Vesely @ 10.25 – 3 units (Pinnacle)
-
Comment -
Wozniak @ 3.56 – 2 units (Pinnacle)
Comment -
HC, did you hedge in-game in the Murray match? You were getting great odds.Comment -
Naw.Comment -
hardcoar doesn't like free moneyComment -
It is. It is also lost money if Vesely wins. In the long run hedging is negative due to bookmaker margins. As long as I don't actually NEED the money right now, it's a net long term loss.Comment -
I have heard this before and from my own experience I would say there are times to hedge and times to let it ride. I think a hedge was in order here only because the odds on Murray were so great after that first set. He went from -1000 or -1100 (I'm not sure exactly) to start the match to -110 after the first set. I've never seen that before. I assume the odds were low because the books thought Murray would lose.Comment -
My reasoning is still sound. The only good time to hedge is if you are convinced the hedge line holds value in itself.Comment -
Which was exaclty the case here.Comment -
I wouldn't know. I wasn't looking live.Comment -
You seem to be on the same page as myself regarding Novak's somewhat overrated chances of winning this tournament given his recent form...my book is offering Novak to win IW and Novak to NOT win IW at identical odds...
Now I know the classic Hardcoar question is do I see Novak winning the tournament just under half the time (factoring in juice) or not...the answer is I don't, but I'm having a hard time deciding if there's just minimal edge to this bet (he's barely under the required "positive EV" threshold) or significant (i.e. Djoker only takes it down 30-33 percent of the time). Any thoughts as to how worthy of a bet Novak to NOT win is? Given that I find edge to the play, I'll be making it one way or the other...just can't decide how large or small to go.
Cilic --> Doesn't Matter --> Gulbis/Isner --> Wawrinka/Federer is not a cake walk. I'm even considering Cilic ML...but I digress.Comment -
you talked me at-least into a play on Novak NOT...but i am unconflicted as to "how heavy"...as i decided long ago to not try to cap "confidence"= cap the capper...doing so just invites "Murphy's Law" into the picture...
if a play candidate is clearly +ev...i do not try to guage just how "clearly" that is...it is a play, period...and by definition, a play is an effort to WIN (not risk, as most do it) 1unit (why it is SO much easier psychologically for me to buy tickets on dogs than faves...exactly the opposite for most others...where they are "suspicious"...i simply see a cheaper +ev chance to add a unit to my bankroll...on the other hand, faves don't scare me off either cuz i know the ticket-price on a fave is bigger for a reason...it's proportionately that much more likely to hit...now I digress...)
this approach works best for someone as simplistically frustration-averse as myself...as frustration breeds "attempts at settling the score with that bastard Mr. Murphy" = that slippery slope called "chasing"...that NEVER ends well
______
anyhow, Novak NOT is clearly +ev...so why not plunk down at least the minimum amount you'd conceive of ultimately taking now?...like putting salt on food...you can always add more later...and you eliminate the "d'oh" of being left off the bus completely while your'e deliberating just how much
_______
as i type this...at pinnacle
Novak YES, -113
Novk NO, +102..........at these prices NO = YES SIR!Last edited by fitguy67; 03-12-14, 06:31 AM.Comment -
I find it very difficult to determine just how good a chance Djokovic has at this title, but in my opinion it is certainly not greater than 50 %. If you get + odds I feel very confident in telling you it's not a bad play. I have no idea whether it's a particularly good one or just how good it is though, unfortunately.Comment -
Murray @ 1.801 – 10 units (Pinnacle)
Comment -
Haas @ 5.02 – 3 units (Pinnacle)
Comment -
Radwanska @ 1.79 – 3 units (Pinnacle)
Comment -
Li Na @ 1.495 – 10 units (Pinnacle)
Comment -
Pennetta -0.5 @ 1.909 – 10 units (Pinnacle)
Comment -
Pennetta 1:st @ 3.05 – 4 units (Pinnacle)
Pennetta +4.5 @ 2.02 – 4 units (Pinnacle)
Pennetta 2-1 @ 8.36 – 2 units (Pinnacle)
Comment -
HC, in terms of value, do you like the odds we are getting on Isner are good/fair/or poor? He has shown that he can beat Djoker and Djoker has shown that he can be rattled by Isner and pro Isner crowd.Comment -
I know, but I recall us saying that once before and Isner won. I don't think Djoker has solved Isner yet. Their matches have been close. Not saying he will win but if he gets it into a tie break anything can happen. If this was Fed, I'd say Isner had no chance. It will be funny having Isner be such a big underdog and to have the over/under set at 25 games.Comment -
There can be a tiebreak again
Comment -
Guys I dont know if he does this because he is dumb or cocky, Novak does not stand in the right place when returning Isner's serve.
