What about reversing someone's reads and being 100% right?

Give me someone who is right at sports betting 57% of the time with an unexplained model and I will ride coattails all day. Give me someone who is right 53% of the time and has a very clear and explainable model and I will take absolutely no part in their wagers. Being correct is a trump card. It is always more valuable to get it right than to elaborate on why it is right while sacrificing anything at all on the margin.

Then you have the GOAT player because fading wrong picks in a y/n, heads/tails etc scenario is as perfect of a strategy as backing someone who is always correct.

i would say in this particular example that both of these theoretical players are right for the right reasons

Why?

CDL showing why he is a terrible villager with this series of posts here

Sample size for ww not big enough to have confidence that anyone's not just running way over expectation on their right/wrong though. So have to look to further explanation.

Kaze and insanity showing that they'd rather back a LOSER that they can understand than a PROVEN WINNER who operates on a level above others.

obv a terrible analogy to WW

the player who can explain their reasoning and convince others to follow is obv more valuable in WW than the guy who is right 4% more but is just pumping out names and affiliations

the second guy has better post-game barg equity doe

Sure it is. Also no need to explain further since none of the reasons are actual fact. They are simply opinions formed on the basis of incomplete information for reasons that resonate with people based on personal experiences which are biased by the lens in which they are viewed.

dkjoe taking himself in the 2nd round *yawn*

Why? If you have the two players any smart player doesn't need to be convinced. Just because others don't play optimally doesn't mean the person who is right more is at fault. The onus of others seeing the light is on them to follow along and understand.

Hey cdl, are you familiar with the scam where you send out opposite picks to a large number of people, then do it again for the ones who got the right puck the first time, then again for a few more iterations, leaving you with a small handful of people who have only seen you make correct picks?

Transparency is kind of important in general. I'm sure you can see the myriad scenarios where only having a belief about the veracity of the position can bite you in the ass.

Oooohhh, the first self-pick. I am surprised one of these actually happened.

obviously. i think we're arguing two different things here. (and you're probably doing it on purpose)

Ok, so shortline spews out a lynch list day 1, nothing else... do you listen to him?

You have no idea if he's a wolf or a villager... I mean I shorty, but I want to know what I'm following. Also, if he explains it and it makes sense to me... bonus, I can figure out his role, and decide if I want to blindly follow his reads... which aren't always right, given the Elliot lynch in the reunion game in particular.

No I am not. That's not the same bc there is transparency bc all reads and such are posted in every thread for everyone to see. Past games and stats are also researchable.

No I wouldn't. However, if I turned my account over to my mom for a game and only could give her pregame advice then I may tell her to do something like that. If you suck at ww you should always sponge other players/consensus. If you are good you should basically always take a lead role in forming the consensus and driving the thread. It is each players responsibility to recognize their niche.

Some villagers need to be right early to get nkd. Others need to be right late bc they'll be alive. Some wolves need to clear themselves so they can win. Some wolves should just get a few mislynches and "spew" a few players in some manner then get killed.

The latter is especially important and a key to wolfing that so few understand. Most wolves can be more valuable by making the game more winnable for a couple of teammates than winning it on their own. You don't need to survive to play the most important role. Hell, you can look at the slow game that just ended where I got lynched at f5 but soah still got mislynched at f3 bc I had "spewed" him wolf so hard that bhuber overlooked his villagery play and the screwups from mucks.

You went away from ww examples in your arguments and specifically went to sports betting.

To this point (the reads in threads one) I refer you to the huge volume of work done on cognitive bias, etc. to say that perception and ground truth diverge greatly, as well as accurately interpreting data. Again transparency and reasoning helps mitigate these shortcomings.

Another way to get at my point:
How accurate was traz in his reads over all his games. Also, what are you defining as a read? Any opinion? Final read before a person was revealed? You keep throwing specific numbers around, but the margin of error for what ones perception of these numbers is and what they actually are is quite large.

Is me calling you a wolf enough reason for you to be lynched? Even if I don't have a case per se?

Hay man! It's a hard life sometimes.

Hard to get crap straight when you were lock cleared for an old mish-mash for 5 days straight until soah's perceived "convenient" flip-flop on you at f5 when perdition finally flipped villager...despite repeated attempts to well named and soah to discern whether or not they were hard clearing someone incorrectly.



I still love them both though

The one person I would sponge you on, no questions asked...regardless of whether or not you were wolf or villa.

No shame in being wrong, there.

I completely agree with your assessment of the roles we need to play, but what does that have to do with being right for the right reasons and being able to articulate why you are right to the thread?

Using your mom example... change it from mom to random noob... who gets no pre-game advice... And yeah I don't generally blindly follow anyone, but if it's day 1 and I haven't had time to read (lol at the posting insanity in mish mashes now) I usually try to look at the people whose reads I trust, figure out if I think they are a villager, and sponge them... I doubt I'm the only person that does that.

Not unless people have first determined whether or not they think you are a villager

Actually, I disagree with what I just wrote...

I'd say if you call me a wolf, I should probably be lynched. but that's not true necessarily of every read you make.