Gambling publications are a waste now

[edawg]

Always get Steele and Lawrence magazines gives you something to read on the crapper.

 

[BobbyFK]

on the phone now, ill let you know when phone line clears up for the fax to be received in.

I'll be standing at attention

 

[KVB]

I have a very real and legitimate concern that after decades in this business, even with machine learning that I've employed for a long time, that my office is going to have trouble competing with AI going forward. Unless I do more to employ it.

That said, the only thing that makes me feel better is that the pool of unsophistcated bettors is big, increasing, and sustainable and that means we can still gain edges, regardless of the sharpness of the market overall, exploiting the two principals that have been there from the beginning:

The public has a tenedency to bet Favorites and OVERs. I am confident that these two facts won't change much and will always serve to pull the markets a little out of whack.

The issue becomes just how often that occurs enough to pull the trigger. The first sign of edge loss isn't in the losing of bets or decreasing of bankroll, it's in the decreasing opportunities to find value.

If the market is catching up to your edge, you don't (you might, but it's you could also still be winning) see it in the immediate bottom line, you see it in the making of less bets. I think I mentioned this in a video, talking about a Totals Fund I had that killed it one year, but had like 1/3 of the number of bets triggered the next year. A true sign the market was catching up.

That Fund also lost horribly that year, but the lack of triggered bets is far more of a concern than a variance determined losing streak.

I hope that made sense. Not even sure who all this applies to, but it's something I'm dealing with in my office as AI runs amok.

 

[samsncharge99]

I'll be standing at attention

is that a dikk joke

 

[Tanko]

I have a very real and legitimate concern that after decades in this business, even with machine learning that I've employed for a long time, that my office is going to have trouble competing with AI going forward. Unless I do more to employ it.

That said, the only thing that makes me feel better is that the pool of unsophistcated bettors is big, increasing, and sustainable and that means we can still gain edges, regardless of the sharpness of the market overall, exploiting the two principals that have been there from the beginning:

The public has a tenedency to bet Favorites and OVERs. I am confident that these two facts won't change much and will always serve to pull the markets a little out of whack.

The issue becomes just how often that occurs enough to pull the trigger. The first sign of edge loss isn't in the losing of bets or decreasing of bankroll, it's in the decreasing opportunities to find value.

If the market is catching up to your edge, you don't (you might, but it's you could also still be winning) see it in the immediate bottom line, you see it in the making of less bets. I think I mentioned this in a video, talking about a Totals Fund I had that killed it one year, but had like 1/3 of the number of bets triggered the next year. A true sign the market was catching up.

That Fund also lost horribly that year, but the lack of triggered bets is far more of a concern than a variance determined losing streak.

I hope that made sense. Not even sure who all this applies to, but it's something I'm dealing with in my office as AI runs amok.

Great post KVB...
Would you also agree the books are working the process as well as the Vig seems to be growing more and more? Sure they are baiting bettors at times to sway the wagers but, in general, it seems the Vig is getting pressed up across the industry.

 

[KVB]

Here's what I mean with that post above.

All of these charts represent tracked plays at SBR, where there are summaries with links to the individual plays that I can produce now, even. So all of these plays and tracking was public real time.

Look at these two years of NCAAF Totals. When it comes to the closing line, my tracked comparison was crude, down to a half point, instead of exact as that means I would reveal the push rates and values of numbers in the market...something I chose no to do then.

Look at 2018-2019...

Here are the Units that year, finishing up +7.58 units over 137 plays. The overall record was 74-62-1. Here's how that looked...

While my closing line comparison was crude (not accounting for key numbers), even the crude comparison was over .5 points ahead of the market on average. The record against the close that year was 80-31-26. It beat the closer by .58 points, it was more than half a point better against the close and even finished bringing the overall average up, you can see the trend over the last 30 plays or so, a strong sign for sure in a mature market...

This Fund had won several years in a row, but look what happened with that same Fund, that same strategy in fact, the next year, the 2019-2020 year.

The Fund finished -11.17 Units but there were only 50 triggered plays, a far cry from 137 plays the season before...

Even worse, that next season the Fund beat the closer in the crude comparison, but by a dimsal .12 points, a far cry from over a half point the season before...

So you can see, when we talk about info or methods becoming obsolete, useless, or the market catching up, there are ways we can see it happen real time.

