How do you analyze to determine if a player is a long term winner

[danshan]

I hear it everyday, this guy is a winner, he is the best capper.  My friends say Frank is awesome he won like 10 straight.

 

John is up 20 units on baseball

 

this guy has a winning record of 700-300

 

this guy crushes the line but has a record of 500-500

 

what is what?

 

how do you gauge a winner?

[Always Call Heads]

You know the answer to this one: CLV.

 

The better question is why you believe that anyone thinks differently.

[MadTiger]

"Wack MCs only lasted one season."--Robert "RZA" Diggs, "Bells of War"

 

In anything, people have to have enough of a verified track record to really claim anything above luck.

[danshan]

yeah the simple answer is CLV but I think lots of experienced bettors believe in line bias.  

 

I think its easy to say CLV but if a guy had a record of 720-280 a good chunk of bettors would take him serious, dont you agree?

[evade]

Why do you want a gauge a winner/loser, anyway? Do you want buy his picks? If yes, you are wasting your money. 

[Always Call Heads]

yeah the simple answer is CLV but I think lots of experienced bettors believe in line bias.  

 

I think its easy to say CLV but if a guy had a record of 720-280 a good chunk of bettors would take him serious, dont you agree?

Here is your problem and I have explained it to you before. 

 

You have a WNBA model. If you start the year 17-3 and are not getting CLV, you say you would chunk the model. I said you do not chunk the model because the market is wrong and will catch up to you.

 

You have a belief in market infalliability  All markets are inefficient.

 

So when people tell you they do not pay attention to CLV as much as they pay attention to their record of 1,000s of bets, you presume they do not value CLV. That is not the case. They do not believe that CLV is necessarily an absolute predictor of future returns. But you will obviously have CLV if you are a winner over the long term.

[danshan]

u r not always wasting your money buying picks.  there are some real guys who sell legit picks out there, they are far and few between but they are not unicorns they do exist.

 

I do not personally buy picks

 

I think the most important reason someone who bets more than recreational or aspires to be more than recreational needs to know this info about themselves.

 

a guy goes on a heater wins 65% of 500 bets and he thinks he knows it all and sells his boat and becomes a pro and 3 months later he is at bankruptcy court!

[danshan]

Here is your problem and I have explained it to you before. 

 

You have a WNBA model. If you start the year 17-3 and are not getting CLV, you say you would chunk the model. I said you do not chunk the model because the market is wrong and will catch up to you.

 

You have a belief in market infalliability  All markets are inefficient.

 

So when people tell you they do not pay attention to CLV as much as they pay attention to their record of 1,000s of bets, you presume they do not value CLV. That is not the case. They do not believe that CLV is necessarily an absolute predictor of future returns. But you will obviously have CLV if you are a winner over the long term.

 

 

i think years and years ago the market was OVERALL efficient and not efficient on every game but I think in todays market nearly every single game is efficient. remember the indicator of whether a line is efficient is the votes by bettors.  and you can see there is very little movement in most major market games where something did not significantly change.

[MonkeyF0cker]

If the plays are ATS, RMSE of wagers vs. RMSE of the closing line is a good start.

[Always Call Heads]

i think years and years ago the market was OVERALL efficient and not efficient on every game but I think in todays market nearly every single game is efficient. remember the indicator of whether a line is efficient is the votes by bettors.  and you can see there is very little movement in most major market games where something did not significantly change.

Yes, the market gets more and more efficient all the time. But it will never be so efficient that someone cannot win. They may not be able to win at a professional level betting hundreds or thousands of games per year but there will always be lines that are completely wrong.

[Always Call Heads]

yeah the simple answer is CLV but I think lots of experienced bettors believe in line bias.  

 

I think its easy to say CLV but if a guy had a record of 720-280 a good chunk of bettors would take him serious, dont you agree?

If a person had that record, the chances that he is not sharp are basically zero no matter what his CLV is.

[danshan]

I think that is where it gets all cloudy and blurry is the kinda might if stuff.

 

for me I dont want to be stuck in the hole of even if I am winning it is luck because of line value but at the same time dont want to be just losing and losing and beating the line!

[Always Call Heads]

I think that is where it gets all cloudy and blurry is the kinda might if stuff.

 

for me I dont want to be stuck in the hole of even if I am winning it is luck because of line value but at the same time dont want to be just losing and losing and beating the line!

