Why would anyone take your picks seriously? You don't even have a huge sample size. Not hard to do good or bad in a short sample. Your model that you use, i have strong hunch if anyone who does model legitimately takes a look at your model if you showed it to them, you probably get laughed off because what you are doing is probably either incorrect or applied incorrectly.
How is tracking your plays so hard? If you are posting plays that are basically -110 lines since you don't bet moneyline, thats pretty simple. Such as okay 3-3 today, -0.3 units. YTD is now 50-45 and 0.50 units. Even if your plays are moneylines that simple. If some plays are 1 unit, others 2 unit, it doesn't take long to track it. Now tracking your CLV is another story and takes time. For you to not even track your win/loss and plus/minus unit amount is a joke. That takes very little time to count your w/l and total unit won or loss as the previous post, you would see what your current win/loss and unit plus or minus overall is.
Your mlb plays is not ready for prime time. Who in the world do you think you are? You are acting like you are some smart person with a some special model. I honestly think you don't know anything and you are misapplying everything incorrectly.
Yea you seem to like to crack jokes on yourself like it is nothing. That is why its hard to take you serious. Look at buffetgambler or those guys when they post. They are straight to the point... post plays... then win/loss and ytd. Sure they will make a few comments on the games etc especially if they got unlucky. But you... you are making it like a joke like you are betting monopoly money. Im curious if there are ppl here who bet big money and actually tail you. By that i mean like at least 1k a game. I can't imagine anyone would follow your plays because its like if someone did tail you... then see you joke about your losses etc, how could anyone take you serious? The people on this thread that reply back to you, they are most likely tailing you from what i infer. Obviously they are betting but not that much as in 1k+ each game etc.
You keep saying you have no plans to be a tout or want to be a tout. First off, you are not even qualified to be a tout. Do you seriously have that much confidence in yourself to say something like that? There is no way you are a winning bettor if you record all your plays in all sports. You are going to be a net loser over whatever amount of plays you post for the entire season when you factor in all the sports.
Wins and losses don't mean anything to you. So if you go 100-130 and down 40 plus units, you don't care if you have CLV on it? Thus... you say okay im down over 40k usd. But hey... at least i got +CLV? Other people already mentioned this... +CLV doesn't pay the bills... what your net profit/loss does. You mean you rather be down 40 units and have +CLV vs being up 20 units and having a huge -CLV?
Of course RAS wouldn't make any comments like you. You say if they do, it might hurt their business. Their customers would think RAS is a joke and playing stupid kiddy games and think this guy is basically screwing around and doesn't care we are betting big money into their plays. That is another reason why you wouldn't even make it as a tout if you wanted one. You think if you are down that many units, you make a funny joke, your customers would laugh about it? Or what would the ppl in this thread that probably tail you here?
Honestly admit you are not the best capper on earth? You are probably not even a winning bettor. You sure have lot of confidence for someone like you even making a statement like that. If you are making mistakes like the other guy said in making mlb lines, how ppl here don't know if you are making mistakes in cfl and other sports? You might even be making the same mistakes but the CLV in that small sample size of your plays just had positive variance for you short term. I don't think you have a damn clue what you are doing. And when you even say that... its like... you are acting and talking foolish where nobody would take you seriously.
I don't have a dog in this fight and I'm not choosing sides. It's just curious you expend the effort you do on this. The whole point of restricting Dan to 1 thread is that it's easy to ignore for whatever reason. I'm guessing your time could be better spent.
better spent than talking me, I am the only show in town right now! I like the back and forth its fun for me and I hope he keeps it coming. I do find it odd the attention he gives to my thread! anyway keep it coming Donny always here to chat you up brother!
OK, finally got my non-NBA bets recorded, and figured out how my danshan tailing game is working out. It might be worth noting that I dont tail anybody religiously. If I object to a play I stay away from it. At first this summer it didnt matter because I didnt know enough to object to any of danshans plays, except for a while I shied away from his totals and went with just his sides. (Because his sides won about 15+ units for me last summer). But the bets I made in the last few weeks on WNBA games motivated me to start watching them, and I began forming few of my own opinions of the teams. For instance today I cant tail the Wings bet because they are late game imploders. But I will watch and bet live especially if the Storm get behind and seem way out of sorts.
