page 1 of 3
Author Message
Serhat Ugur (hoopseng)
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 209
Location: Basketball Research
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:05 am Post subject: Haralabos Voulgaris talks on us Reply with quote
Courtesy of True Hoop
He is talking on us:
Code:
Do you ever talk shop with other basketball stat experts?
I don't really talk shop with other stat experts, to be honest I don't really know of any. There are a bunch of people who post on the Sonics Central APBR board whose opinion I respect. But I am kind of of the opinion that anyone devoting all this time to the study of basketball and not willing to really profit from it, is fooling themselves in some way.
I remember reading a post on the board where a poster stated that he could predict games with 60% accuracy against the vegas line, but he was not interested in doing so. If this guy could win even at a 56% clip over a significant sample, he could make a few million in a few years, and probably retire in five years. I tend to question the sanity or honesty of a person making such a claim.
As I mentioned, there are a few people who's work and opinion I respect, I have even reached out to a few of them with job offers, but I haven't really found anyone who I'd either be interested in hiring, or who'd be interested in working for me. I'd also add that anyone who feels that they can beat the sport from a predictive angle is also willing to come work for me and make a few million.
I think this guy has mentioned me too. Again, I have no interest in betting on anything. I haven't calculated my prediction model's overall success rate against Vegas lines. One thing I know from one my reader's e-mail is my model has gone 63% in March, and 62.7% in April against the Vegas' point totals. I adviced my reader not to bet on NBA games by looking at my score predictions because I know betting is a foolish event even if you're using the world's greatest scientific prediction model ever.
_________________
http://www.nbastuffer.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ryan J. Parker
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 711
Location: Raleigh, NC
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:14 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
I know betting is a foolish event even if you're using the world's greatest scientific prediction model ever
This is an inaccurate statement. Voulgaris is correct in his statement. He is what the sports betting community would consider a sharp.
Unless you've ever tried to make money betting sports, then quite honestly you're not really in a position to make claims about the subject. There are a lot of misconceptions and misunderstandings about the subject that are probably better left to another forum.
Regardless, I would say that a majority of the quantitative analysis used in the sports community (or in any business) is a form of betting, although it would more likely be called investing instead. Buying stocks are a gamble, yet you always hear people talk about investing instead of gambling. There really is no distinction between the two.
Think of it like this: If you create a model to forecast how a player would perform on your team and then you determine it to be profitable to sign or make a deal for this player, then obviously you are betting on him (or should I say investing in him) to perform. This really isn't much different from the perspective of someone that bets on sports.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Serhat Ugur (hoopseng)
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 209
Location: Basketball Research
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:31 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Ryan J. Parker wrote:
Quote:
I know betting is a foolish event even if you're using the world's greatest scientific prediction model ever
This is an inaccurate statement. Voulgaris is correct in his statement. He is what the sports betting community would consider a sharp.
Is it the way of admitting that APBR people should bet on NBA games? maybe do it for a living like Voulgaris does?
_________________
http://www.nbastuffer.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ryan J. Parker
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 711
Location: Raleigh, NC
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:55 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
hoopseng wrote:
Is it the way of admitting that APBR people should bet on NBA games?
Please clarify something for me: what you mean when you say "admitting"?
I just want to backup what Voulgaris is saying. He's not a nut job. There is a lot of money that can be made in the sports betting market if you have the skills.
I find it extremely unlikely that anyone will ever stumble upon on a method to forecast games at a 60% clip against the point spread without actually building a model for this express purpose. In fact, that is an unrealistic winning percentage thanks to the numerous amount of numerical analysis already being done by people like Voulgaris.
People that nonchalantly say they can forecast at a 60% rate but choose not to bet don't realize that they really can't forecast at a 60% rate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
KeeneKaufmanWheeler
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
Posts: 72
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:11 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Actually, I think he might be talking about something I posted, but is misquoting me.
In another thread that someone had started asking if anyone mkaes money by betting their stat models, I made a tounge-in-cheek comment that I backtested my model for about a season and it "worked" 53% of the time.
That was one of the only threads I've ever seen on this board about betting (and I kind of prefer it that way).
Obviously, my point was that even though it had a winning record, betting it would not have worked at all, and I said so at the time. I don't beleive that any systematic statistical model could be applied to NBA games and win over the long haul.
One of my favorite futures markets analysts, Dennis Gartman, says this about systematic trading: "Systems work great, until they don't."