 

Yes, that is why gambling is tricky. Nothing works forever if you are using models. You have to get better and better. But if you can handicap, you cannot lose your edge. You can have opportunities taken away from you but there will always be lines to bet and win.

 

Anyhow, the things for you to get down is that everyone agrees that CLV is an indicator of future returns. It is not an absolute indicator and the further down the level of efficiency you go, the less you would need to pay attention. But if you are winning, you will always most likely have CLV.

[IAG]

Why do you want a gauge a winner/loser, anyway? Do you want buy his picks? If yes, you are wasting your money.

 

 

I was wondering the same thing.

[Always Call Heads]

I was wondering the same thing.

danshan is a financial guy. He is interested in high level gambling discussions and believes in market efficiency because of his financial background.

[danshan]

Yes, that is why gambling is tricky. Nothing works forever if you are using models. You have to get better and better. But if you can handicap, you cannot lose your edge. You can have opportunities taken away from you but there will always be lines to bet and win.

 

Anyhow, the things for you to get down is that everyone agrees that CLV is an indicator of future returns. It is not an absolute indicator and the further down the level of efficiency you go, the less you would need to pay attention. But if you are winning, you will always most likely have CLV.

 

 

isnt handicapping and modeling the same thing

 

I say the line on the Cowboys should be -7 and its -5 so I bet it

you handicap and say Cowboys should be more than -5 and bet it

 

what is the difference?

[Always Call Heads]

isnt handicapping and modeling the same thing

 

I say the line on the Cowboys should be -7 and its -5 so I bet it

you handicap and say Cowboys should be more than -5 and bet it

 

what is the difference?

Not really. This goes back to the Nebraska-Akron game I discussed at BT. The end point is arrived at by different means. Using statistics is on average probably going to be the most accurate. However, using team information and knowledge acquired through a lifetime of following sports also has value and is sometimes more accurate than the stats.

[danshan]

yeah I understand but

if the cowboys were -7 I would not bet them cause I have -7

and if the cowboys were -7 you would not bet them cause 7 is too much ( assuming of course) but at some point the number is too much for cappers as well!

[Always Call Heads]

yeah I understand but

if the cowboys were -7 I would not bet them cause I have -7

and if the cowboys were -7 you would not bet them cause 7 is too much ( assuming of course) but at some point the number is too much for cappers as well!

Yes, the question is whether or not -7 is the right number or not and how you arrive there. Your idea is that -7 is always the right number. It isn't. And in some weeks, it is wrong even if it is the right number and there are some people that have a knack for sniffing that out.

[MonkeyF0cker]

Yes, the question is whether or not -7 is the right number or not and how you arrive there. Your idea is that -7 is always the right number. It isn't. And in some weeks, it is wrong even if it is the right number and there are some people that have a knack for sniffing that out.

How do you know it's the wrong number?

[danshan]

the thing is to me the best closest most accurate right number is the closing number, we have not found any other method to determine a better number.

 

so if it closes -5 and I have -7 I am wrong win lose or draw

[Always Call Heads]

How do you know it's the wrong number?

Intuition. One way that the number is often wrong due to modeling is that models have a hard time catching up to teams that improve after the start of the year. As a gambler, you may be able to catch something the models cannot catch. But because the models will keep the number where it is supposed to be in theory, there is an opportunity to win. Some people can have a feel for when a team will be flat. Those types of things can give someone an advantage over the pure numbers.

[Always Call Heads]

the thing is to me the best closest most accurate right number is the closing number, we have not found any other method to determine a better number.

 

so if it closes -5 and I have -7 I am wrong win lose or draw

No, the line often moves heavily in one direction and is completely wrong. On average yes. In the specific, no.

[danshan]

Intuition. One way that the number is often wrong due to modeling is that models have a hard time catching up to teams that improve after the start of the year. As a gambler, you may be able to catch something the models cannot catch. But because the models will keep the number where it is supposed to be in theory, there is an opportunity to win. Some people can have a feel for when a team will be flat. Those types of things can give someone an advantage over the pure numbers.

 

 

if this is true than how can the line overall be efficient?

[MonkeyF0cker]

Intuition. One way that the number is often wrong due to modeling is that models have a hard time catching up to teams that improve after the start of the year. As a gambler, you may be able to catch something the models cannot catch. But because the models will keep the number where it is supposed to be in theory, there is an opportunity to win. Some people can have a feel for when a team will be flat. Those types of things can give someone an advantage over the pure numbers.

So your entire argument here is that a crystal ball is better than a profitable model.

 

Thanks for the clarification.