I don't know how politics work. Is it just fade Nate Silver?

All I remember was three years ago winning a bunch of money on Trump because the odds seemed ridiculous. I actually bought a rental property with the winnings so its the gift that keeps on giving.

This USA-Spain game is out of control. Already on my second cherry coke from the stress. I got about 70 drink tickets if anyone wants to drink. Find the white guy stressing out at the Westgate

it's pretty easy to pick up money from either inefficiencies or people wanting to play longshots. in an efficient market where only one of the listed outcomes can win the yes/no prices should sum to 100%. in some markets the YES sums to well over 120% because people want to back a side instead of betting something doesn't happen so you just buy NO's for every offering and lock in a profit. you can grab the xml feed and sum up the BestBuyYesCost and BestSellYesCost to see which markets are most irrational (stuff sums to 110% or higher) and watch those and build up positions. it's pretty small stakes, high site fees, and long time frames so you gotta like political stuff or be bored. should be worth a few thousand each year and more in election years.

or just sell NO to people who want to buy yes on markets that meme well like indictments, impeachments, or andrew yang.

pro players get into the weeds and actually build models, study the news, and try to predict stuff but seems like too much work

the guy whose dog gets to **** and piss on the floor seems like the bigger power mover to me

Sportsbooks are desperate to keep horse racing customers as it's free 15% for them. There's a lot of competition to keep the whales. Wynn is pretty aggressive on it. Probably only place that will let him have the dog.

I like to spread it around.

I can set up a bot that finds whenever there's > 100% using the XML feed if it will make us millions. Or tens of thousands with minimal effort

Yes fade 538 politics, Nate tha Great is a huge lefty. He was right about Obama twice but so were the sharps. 2016 was a disaster for him however I predict a Dem presidency win in 2020 so 538 will look accurate this election cycle.

2p2 did pretty well beating Intrade.com, no doubt that I will be betting political futures closer to the end of this year. Not worth tying up money in a November 2020 outcome at the moment.

I think with predictit you can sell your shares and cash out at any time

i'm guessing that is where the most value would be. buying low and selling high

or buying high and selling higher

why did you bet this game? just for the thrill off it ? at 75' lay usa

No bet just pride in my country. We are all Americans today

Yes you are definitely right about this.

The line has moved in the Giants favor since last night..why might that be? Does Pomeranz really neutralize the Rox' big left-handed bats: Blackmon, Dahl and Murphy? What are the other factors in this?

Pomeranz is slightly worse than Jon Gray, SF better bullpen, home field advantage etc. My model has the fair line as Giants -104

Giants at + odds (120s-130s) one of my bigger bets tonight

He had Trump with approx. 30% chance of victory. I don't see how you can define that as a disaster for Nate.

Especially as ~+400 or better was widely available on Trump near election day. If you bet 538's model for winning the presidency, you'd have bet on Trump against WA lines.

I get the hate for 538 in general, though. Their projections are basically terrible when it comes to sports. As a fan, why even look at their projections when you can just look at market lines and even futures odds (lol) for better projections. And of course, as a gambler, their stuff is even worse as you'll get crushed if you try to bet any of it.

Only thing I know about 538 is they did really bad in some election (maybe 2014 midterms) and the guy went crazy on Twitter and was attacking some guy from Princeton consortium non stop
Outside of that I don't know anything about politics except that 2016 election night nytimes was moving heavily to trump and the markets weren't reacting so I just kept betting trump all night

That was on Election Day. Earlier he had him at 5% or less.

Can't have it both ways, can't take credit when you're right and avoid blame when you're wrong by saying, well, I had X% chance!

Yeah, that 5% thing is just not true.

As to your 2nd statement, I don't get it. I guess you are saying there is no point to assigning probabilities? He has to pick a winner and if he is right, he is right? I disagree with that.

I feel exactly the opposite. Their sports projections are fantastic, I could give a crap what they think about politics.

At multiple points 538.com had Trump at 11% chance to win. That means, on that particular day, if you asked Nate Silver, "Hey, Nate, what are the chances Trump wins this one, eh?" he would have said "Oh about 10% and that's being generous *chuckles*"

There is a point to assigning probabilities; he thought Trump had basically no shot and he was dead wrong. He was laughably wrong even at the time.

Women's World Cup thoughts? Took China and Japan me so seerie.

nice I like them too at the prices they're getting

What about the respective offenses?

seems one-sided for that variable

check them home away splits

i can't believe i bet against our best friend Giolito today too. and under in K's.

I'm sorry friend

ATL/CHN under looks good too even with climate change going on and a 12 total and all that wind. And Greinke over Kershaw

final K tally

Sabathia u5.5 ***
Aaron Sanchez o4 ***
Rodriguez u6.5
Keller u4
Giolito u6.5 ****
Lester o5
Teheran o5
Kershaw u5.5
Gray u5.5

Hopefully we will have God on our side. Stars and stripes for the big ones.

Just confusing when to bet against the herd.

no wrt SF, yes wrt to the Wrigley total

i dunno, i don't do qualitative analysis or care too much what the market is doing

i just believe my model. it has provided me with so much, i can't question it. it says there's gonna be a lot of strikeouts

fwiw since 2010 there's been 101 games with a total 12 or above (14 at wrigley). 61 of them went under. I think people over-estimate the Wrigley wind effect and the totals go crazy over. It's usually a narrative you find on message boards and Gambling Twitter. Two people in front of me at the sportsbook bet the over and I know one of them to be one of the worst bettors I've ever seen.

Able to grab u12.5 for a lot and u12 at + odds for a lot. Lets hope they keep it low and lot of K's

Too lazy to check if this is accurate, but it is part of the ACTION NETWORK (though using things like avg runs is bad)

https://www.betlabssports.com/blog/wind-at-wrigley/

angles like that usually get adjusted for. that is why you should focus on your models and not angles.

RIP Wrigley wind over and NBA Playoffs Zig Zag theory