R40, you can keep generalizing all you want, I have nothing to gain from responding after this.
FWIW, I have no ego, I judge no one unless they're harming others, I don't make generalizations, and I don't even try to guess/assume other people's thoughts or motivations. I could easily be an outlier (in fact, I think it's pretty likely).
Clearly you disagree with some of that and that's perfectly fine by me.
OK. I was not under the impression that you are a professional gambler. Is that the case?
dude eat another bowl of cheerios, if your mad at your therapist send him or her a text dont take it out on me. I think you are thinking I am a NICE guy, focus focus danshan NICE guy, is that in your head now, hope so, take two chill pills and call someone you like
yeah man it turned dark really quick, wow, I am asking about the Indians now anyone got some insight I am missing I got them at -139 and they are sitting at -105 and I have no freaking reason why
dude eat another bowl of cheerios, if your mad at your therapist send him or her a text dont take it out on me. I think you are thinking I am a NICE guy, focus focus danshan NICE guy, is that in your head now, hope so, take two chill pills and call someone you like
Was this meant for me? Sorry if you took what I wrote the wrong way. I included a smiley for a reason; that was meant to be lighthearted. I'm not mad and had no problem with what your wrote. I have real life to worry about. Forum posts could never bother me to any significant extent. Apologies for any miscommunication.
Miller does not move the line IMHO
I think Clevinger is slightly better than Paxton
I think the Indians are way better than the Mariners
and they are home -109 come on!
how could it be -109 seems off more than slightly to me
60% CLV on your bets equates to roughly 54% success rate.
Can we talk about this a little more in depth? Did you reach this conclusion empirically or analytically? If the latter, can you post how you got there?
Can we talk about this a little more in depth? Did you reach this conclusion empirically or analytically? If the latter, can you post how you got there?
what is your opinion on this, I wish more people talked about how they calculate and how they think that calculation matters, thanks
Lines for 5-2
Tyler Anderson Yu Darvish Cubs -163
Clayton Richard Derek Holland Giants -130 8
Ivan Nova Stephen Strasburg Nationals -205 6.5
Julio Teheran Jacob deGrom Mets -183 8
Aaron Nola Jose Urena Marlins 150 8
Wade Miley Luis Castillo Reds -141 9
Hyun Jin Ryu Zack Godley Diamondbacks -111 8
Danny Duffy Drew Pomeranz Red Sox -146 8.5
Blake Snell Michael Fulmer Tigers -102 7.5
Matt Moore Corey Kluber Indians -390 8
Luis Severino Dallas Keuchel Astros 110 8
Dylan Bundy Andrew Heaney Angels -114 9
Lucas Giolito Carlos Martinez Cardinals -286 8
what is your opinion on this, I wish more people talked about how they calculate and how they think that calculation matters, thanks
Positive CLV is a great indicator of future success. I've never made an attempt, formally or informally, to directly translate it into an ROI, which is why I'm curious how R40 got there. I hope he will reply.
I think he just eyeballed it because to me that number is hard to believe, I mean too many factors to just leave it there at 6 out of 10, I read in a Pinnacle article that you need to be at roughly 3 out of 4 to see any profit long term. I think its a matter of calculation as well. I calculate CLV very different NOT ON THIS THREAD but on my real bets I calculate based on wager size and I use the pinny margin as if it is true win% to calculate +CLV
example played Yankees yesterday bet at 167 it closed at 152 so I consider that 1.21% CLV net after deducting the pinny margin of roughly 1.04% on MLB generally but I even go a step further and since it was not a full unit I bet on the Yankees that would make the net effect of that +CLV smaller not the 1.21%.
so I have 3 bets
-150 I bet 1.5 on CLV 2%
100 I bet 1 on CLV 2%
200 I bet .5 on CLV 5%
so my net clv on those 3 bets is 2.5% CLV most people this would be avg clv of 3% because in my opinion you cannot count each bet as a unit for CLV purposes because you did not bet a unit. Think of a book taking bets 1 million bets of a dollar at avg of +2% CLV and then they take 1 bet at 1 million at CLV -4% this is a 2% loss with an avg CLV of 1.99% how most people do it and that dont make sense to me.