Anyway, the danshan-tailed WNBA count for rook so far is 6-2. Im also 2-0 on small cfl bets. Nowhere near as stunning as last years efforts, but so far quite solid from my point of view...
OK, finally got my non-NBA bets recorded, and figured out how my danshan tailing game is working out. It might be worth noting that I dont tail anybody religiously. If I object to a play I stay away from it. At first this summer it didnt matter because I didnt know enough to object to any of danshans plays, except for a while I shied away from his totals and went with just his sides. (Because his sides won about 15+ units for me last summer). But the bets I made in the last few weeks on WNBA games motivated me to start watching them, and I began forming few of my own opinions of the teams. For instance today I cant tail the Wings bet because they are late game imploders. But I will watch and bet live especially if the Storm get behind and seem way out of sorts.
Anyway, the danshan-tailed WNBA count for rook so far is 6-2. Im also 2-0 on small cfl bets. Nowhere near as stunning as last years efforts, but so far quite solid from my point of view...
Oops,edit: missed 3 plays from danshans original thread new count is 7-4...
I do look at your numbers and compare to mine, I'm on Seattle -9 myself, so something is different. Either way, keep adding information regarding injuries, days off, coaching moves, all data points that help on coming up to a final line. It is a ghost town in here, so when you are writing, I am sure you will get criticized because there's nothing else to write about. Rook, thanks for keeping record, as CLV is wonderful for long term success, but profits are the only thing I care to comment on.
I do look at your numbers and compare to mine, I'm on Seattle -9 myself, so something is different. Either way, keep adding information regarding injuries, days off, coaching moves, all data points that help on coming up to a final line. It is a ghost town in here, so when you are writing, I am sure you will get criticized because there's nothing else to write about. Rook, thanks for keeping record, as CLV is wonderful for long term success, but profits are the only thing I care to comment on.
Gordon what do you think of my plays are they solid, bad, inbetween, ok???
I do look at your numbers and compare to mine, I'm on Seattle -9 myself, so something is different. Either way, keep adding information regarding injuries, days off, coaching moves, all data points that help on coming up to a final line. It is a ghost town in here, so when you are writing, I am sure you will get criticized because there's nothing else to write about. Rook, thanks for keeping record, as CLV is wonderful for long term success, but profits are the only thing I care to comment on.
Gordon do you believe someone can be a long term winner without having a good clv number?
Gordon do you believe someone can be a long term winner without having a good clv number?
No, but can't be the only data point one focuses on. I'm not saying that your doing that, you are offering a lot to site since your return, I was on Seattle last night at 9, got a bit lucky with a great 4th quarter. Listened too much to others for this pre-season 1st week, damn VSIN and almost everything that got in my head listen to Sirius swayed me a bit and hit Baltimore, Miami while Under of GBay smashed, Over LAC trash, Indianapolis garbage, Washington joke. Saved by Bill with their performance. Had them large myself (not large to many on here) but too many people playing for positions that were better than expected (Especially WR) and Stidham had good day along with Hoyer.
I hesitate to join the fray for various reasons. Some arguments cannot be won, some trolls are just waiting to pounce, and sometimes there are just better ways to spend ones time. Anyway youve asked for input/feedback so fwiw
-First let me say I respect and admire your passion. You may rub some people the wrong way but youre trying to improve your skills and youre trying to contribute to the forum.
-I would advise you to take a deep breath sometimes and also to evaluate the source of the information/feedback youre getting. Comments from a veteran poster and/or proven handicapper should be worth more than comments from your average troll. On a related note try not to sweat the the haters...haters gonna hate no matter what.
-Some winners are modelers, some are handicappers, some probably the most successful are both. You cant argue for primarily handicapping methods to a modeler and you cant argue primarily modeling methods to a handicapper. Traditional doctors have a certain way of doing things and holistic doctors a different way. Its not necessarily right or wrong but a matter of school of thought. On a less serious level you cant argue Ford to a Chevy guy, you cant argue android to an apple person.
