Hooligans Sportsbook

Heads or Tails: Science of the Math

  • Start date •
  • Replies
    20 Replies •
  • Views 1,304 Views
Follow
wal66

wal66

New Member
Since
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
11,716
Score
2
Tokens
0
Ok so maybe it's not the science of the math but I like tabloid catchy type titles.

I looked online and so far my searches only lead me to books to buy. I have nothing against a purchase but I hate waiting. Does anyone know of a site where you can ask and get a relatively immediate answer?

I'm assuming that if I flip a coin 100 times the odds are pretty good it won't land on heads 50 times and tails 50 times but over the course of time it will average out to 50%

What if though I was flipping multiple coins and was only focused on the collective groups of coins being more heads or more tails not specifically heads or tails?
 
Good read Matty.

Naturally I have an agenda here. The coins are a mere metaphor for the various approaches we have to analytical wagering. Some chase steam, some watch games, some analyze data, others have a keen sense of homefield/court/ice edge and still others really understand match-ups, injury reports and more importantly how those effect certain teams in certain games.

Now I'm gonna do what I typically do and generalize but at least give it a once over.

Durito = chasing steam
MonkeyFocker = modeling
FairWarning = eye test
Cougar/RayRay = match-ups

More generalization here...........

Durito probably does the best over the course of time because he spreads more around and steam chasing might be a more efficient method. Naturally he doesn't win every contest but he does alright.

MonkeyFocker probably does right on par with Durito because like steam, modeling shouldn't show any bias in its practice and also like Durito he spreads enough around in an attempt to get an edge on variance.

FairWarning will do alright but obviously he is more selective and his options are seriously reduced because he is relying on teams he has seen.

Cougar and RayRay will do ok but probably have the greatest amount of hot and cold streaks due to the unknowns of a player's replacement stepping up and being a big difference or huge disappointment plus other variables in momentum and such.

The point:

Now all the above approaches work, some better than others but essentially they all work. Regardless of which works best or who is on a roll individually, collectively they would increase their chances of profit.

There would be opportunities when the steam agreed with the model which agreed with the matchup which agreed with the momentum and in those instances the group would be like the spinning coin which lands on tail 80% of the time, relatively speaking.
 
No one is winning anything with some of those methods.

I do a lot more than steam chase, but if you are talking about betting into large full game markets at WA #'s then no I don't do that.

I'd wager my whole that MF makes more than me.
 
Durito, I was trying to simplify things, that's why I said I was generalizing. I wasn't trying to pigeon whole anyone in particular. I am just as sure FairWarning and RayRay and Coug's implement other utilities as well. I was just being generic to express a theory.
 
wal66
Good read Matty.

Naturally I have an agenda here. The coins are a mere metaphor for the various approaches we have to analytical wagering. Some chase steam, some watch games, some analyze data, others have a keen sense of homefield/court/ice edge and still others really understand match-ups, injury reports and more importantly how those effect certain teams in certain games.

Now I'm gonna do what I typically do and generalize but at least give it a once over.

Durito = chasing steam
MonkeyFocker = modeling
FairWarning = eye test
Cougar/RayRay = match-ups

More generalization here...........

Durito probably does the best over the course of time because he spreads more around and steam chasing might be a more efficient method. Naturally he doesn't win every contest but he does alright.

MonkeyFocker probably does right on par with Durito because like steam, modeling shouldn't show any bias in its practice and also like Durito he spreads enough around in an attempt to get an edge on variance.

FairWarning will do alright but obviously he is more selective and his options are seriously reduced because he is relying on teams he has seen.

Cougar and RayRay will do ok but probably have the greatest amount of hot and cold streaks due to the unknowns of a player's replacement stepping up and being a big difference or huge disappointment plus other variables in momentum and such.

The point:

Now all the above approaches work, some better than others but essentially they all work. Regardless of which works best or who is on a roll individually, collectively they would increase their chances of profit.

There would be opportunities when the steam agreed with the model which agreed with the matchup which agreed with the momentum and in those instances the group would be like the spinning coin which lands on tail 80% of the time, relatively speaking.
Click to expand...

I'd be careful with how you say and define this portion. Yes the all work in the sense that you have games to bet on and see results from. Saying they all WILL increase their chance for profits I disagree.

BOL Wally
 
true ff... i would be a much wealthier man if i kept my eyes off of big tv games/large conf. games with more volume and more efficient market... of course we all want to beat closers, but i dont worry about it near as much with the normal games i bet...betting smaller schools in smaller conferences with less action on them means i really like my chances more than when i do something fucking stupid like bet uconn at tennessee when every number on the board has told me its a shitty play...

then again, i would imagine someone like mf or durito, that gamble for a living, bet 10x more games than i even look at...who knows...i definitely have an advantage knowing small schools and their players and their personal matchups...those guys may not even look at shit like that, but im proof that knowledge of this is key when betting into much smaller markets...
 
You make it sound like there are so many good methods and everybody's winning. I'm sure you understand that 99% of bettors are losers and they all have methods. Look at the best bet thread. The cumulative bets are always in the red. Even though you have some highly rated players giving their absolute top bets of the day.

Every gambler should aspire to develop winning methods, but lets just be realistic about it.
 
Reno, that's not exactly what I was saying.

Say these guys got together before the games started and compared data. Say for instance that the entire group had a varied collection of games but there were a couple of games that showed up in more than one card and while we are at it let's say 2 games were on everyone's card.

What I am saying is that those 2 games that was on everyone's card would have a consensus edge over all the other games. So as far as coinflips go it would be like flipping a coin that was weighted on one side. It might very well land opposite sometimes but it will most likely land to the weighted side more often.
 
wal66
it would be like flipping a coin that was weighted on one side. It might very well land opposite sometimes but it will most likely land to the weighted side more often.
Click to expand...

And 99% will still lose cause they'll consistenly play -7 -110 at ButtFuckOnline.com instead of -6.5 -105 at ReduicedButtFuck.com

:bashing:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.