The same thing will happen to anyone who tries to gamble based on stats analysis, and over the long run it will happen to this guy too.
_________________
http://www.thebratwurst.com
Last edited by KeeneKaufmanWheeler on Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:16 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Serhat Ugur (hoopseng)
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 209
Location: Basketball Research
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:13 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
"There are a bunch of people who post on the Sonics Central APBR board whose opinion I respect. But I am kind of of the opinion that anyone devoting all this time to the study of basketball and not willing to really profit from it, is fooling themselves in some way. "
My point is this. Do APBR people really fool themselves by not choosing to bet on NBA?
_________________
http://www.nbastuffer.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MattB
Joined: 22 Jun 2006
Posts: 38
Location: Lowell
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:30 pm Post subject: hmm Reply with quote
So glad you picked up on this piece. I've been discussing it with friends for a while now.
Haralabos seems a bit cocky, but judging by his track record he appears to be able to back it up.
The most interesting part is his comment on other basketball stat heads. Is it foolish not to bet on basketball if you have what you think is a working system? Is there such thing as a system that is a guarantee?
At the end of the article he says it's not really gambling since he has a such a large edge. Is he overstating the worth of statistics in general as used as a predictor in sports?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Serhat Ugur (hoopseng)
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 209
Location: Basketball Research
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:37 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
And no words in the interview about what his record against the Vegas is?
_________________
http://www.nbastuffer.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ryan J. Parker
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 711
Location: Raleigh, NC
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:49 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
KeeneKaufmanWheeler wrote:
The same thing will happen to anyone who tries to gamble based on stats analysis, and over the long run it will happen to this guy too.
This is not true. Voulgaris clearly understands the game the way most people that work for NBA teams do. I suspect that most people that "build models" do not have the background to do so properly or they gloss over important details of the game. Based on the articles, Voulgaris methods do not suffer from these problems.
Academia is filled with people that can build models to "understand" the game. Problem is, it has no real application for an actual team. See the Wages of Wins as an example.
hoopseng wrote:
My point is this. Do APBR people really fool themselves by not choosing to bet on NBA?
No, (in general) APBR people do not fool themselves. I do, however, agree with what he is trying to say. When he talks about people fooling themselves, I believe he speaks about people that a) believe you can't win money betting the NBA without "inside information" or b) believe they can win at a high rate yet choose not to do so. You can absolutely make money betting the NBA without inside information. If you could win at such a high rate against the NBA point spread and totals markets then you'd be doing so. The only people qualified to say they could but choose not to are doing quantitative analysis for an NBA team or in some other field that is rewarding to them (either financially, mentally, or both). Amateur researches do not fit this mold. These amateurs are just that--fooling themselves with these statements.
I have no doubt that there are some people that post on this message board that could bet the NBA and win a tidy sum. I suspect, however, that 99% of those people are working for an NBA team. If you're looking to bet you're likely posting at another board. If you're looking to use and progress your skills for actual application in the NBA then you're posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
KeeneKaufmanWheeler
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
Posts: 72
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 2:56 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="Ryan J. ParkerThis is not true. Voulgaris clearly understands the game the way most people that work for NBA teams do. I suspect that most people that "build models" do not have the background to do so properly or they gloss over important details of the game. Based on the articles, Voulgaris methods do not suffer from these problems.[/quote]
Based on what evidence? An article in which he says he has the midas touch? If I say that I am a billionaire would you believe me?
I've been around a lot of traders and gamblers, and Voulgaris' claims aren't any different from any number of stories I've heard from any number of other people. And you'd be surprised how often those guys get wiped out in a heartbeat and/or were never as successful as they claimed.
Here's an interesting book: "Education of a Speculator", by Victor Niederhoffer. It's all about his God-like approach to trading. But be sure to get the second edition, printed after his fund blew up and lost anywhere from $1-$3 billion in one day (they never did figure out how much he actually lost).
It's amazing how much people can think they "know" when they are just getting lucky all along.
_________________
http://www.thebratwurst.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ryan J. Parker
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 711
Location: Raleigh, NC
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 3:10 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
There is a small chance Voulgaris is making everything up, but I find it highly unlikely. Sure one article doesn't prove anything, but clearly he understands how to beat the game.
Any form of investment has risk involved. As long as Voulgaris (or any gambler for that matter) has an edge and understands the Kelly criterion, then they will never lose all of their money. They can get lucky and win a ton, or they can get unlucky and lose a little.
