I've been lucky lately, which shows.

[Hardcoar]

Glushko @ 3.09 – 4 units (Pinnacle)

[kenz]

HC is on fire lately, and a really good capper. When he is in good mood I enjoy his humour. But sometimes he tries very hard to be annoying, lately somehow he chooses to troll everyone which I dont get since he is on a hot streak

[Hardcoar]

: |

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEQ0l_m3Xm0&feature=kp

[MartyFR]

Glushko @ 3.09 – 4 units (Pinnacle)

Great one lad.

Did not trust her to take it all so picked the +4.5.

Just taken first set.

[Marillion]

I tailed on Glushko, I hadn't noticed that one. Good luck!

[Hardcoar]

Arnaboldi @ 2.98 – 4 units (Pinnacle)

[Hardcoar]

Robert 1:st @ 3.4 – 4 units (Ladbrokes)

[Cappinpicks]

any leans for achtleitner or haase?

[poet]

HC, still trying to understand, is your system based on picking winners or finding value in the lines (and knowing how much to bet based on that value), which will pay off in the long run regardless of individual outcomes?

[Hardcoar]

Both as mentioned. I think Mayr-Arschleitner is the superior bet at current market odds.

[Hardcoar]

HC, still trying to understand, is your system based on picking winners or finding value in the lines (and knowing how much to bet based on that value), which will pay off in the long run regardless of individual outcomes?

Is any system ever based on anything other than finding value?

Check that... is any successful system ever based on anything other than finding value?

[Hardcoar]

Mladenovic +3 @ 1.926 – 10 units (Pinnacle)

[Hardcoar]

Davydenko @ 1.57 – 5 units (Ladbrokes)
Davydenko 1:st @ 1.67 – 5 units (Ladbrokes)

[Hardcoar]

Delbonis 1:st @ 1.5 – 5 units (Ladbrokes)

[Hardcoar]

Cuevas @ 1.6 – 4 units (Pinnacle)

[fitguy67]

HC, still trying to understand, is your system based on picking winners or finding value in the lines (and knowing how much to bet based on that value), which will pay off in the long run regardless of individual outcomes?

Poet, something i've found that works very well in tailing this thread is to take each play TO WIN exactly the same amount...the amounts risked automatically adjust..more risked for those more likely to hit (as implied by the odds)...less for those less likely to hit (as implied by the odds).

[Hardcoar]

Yeah that'd interesting... I wonder whether tailing me in such a manner is superior to tailing me according to estimated expected value.

[fitguy67]

depends on how well you "cap yourself" (aka. guage "confidence" or "estimate" EV)...i choose to eliminate this additional source of variance in favor of letting the odds (the single best estimator of a bet's probability of hitting) determine the bet size objectively for me...

your well-demonstrated ability to find value (a simple "worth it or not" decision that ultimately rests on comparing your perceived probability with that embedded in the book's odds) is far more reliable IMO than any attempts to rate the strength of that value (a much more complicated process of ranking qualified plays relatively against themselves AND absolutely against a multi-point unit scale)...

getting one estimation process (the prob of an event occurring) right is a tough-enough job...trying to then estimate how well you did that is a MUCH more difficult trick to pull off consistently

I'd expect that comparing the results of placing the same plays with "your full-featured way" versus "my simplified way" over the long haul (once the accounts are adjusted for total amount staked) is that the $change from point zero to point n would be roughly identical...but your "actively managed bet-size" path would exhibit considerably more variance than my path based on mechanically betting to win a flat amount ...meaning a bumpier (more financially & psychologically painful) path to the same place...

straightforward application of Occam's Razor for me

[Hardcoar]

Yeah I might just start betting to win.