Strikeforce Dallas June 18th

[SPX]

Illegal, sure. I'm just wondering.

I mean, a perfect example would've been Jeremy Stephens vs Danny Downes. Stephens never submits anyone but almost yanked Downes' arm off with a kimura that he kept working on.

I wonder what the line was for Stephens via submission.

[Luke]

I wonder if a fighter who has a significant advantage over his opponent has ever bet on himself to win a particular prop where the odds are good, like a striker betting on himself to win via submission in round two or some shit like that. And then gone into the fight focused on getting an RNC in the second round.

Its probably happened before but its highly illegal.

[SPX]

Two things. . .

1. I was wondering when you were going show up, Svino. You must've seen the Batsignal.

2. I should've pounded the shit out of that Couture line. Shame on me.

[Luke]

If you're talking about the superbowl with huge amounts of public money coming in the best line on the dog comes at closing. But what about wnba or arena football? Just yesterday in the Wnba a dog at opening closed as the favorite. BTCL is the best way to tell if someone is a winning gambler.

I was talking about MMA fights , a lot of the time the best dog line is the closing line .

[Svino]

I think this is the real problem. If you knew for a mathematical fact exactly what the edge is, then full kelly would probably be the most profitable way to go. But at the end of the day, we're just guessing.

Yeah, I agree with what you guys are saying. You have to play things a lot more conservatively in MMA betting because you can rarely be that confident in your valuation of a line. With small bets, every bet you make on the correct side of the line is positive expected growth. With Kelly bets, you risk making severely negative expected growth wagers if your estimation is even a little off.

I don't think the Kelly Criterion is a totally useless thing to think about, though. Sometimes I'll make a "worst case" estimate and look at the Kelly for that. Then there fights (Couture vs. Toney) that I really do believe can be pinned down very accurately, so Kelly is useful there as well.

[SPX]

I wonder if a fighter who has a significant advantage over his opponent has ever bet on himself to win a particular prop where the odds are good, like a striker betting on himself to win via submission in round two or some shit like that. And then gone into the fight focused on getting an RNC in the second round.

[flyinggogoplata]

What if you bet all dogs, a lot of the time the closing line is the best line you'll see on the dog

If you're talking about the superbowl with huge amounts of public money coming in the best line on the dog comes at closing. But what about wnba or arena football? Just yesterday in the Wnba a dog at opening closed as the favorite. BTCL is the best way to tell if someone is a winning gambler.

[flyinggogoplata]

right, you can calculate your overall edge, which I have done with the help of svino a few times. There is a thread around here somewhere that has the formula in it.

But that is different than calculating your edge on a specific fight. Say I set my line at -115 for Werdum, and he opens at +220... I better be pretty damn confident in that -115 to go out and make a big bet based on the value. SPX and I see eye to eye on this, it is a myth to say you can precisely predict the outcome of a fight to within a few percentages. I generally think in like 20% groupings personally.

It's not a myth for most sports because math models can be very good, however you're probably right about mma in particular simply because a lack of any databases existing.

However there is no need to predict any fight to within a few percentages. If you see any value on a opening line you might as well max bet it with the limits being so low. Pinnacle's head linesman once proposed releasing every fight at pick em with low limits of course. Then when the line is banged into shape by the sharps the are limits upped.

[MMA_scientist]

That's pretty much me, too. I do try to set percentages, but really it's more like I put them into various categories, like:

Not going to win (barring some crazy fluke shit)
Might win, but doubtful
Solid chance to win, close fight
Will probably win, close fight
Should win
Will definitely win (barring some crazy fluke shit)

pretty much what I do. The hard thing about it is that you never get confirmation. You are never really right and you are never really wrong. If you set your line at -400, the other guy is still supposed to win 20% of the time... so when you lose, well yeah, he had a 20% chance. You really never get confirmation that you were correct on your line.

I just try to think, at this moment in space and time with all the information that we have, what is going to happen? Then I have confidence level similar to your scale, and then I match up the line with my confidence level, and pull the trigger.

There are some things, at this moment in space and time, that I do not think will happen, period, 0%- like Rogers submitting Barnett or Daley submitting Diaz. Just is not going to happen. Even if Barnett takes a dive, Rogers won't even think about trying to submit him, it is almost risk free money.

[Luke]

If you routinely beat the closing line you're a winning gambler.

What if you bet all dogs, a lot of the time the closing line is the best line you'll see on the dog

[Luke]

I think this is the real problem. If you knew for a mathematical fact exactly what the edge is, then full kelly would probably be the most profitable way to go. But at the end of the day, we're just guessing.

I don't think you can apply Kelly to MMA or boxing because you never really know your exact edge in a fight is .
In football after running my numbers I can predict my exact adv (using my system)against the point spread and convert those points in my adv to a percent that gives me my exact edge .In MMA/boxing I wouldnt even know where to start to figure it out

[SPX]

I generally think in like 20% groupings personally.

That's pretty much me, too. I do try to set percentages, but really it's more like I put them into various categories, like:

Not going to win (barring some crazy fluke shit)
Might win, but doubtful
Solid chance to win, close fight
Will probably win, close fight
Should win
Will definitely win (barring some crazy fluke shit)

[flyinggogoplata]

How do you really say, though, that this guy has a 65% chance of winning instead of a 62% chance? It's not like the fight result confirms that or anything.

You would need to create a math model to get lines that close.

[MMA_scientist]

Tracking your edge just takes time. Start a spreadsheet put the odds you bet at then the odds at the closing line. Over a thousand plays you can see your edge pretty clearly. If you routinely beat the closing line you're a winning gambler.

right, you can calculate your overall edge, which I have done with the help of svino a few times. There is a thread around here somewhere that has the forumla in it.

But that is different than calculating your edge on a specific fight. Say I set my line at -115 for Werdum, and he opens at +220... I better be pretty damn confident in that -115 to go out and make a big bet based on the value. SPX and I see eye to eye on this, it is a myth to say you can precisely predict the outcome of a fight to within a few percentages. I generally think in like 20% groupings personally.

[SPX]

Tracking your edge just takes time. Start a spreadsheet put the odds you bet at then the odds at the closing line. Over a thousand plays you can see your edge pretty clearly. If you routinely beat the closing line you're a winning gambler.

How do you really say, though, that this guy has a 65% chance of winning instead of a 62% chance? It's not like the fight result confirms that or anything.