As for "blowing up", if you're putting yourself at risk to "blow up", then you're clearly not managing your risk properly and were lucky to be where you were at.
In fact, this is probably a great time to suggest you read the books Fooled by Randomness and The Black Swan if you have not done so already.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
haralabob
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 27
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 3:25 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Hoopseng is accurate in that I was referring to the post he linked.
I liken his post to saying that he could earn 65% but choose not to, similarly to someone that claims they could cross the street and be handed a million dollars. I find this type of high minded virtue something that I am lacking. I don't think that betting on the the nba is something to be ashamed of nor something that is wrong.
In my opinion, there is no difference between investing in sports betting and investing in the stock market. I do however respect the opinions of those who disagree with me on these points.
Make no mistake if you could truly hit even 58% against a consensus line, you could easily make millions within a few years. This is not conjecture, but it is fact, in addition if you bet within a bankroll, using kelly or some other management technique your risk of ruin would be fairly small.
I'd also like to add that I feel Hoopseng is accurate in that I don't think this board should be cluttered with discussions on sports betting. I'll respond to this post but I respect the integrity of what you people are trying to accomplish here in regards to the study of basketball metrics.
If anyone has any other questions for me i'd be happy to respond to them, either here or privately.
Haralabob
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HoopStudies
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 706
Location: Near Philadelphia, PA
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 3:58 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I have been asked a few times to work on sports gambling. My rationale in NOT doing so is this: You can work in basketball trying to win a championship, then you can do other things afterwards, like work for the league, work for the media, or work on sports gambling. If you work for the league or work for the media, it is harder to get to work for a team than going the other way. If you work on sports gambling, it is very difficult to subsequently work for a team (especially in wake of the Donaghy thing). So working for a team now reflects (in part) my desire to keep flexibility in job choice.
Further, I don't KNOW that what I do can win against the line. I think it would, but I have never spent the time validating it for that purpose.
_________________
Dean Oliver
Author, Basketball on Paper
The postings are my own & don't necess represent positions, strategies or opinions of employers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Serhat Ugur (hoopseng)
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 209
Location: Basketball Research
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 4:05 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
haralabob wrote:
Hoopseng is accurate in that I was referring to the post he linked.
I liken his post to saying that he could earn 65% but choose not to, similarly to someone that claims they could cross the street and be handed a million dollars. I find this type of high minded virtue something that I am lacking. I don't think that betting on the the nba is something to be ashamed of nor something that is wrong.
Betting is not type of a thing to be ashamed, I respect the industry, especially bookmakers for the sharp lines, and amount of money flying around. If any of the rosters here bet on NBA, I never raise an objection to that.
Mr. Voulgaris, I wonder, how do you feel when Sasha Vujacic nails a meaningless three and ruin your highly educated bets? I don't mean your system does not make sense in the long term but aren't these unpredictable side of sports as well as referee behaviors? That's why I personally think that betting is a foolish event. You would never feel safe about where your money is going to go to.
_________________
http://www.nbastuffer.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ben
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 266
Location: Iowa City
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 8:05 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Maybe I need to reread the thread, but hoopseng, are you simultaneously arguing that you can beat the spread 60% of the time and that nobody can consistently win money betting sports?
page 2
Author Message
Statman
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 237
Location: Arlington, Texas
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 8:57 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="hoopseng"]
haralabob wrote:
Mr. Voulgaris, I wonder, how do you feel when Sasha Vujacic nails a meaningless three and ruin your highly educated bets? I don't mean your system does not make sense in the long term but aren't these unpredictable side of sports as well as referee behaviors? That's why I personally think that betting is a foolish event. You would never feel safe about where your money is going to go to.
I would ASSUME that the "good" betters don't take individual events too seriously - since they are betting many games a week (or maybe each day - especially if delving into NCAA) and getting consistent results over the longer haul. The big shot that screws youprobably doesn't happen any more than the big shot that saves you.
_________________
Dan
My current ratings (go to the last page for the most recent stuff):
http://www.pointguardu.com/f136/statmans-ratings-56243/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
haralabob
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 25
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:05 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
Mr. Voulgaris, I wonder, how do you feel when Sasha Vujacic nails a meaningless three and ruin your highly educated bets? I don't mean your system does not make sense in the long term but aren't these unpredictable side of sports as well as referee behaviors? That's why I personally think that betting is a foolish event. You would never feel safe about where your money is going to go to.