-Focus on what you do best. You said you want heavy volume and heavy line value. If thats through CFL, WNBA, and UFC then thats what you should play. Also seeing as how you appear to be a modeler first and a handicapper second, I would focus on sports that lend themselves more to modeling success (i.e. more professional and less college).
-CLV is a good tool but it can be misleadingespecially on small markets and totals, and also due to injuries and service plays. I got great CLV on Syracuse bowl game last year but WVA was missing a ton of guys. If I play a college basketball total that RAS then releases as a play as well Im likely to get much better CLV. More food for thought on CLV: both sides of a bet could cover, and both could have CLV, especially on totals hypothetical example: an NBA total opens at 210 and you bet over, it moves up to 214 and you bet under, it closes at 212 and the final score happens to land on 212. Both bets won, both had 2 points CLV, but the right or best bet still depends on the game stats and also your handicapping/modeling perspective. Ive had this discussion before with others but the right side is not always the side that covers or has CLV. Again though that determination often comes down to perspective and/or methods. Is CLV important in general-YES. Is it possible to win long term without CLV-probably not but its not necessarily impossible. I mean if you gave me great odds on the possibility of a winning season having little to no CLV, I or someone smarter than I, might be able to do it. For example I recommended Oregon State plus 15 as a play but I dont expect to have much CLV there because it opened at 16.5 and went up to 17.5 before falling to 15. I still think plus 15 has value and may well cover but have negative CLV in the process as it may close closer to the opening line. My point is if someone focused solely on betting situations like that where they didnt expect much CLV with a play but still liked their chances of covering then it could be possible to win without having CLV. Would it be easy to win without CLV, especially with heavy volume, no probably not, but again its not necessarily impossible. I dont want to argue the value of CLV but CLV alone shouldnt be your end game.
-You talk about CLV in reference to knowing when youve lost your edge--- well youll know you lost your edge if for example you lose units consistently for say 2+ seasons. That may seem obvious but in terms of answering your question of knowing when youve lost your edge without factoring in CLV thats one way to look at it. Anyone, even great cappers, can have a losing season, but if youre losing for 2+ seasons (and YES probably not getting much CLV in the process) then youve probably lost your edge. And if you did have some CLV those two losing seasons then Id still be concerned about long term profitability going forward. CLV is an indicator but not a guarantee of success. It could be argued CLV is best utilized by the bookmaker. If youve got a customer thats a slight loser but has good CLV and wants to raise their limits then I wouldnt.
-Ill touch upon market efficiency briefly but I dont claim to be an expert on the subject. I would say betting markets are relatively efficient, in the sense that bookmakers do not fear losing big in multiple markets for extended periods of time; yet sharps can still make consistent profit in multiple markets as well. Sports betting markets (and the sharps that can beat them) have been around for so long and there is so much money involved that it breeds a certain level of efficiency in general on both sides of the betting window. Some markets are more efficient than others. I would venture to say the NFL is pretty efficient. I would also say for example college basketball totals are not nearly as efficient. Does that mean you can/should only play college basketball totals and not NFL? No, but if youre expecting similar efficiency or similar CLV on those two markets then you are in for a surprise. You could study opening lines and closing lines vs final MOV but that is not an exact science partially due to late meaningless scores or large turnover margin games.
Other posters may well disagree with some of my thoughts but I hope you found it at least somewhat useful.
I was impressed with the Browns, yes its preseason but man they look sharp. I was not as impressed with Murray as the news here makes it sound like he was the greatest ever and all problems are solved in the desert.
- - - Updated - - -
also the Bronco's offensive scheme looks like its back to dont score dont turn the ball over and punt a ton and let the defense win. I just dont think they have enough defense to win too many playing that way. if it was me Flacco is good at one thing and that is what I would do run run LInday and play action 7 8 9's only. hope to hit 2 or 3 of those a game and bam defense can keep them in it like that.
if the broncos dont throw the deep ball they will not score
I was impressed with the Browns, yes its preseason but man they look sharp. I was not as impressed with Murray as the news here makes it sound like he was the greatest ever and all problems are solved in the desert.
