Moar Threads? Moar Picks

[Hardcoar]

You do mean only betting on things you consider to be 35% or more likely, don't you?

Whatever the case I would focus on whatever I feel I am best at, if there is any discernable difference between areas. If you feel you are a lot more successful betting on women's tennis, then bet a lot more on women's tennis than on men's.

[sluggy1616]

You do mean only betting on things you consider to be 35% or more likely, don't you?

Whatever the case I would focus on whatever I feel I am best at, if there is any discernable difference between areas. If you feel you are a lot more successful betting on women's tennis, then bet a lot more on women's tennis than on men's.

Yeah I meant greater than 35%. I'm actually best at late round mens match ups. Particularly where the odds are about even for the matchup. I haven't put together the percentages yet but I think I win round 65 to 70% of them. My leans are so subjective though. I want to have quantitative as well as qualitative evidence that my pre-match analysis is sound. I can't bring myself to play larger money stakes until I have some quantitative data that supports my leans.

[Hardcoar]

So just to clarify, you do not mean using a 35% MoE? You do mean not betting very high odds. The reason I'm being stupid asking is because you asked me before about similar percentages, but regarding margin of error IIRC.

[Hardcoar]

Boserup @ 2.58

L

Novikov @ 5.3

W

Heras @ 2.68

L

Dookie @ 2.3

L

Konta @ 3.75 – 2 units

L

Andreozzi @ 3.5

L

Fritzl @ 4.7 – 2 units

L

Scheep-Scheep @ 4.9

L

Ramirez Hidalgo 2-1 @ 5.3

L

Lapentti @ 3.55

L

Cepelova @ 3

L

Ramos @ 4.6

W

Matosevic @ 1.79 – 3 units

L

Carreno-Busta @ 3.35

L

Vesnina @ 6.2

L

Estrella @ 2.2

L

Niculescu @ 13

L

Duckworth @ 3.65

L

Lisicki @ 2.04

W

Jovanovski @ 3.45

L

Delbonis @ 6

L

Zhu @ 5.5

L

Watson @ 8

W

Pliskova @ 2.46

W

Hahahaase @ 13

W

Diyas @ 14

L

Karlovic @ 1.84

L

Golubev @ 4.5

L

Total Wins: 11
Total Losses: 32
Total stake: 47u
Yield (including commission): +0.02915u
Return on investment (rounded): 0%

[sluggy1616]

I want to put some qualitative data together that compares the efficiency of a player winning a game. What I mean by that is say fed and joker are meeting in a final. I want to go back to each match both players had in this tournament and find out how efficiently the player is closing out the games they win given the level of talent they face in these matches. For example, say Joker is winning 63% of his points on serve. That stat I don't think is showing the average efficiency Joker has in winning the games in a match. Is Joker winning his average serve game at 40-15 or is it 40-30? I think if one player has been much more efficient than the other throughout the tournament(given equal average opponent strength) in winning games the player has an edge that I don't think the books really consider?(or maybe I'm wrong about that)

Do books consider games won efficiency?

Many thanks

[Hardcoar]

I doubt most bookmakers consider that. That said, 99% of bookmakers simply adjust to market (Betfair and at best Pinnacle) odds, and don't do jack shit themselves. If you're into statistical goldmines this is very likely to be your best option:

http://www.google.se/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tennisratings.co.uk%2F&ei=WlAGVZa2CsWWauvJgoAE&usg=AFQjCNF5Q99yh3UFcaEWeX242HrkAQ4YPw&sig2=IH_g4zRUNc7gbJ6hxZmA-Q

[JC1186]

Yield (including commission): +0.02915u
Return on investment (rounded): 0%

Ouch! That's a lot of time spent analysing matches for no reward.

Better than negative units I suppose.

[Hardcoar]

Indeed. Let's wait and find out.

[sluggy1616]

I doubt most bookmakers consider that. That said, 99% of bookmakers simply adjust to market (Betfair and at best Pinnacle) odds, and don't do jack shit themselves. If you're into statistical goldmines this is very likely to be your best option:

http://www.google.se/url?sa=t&rct=j&...Nc7gbJ6hxZmA-Q

Sweet dude!!! Bookmarked. Thanks

[sluggy1616]

So just to clarify, you do not mean using a 35% MoE? You do mean not betting very high odds. The reason I'm being stupid asking is because you asked me before about similar percentages, but regarding margin of error IIRC.

Thought a bit more about this.