First off living and dying with every single bet seems a little counter intuitive to what I actually do. I'd say over the course of an NBA regular season I place >800 bets. That being said, if I bet the Lakers -7 in the above game and he hit the meaningless (classless) 3, I'd probably feel pretty good. If I took the Spurs, I'd probably feel pretty bad.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
djmbenga
Joined: 27 May 2008
Posts: 1
PostPosted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 11:43 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
hoopseng wrote:
Mr. Voulgaris, I wonder, how do you feel when Sasha Vujacic nails a meaningless three and ruin your highly educated bets? I don't mean your system does not make sense in the long term but aren't these unpredictable side of sports as well as referee behaviors? That's why I personally think that betting is a foolish event. You would never feel safe about where your money is going to go to.
Any kind of gambling, whether it be playing poker, betting sports, or playing the stock market, is a game of exploiting small edges as much as possible. Because we're talking about beating the line something like 56% of the time, most games are pretty close to flipping a coin for money. The edge doesn't really start to appear over a very large amount of games. This is why managing your bankroll, or the amount of money you have to bet with, is so important.
Harlabos uses an effective system to identify valuable lines. In all likelihood these lines are broken into different categories based on how good they are, and he uses consistent bet amounts based on the value he finds in the line. Each bet will be only a small percentage of his bankroll, meaning even if he has a bad run (which can last quite a while), he will still have a comfortable bankroll.
Think of betting many games at a small percentage the sports equivalent of "diversifying your portfolio." Putting a large percentage of your bankroll on any given game would really increase your "risk of ruin," just like investing a large amount in only one company would be an unwise decision. And while going on a bad run can be frustrating, smart bettors with a good bankroll can weather them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mike G
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3552
Location: Hendersonville, NC
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:51 am Post subject: Reply with quote
I think it's a pretty dangerous analogy to be making between gambling and the stock market. In a robust economy, almost everyone benefits from sound investments, almost continuously. You can live comfortably off your gains, without another thought.
In professional gambling, you're in fierce competition against others. So right there, you have to be pretty good at it to win anything. The casino or bookmaker takes a chunk of everyone's bets, don't they? So it's quite the opposite of a stock market, and eventually all but the very-good (or very-lucky) lose their money.
It's not a secret that many lives (or at least, bank accounts) have been ruined by gambling. It's not just the 'compulsive' or inept gambler who loses, but in fact the vast majority who are losing money to a select few. Those few have made it their career to make the connections that feed them the vital information at the last minute: Who is injured, who is reffing, etc.
_________________
`
36% of all statistics are wrong
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
schtevie
Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 408
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:39 am Post subject: Reply with quote
The performance of the stock market is not monotonic. There have been large stretches of time (e.g. the 1970s) where there were no net gains on average. In these eras, what is the difference between gambling and investing?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Harold Almonte
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 616
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:00 am Post subject: Reply with quote
djmbenga wrote:
Quote:
Any kind of gambling, whether it be playing poker, betting sports, or playing the stock market, is a game of exploiting small edges as much as possible. Because we're talking about beating the line something like 56% of the time, most games are pretty close to flipping a coin for money. The edge doesn't really start to appear over a very large amount of games. This is why managing your bankroll, or the amount of money you have to bet with, is so important.
Harlabos uses an effective system to identify valuable lines. In all likelihood these lines are broken into different categories based on how good they are...
This is the quid. There's no something like "counting cards, or stats" as small edges in sports bettings, the spread converts it in a coin flipping. A lot of gamblers know about matchups performances without needing computer programs, know the statistical performance of spreads at every range without academical studies, the changes in lines, etc.., the problem is just that, identify a really valuable line and managing the amount of money to bet. I don't believe there are any program for that. The small edges are so small, you don't get rich from poor, you could get richer from richness.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NickS
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 384
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:31 am Post subject: Reply with quote
I probably shouldn't post, because I, personally, have no interest in gambling and, s DeanO says, there's a hige difference between thinking that the use of advanced statistics would give an edge in gambling, and being confident in that assertion.
But, I was just reading something else that seems relevent. One of the points here applies to the discussion about how one would make money if you knew that you could beat the spread just over 50% of the time.
I hadn't heard of the Kelly criteria before.
Quote:
100% Kelly strategy marks the boundary between aggressive and insane investing.
...