Yes, I know trends can be garbage, but sometimes very useful, books knew Harbaugh's record, they knew Atlanta's record and took that in consideration when making the lines, but were off on Detroit's number, in my opinion, as coverage on Pats and joint practices heard some voices focused on Patriots losing regular season game and need to impress. They were dead on and with the line move, I'm sure some cappers lost on that game, saw some buyback late though.
I was impressed with the Browns, yes its preseason but man they look sharp. I was not as impressed with Murray as the news here makes it sound like he was the greatest ever and all problems are solved in the desert.
- - - Updated - - -
also the Bronco's offensive scheme looks like its back to dont score dont turn the ball over and punt a ton and let the defense win. I just dont think they have enough defense to win too many playing that way. if it was me Flacco is good at one thing and that is what I would do run run LInday and play action 7 8 9's only. hope to hit 2 or 3 of those a game and bam defense can keep them in it like that.
if the broncos dont throw the deep ball they will not score
Excellent write up...I agree, there are some great cappers on this site and many, who keep to themselves for obvious reasons, do have bad runs. Dr. H and Buffett are examples, both who I expect are long term winners, started a service and had down years, does that mean they lost it, absolutely not, I'm sure they have bounced back nicely and have won a ton since then (only assuming). I'm always trying to learn and listen and look for information that may help.
OK @Northeast couple of things 1st one you broke my record for number of characters in a post, and thats a good thing, 2nd I use CLV mainly as a guide or a vote of success. maybe its a confidence thing but I really feel like its a good thing to have 3rd party confirmation from a good source AKA efficient market for all my bets.
if I take a team at -7 and it closes at -7 I feel like I just paid the juice win or lose
if I take a team at -7 and it closes at -9 I feel like I already won (at least long term)
now the funny part is my record so far this year shows something completely different
good bets exp roi 4.07% assuming 2%vig actual ROI 2.43%
bad bets exp roi -2.89% assuming 2%vig actual ROI 4.94%
these are good sample sizes 7239 total bets.
I never look at win loss, I try and look at bets as value only
I buy Yankees at 10 cents cheaper than they close over the season, I am going to make money, that is a fact.
Now Orioles maybe not so much but still overall is probably still true.
Excellent write up...I agree, there are some great cappers on this site and many, who keep to themselves for obvious reasons, do have bad runs. Dr. H and Buffett are examples, both who I expect are long term winners, started a service and had down years, does that mean they lost it, absolutely not, I'm sure they have bounced back nicely and have won a ton since then (only assuming). I'm always trying to learn and listen and look for information that may help.
even for me I gauge toughness of a market based on how many items I model and how many I get to bet out of that model
say I model in 1 sport 100 sides and 100 totals, now if I get 10 sides and 10 totals that to me means my model needs work.
my goal is to get as few bets as possible from every item modeled. in other words the closer my numbers are to market the better i think they are.
in the WNBA for example
last year ratio was super high 4.4 bets out of 10 items modeled and even better CLV last year
this year ratio is 2.3 bets out of 10 items modeled and CLV is down in comparison.
especially on totals, this year the books have done a way better job of opening with closer total numbers.
Sides market in WNBA for me is tricky because 1 guy who just says I am gonna go nuts can change the wnba market easily with a few bets. but overall I still think it is efficient.
even for me I gauge toughness of a market based on how many items I model and how many I get to bet out of that model
say I model in 1 sport 100 sides and 100 totals, now if I get 10 sides and 10 totals that to me means my model needs work.
my goal is to get as few bets as possible from every item modeled. in other words the closer my numbers are to market the better i think they are.
in the WNBA for example
last year ratio was super high 4.4 bets out of 10 items modeled and even better CLV last year
this year ratio is 2.3 bets out of 10 items modeled and CLV is down in comparison.
especially on totals, this year the books have done a way better job of opening with closer total numbers.
Sides market in WNBA for me is tricky because 1 guy who just says I am gonna go nuts can change the wnba market easily with a few bets. but overall I still think it is efficient.
