Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Sports Betting Discussions related to wagering on sporting events.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-22-2009, 06:55 PM   #201
Thremp
banned
 
Thremp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: I lurve bewbs
Posts: 36,452
Re: Teaser bettors: DAL +5

Could you explain the reduction in variance. I'm not seeing it.

ETA: That post you linked doesn't really illuminate anything either. Its really basic.

Last edited by Thremp; 12-22-2009 at 06:57 PM. Reason: ETA
Thremp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 07:29 PM   #202
Rustjive
old hand
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: unparalleled quantum superposition
Posts: 1,311
Re: Teaser bettors: DAL +5

Dreamer, are you trying to say that in the past people bet Wong Teasers because their expectation for -1.5 to -2.5 going forward was > 50% ATS?

Because that's what it sounds like.
Rustjive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 07:30 PM   #203
Thremp
banned
 
Thremp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: I lurve bewbs
Posts: 36,452
Re: Teaser bettors: DAL +5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustjive View Post
Dreamer, are you trying to say that in the past people bet Wong Teasers because their expectation for -1.5 to -2.5 going forward was > 50% ATS?

Because that's what it sounds like.
Some people do this as a first level analysis, but no one I consider intelligent uses this type of analysis as anymore than masturbatory.
Thremp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 07:33 PM   #204
Dreamer
journeyman
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 337
Re: Teaser bettors: DAL +5

[QUOTE=Thremp;15548958]Could you explain the reduction in variance. I'm not seeing it.

ETA: That post you linked doesn't really illuminate anything either. Its really basic.[/QUOTE]

So why is everyone and their uncle in this thread questioning my suggestion that Wong teasers wont be as profitable going forward when most people agree that certain subsets such as short HDs will be closer to 50% going forward?

If you are looking at the same given situation, variance is a function of edge.

If they had a 100% edge how much va****** would you have?

D.
Dreamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 08:08 PM   #205
KUJustin
veteran
 
KUJustin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,346
Re: Teaser bettors: DAL +5

Quote:
Originally Posted by atrainpsu View Post
Because the value in teasers comes from picking up the 22%+ from the extra 6 pts, not because the team wins ATS 52%+ of the time.

Take a side that picks up 22% in a teaser and you can make money on them regardless of how often they win ATS.
But the point is that the 22% is suspect because it's based on lines in the past that he's arguing were potentially inefficient. Your argument for the 22% going forward is based on it being 22% in the past.

No one is suggesting that you don't treat the lines going forward as 50/50.
KUJustin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 08:30 PM   #206
Thremp
banned
 
Thremp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: I lurve bewbs
Posts: 36,452
Re: Teaser bettors: DAL +5

[QUOTE=Dreamer;15549793]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thremp View Post
Could you explain the reduction in variance. I'm not seeing it.

ETA: That post you linked doesn't really illuminate anything either. Its really basic.[/QUOTE]

So why is everyone and their uncle in this thread questioning my suggestion that Wong teasers wont be as profitable going forward when most people agree that certain subsets such as short HDs will be closer to 50% going forward?

If you are looking at the same given situation, variance is a function of edge.

If they had a 100% edge how much va****** would you have?

D.
That isn't strictly what variance means. I'm not math geek, but I did seek clarification on that point. And it appears you're using variance to mean some amount of swongage necessary to reach a certain amount of dollars. Like a Sharpe Ratio or something of that sort. In which case, then I'd agree.

No one is questioning that HDs teased won't be as profitable going forward. If that is what you're trying to prove, you should construct a more sound argument, as the one you've presented is quite dubious (HD covering at 48%) and the examples you use, somewhat asinine (54% SU is superior to a 6 pt teaser garnering 19% more).

Your seems to imply that you think NFL isn't efficient regarding HDs and/or that the teaser "sweet spot" won't fall in greater than a breakeven amount. I could very well be misunderstanding this, but that seems to be the source of a large amount of contention.
Thremp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2009, 04:48 AM   #207
NegativeZero
veteran
 
NegativeZero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Future uncertain; end always near
Posts: 3,358
Re: Teaser bettors: DAL +5

Quote:
Originally Posted by KUJustin View Post
But the point is that the 22% is suspect because it's based on lines in the past that he's arguing were potentially inefficient. Your argument for the 22% going forward is based on it being 22% in the past.

No one is suggesting that you don't treat the lines going forward as 50/50.
This.
NegativeZero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2011, 12:19 AM   #208
PerpetualCzech
adept
 
PerpetualCzech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 863
Re: Teaser bettors: DAL +5

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImStillBen View Post
Based on the market when I posted:

DAL 9+ 0.277602524
DAL 8 0.01306895
DAL 7 0.047769265
DAL 6 0.031545741
DAL 5 0.01306895
DAL 4 0.034700315
DAL 3 0.097341145
DAL 2 0.021631365
DAL 1 0.020730059
DAL 0 0.000901307
NYG 1 0.023433979
NYG 2 0.018026138
NYG 3 0.081117621
NYG 4 0.0261379
NYG 5 0.018026138
NYG 6+ 0.274898603

DAL +5 -257.2131148
NYG +8 -260.2272727

Turns out 2% isn't too bad for 1 & 2. I guess you are a genius!

I think it's funny that your friends try to stifle teaser discussion as though anyone pays attention to your dead forum and then you come here trying to teach a huge mass of people. I guess your friends are thankful you're so bad at this.
All of these decimal expressions can be expressed as fractions with a denominator of 2219, which means you are somehow basing them on some sort of sample of 2219 games (and reporting the results with an accuracy to the billionths lol) This means you have a massive margin of error which you are completely ignoring and accounts for the irregularities I described earlier in the thread.

If you do not respond I will assume you agree and are conceding the argument to me. I will also further assume you are finally agreeing I am a better sportsbettor than you.

Looking forward to your response.
PerpetualCzech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2011, 12:21 AM   #209
anononon
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Teaser bettors: DAL +5

first of all, sick burn

second of all, lmao @ 2219
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2020, 08:50 PM   #210
PerpetualCzech
adept
 
PerpetualCzech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 863
Re: Teaser bettors: DAL +5

[QUOTE=Dreamer;15549793]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thremp View Post
Could you explain the reduction in variance. I'm not seeing it.

ETA: That post you linked doesn't really illuminate anything either. Its really basic.[/QUOTE]

So why is everyone and their uncle in this thread questioning my suggestion that Wong teasers wont be as profitable going forward when most people agree that certain subsets such as short HDs will be closer to 50% going forward?
Seems like enough time has gone by that this can be tested now.
PerpetualCzech is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online