The Kelly criterion gives you an explicit rule for how to divide your investments to maximize long-term growth rate. . . . [Imagine a 51/49% bet] Looks good -- expected gain 2% per day -- but you don't want to risk all your money on one day. Instead use strategy: bet fixed proportion p of your capital each day. Theory says: the long-term growth rate depends on p, but in an unexpected way. . . .
I imagine anyone who's taken business classes already knew that, but it was new to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kjb
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 864
Location: Washington, DC
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:32 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Seems to be a lot of confidence here that it's unlikely to make money by betting on sports. It may seem like a coin flip to some, but as Voulgaris is pointing out, IF one could come up with a system to beat the Vegas odds even 56% of the time, that individual could make a ton of money.
And, there's reason to believe that such a model could be constructed. A coin flip is inherently random, a sports contest is not. Especially since there's no requirement that a bettor place a wager on every game.
I do not bet on sports, and I don't have the aptitude or inclination to construct a system that would turn me into a sports bettor. But, the fact that I'm not smart enough to build a system that can beat the Vegas odds doesn't mean that such a system could not be built.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Mike G
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3552
Location: Hendersonville, NC
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:33 am Post subject: Reply with quote
schtevie wrote:
The performance of the stock market is not monotonic. There have been large stretches of time (e.g. the 1970s) where there were no net gains on average. In these eras, what is the difference between gambling and investing?
Precisely. Gambling is like investing in a very bad economy.
_________________
`
36% of all statistics are wrong
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
gabefarkas
Joined: 31 Dec 2004
Posts: 1313
Location: Durham, NC
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:19 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Mike G wrote:
I think it's a pretty dangerous analogy to be making between gambling and the stock market. In a robust economy, almost everyone benefits from sound investments, almost continuously. You can live comfortably off your gains, without another thought.
Disregarding inflation and other things usually accompaning such a period of unencumbered growth.
Mike G wrote:
In professional gambling, you're in fierce competition against others. So right there, you have to be pretty good at it to win anything. The casino or bookmaker takes a chunk of everyone's bets, don't they? So it's quite the opposite of a stock market, and eventually all but the very-good (or very-lucky) lose their money.
Last time I checked, my broker still charges me a commission for the "priviledge" of investing with him and esteemed bank. Sometimes he even takes a cut of my profits, depending on the length of time I've held the investment.
Mike G wrote:
It's not a secret that many lives (or at least, bank accounts) have been ruined by gambling. It's not just the 'compulsive' or inept gambler who loses, but in fact the vast majority who are losing money to a select few. Those few have made it their career to make the connections that feed them the vital information at the last minute: Who is injured, who is reffing, etc.
Replace "gambling" with "day trading" (and "gambler" with "day trader") in that paragraph.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Amazing_Happens
Joined: 16 Jun 2008
Posts: 1
PostPosted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 12:05 pm Post subject: I think We're Missing the Point Reply with quote
I think we are making this more complicated than it needs to be.
All Voulgaris was saying is that, barring some very rare exceptions, if you have an edge that you can make good money using, you would take it.
Wouldn't you?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 785
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:23 pm Post subject: Re: I think We're Missing the Point Reply with quote
Amazing_Happens wrote:
All Voulgaris was saying is that, barring some very rare exceptions, if you have an edge that you can make good money using, you would take it.
Wouldn't you?
Me? No, I wouldn't. My dad had a rather puritan attitude towards money, and raised me to have a deep distrust of "free money" -- ie getting paid without working for it. I can't be the only one who doesn't gamble because of this.
Also, even if I had an edge, a run of bad luck would still break me. Given the marginal edges we're talking about here, it wouldn't take a long run of bad luck to do this. That would be catastrophic. I'm sure professional gamblers have a way of avoiding this, but personally, I can't see why I would take the chance, especially when I already have a steady source of income from working.
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
devin3807
Joined: 11 Oct 2007
Posts: 66
PostPosted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:50 pm Post subject: Re: I think We're Missing the Point Reply with quote
Mike G wrote:
schtevie wrote:
The performance of the stock market is not monotonic. There have been large stretches of time (e.g. the 1970s) where there were no net gains on average. In these eras, what is the difference between gambling and investing?
Precisely. Gambling is like investing in a very bad economy.
Well, unless you have a system which has shown to consistently win 56% of the time, then it'd be like investing in a good economy.