Speaking of WNBA, I have the line at Minnesota at -1.5, so I'll be on them, any thoughts on tonight's totals?
because normally I need a variance of two or less, that is what i shoot for in basketball , if you can make lines and get that close you are onto something , but over time ive changed my game plan and made it 3 or less , numerous subsets will tell me how much to bet , I may post a play and because of rules its always one unit , the nba i bet much much, more depending where the line is when i bet it.
I think once the markets lines get further from mine it starts getting ugly, many reasons for it, but I think the big reasons are late injuries.
And one thing about CLV , i spit at it , at times, for example last night in the nfl , yes i had many reasons for those plays , the market agreed, BOTH LOST , id rather be on the winning side then the right side sometimes.
line value is all that matters to me, if this thing closes at +3 that is a loss for me and I am not excited about same as that Under 165 if it closes at 164 or higher that is a loss for me, win lose or draw! I am getting concerned is the "donny jinx" real, since he started fighting with me I have not had one good line except for CFL, which I am kicking butt in by the way!
- - - Updated - - -
I wish we had these kinds of discussions on these games when the lines come out WISDOM OF THE CROWD!
- - - Updated - - -
I have been working tons of tennis late at night and have not been getting up early enough to catch the WNBA lines when the limits go up, it looks like I could have got Under 166.5 this AM at max limit but I was still sleeping from overnight tennis modeling
line value is all that matters to me, if this thing closes at +3 that is a loss for me and I am not excited about same as that Under 165 if it closes at 164 or higher that is a loss for me, win lose or draw! I am getting concerned is the "donny jinx" real, since he started fighting with me I have not had one good line except for CFL, which I am kicking butt in by the way!
- - - Updated - - -
I wish we had these kinds of discussions on these games when the lines come out WISDOM OF THE CROWD!
- - - Updated - - -
I have been working tons of tennis late at night and have not been getting up early enough to catch the WNBA lines when the limits go up, it looks like I could have got Under 166.5 this AM at max limit but I was still sleeping from overnight tennis modeling
because normally I need a variance of two or less, that is what i shoot for in basketball , if you can make lines and get that close you are onto something , but over time ive changed my game plan and made it 3 or less , numerous subsets will tell me how much to bet , I may post a play and because of rules its always one unit , the nba i bet much much, more depending where the line is when i bet it.
I think once the markets lines get further from mine it starts getting ugly, many reasons for it, but I think the big reasons are late injuries.
And one thing about CLV , i spit at it , at times, for example last night in the nfl , yes i had many reasons for those plays , the market agreed, BOTH LOST , id rather be on the winning side then the right side sometimes.
That was the reasoning for my question about the WNBA, line moved opposite of what I have and at +3, added another small buy. We will see if I'm way off or if the market is right moving it.
Comments
BET
8-8
Wings +8.5
I don't have a dog in this fight and I'm not choosing sides. It's just curious you expend the effort you do on this. The whole point of restricting Dan to 1 thread is that it's easy to ignore for whatever reason. I'm guessing your time could be better spent.
Anyway, the danshan-tailed WNBA count for rook so far is 6-2. Im also 2-0 on small cfl bets. Nowhere near as stunning as last years efforts, but so far quite solid from my point of view...
Oops,edit: missed 3 plays from danshans original thread new count is 7-4...
- - - Updated - - -
Gordon what do you think of my plays are they solid, bad, inbetween, ok???
8/9
Minnesota +2
Chicago Under 165
- - - Updated - - -
Gordon do you believe someone can be a long term winner without having a good clv number?
donny never got over you winning that $40,000 cluelessly betting NBA at Pinnacle.
LOL has he ever heard of Survivorship Bias
No, but can't be the only data point one focuses on. I'm not saying that your doing that, you are offering a lot to site since your return, I was on Seattle last night at 9, got a bit lucky with a great 4th quarter. Listened too much to others for this pre-season 1st week, damn VSIN and almost everything that got in my head listen to Sirius swayed me a bit and hit Baltimore, Miami while Under of GBay smashed, Over LAC trash, Indianapolis garbage, Washington joke. Saved by Bill with their performance. Had them large myself (not large to many on here) but too many people playing for positions that were better than expected (Especially WR) and Stidham had good day along with Hoyer.