but most people dont and they claim CLV success and the strange thing to me that I cannot figure out is ROI from CLV because most people I read about have CLV of say for the season hard to tell the true number but for example DRH he uses CLV without margin so deduct roughly 1% for margin and you get the rough net NOT weighted but a good estimate
he has
.33% 8%ROI
1.2 8%ROI
1.4 10%ROI
1.8 10%ROI
1.6 -5%
Comments
OK. I was not under the impression that you are a professional gambler. Is that the case?
Yes, for about 15 years, though I've always referred to myself as the least successful pro I know (and again, that's not out of being humble).
Perhaps that is why I had that impression.
I think this is all hitting too close to home for Goats.
Was this meant for me? Sorry if you took what I wrote the wrong way. I included a smiley for a reason; that was meant to be lighthearted. I'm not mad and had no problem with what your wrote. I have real life to worry about. Forum posts could never bother me to any significant extent. Apologies for any miscommunication.
I'm not even sure what means but I'm done posting (for the purposes of this discussion).
I honestly didn't mean to turn anything dark, I'm not upset, and I have no problem with either of you guys. Clearly my posts somehow came off wrong.
forget all that, help me with the Indians, pretty please
I don't know shit about baseball. Not a fan of the sport and don't currently bet it. Sorry.
They put Miller on IR.
FWIW I played Paxton @ +110 last night.
GL-
I think Clevinger is slightly better than Paxton
I think the Indians are way better than the Mariners
and they are home -109 come on!
how could it be -109 seems off more than slightly to me
GL-
Just razzing some of your comments.
18-25 WL avg line 49.33%
Units -6.13
CLV .12%
Nationals -110 1.1for1
Rockies +172 .58for1
what is your opinion on this, I wish more people talked about how they calculate and how they think that calculation matters, thanks
20-26 Avg Line 49.08%
Units -4.71
CLV .14%
Tyler Anderson Yu Darvish Cubs -163
Clayton Richard Derek Holland Giants -130 8
Ivan Nova Stephen Strasburg Nationals -205 6.5
Julio Teheran Jacob deGrom Mets -183 8
Aaron Nola Jose Urena Marlins 150 8
Wade Miley Luis Castillo Reds -141 9
Hyun Jin Ryu Zack Godley Diamondbacks -111 8
Danny Duffy Drew Pomeranz Red Sox -146 8.5
Blake Snell Michael Fulmer Tigers -102 7.5
Matt Moore Corey Kluber Indians -390 8
Luis Severino Dallas Keuchel Astros 110 8
Dylan Bundy Andrew Heaney Angels -114 9
Lucas Giolito Carlos Martinez Cardinals -286 8
21-26 W-L Avg Line 48.94
Units -3.72
CLV .1%
example played Yankees yesterday bet at 167 it closed at 152 so I consider that 1.21% CLV net after deducting the pinny margin of roughly 1.04% on MLB generally but I even go a step further and since it was not a full unit I bet on the Yankees that would make the net effect of that +CLV smaller not the 1.21%.
so I have 3 bets
-150 I bet 1.5 on CLV 2%
100 I bet 1 on CLV 2%
200 I bet .5 on CLV 5%
so my net clv on those 3 bets is 2.5% CLV most people this would be avg clv of 3% because in my opinion you cannot count each bet as a unit for CLV purposes because you did not bet a unit. Think of a book taking bets 1 million bets of a dollar at avg of +2% CLV and then they take 1 bet at 1 million at CLV -4% this is a 2% loss with an avg CLV of 1.99% how most people do it and that dont make sense to me.
he has
.33% 8%ROI
1.2 8%ROI
1.4 10%ROI
1.8 10%ROI
1.6 -5%