Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

[MMA_scientist]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

The dream is to make $50K a year or more. The biggest problem is the relative infrequency of events. I mean, basketball fans have it good during the season. There are games every fucking night! But for MMA you're lucky if there are 4 or 5 events in a month.

Don't let the dream die.

[Luke]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

if I go 14-4 every year and make 1000 why cant I over 5 years get to the point I'm betting 1k a fight instead of 100?
If I bet 1000k per fight then I'd make 10k in a year. The only reason I dont bet more fights is because I'm the only one that cares for boxing around here so theres no one to discuss it with.

I dont think I'll ever be the person to bet 100 fights in a year because I dont like the up and down swings .If I just picked and choose my fights I bet I should hit 3 out of every 4 all year

[Luke]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

Another thing .We better start getting use to taking dogs because the line on favorites is skyrocketing lately imo

[SPX]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

Another thing .We better start getting use to taking dogs because the line on favorites is skyrocketing lately imo

You know I'm already on that bandwagon and I'm +2.49u for the year on dog bets.

I think the key for dogs is proper bet sizing and really making educated plays. I mean, if you think a fight's a toss up and you can get +150 on either fighter then that's the definition of value. But I have too many times heard people say "this fight's too close to call." Well if it's too close to call and you can get a decent dog price then it's worth a bet, in my opinion.

I really had no idea who was going to win between Mir and Carwin, but at +150, I thought it was worth a full unit bet (pretty much my max for an underdog).

You also have to get used to losing more fights than usual. I mean, my dog record is 6-11 but I'm still ahead. You definitely can't do that with favorites.

[Luke]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

I bet alot of dogs last year and I think I only lost one. I wont bet a dog if I think its 50/50 I have to think the dogs is going to win or I'm just wasting my money imo

[SPX]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

I bet alot of dogs last year and I think I only lost one. I wont bet a dog if I think its 50/50 I have to think the dogs is going to win or I'm just wasting my money imo

I don't see how it's wasting money.

Let's say you have two fights that are ~50/50 and on each fight the underdog is +150.

You bet one unit on the first fight and lose and you are -1u
You bet one unit on the second fight and win and you are +.5u

How is that wasting your money? I mean, if in fact they're truly 50/50 then over the long run you can expect to win about as many as you lose, but you're getting paid out 3:2 when you win.

It's like getting a blackjack!

[Luke]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

Because 50/50 is always 50/50 just because you lost fight A that was 50/50 doesnt mean you'll win fight B that is 50/50. You could lose 10 fights in a row that were 50/50 because one fight has nothing to do with the next

Its just like the roulette table just becaus Red hit this spin doesnt mean black is anymore likely to hit next spin. One fight has nothing to do with your chances of hitting the next fight.

[SPX]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

Because 50/50 is always 50/50 just because you lost fight A that was 50/50 doesnt mean you'll win fight B that is 50/50. You could lose 10 fights in a row that were 50/50 because one fight has nothing to do with the next

Its just like the roulette table just becaus Red hit this spin doesnt mean black is anymore likely to hit next spin. One fight has nothing to do with your chances of hitting the next fight.

That's why I said, "if in fact they're truly 50/50 then over the long run you can expect to win about as many as you lose."

Let me ask you this. If you have a sufficient bankroll to withstand the swings and someone offered to flip a nickel 1,000 times, and every time it lands on heads you give them $1, and everytime it lands on tails they'd give you $1.50, would you play it? Sure you would, or at least I hope so!

One thing you'll learn about me--and I'm not sure how much I've talked about this around here--is that a lot of my gambling ideas and philosophies come from casino games, especially blackjack. I used to be obsessed with blackjack. I wanted to be a pro blackjack player and maybe even put together a card counting team and go the whole 9 yards. The problem is that I'm just not good enough with numbers to do the calculations--even though it's simple math--fast enough in a casino setting to maintain the count and correlate my bets.

But one thing I picked up from blackjack is the idea that you should almost always bet when you have an advantage. And a +150 line in a 50/50 fight is a huge advantage! Another thing is the idea of volume. A good card counter--while playing with an advantage in a plus count--has a mathematical expectation of winning money. He may not win every hand, and he may even lose a string of hands, but he knows that it's best to play every single hand he can in which he has the edge. He may go through swings in his bankroll, but in the "long run"--usually defined in blackjack as hundreds of thousands of hands or more--he will come out ahead. It's a mathematical fact, not opinion, not luck.

Of course, betting on fights, we don't have hundreds of thousands of fights. But what will happen in the long run usually approximates the sort of behavior you'll see in the short run. So I want to place bets on EVERY SINGLE line that's off.

