Jump to content
** April Poker League Result : 1st Like2Fish, 2nd McG, 3rd andybell666 **
Download the PL Forum App!
** ELO Ratings are now back **

stefan2008

New Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    31

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by stefan2008

    The most "accurate" bookmaker

    in Betting Systems & Strategy

    Posted

    Re: The most "accurate" bookmaker

    So are you saying that the bookies opening lines are closer to the actual results than the closing lines? Is that what the second number being bigger than the first one means?
    Correct but as I said 380 is not enough. I believe closing line is more accurate in the long run. It's just speculation though as historical opening lines (in suitable format) are impossible to find on the net, at least from my experience.

    The most "accurate" bookmaker

    in Betting Systems & Strategy

    Posted

    Re: The most "accurate" bookmaker No, I don't mean that. No one knows true probabilities because they do not exist, so "true" in this context might be the wrong term. Conversion to no vig (true) odds is done just for the sake of accuracy. They are as true as possible from the bookmaker's point of view when it comes to opening, and as true as possible from the public's point of view from then on. Essentially, every line is accurate at every point in time (from opening to closing), just with different variances. Our sole job is to spot those variances.

    DRAWING CONCLUSIONS

    in Betting Systems & Strategy

    Posted

    Re: DRAWING CONCLUSIONS

    stefan 2008 Your questions show your complete ineptness to understand fundamental Sports betting and like bacadirum, I wish you luck in your suffering.
    Which questions you are referring to? Read again please, it's not all about writing. Me asking you to back complete and utter speculation on your part regarding MLB betting with some stats thus going beyond your biases proves my ineptness to understand fundamental sports betting?! C'mon, you can do better than this, it's too obvious.

    DRAWING CONCLUSIONS

    in Betting Systems & Strategy

    Posted

    Re: DRAWING CONCLUSIONS I liked your previous posts but this one is bs most of time. You're going to extremes and generalize things to prove your points. No serious punter is looking for exactness, every serious punter knows there is no holy grail because market is evolving constantly and adjustments need to be made. If there was not for patterns everything would be pretty much pointless. Having said that, our mind's structure which tends to compulsively look for those patterns in order to "protect" us from unknown things/situations, needs to be taken care of to the extent possible. To imply that all people trying to build a betting model based on some correlation fall into the trap of cognitive biases is a huge over exaggeration.

    The end result of all this can be seen in Baseball ( a game with the randomness of two dice being thrown )
    Any numbers to back this up or we have to give your perception the benefit of the doubt?
    What new punters or even more experienced punters need to remember is betting is very basic and not like some try to convey, similar to Stock Markets and derivative dealings.
    There's no substantial difference between betting and stock market.

    Betting for a living

    in Betting Systems & Strategy

    Posted

    Re: Betting for a living

    Probably not a popular view, but I have to disagree here. Once you got past the metaphors and science bit, Mayfly was basically preaching the standard stuff - discipline and understanding the market. It may sound like a broken record the way everyone else says it, but we all say it because it's true.
    I think you missed the point here. His was not trying to reinvent the wheel but to present the things we're all familiar with in unconventional way, and he's done it brilliantly. Why complicate the simple stuff, the question arises. The answer is rather complex and has to do with the way our mind works. Most of us will hardly bother to read through all of those patienceanddisciplinearekey type of posts even though they're all valid advices. But we find it boring (assuming we are willing to learn and refresh our knowledge of matter) because it doesn't have any conceptualization behind, just plain words that have been repeated thousands and thousands of times over. It's not appealing to our mind which will take a lot time to embrace it, if at all. That is one of the better sides of our psychological structure, however, imagine believing everything you hear or read without questioning it. On the other hand, when you have a concept supporting the resulting idea it has a way bigger potential to become belief, and because all our decisions are based on beliefs, it's absolutely crucial to have ones that correspond to reality. In the process of forming beliefs, keyword for mind is evidence, you need to find an evidence to support your thought in order for it to become belief. I find
    Another genetic blast from the past is your brains ability to convince you your actions are correct, hence the stubbornness found in everyday life. While one can see how this Fail/safe stops inner conflict which may lead to mental instability, it wrecks havoc in a situation on an exchange. There’s no problem when you are right, you trade out at your predetermined figure, congratulate yourself on your shrewdness, get your shot of dopamine and all is good in the World. However, when the trade goes the other way, in comes the millions of years genetic make up. Selling out for a loss before the event has started not only means a loss but worse, proof that you were wrong and because the price is on the drift its almost certain more losses will follow yet you doggedly hold on to the belief you are right. Just when things seem they can’t get worse, rather than take your punishment you chance leaving the liability all on that one selection, yes the one you paradoxically expected to win. And of course the rest is history, but never mind, your brain will do its age old business and you are ready to give it another go in the knowledge that loss was an unfortunate blip never to be repeated. Don’t worry, we’ve all been there but it’s good to know why.
    far more convincing than "controlling your emotion is key to be successful".

