Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Omega's $50 sport betting challenge and tips

Jump to new
Just increase to 10% or halve to 5%, not keep on doubling/halving forever.

Independence of outcomes is good in theory, but it doesn't take into account a bettor having a good run or bad run. ie. being in tune with the markets. Correct position sizing should capitalize on those times when you're in tune.
 
Gringotts Bank said:
Just increase to 10% or halve to 5%, not keep on doubling/halving forever.

Independence of outcomes is good in theory, but it doesn't take into account a bettor having a good run or bad run. ie. being in tune with the markets. Correct position sizing should capitalize on those times when you're in tune.
Click to expand...

This is sports-betting based rudimentary trial/learning process based on prediction being higher than implied probability given in the odds.


A bit different to trading based on current conditions. There is not a high level of discretion at the time of betting. The bet is placed before the event. This is not a trading type strategy.

In other cases outcomes are not 100% independent and if psychology comes into it your position sizing strategy could become a consideration.

Although you would be betting less during successes at 5% and more during losses 10%, if the cause of those results were based on psychological aspects. eg when your in tune or tilting.

Wouldn't negative results by self-destruction be magnified if you are betting more?

Wouldn't it be better to stop trading at the point you have recognised the psychological tilting

or

reduce trades to lower levels after losses and higher levels after gains?

Which also works in with fixed fractional position sizing.

If your having a bad day I thought you would want to bet less not more.


Also

I would like to see someone successfully argue that a one NBA/NFL game effects another NBA/NFL game result


My NBA team lost because our states NFL team won their game.

That is like saying the eagles lost because the dockers won their game, even though they are not playing each other.

A bit hard to justify ..

haha

I'm sure someone could justify it.

Hopefully, as much as possible any past game factors, such as fatigue or changes in players etc would be included in the analysis of the game and predicted probability.Once again this would not be due to my decision making/ psychological factors or winning my last bet etc



However here is the graph anyway







gringottsequityF.png




Not much in it (in my opinion) by using dblhalf position sizing in this limited example....

cheers
 
OmegaTrader said:
Wouldn't it be better to stop trading at the point you have recognised the psychological tilting
cheers
Click to expand...

Often, but you seemed to have winners following losers quite often so I just wanted to see what it did to the equity chart.

I have noticed one game's outcome in AFL on a Friday can often affect Sat/Sun games. For example an upset on Fri will often cause upsets for the rest of the round.
 
Gringotts Bank said:
Often, but you seemed to have winners following losers quite often so I just wanted to see what it did to the equity chart.

I have noticed one game's outcome in AFL on a Friday can often affect Sat/Sun games. For example an upset on Fri will often cause upsets for the rest of the round.
Click to expand...


How is it that the dockers game result affects the eagles game result?

Or an NFL game affects a NBA game

Only maybe, possibly if there is tanking to get draft picks next year or something to do with the finals draw that it is beneficial to lose and this would have to based on games already played recently as well.

That would not be reflected in the bookies calculations or any punter unless an insider had prior knowledge.

Even then that is very difficult for me to account for or measure, it would be interesting to review whether teams with incentive to tank in-fact do in the past and factor that in.

But that would be used in the calculation already if it was used as a factor.

Another way was if a game inspired a team to perform better.

But once again, hard to factor in or measure.

The weather across game could have an impact/ cause upsets.
But games are played across geographical locations.

Again should already be factored in if it is being used in the analysis.

So for this type of match winner strategy the outcomes of games are independent.

However for other types of bets, eg on league or final winners although matches may be independent,yet the results may affect each other, eg one team loses so another team wins the league etc etc

Regardless, gaming/fixing is always present in sports betting but in that absence it is very hard to argue that a game result will affect another teams performance to a great extent.




Cheers
 
I don't think one sporting code could affect another sporting code. But say with AFL, most players would watch the Fri night game, or at least know about an upset. Now it's in their thinking. It's implanted... "what if we weren't on top of things the way we thought? What if there was an upset in our own preparation and game plan?".

That's all that's needed. It's extremely powerful. Can give you experimental examples if you want.
 
Gringotts Bank said:
I don't think one sporting code could affect another sporting code. But say with AFL, most players would watch the Fri night game, or at least know about an upset. Now it's in their thinking. It's implanted... "what if we weren't on top of things the way we thought? What if there was an upset in our own preparation and game plan?".

That's all that's needed. It's extremely powerful. Can give you experimental examples if you want.
Click to expand...

Sorry, agree to disagree?

haha

Tentative or infinitesimally minimal is the best I would admit to.
 
Turn on the Kyrgios game if you haven't yet. Amazing display. If his mind is right he can do anything. If not, he's down the drain very quickly. Despite all his talent, if the mind isn't right, he fails. We've seen it over and over.

A between leg shot on a 5th set tie break. Unprecedented. It was setting up as a standard shot.
 
yep,

He is that type of player. At hopman cup australia and swiss with federer both favourites lost. Although it was only the hopman cup not the aopen...

back to my other point- did the loss of the la-lakers game today affect his mindset???
:)
probably not

Sometimes he seems to channel all of his anger into the points.Then comes up with unorthdox shots.Probably imagines the ball is a pesky journalist haha
 
The Lakers wouldn't have any effect.

How to explain the massive statistical bias of a 'home ground advantage' in most sports, if not psychological? Weather and travel would make up a small part of the bias observed.
 