[Svino]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

The fact that all betting events are independent is one of the few advantages of sports betting over other types of investing, where (say) a market crash can make all your stocks drop at once. When events are correlated, your variance is raised, which is bad. It would suck if we had to worry about a "combat slump", where most of the fights on a card were lost by both fighters.

I think for many people (self included), the biggest obstacle to living off gambling is bankroll size. Basically, even if you can make 20% ROI per year at low risk (which is crazy good), you need a $250,000 bankroll to make $50k per year. It's not quite that high, since you can put some of that nest egg in safer (say +5% ROI) investments and gamble with 100k or so, but then there are bet limits and other problems of scale.

As for my own year-to-date numbers: 23 bets so far, +7U. Profit / (Cash Wagered) ratio of 13.6%. I'm doing much better on favorites than dogs because of a disastrous UFC-Versus card, which was my only losing night.

Luckiest win: Lawler
Biggest facepalms: Vera, Stevenson
Most profitable plays: Carwin, C. Miller

[Luke]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

Because 50/50 is always 50/50 just because you lost fight A that was 50/50 doesnt mean you'll win fight B that is 50/50. You could lose 10 fights in a row that were 50/50 because one fight has nothing to do with the next

Its just like the roulette table just becaus Red hit this spin doesnt mean black is anymore likely to hit next spin. One fight has nothing to do with your chances of hitting the next fight.

That's why I said, "if in fact they're truly 50/50 then over the long run you can expect to win about as many as you lose."

Let me ask you this. If you have a sufficient bankroll to withstand the swings and someone offered to flip a nickel 1,000 times, and every time it lands on heads you give them $1, and everytime it lands on tails they'd give you $1.50, would you play it? Sure you would, or at least I hope so!

One thing you'll learn about me--and I'm not sure how much I've talked about this around here--is that a lot of my gambling ideas and philosophies come from casino games, especially blackjack. I used to be obsessed with blackjack. I wanted to be a pro blackjack player and maybe even put together a card counting team and go the whole 9 yards. The problem is that I'm just not good enough with numbers to do the calculations--even though it's simple math--fast enough in a casino setting to maintain the count and correlate my bets.

But one thing I picked up from blackjack is the idea that you should almost always bet when you have an advantage. And a +150 line in a 50/50 fight is a huge advantage! Another thing is the idea of volume. A good card counter--while playing with an advantage in a plus count--has a mathematical expectation of winning money. He may not win every hand, and he may even lose a string of hands, but he knows that it's best to play every single hand he can in which he has the edge. He may go through swings in his bankroll, but in the "long run"--usually defined in blackjack as hundreds of thousands of hands or more--he will come out ahead. It's a mathematical fact, not opinion, not luck.

Of course, betting on fights, we don't have hundreds of thousands of fights. But what will happen in the long run usually approximates the sort of behavior you'll see in the short run. So I want to place bets on EVERY SINGLE line that's off.

The only thing I'm good at is numbers.When I was 19-21 I counted cards in BJ at Casino Windsor.I'd go up there once a money and try to win 500 then I'd leave .I won way way more than I ever lost. But its very hard to do.Sportsbetting is 10x easier than counting cards.

I'm not changing how I bet .I'm never going to bet a fight thats 50/50 but I will bet a fight thats 55/45 .I have to think my guy is going to win for me to make a bet plain and simple.

You say you bet Carwin because you thought it was 50/50 ,well really Carwin should have been a big favorite because I see him winning that fight 80% of the time.

The way I look at it if I hit 65-75% of my bets ,have a real low average juice then someday I will feel confortable betting 5k a play.Now if I'm hitting 55-60% of my bets and going on swings I dont think I could ever bet big bucks.

Thats just me though,everyone is differnt

[zY|]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

Yeah SPX, your math and logic makes sense, but the problem becomes the handicapping doesn't conform to it.

Here's a question. How many fights have you thought were 50/50 upon entering but then afterwards it's obvious one guy totally outclasses the other?

I guess it just comes down to confidence in your handicapping skill, but I just don't see this as something you can get down to a quantifiable science like counting cards in blackjack.

[Luke]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

Yeah SPX, your math and logic makes sense, but the problem becomes the handicapping doesn't conform to it.

Here's a question. How many fights have you thought were 50/50 upon entering but then afterwards it's obvious one guy totally outclasses the other?

I guess it just comes down to confidence in your handicapping skill, but I just don't see this as something you can get down to a quantifiable science like counting cards in blackjack.