To further drive home the point, look at those charts when we put both of those publicly tracked seasons together. You can see a clear issue with the number of triggers, the declining closing performance, and then of course the last straw, the loss of Units...

So sure, over the two seasons I was still beating the closing line by near half a point, but the declining number of plays is a more significant sign, even more important than the massive unit loss...

I post this because it is somewhat relevant, if you are deciding methods and information are becoming obsolete.

Hopefully one can pick up what I'm putting down.

 

[KVB]

Great post KVB...
Would you also agree the books are working the process as well as the Vig seems to be growing more and more? Sure they are baiting bettors at times to sway the wagers but, in general, it seems the Vig is getting pressed up across the industry.

Good point, and one to watch. That said, let the vig get pressed up in those books, let the public eat it up.

It doesn't matter. It's about getting the number you want.

Every better should have no problem placing a bet at a high vig book as long as the numbers is what they want. That usually means a dog is being bet, if anything as the favorite is usually what's getting juiced there, at those books.

Remember in the Knowing Your Markets video, a book can stop and start action with a number move to increase volume. Sometimes a move to increase volume simply brings in +EV bettors, offsetting the benefit of the bigger handle and those books might already be kickin those types of bettors out.

Regardless of the vig, those sharper books, that don't mind some of the +EV action, will do all they can to increase that handle. So they won't price out the market on vig alone.

Books across the country aren't too worried about pricing out that market because if Joe Schmoe likes his Yankees to win today, he probably doesn't care what he's paying.

If that book just juices the Yankees on the favorite, they can still get one sided, and raise the price to possibly limit the sales of that side. But the smart, sharper book, won't just raise the favorite to limit sales there, they will raise the dog and balance that action out, for an overall increased handle.

That raised dog represents the market being out of whack and opportunity.

It doesn't always have to the fave that's juiced and the dog is waiting to get pounced, it can be either way but using the example of the favorite getting hit is probably more common.

 

[JDS]

Good point, and one to watch. That said, let the vig get pressed up in those books, let the public eat it up.

It doesn't matter. It's about getting the number you want.

Every better should have no problem placing a bet at a high vig book as long as the numbers is what they want. That usually means a dog is being bet, if anything as the favorite is usually what's getting juiced there, at those books.

Remember in the Knowing Your Markets video, a book can stop and start action with a number move to increase volume. Sometimes a move to increase volume simply brings in +EV bettors, offsetting the benefit of the bigger handle and those books might already be kickin those types of bettors out.

Regardless of the vig, those sharper books, that don't mind some of the +EV action, will do all they can to increase that handle. So they won't price out the market on vig alone.

Books across the country aren't too worried about pricing out that market because if Joe Schmoe likes his Yankees to win today, he probably doesn't care what he's paying.

If that book just juices the Yankees on the favorite, they can still get one sided, and raise the price to possibly limit the sales of that side. But the smart, sharper book, won't just raise the favorite to limit sales there, they will raise the dog and balance that action out, for an overall increased handle.

That raised dog represents the market being out of whack and opportunity.

It doesn't always have to the fave that's juiced and the dog is waiting to get pounced, it can be either way but using the example of the favorite getting hit is probably more common.

Quote of the day, or should I say lesson of the day. Thanks for sharing KVB I’m glad you are back over here again.

 

[KVB]

Quote of the day, or should I say lesson of the day. Thanks for sharing KVB I’m glad you are back over here again.

Right on Jerky, feels good to get back into the groove.

I'm just back, not "back over here" as I was at no Forum, not even lurking these last couple of months. Wasn't posting much at SBR anyway since coming here earlier this year. I don't even know if my last posts were deleted. I was defending JJ Gold and chastising the toxic moderation, I don't even know if they responded or deleted posts. The mods tend to take it personally and react that way, instead of actually listening to what's being asked and said.

They tend to create and desire drama that I simply am not interested in, that's for sure.

What I do know is that I had many questions and instead of them being answered, they just kept deleting them. Never saw a ban or even a legitimate threat of a ban, just saw my posts disappearing.

LMAO, so I gave up.

 

[Tanko]

Here's what I mean with that post above.

All of these charts represent tracked plays at SBR, where there are summaries with links to the individual plays that I can produce now, even. So all of these plays and tracking was public real time.

Look at these two years of NCAAF Totals. When it comes to the closing line, my tracked comparison was crude, down to a half point, instead of exact as that means I would reveal the push rates and values of numbers in the market...something I chose no to do then.