-First let me say I respect and admire your passion. You may rub some people the wrong way but youre trying to improve your skills and youre trying to contribute to the forum.
-I would advise you to take a deep breath sometimes and also to evaluate the source of the information/feedback youre getting. Comments from a veteran poster and/or proven handicapper should be worth more than comments from your average troll. On a related note try not to sweat the the haters...haters gonna hate no matter what.
-Some winners are modelers, some are handicappers, some probably the most successful are both. You cant argue for primarily handicapping methods to a modeler and you cant argue primarily modeling methods to a handicapper. Traditional doctors have a certain way of doing things and holistic doctors a different way. Its not necessarily right or wrong but a matter of school of thought. On a less serious level you cant argue Ford to a Chevy guy, you cant argue android to an apple person.
-Focus on what you do best. You said you want heavy volume and heavy line value. If thats through CFL, WNBA, and UFC then thats what you should play. Also seeing as how you appear to be a modeler first and a handicapper second, I would focus on sports that lend themselves more to modeling success (i.e. more professional and less college).
-CLV is a good tool but it can be misleadingespecially on small markets and totals, and also due to injuries and service plays. I got great CLV on Syracuse bowl game last year but WVA was missing a ton of guys. If I play a college basketball total that RAS then releases as a play as well Im likely to get much better CLV. More food for thought on CLV: both sides of a bet could cover, and both could have CLV, especially on totals hypothetical example: an NBA total opens at 210 and you bet over, it moves up to 214 and you bet under, it closes at 212 and the final score happens to land on 212. Both bets won, both had 2 points CLV, but the right or best bet still depends on the game stats and also your handicapping/modeling perspective. Ive had this discussion before with others but the right side is not always the side that covers or has CLV. Again though that determination often comes down to perspective and/or methods. Is CLV important in general-YES. Is it possible to win long term without CLV-probably not but its not necessarily impossible. I mean if you gave me great odds on the possibility of a winning season having little to no CLV, I or someone smarter than I, might be able to do it. For example I recommended Oregon State plus 15 as a play but I dont expect to have much CLV there because it opened at 16.5 and went up to 17.5 before falling to 15. I still think plus 15 has value and may well cover but have negative CLV in the process as it may close closer to the opening line. My point is if someone focused solely on betting situations like that where they didnt expect much CLV with a play but still liked their chances of covering then it could be possible to win without having CLV. Would it be easy to win without CLV, especially with heavy volume, no probably not, but again its not necessarily impossible. I dont want to argue the value of CLV but CLV alone shouldnt be your end game.
-You talk about CLV in reference to knowing when youve lost your edge--- well youll know you lost your edge if for example you lose units consistently for say 2+ seasons. That may seem obvious but in terms of answering your question of knowing when youve lost your edge without factoring in CLV thats one way to look at it. Anyone, even great cappers, can have a losing season, but if youre losing for 2+ seasons (and YES probably not getting much CLV in the process) then youve probably lost your edge. And if you did have some CLV those two losing seasons then Id still be concerned about long term profitability going forward. CLV is an indicator but not a guarantee of success. It could be argued CLV is best utilized by the bookmaker. If youve got a customer thats a slight loser but has good CLV and wants to raise their limits then I wouldnt.
-Ill touch upon market efficiency briefly but I dont claim to be an expert on the subject. I would say betting markets are relatively efficient, in the sense that bookmakers do not fear losing big in multiple markets for extended periods of time; yet sharps can still make consistent profit in multiple markets as well. Sports betting markets (and the sharps that can beat them) have been around for so long and there is so much money involved that it breeds a certain level of efficiency in general on both sides of the betting window. Some markets are more efficient than others. I would venture to say the NFL is pretty efficient. I would also say for example college basketball totals are not nearly as efficient. Does that mean you can/should only play college basketball totals and not NFL? No, but if youre expecting similar efficiency or similar CLV on those two markets then you are in for a surprise. You could study opening lines and closing lines vs final MOV but that is not an exact science partially due to late meaningless scores or large turnover margin games.
Other posters may well disagree with some of my thoughts but I hope you found it at least somewhat useful.