I remember trying this a while back.

I gave up being essentially b/e, and the variance was annoying the hell out of me.

Hope youre using pinnacle, as the odds are far better than any Australian bookie.
(However require 3x deposit turnover, before a withdrawal/ price you pay for the best odds though)

GL
 
mcgrath111 said:
I remember trying this a while back.

I gave up being essentially b/e, and the variance was annoying the hell out of me.

Hope youre using pinnacle, as the odds are far better than any Australian bookie.
(However require 3x deposit turnover, before a withdrawal/ price you pay for the best odds though)

GL
Click to expand...
Better than Betfair.au?
 
Gringotts Bank said:
The Lakers wouldn't have any effect.

How to explain the massive statistical bias of a 'home ground advantage' in most sports, if not psychological? Weather and travel would make up a small part of the bias observed.
Click to expand...

of course psychology plays a part, humans are playing, not just machines.

Blame the refs :)

I always go agro at the ref.

"The social atmosphere in the stadium leads referees into favoritism"

http://freakonomics.com/2011/12/18/...advantageous-is-home-field-advantage-and-why/


Considered together, the results suggest that in sports with little or no spectator influence teams may win more often at home for reasons other than biased umpiring decisions, such as familiarity with their home ground or a visiting team's fatigue following travel.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11769890

I think all of the above+ we don't know


Also this

Home bias is the tendency for investors to invest in a large amount of domestic equities, despite the purported benefits of diversifying into foreign equities. This bias is believed to have arisen as a result of the extra difficulties associated with investing in foreign equities, such as legal restrictions and additional transaction costs.

Investopedia http://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/homebias.asp#ixzz4WAdxG3uN


ahahah, not really

cheers
 
Gringotts Bank said:
Better than Betfair.au?
Click to expand...

Betfair has a 2-5% commission the odds you see are not always the odds you get.

But the major benefit is laying and that they are an exchange so supposedly don't care if you win

I am in the infancy stages of my betting journey. so might have more to say on bookies, not getting accounts closed and odds comparisons later on.
 
Ah yes I forgot about Betfair.
The odds at Pinnacle are generally better, however betfair can have better lines.
I generally arb using pin or betfair...doesnt pay great, but ok pocket money.
 
Position sizing as a function of being 'in tune' with markets and the 'hot hand fallacy'.

Initially thought to be a fallacy, the 'hot hand' may actually be more of a phenomenon than fallacy. Some papers on wiki supporting that angle - haven't read them though.

It's probably no different to a risk manager saying "You're not seeing it too well today, stop trading and start up again tomorrow".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot-hand_fallacy
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-hot-hand-debate-gets-flipped-on-its-head-1443465711
 
mcgrath111 said:
Ah yes I forgot about Betfair.
The odds at Pinnacle are generally better, however betfair can have better lines.
I generally arb using pin or betfair...doesnt pay great, but ok pocket money.
Click to expand...

I am not using arbing strategy.
still focusing on the easy stuff


1) I can't/ am not willing sit there all day
2)Haven't got acess to software to notify me instead
3) Haven't got acess to software to place the bet for me, instead

later on it is a consideration.

The good aspect of value betting is that once you place the bet, you generally just leave it .Don't have to wait for it.

The bad aspect is the analysis, being wrong and that you are taking on risk and variance, unlike arb which is risk free.


Although an understanding of bookie spread and arbitiage as well as searching for the best odds, helps other strategies performance.

Gringotts Bank said:
Position sizing as a function of being 'in tune' with markets and the 'hot hand fallacy'.

Initially thought to be a fallacy, the 'hot hand' may actually be more of a phenomenon than fallacy. Some papers on wiki supporting that angle - haven't read them though.

It's probably no different to a risk manager saying "You're not seeing it too well today, stop trading and start up again tomorrow".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot-hand_fallacy
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-hot-hand-debate-gets-flipped-on-its-head-1443465711
Click to expand...

I personally wouldn't deviate from a fixed fractional alot, unless it was an extreme circumstance or the strategy was not fixed fractional in the first place. It just opens up Pandora's box. If I am tilting, try and stop asap.

if odds were alot better, I might tweak it a bit but keep close to the fractional,but be conservative on other bets to try and counteract this. For example if the position size on a long shot optimal size should be 3%, but I like the bet( has good ev and difference in implied probability), I would make sure it is combined with other favourite bets, which might be 24% optimal size, so that am still being within my limits. Every now and then I will place another bet on the same game, if odds move alot but will always make sure it is counteracted with other conservative bets.

I don't change it based on past successes.

If bets become worse I would not make the bet after a certain point.
 
Gringotts Bank said:
You could almost plot an MA and trade the equity curve. How frequently are the trades occurring?
Click to expand...


I would say daily 1-2 on average in about 2 months there has been 224 bets. So maybe 3-4 daily.

Yeah that is what I thought too. This sounds crazy but sometimes when I am bored I look at lines in the everyday environment and apply basic support and resistance trendlines....

It seems to work there too.:rolleyes:

Anyway looking as a contrarian indicator even with bookie spread the opposite strategy to what I am using would be crushing it. The thesis is Bookie odds implied probability> My Estimated implied probability therefore value to bet.

1) Perhaps the market knows better and that is why the discount is there and it is better to follow the market.

2) Just variance and or there is no edge
 
Top