    Combining players statistics

    in Betting Systems & Strategy

    Posted

    Re: Combining players statistics

    Again, I would like to stress that my question was not about % serve is in, but on % point is won on serve. This is completely different things and I assume everybody understands this.
    Ok sorry, got it from the start, just found Datapunter's point interesting and somehow related to your question. So your stats gave you the average number for one of the variables but you struggle to figure out how this varible is gonna "behave" in different circumstances (i.e. in particular match). Right? If you would be able to put the players in different categories (based on ranking or w/l ratio on specific surface etc.) you might be on to something I think. In that case you'd get something like: player x has 74% games won on his/her serve against top 10 player etc. Is that what you're looking for ?

    Combining players statistics

    in Betting Systems & Strategy

    Posted

    Re: Combining players statistics

    Regardless of who the opponent is you always give your first serve all you got. Getting it over the net and between the lines is up to you and you alone. So are you making that statement on the basis of statistical evidence ? In other words do you have data that supports a players's first serve % is on average lower against perceived strong opponents than weak opponents. It would be a purely psychological thing, perhaps a little bit tactical, but i just can't see it having any statistical significance.
    I read a number of interviews of players and tennis pundits talking about the serve and return percentages affecting each other. The fact that we cannot quantify those things do not prove that they're not significant for the outcome. You might not be able to gain an edge based on these "invisible" factors but what you can do is to prevent yourself from blindly reading into something which is possible to quantify by not putting it in context.

    Combining players statistics

    in Betting Systems & Strategy

    Posted

    Re: Combining players statistics

    Serve % is an absolute measure, i.e. it does not depend on anything else, the serve either goes in or it doesn't, it totally in the players hands.
    You're wrong here mate. The pressure returner put on opponent's serve and a return's quality is always gonna affect first serve %.

    Odds evolution question

    in Betting Systems & Strategy

    Posted

    Re: Odds evolution question Impossible to tell... Closing odds are normally more accurate, but it all depends on the efficient of the market in question, and I'm affraid tennis market is one of the less efficient ones. One way or another, you cannot conclude anything about the implied probabilities being more or less accurate when it comes to one particular match.

    Australian Open 2009 - bets, predictions, reasoning

    in Other Sports & Novelty Predictions

    Posted

    Re: Australian Open 2009 - bets, predictions, reasoning Federer-Nadal pick:over 41.5 odds:1.96 stake:8/10 bookie:Pinnacle As we all know bookies rarely make mistakes in those occasions.No difference here,odds are set exactly as it should be(except Bwin)and reflects reality.Therefore no value when it comes to winner,at least for me. But i found this over bet as a good one.As long as i analyse this final i dont see less than four sets here which IMO will be enough for this bet to be prized.Facts support my theory..Except last year RG final all 10 previous meetings between this two(in best of five,of course)ended with every player won at least one set.But its not just pure stats. Simply i cant imagine one player to be so dominant tomorrow.Dont want to go further with comparing them(forhand,backhand,serve,movement,consistency,psychological stability,etc.etc.)cause all the facts are well known and i wont say something new,thats for sure.But we could agree in one,they are pretty much even overall,no significant advantage for neither of them. I think that Nadal will be fresh enough for yet another long match,and have to disagree with some opinions about Nadal s tiredness,lack of energy,bla,bla...Just to remind you on Federer s 5 sets thriller,from 0-2 to 3-2,more difficult situation,physically and mentaly wise,compare to Nadal s one. I wouldnt underestimate Nadal s win over Verdasco who isnt worse than Fedex ATM(my opinion).Everybody were talking about fantastic play by Verdasco,but he lost it after all.Nadal was too good.Its something people expect from world no.1,to dominate against every player,people are searching for his weaknesses,not the good sides,thats why he is underestimeted sometimes,specially on hard. To sum up,its more equal than it seems,although some slightly advantage for Fedex.41.5 is not that big margin for such type of match and i am quite confident about this pick.GL

    Australian Open 2009 - bets, predictions, reasoning

    in Other Sports & Novelty Predictions

    Posted

    Re: Australian Open 2009 - bets, predictions, reasoning

    my bet won nadal was very very bad, thats the reason verdasco was looking as good i will analyse later, why federer will trash nadal 3-0 in the final p.s only 25 ue by nadal, the crucial factor for this match against 76 of verdasco:ok
    Please,stop posting here.You know absolutely nothing about tennis and your posts are full of nonsenses,misleading comments,wrong arguments,conclusions,etc.etc. Actually its completely oposite from what you wrote,Nadal wasnt looking so good(of course that he wasnt bad)because of Verdasco and his consistency,great serve,volleys,movement,psychological stability,etc.,etc.It was a great match(best one so far at AO)where couple of points decide the winner. When it comes to final it wont be that easy for Federer,although this marathon match isnt advantage for Nadal,thats for sure.No value in 1.46(bwin) for Fedex,will be much closer than the bookies suggest but on the other hand its to risky to bet on player that spent more than 5 hours in his previous match and plays on least suitable surface for him.Maybe over is an option here,but will see...

    Australian Open 2009 - bets, predictions, reasoning

    in Other Sports & Novelty Predictions

    Posted

    Re: Australian Open 2009 - bets, predictions, reasoning

    murray is not federer
    Yes,and best proof is their H2H(5-2 for Murray).Where was Federer in Murrays ages?Cut the crap man! Verdasco is playing in life form,i am sure he is capable to push Nadal to his limits(on hard) and it wont be sensation(at least for me)if Nando somehow manages to advance. 6.36 for Vedasco has some value and will try it,small stakes though.
×
×
  • Create New...