Wishing you success in the future.
I was impressed with the Browns, yes its preseason but man they look sharp. I was not as impressed with Murray as the news here makes it sound like he was the greatest ever and all problems are solved in the desert.
- - - Updated - - -
also the Bronco's offensive scheme looks like its back to dont score dont turn the ball over and punt a ton and let the defense win. I just dont think they have enough defense to win too many playing that way. if it was me Flacco is good at one thing and that is what I would do run run LInday and play action 7 8 9's only. hope to hit 2 or 3 of those a game and bam defense can keep them in it like that.
if the broncos dont throw the deep ball they will not score
Yes, I know trends can be garbage, but sometimes very useful, books knew Harbaugh's record, they knew Atlanta's record and took that in consideration when making the lines, but were off on Detroit's number, in my opinion, as coverage on Pats and joint practices heard some voices focused on Patriots losing regular season game and need to impress. They were dead on and with the line move, I'm sure some cappers lost on that game, saw some buyback late though.
- - - Updated - - -
Excellent write up...I agree, there are some great cappers on this site and many, who keep to themselves for obvious reasons, do have bad runs. Dr. H and Buffett are examples, both who I expect are long term winners, started a service and had down years, does that mean they lost it, absolutely not, I'm sure they have bounced back nicely and have won a ton since then (only assuming). I'm always trying to learn and listen and look for information that may help.
if I take a team at -7 and it closes at -7 I feel like I just paid the juice win or lose
if I take a team at -7 and it closes at -9 I feel like I already won (at least long term)
now the funny part is my record so far this year shows something completely different
good bets exp roi 4.07% assuming 2%vig actual ROI 2.43%
bad bets exp roi -2.89% assuming 2%vig actual ROI 4.94%
these are good sample sizes 7239 total bets.
I never look at win loss, I try and look at bets as value only
I buy Yankees at 10 cents cheaper than they close over the season, I am going to make money, that is a fact.
Now Orioles maybe not so much but still overall is probably still true.
even for me I gauge toughness of a market based on how many items I model and how many I get to bet out of that model
say I model in 1 sport 100 sides and 100 totals, now if I get 10 sides and 10 totals that to me means my model needs work.
my goal is to get as few bets as possible from every item modeled. in other words the closer my numbers are to market the better i think they are.
in the WNBA for example
last year ratio was super high 4.4 bets out of 10 items modeled and even better CLV last year
this year ratio is 2.3 bets out of 10 items modeled and CLV is down in comparison.
especially on totals, this year the books have done a way better job of opening with closer total numbers.
Sides market in WNBA for me is tricky because 1 guy who just says I am gonna go nuts can change the wnba market easily with a few bets. but overall I still think it is efficient.
I keep wishing that more of these guys with wisdom in the game would say more.
Speaking of WNBA, I have the line at Minnesota at -1.5, so I'll be on them, any thoughts on tonight's totals?
- - - Updated - - -
And Gordon , for me the line is getting further from mine which is a clear no play , i hope you guys cash.
I see the line is moving away as well, any injury situations of knowledge? Can I ask why automatic no play for you?
- - - Updated - - -
I took Under 165 because I have 161 for that game its hovering around 164.5 now but I expected it to drop more
I think once the markets lines get further from mine it starts getting ugly, many reasons for it, but I think the big reasons are late injuries.
And one thing about CLV , i spit at it , at times, for example last night in the nfl , yes i had many reasons for those plays , the market agreed, BOTH LOST , id rather be on the winning side then the right side sometimes.
- - - Updated - - -
I wish we had these kinds of discussions on these games when the lines come out WISDOM OF THE CROWD!
- - - Updated - - -
I have been working tons of tennis late at night and have not been getting up early enough to catch the WNBA lines when the limits go up, it looks like I could have got Under 166.5 this AM at max limit but I was still sleeping from overnight tennis modeling
Who are you on for CFL, if you don't mind ?
- - - Updated - - -
That was the reasoning for my question about the WNBA, line moved opposite of what I have and at +3, added another small buy. We will see if I'm way off or if the market is right moving it.
here you go!
Good luck sir...