Watch Washington final 2013. Isner was smashing Del Potro in the first set. In the 2nd set Del Potro took a few steps back and began returning his serves from way behind baseline. Result is he demolished Isner the last 2 sets 6-1, 6-2
After that game Isner played 2 matches against Djokovic. I watched the first game (Cincinnati) where Isner won and the first set of 2nd game (Paris) where Isner won. Djokovic stayed too close to the baseline and could not return those serves.
I did not watch 2nd or 3rd sets where Djokovic won 6-1 6-2, so I will youtube it.
Found it. Djokovic still stands too close to the baseline but
1. Paris court is very slow
2. Djokovic was in good shape end of 2013
3. Paris is not US soilLast edited by kenz; 03-15-14, 02:15 AM.Comment -
Check here where Del Potro returns Isner's serves in the 2nd set starting from 3:07. He is near the line referees. This is how you should return IsnerComment -
Isner leads 2-0 on US outdoor hard courts, winning those games with MLs around @6 and @7.
He knows how to beat Djokovic in his backyardComment -
HC = The boss!Comment -
are u guys serious about considering a ML bet on djoker -654...of course, you're VERY likely to win..but it's precisely the habit of taking bets like this because they're very likely to hit that will kill you over the long term...cause it won't come in 86.74% of the time...and if tomoro is one of the relatively small % of times that your bet loses, not only do you NOT get your small% "return" on your "investment" (ie.your stake)...you lose the whole damn investment as well...
looking at the other ML option, given these two dude's h2h, do you honestly think Isner wins less than 15.29% of the time required to make taking +554 bets like this profitable over the long haul...
Isner +554 = 0.1805u to win 1 unit is the type of no-brainer value-play you should get used to taking...
same reason you eat your leafy green vegetables every day, even tho' you don't like 'em...
eating spinach daily even tho' you don't enjoy it every time you do it--over the long haul it makes your body stronger
taking value bets (where your best estimate of winning (albeit small) is greater than that implied by the price) regularly, even tho' you don't particularly want to because you know it probably will not win THIS time...will similarly make your bankroll stronger over time...
because the $-boost of the occasional surprise wins will more than offset the more-frequent unsurprising $-draining effect of losses
conversely, putting "just win tonight baby" concerns over "value" concerns will weaken the account over time...in the same way that changing lanes without a "shoulder check" will hurt you...you'll get away with ignoring the long term for, well, a long time...while u'r doing it it seems like it'll continue forever...then suddenly, bang!...and you lose more in that one surprise loss than in all the small gains you accrued when you ignored the "value stuff the boring eggheads were always going on about" and just went with your "win the damn bet tonight" gut feeling
__________
for Djokovic -654 to make sense, you must honestly believe Djokovic wins at least 86.74% (=1/1.1529) of possible encounters in identical parallel-universes...damn, seems like a high thresh-hold...at least at first blush given the most basic h2h and other info
...but i don't want to lose today...i want to bet on Djokovic, cuz i just KNOW he'll win...but...damn eggheads and their long term perspective telling me something i know (correctly) is very likely to win today...will certainly lose $ over time
for Isner +554 to make sense, you must honestly believe Isner wins at least 15.29% (=1/6.54) of possible encounters...now this one I see as an easy thresh-hold to hit...i know from the eggheads that it'll make me money over the long haul...but i also know that in order to enjoy such long-term profit...i MUST train myself to submit bets like this that i know are likely to lose...because, i can never know the hour/day of the "surprise" big wins that make all the unsurprising small losses more than worthwhile
_____________
it's the bold-faced bet on Isner for me...even tho' i know it's unlikely to win this time (or any time, for that matter)...