Ed Küpfer wrote:
Amazing_Happens wrote:
All Voulgaris was saying is that, barring some very rare exceptions, if you have an edge that you can make good money using, you would take it.
Wouldn't you?
Me? No, I wouldn't. My dad had a rather puritan attitude towards money, and raised me to have a deep distrust of "free money" -- ie getting paid without working for it. I can't be the only one who doesn't gamble because of this.
Also, even if I had an edge, a run of bad luck would still break me. Given the marginal edges we're talking about here, it wouldn't take a long run of bad luck to do this. That would be catastrophic. I'm sure professional gamblers have a way of avoiding this, but personally, I can't see why I would take the chance, especially when I already have a steady source of income from working.
It's all about perspective.
If you were able to create a model that would win 56% of the time, well dammit, you worked for that money.
I think some people fail to distinguish between two types of gambling (or maybe more, I just made that up).
Gambling vs. "Gambling".
The first guy goes out wasting his money on lottery tickets or betting the house on red hoping to get rich. He has strategy and nothing to improve his odds. Pure gamble.
The second guy approaches it as a job, with advanced strategies, be it the MIT Black Jack teams in Bringing Down The House, or advanced statistical analysis of basketball games. He's not just tossing around money in hoping to get rich, he's got rules that, if he follows, have shown to consistently produce winnings over the long haul. It's this form of gambling which I feel is hardly much different from many investors.
The first gambler hopes for free money; the second "gambler" works for it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Serhat Ugur (hoopseng)
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 208
Location: Basketball Research
PostPosted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:23 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
A question for "Gambling" friends here: Besides Voulgaris' data warehouse, is there any other forecasting techniques used in sports betting, especially in NBA? Note that I'm not asking the money management systems.
For example "Neural Networks" ever used in NBA betting?
I'm intented to write an article covering this issue. Any documented study or an article would help me out...
_________________
http://www.nbastuffer.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kjb
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 864
Location: Washington, DC
PostPosted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:35 pm Post subject: Re: I think We're Missing the Point Reply with quote
Ed Küpfer wrote:
Amazing_Happens wrote:
All Voulgaris was saying is that, barring some very rare exceptions, if you have an edge that you can make good money using, you would take it.
Wouldn't you?
Me? No, I wouldn't. My dad had a rather puritan attitude towards money, and raised me to have a deep distrust of "free money" -- ie getting paid without working for it. I can't be the only one who doesn't gamble because of this.
Also, even if I had an edge, a run of bad luck would still break me. Given the marginal edges we're talking about here, it wouldn't take a long run of bad luck to do this. That would be catastrophic. I'm sure professional gamblers have a way of avoiding this, but personally, I can't see why I would take the chance, especially when I already have a steady source of income from working.
Considering that I'm generally against gambling, I'm as surprised as anyone that I'm actually making this point. But... I think most (all?) professional gamblers think of themselves as working for their winnings. If, for example, Someone were to construct a statistical system that could beat the Vegas odds 60% of the time, then were to construct a financial management system to permit them to tolerate inevitable losing streaks, then were to apply those systems to NBA games (by analyzing every game for the entire season), wouldn't that be "work"?
I know that professional poker players consider what they do to be work. And few pro poker players think of themselves as gambling. In my case, while I was never a professional poker player, I never thought of it as gambling -- poker is a game of decision-making and risk analysis. I suspect that sports betting isn't all that different. (Although I have zero interest in actually betting on sports.)
page 3
Author Message
Mountain
Joined: 13 Mar 2007
Posts: 1527
PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 12:32 am Post subject: Reply with quote
NBA "stock markets" might be considered neural networks but not sure about the speed and quality of the signals.
Last edited by Mountain on Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:16 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Harold Almonte
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 616
PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:07 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Add autodiscipline to that. All sports gamblers do and need to do last moment's information and "feeling" adjusts, no matter how good the system they have, and at this point, they are not different than anyone without a system.
One only sport's squedule doesn't give enough games every day where you could discover a real valuable edge, not either at full games or second halves over/unders, you would need to pass on some days, but if you reduce your betting usage, you don't score (earn money) enough, even improving your efficiency and kelly criterion. And remember you need to be 53% efficient to start earning some money (payments are 10-11, and the odds forcing you to be 50%), and a big bank (a lot of succesfull gamblers bet with other people's money).
Good betting skills have nothing to do with games and players's inside detailed statistical data, because sports's results are not associative at the individual game level, not even at over/under.