I agree .Most of us thought Cain-Nog was close to 50/50 as we thought Carwin-Mir was close to 50/50 neither could have been further from the truth .Lets say Mir was +150 and Nog was +150 and you bet both of them because you thought it was 50/50 when actually it was closer to 80/20 .So whos to know that every bet you make at 50/50 isnt really 80/20 against you

[SPX]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

The only thing I'm good at is numbers.When I was 19-21 I counted cards in BJ at Casino Windsor.I'd go up there once a money and try to win 500 then I'd leave .I won way way more than I ever lost. But its very hard to do.Sportsbetting is 10x easier than counting cards.

That's interesting. Well you should know where I'm going with all this then.

I'm not changing how I bet .

I'm not trying to get you to and sorry if I gave that impression.

I'm really more defending my way of doing things and also defending my statements about giving up money if you're overly conservative. It's not to say that there's a right or wrong way. There's a psychological component to this whole thing and if it's worth it to you (or anyone) to lose a little in the profit department in order to be comfortable, then that's cool, and I think we ALL do that in our own ways.

I mean, I know Scientist has said in the past that he's aware that he's not draining every last bit of value out of the lines, but it's worth it for him to be in a more comfortable headspace.

I'm never going to bet a fight thats 50/50

Not even if you could get +200 on a dog? Or +300? Or +1000? Eventually there's gotta be a point for you where it's worth it. For me, it's +150.

You say you bet Carwin because you thought it was 50/50 ,well really Carwin should have been a big favorite because I see him winning that fight 80% of the time.

Well we know that now, though I'd say 70% probably. But we didn't know before. Honestly, to me, I saw Carwin PROBABLY winning, but Mir's looked good in a lot of his fights lately (minus Lesnar) so I just said, well, 50/50. And for me, what I really mean by this is that there are too many factors in play for me to know how the fight's going to end up. Maybe a better way to put it is "based upon what I know, I think the fight could go either way."

[SPX]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

Yeah SPX, your math and logic makes sense, but the problem becomes the handicapping doesn't conform to it.

Here's a question. How many fights have you thought were 50/50 upon entering but then afterwards it's obvious one guy totally outclasses the other?

I guess it just comes down to confidence in your handicapping skill, but I just don't see this as something you can get down to a quantifiable science like counting cards in blackjack.

This is true, and part of the reason that I don't actually bet EVERY fight. I say that there is value--one way or another--in nearly every line, but if I can't find the value then I just let it go.

As for 50/50, this was mostly explained in my response to Luke, but I will add this: One thing that's great about this shit is that you can be off on your capping and still win money. Let's get away from 50/50 and say you peg a fight at 80/20 and you bet a line that's -350 for the guy you think wins 80%, then he wins, but he just kind of squeaks by. Then you realize the fight's probably more like 60/40. Well thankfully you don't lose just because you were a little off. So there's some room to fuck up in your assessment and still be successful.

Honestly I don't put a lot of stock into my exact percentages. I usually set one and compare it to the lines that are offered, but really my judgement calls are more like:

He Will Almost Certainly Lose (Don't bet)
He Might Win, But It's Doubtful (Bet Him if I can get +300 or better)
Could Go Either Way (Bet the Dog at +150 or better)
He Should Win, But The Other Guy Could Definitely Take It (there are different levels of certainty here, but this is in the -135 to -300 range, depending on how confident I am)
He Will Almost Certainly Win (these are the few times that I drop bets in the -400 or higher range)

. . . or something like that.

That's not an exact guide to how I make my decisions, but it's a good generalization.

[Luke]

Re: Official Year-to-Date Results Thread

That's interesting. Well you should know where I'm going with all this then.

Counting card is 10x harder than you think I spent 6 months before my 19th birthday practicing before I went the first time.I honestly didnt think it was going to work but me and a couple friends went up the day after my 19th and they watched me as I played .I won like 275 dollars that night and quit .I won just enough to pay for our hotel room,drinks,and gas home .

You now how you feel when you have a huge bet down on a fighter and you heart pumps a million beats per minute and your head is racing a million thoughts and by the end of the fight your mental drained? Thats how every minute of card counting is because you cant mess up the count,you cant miss a card, and you cant look like you're counting

I'm not trying to get you to and sorry if I gave that impression.

I'm really more defending my way of doing things and also defending my statements about giving up money if you're overly conservative. It's not to say that there's a right or wrong way. There's a psychological component to this whole thing and if it's worth it to you (or anyone) to lose a little in the profit department in order to be comfortable, then that's cool, and I think we ALL do that in our own ways.

You dont have to defend how you're betting ,as long as you win is all thats matters .

Not even if you could get +200 on a dog? Or +300? Or +1000? Eventually there's gotta be a point for you where it's worth it. For me, it's +150.

Well yeah eventually I'd bet a fight thats 50/50 but you were talking +150. +150 and +350 is a huge difference