but those unlikely surprise wins are so sweet...they make all the small losses i poured into the books while waiting for the unlikely to happen "worthwhile"...
look at this thread...a crap win%...no fun and rather irritating most of the time giving money to the books...but notice that there are always just enough unlikely surprises coming in bunches to counteract the no-luck drought periods (see the 0-9 spell a few pages ago...counteracted shortly thereafter by a "kexx rich" spell) to keep the ROI% oscillating in the 2 to 10% range...
so i bet on Isner +554 and instead of cheer him on, i cheer on the roulette-spin (of possible results drawn from an huge number of identical parallel-universes) to give me one of the less likely results in which Isner wins...as long as my estimate that such lucky-for-me results make up at least 15.29% of the "draw" (and hopefully substantially more...i'll never really know...but the degree to which the true % of "good" results in the spin exceeds that implied by the price...in this example 15.29%...that's my EDGE)
I figure Isner wins at least 20% of the encounters...if this figuring is accurate, it means I'd have a fat residual or "edge" of 100% - (20%/15.29%) = 30%...meaning if i could continue making this exact play over and over...80% winners/20% losers over the haul...and if the price was always +554 (which implied a break-even win% of only 15.29%)...iteration after iteration...my account would sport an amazing 30% ROI as the rare-but-large $-wins overwhelm the more-common-but-smaller $-losses...in fact, you only get to make each play once...but with cultivated attention to these sorts of long-term probability-based value considerations you can accumulate net gains from the market and the actual ROI tells you what your average "edge" actually is (seems to be oscillating about 5% for this--and the three precursor--threads...excellent, even tho' it's loaded with plays you don't expect in any way to cash...and if you try to filter out the "bad" ones u just kill the ROI, cuz you never know which ones'll hit/miss...the "very likely to hit" 1.5xx one you loved to tail burns and the "unlikely flier" at 8.50 that you hated cashes...they all have value, but only 45% or so of them actually cash and we'll never know beforehand which ones)
____________
to anybody still with me, apologies for the "word blizzard"...it has helped greatly to clarify my own thinking on "value" and how to pull it out of an event-betting market that giveth and taketh...and to do so in such a way that on balance and over time "the $-giveths more than offset the $-takeths"
contemplating the Djoko (who i THINK will win tomorrow and thus WANT to justify betting on, whatever the price...you know the old "no chalk on winners" schtick) vs. Isner (who i KNOW might win if I'm lucky...do i want to make what amounts to a small donation to the book in the more likely event that i'm not lucky)...got me thinking...about probabilities, book-prices, event-results, $-gains/$-losses...
now i understand better why i do what i do...and i know a few things that should be changed or at least experimented with...most important realization is that the temptation to ignore a bad book-price (with an unclear or negative edge) on a play, simply because you don't want to be "left out" of holding a ticket when the likely event (Djoko winning) happens is a long-term killer...and that whenever a very popular view (such as Djoko winning) drives many to ignore the longer-term value considerations...considerable value may be created for those prudent enough to tame their short-term desire and take the higher-valued, usually less-likely side (ie. Isner winning).
Isner +554 = 0.1805u to win 1 unitLast edited by fitguy67; 03-15-14, 05:31 AM.Comment
only question is...how will they price the prop-bet on that near certainty...