LOL ok bro.



More first-post ******s, exactly what this forum has been lacking.

I mean all he did was ask a question, it's not like he actually accused you, plus you did get an 'odds boost' to be fair

Completely unsure on why there is such aggression. I was simply pointing out that the Nationals 2020 World Series odds are being listed as +800.

Congrats on getting them at +800 yesterday. I think myself and the two others who questioned it (why didn't you call them out as well?) were just surprised to see the line so high because I had not seen it anywhere that high.

Yeah, me and over 28 million other people had access to it if they bothered to look at the app, don't act like it was a one-off just given to me ffs.

poogs, I'm ashamed of you. The new forum idiots are just that, you should know way better by now.

Nice win

The old timers know that you're just a poseur but the new guys might not so maybe just list the book the next time you quote odds that are 5% off market?

Sorry I hurt you even though we’ve never met or corresponded. Go in peace with Christ.

I dont think theyre idiots for questioning that bet. Quite the opposite actually.

And I dont care about how you feel at all, about anything, and I dont think anyone around here does either anymore really. I think youre bit of a thin-skinned weirdo phony tbh, and your condescension is unearned

Pinnacle NFL player prop limits down to $250 tonight from $500 earlier in the season including this past Monday. Looks like you did it again, Sigs.

Edit: -120/-120 now too. RIP.

Funny how Sigs' recent disappearance itt over the last few days coincided with the start of conflict among others

5Dimes now -120/-120 as well for NFL, -115/-115 atm for NBA ****

sigs real goal was to just get all the old timers back

nfl
https://pastebin.com/Yug5KGsF

nba
https://pastebin.com/QZhzgqwN

lot of nfl unders tonight
kirk u5 -112
samuel u2.5 +100
kittle u6 +103
murray pass complete u21.5 +100
murray attempts u33.5 +120
garoppolo o30.5 attempts +131
murrey td passes u1.5 -180

sorry i was moving

now i live 0.2 miles from the strip instead of 0.1

needed to move further away to absorb week 8 losses. but now i can actually park my own car and save 20 minutes a day in traffic, so technically we did it.

got sanders 1st 49ers td +800
mostert no td -330
sanders yes td +250
kittle no td +100
coleman no td +140

lets lose this money

Got Kittle U6 +120 and Murray completions U21.5 -110 thanks Rsigley

nice 58.49% ROI for TNF even with that random 88 yard TD pass

and won some TD bets

are we back?

if your model told you a full game was going to cover at 75% and you could get that line at -110, you'd think you overlooked some major info, or your model is broken.

but it happens fairly often in props. what then? are you adjusting your edge down, taking into account the fact that the existence of this line being available at multiple books means something? or are you disregarding their opinion and trusting your model entirely? when it says you have a 70% edge on a prop, do you believe that?

I think it comes down to your model values and projected playing time. Projecting playing time involves a lot of manual adjusting, so that is a huge source of error in any model.

Personally, I have five models that I calculate, but for my betting I only use the one the focuses on minimizing variance and uses median player projections. The other models help me sometimes in understanding why my projected line (for game bets or props) may be off by a lot and then it comes down to a judgment call.

Maybe an example, the Mostert no TD had a big edge last night at ~20% which seems crazy. For rushing TD's my model values not only red zone touches, but red zone touches within the 10 and within the 5. And he gets decent touches there, but then the playing time variable comes in. Last week 0 touches, the week before 7 but they were almost all when they were up by 40 in the 4th. Add in that Cardinals have only allowed 3 red zone rushing TDs all year, and it makes sense why I had a huge edge vs. market. I checked my other models to see if they had similar projections for him and they did, so I felt fine betting that.