Look at 2018-2019...

Here are the Units that year, finishing up +7.58 units over 137 plays. The overall record was 74-62-1. Here's how that looked...

While my closing line comparison was crude (not accounting for key numbers), even the crude comparison was over .5 points ahead of the market on average. The record against the close that year was 80-31-26. It beat the closer by .58 points, it was more than half a point better against the close and even finished bringing the overall average up, you can see the trend over the last 30 plays or so, a strong sign for sure in a mature market...

This Fund had won several years in a row, but look what happened with that same Fund, that same strategy in fact, the next year, the 2019-2020 year.

The Fund finished -11.17 Units but there were only 50 triggered plays, a far cry from 137 plays the season before...

Even worse, that next season the Fund beat the closer in the crude comparison, but by a dimsal .12 points, a far cry from over a half point the season before...

So you can see, when we talk about info or methods becoming obsolete, useless, or the market catching up, there are ways we can see it happen real time.

To further drive home the point, look at those charts when we put both of those publicly tracked seasons together. You can see a clear issue with the number of triggers, the declining closing performance, and then of course the last straw, the loss of Units...

So sure, over the two seasons I was still beating the closing line by near half a point, but the declining number of plays is a more significant sign, even more important than the massive unit loss...

I post this because it is somewhat relevant, if you are deciding methods and information are becoming obsolete.

Hopefully one can pick up what I'm putting down.

Sorry long post here....

I track exactly the same information on NAAFB. Maybe I picked it up from one of your posts 7-8 years ago.

One of the issues is that it is hard to "let go" of a method once its been performing well. Everyone wants to milk it for as long as the ride lasts and that can lead to an eventual downturn, unless as you point out you look for indicators and have the backbone to make a change. But, then how do you know if its just not a head-fake in the market or it's truly a change?

Look at the 2018 data. Around plays 40 and 80 you saw significant decay in unit performance... The Avg vs Close still held tight but the units started to drop. Did you question the process and start to consider the market catching up? Tough to know what the true drivers are without continuing to get more data, which means continuing to ride the train even, unbeknownst to you, it is the start of the market catching up.

Its as though you have to suffer a little with losses to realize, OK the market has shifted.

When I see a method that I believe has played out and the market has "caught up", I'll stop playing it but continue to track it even for up to another year just for my own peace of mind.

 

[Tanko]

Perfect example, is I just put to bed 2 MLB methods I used extensively the last 3 years and made some bank. They started to fade late in the season so I laid off them. I continued to track them until All-Star break for confirmation. They are no longer being updated.

 

[KVB]

Yeah Tanko, the key there is that the closing line performance stayed solid and I was still getting ample triggers, so I worried less.

But remember, even closing line performance has some variance, just like the results.

What did I lose in the stretch? 7-8 units? I've come to learn with some methods, that that's nothing.

Remember this?

That's a Contrarian Fund. That Fund doesn't care about beating the closing line, because of it's nature. I never publicly tracked that Fund against the closer.

That makes the decision to hold the course much harder, but all tests still pointed to variance in the contrarian markets. As I often posted in analysis, these are market shakeouts.

I posted and tracked the contrarian Funds to show just that, how the markets work.

Like stocks you don't want to get scared out in a shakeout, look at the swings in that chart, they make 7-8 unit changes look like nothing.

I tracked those Contrarian Funds to show the market behavior, which was most obvious in the backbone plays, which I often called "market tracking plays" and this chart below shows where I was actually changing my stake in that Fund. The Purple Circle shows where I actually cut my bet size in half after a frothy run. All of which was posted when I was posting this.

Much more like stocks than sports as I had no closing line value gauge to make decisions here. What a fukkin ride that was...

 

[carolinakid]

how much is that little gold sheet fold out, now i think the last time i seen it in a book store it was about 7 bucks, a long time ago

 

[KVB]

Damn, just look at the "shakeouts" in that 2019 Fund. There were many that year, and some real drastic ones too.

Most would never be able to handle that kind of variance, something I've come to see in these markets regularly.

 

[KVB]

I think that Romeo guy was blindly tailing me and got caught up in one of those shakeouts. Probably chased, who knows, but he never did recover from that.

Could you imagine chasing during that -25 unit run? The damage to changing bet size would have been immense.

Now he just makes wild things up about me from years ago and never moved on from it.

 

[BobbyFK]

is that a dikk joke

Yes sir