For me to bet a match that I thought had a 35% change of winning, I would need a 15% cushion in the odds before I would make the bet(although I dont currently bet these types of matches). IE book odds of no greater than 20%. But like you said, I'm going to try to specialize in what I have so far been good at. I am thinking that if I do get good I will take say a 15% piece of my book and start tailing your plays to lower the correlation of my overall results since your specialty is very different from mine. Kinda like you do with an investment portfolio by holding different asset classes.

[Hardcoar]

I don't know what the f*ck that link was. I mean this:

http://www.tennisratings.co.uk/

[Hardcoar]

15 %-pts cushion, I take it.

[Hardcoar]

Kohlschreiber @ 7.2

[Hardcoar]

Pennetta @ 1.75 – 2 units

[Hardcoar]

Errani @ 1.79 – 2 units

[JC1186]

Pennetta @ 1.75 – 2 units

Pretty much just Stosur's dud player and defending champ?

[Hardcoar]

Azarenka @ 2.98 – 2 units

[Vinnie Paz]

Ouch! That's a lot of time spent analysing matches for no reward.

Better than negative units I suppose.

11-32 and even?!?! Don't know about you but I'm kissing the ground if I can survive that and be even afterwards. So good job nailing the big dogs!

[Hardcoar]

Luck always evens out the longer the run. My long-term result will not be a product of luck.

[Hardcoar]

Pretty much just Stosur's dud player and defending champ?

Pennetta seems to have done well in her opening round, and she absolutely loves this tournament. The 6-0 H2H always helps.

[JC1186]

11-32 and even?!?! Don't know about you but I'm kissing the ground if I can survive that and be even afterwards. So good job nailing the big dogs!

It's just a waste of his (clearly very natural - through hard work I'm sure) ability, that's all. Good to stay even for sure. My approach use to be similar. I've got a pretty damn good ability to pick upsets and for about 3 years I nearly entirely bet dogs.

It worked. I profited about 10-30K per year. But my game plan is definitely different now and I think it's for the better.

[JC1186]

Pennetta seems to have done well in her opening round, and she absolutely loves this tournament. The 6-0 H2H always helps.

Good luck. Was tempted to take her too but always find it tough to oppose Sam at these odds because of her unpredictability and huge variance between her best and worse.

Does her ball bashing go long and into the net? Or does she have one of those days where everything lands in?

In theory these courts should really suit Sam. Though her results haven't be indicative.

[Hardcoar]

Errani @ 1.99 – 2 units

[Hardcoar]

Ramos @ 70

[JC1186]

Nice win on Pennetta HC.

[Hardcoar]

Sure. Errani dun' goofed though. Hopefully she'll stop being a dumb bitch (or conversely, Lisicki starts being her usual dumb-bitch self) eventually.

[felix_felicus7]

It's just a waste of his (clearly very natural - through hard work I'm sure) ability, that's all. Good to stay even for sure. My approach use to be similar. I've got a pretty damn good ability to pick upsets and for about 3 years I nearly entirely bet dogs.

It worked. I profited about 10-30K per year. But my game plan is definitely different now and I think it's for the better.

Interesting post JC. What made you change an already sucessful strategy? Just realizing you were missing further profit thru taking underrated faves occasionally as well, or something else? Can you elaborate on what kind of yield that 10-30k represented? Thanks in advance. And to HC - fantastic to have your thread back!!

[SCI]

Sure. Errani dun' goofed though. Hopefully she'll stop being a dumb bitch (or conversely, Lisicki starts being her usual dumb-bitch self) eventually.

Anyone with power who doesn't miss like a retard and Errani is helpless. She needs dirt to eat the balls up with her weak lobbing serve. I'm surprised how she doesn't get clobbered on anything other than clay more often.

[Hardcoar]

Exactly. Which is why Lisicki to me was the perfect retard for Errani to play against.

The answer to your surprise: Because she actually plays very well most of the time.

[SCI]

Exactly. Which is why Lisicki to me was the perfect retard for Errani to play against.

The answer to your surprise: Because she actually plays very well most of the time.

I thought the same way 2 weeks ago against Puig and she got clocked. Helpless from the door. Never again on anything other than clay unless she's playing another midget with a weak serve.

[Hardcoar]

Smith @ 1.87

[Hardcoar]

Smith @ 1.99

[Hardcoar]

Isner @ 8.4 – 2 units

[Hardcoar]

Lamasine @ 3 – 2 units

[Hardcoar]

Karatsev @ 3.2 – 3 units