Same thing with Murray pass attempts. That one really confused me from a qualitative perspective. Cardinals play fast and so do the 49ers. I had both projected for ~60 snaps in the game. Even though I bet the Cardinals +10 they're probably playing from behind most of the game which means more passing, my model(s) still only predicted ~30 pass attempts for him with ~19 completions. So where are the other 30 snaps coming from? I had him projected for ~6.5 rushes and ~3.2 sacks, so say thats 9. I had Alfred Morris predicted for 4 rushes, Zenner 5. Still missing snaps and thats where the whole Kenyan Drake thing comes in. Really hard to predict his rushes. I had him predicted for the remaining ~12 or so but that could have gone bad since I manually did that due to really having no data about how Arizona plans to use him. The 12 was based on reading articles quoting coach, etc.

Why would these bad line exist and why wouldn't bookmakers consider that? No idea. I don't know if a casual player is focusing on a prop involving a third string RB who played for 5 teams in a couple years. Maybe they set it by assuming he would get more touches since they would have a big lead? They might have just used his red zone usage and average snap count over a period? I don't think his role played in much to the spread and total, so them misprojecting him wouldn't really have a big effect.

There are a couple times a week where I reject my models predictions because they disagree. I never kept stats on how much I lost/won by doing this, but for the most part I trust my models. On prop related things over my life I made in the range of 127k prop bets with an overall positive ROI so why wouldn't I put faith in the thing that provides for me and my family. It also calculates all the stats which I use for full game, half time, etc. bets which is also over 100k bets made easily and those also are profitable. So just trust the system.

you have no idea how reassuring it is to read others make manual adjustments, i do that non-stop and always kind of felt like it was a symptom of incompetence that I couldn't just get an algo to sort that out on my own

main thing i've learned is no matter how hard I try, it's difficult to get a better update to sudden news without adjusting manually and that my model is always behind on the times of dramatic changes in coaching strategy or player skill so it can suffer in the short term unless I study up on my own and say "hey this guy didn't have a slider before but now he does so maybe he just needed an extra pitch"

I think if you just have a methodology that is consistent for doing it, then it's fine. It tends to come up more in NBA for me since a lot of coaches want to rest players and flat out say player X is only playing 20 minutes even if they're averaging 30/game. No way for a quant model to predict that effectively. As long as it's not just I want this to be true type manual changing, I don't see anything wrong with it.

Then you get to decide if the coach saying that literally means 20 minutes or they'll just play whatever. I have a spreadsheet of coaches for every sport and rankings on how well i believe them based on past data.

In the NFL the Patriots are the hardest to predict because they are inconsistent in their usage and Belichick just lies all the time

all of that makes sense, but i'm really particularly interested in the moments when your props model is predicting a massive edge. the question isn't "do you have an edge?" but rather "do your results suggest that your edge on those props is as large as your model is predicting?"

i think one of them was supposed to go under 75% of the time, and it was available at even odds. in a hypothetical where someone offers you unlimited action and you know you'll get paid, would you try to get down your kelly stake on that prop? and would you use your model's prediction or manually adjust it down a bit, to take into account that the market has such a huge disagreement with you?

a couple years ago i set a limit of 5 max bets for any bet and i usually follow that. it limits losses in scenarios where i'm wildly off. some times i do 6 or 7 on props because i'm careless on keeping records until after games start (e.g., bet it 5x and then 2 minutes before game starts see a lot of value in an over or something and just bet without thinking because there's only 2 minutes)

i stopped using kelly a long time ago just because i'm maxing everything on every type of bet so the amount kelly tells me to bet is impossible a majority of the time. and in FG/1H/2H markets usually 1 or 2 max bets pushes them out of the profitable range anyway since the lines are pretty efficient.

when i had more outs and smaller bankroll i would consider things like estimated variance in determining how much to bet and calculating edge. so two people with projected rebounds of 5.6 are unlikely to have the same distribution (Which is why I feel poisson is inappropriate to use but it is a good approximate).

the %'s i post are based on generating a large number of outcomes, creating a CDF for a player, and then probability based on the CDF

"Why would these bad line exist and why wouldn't bookmakers consider that? No idea"

Me either! But posting your props publicly for free for all these mouth breathers (myself included) just might make them think twice