Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
This retard is a closeted homosexual.
100%.....Ive heard of guys stalking women before, but never dude on dude like this sand homoQuote:
Originally Posted by jdaewoo
The biggest reason I don't think redietz ever did well at sports betting is that he mocks the concept of EV.
If you don't use EV, then how do you know when to not bet?
Just bet your single best pick every week? Top 2? Do you just go off a hunch?
There are also reasons why Redietz seems to mock the idea of people being kicked off books or readily limited. Maybe it is because he is betting all over the place and his action is never seen as that sharp?
Which would be fine if that was part of your strategy and not just an unintentional side effect of place a decent amount of bets expected to lose.
All his records are for these contests where EV is not particularly relevant. You gotta make your best pick each week even if it isn't +EV. Then from that you start to see yourself as a real sports bettor because you're competing with mopes and not professional organizations.
#truth
I hate to reveal it again and again ..
Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
I don't "mock" the concept of EV.
I mock people who substitute "EV" for "my personal opinion is" or "my personal opinion of what the EV might be."
I think EV estimations are essential for all random probability exercises and calculations.
I think "EV" estimates (outside of bonus analyses, middles shooting, and arbitrage analyses) in sports betting are an overly grandiose exercise in self-love and Leonardo Da APing. People make the classic fundamental error of justifying wagering on non-random events by importing random probability concepts and treating them as if they were/are applicable.
There is really no justification for labeling ballpark personal estimates with the "EV" tag. Just say, "I think this" or "I think that." The edges in sports betting are small enough that importing these personal opinions and labeling them as some kind of actual math are either excuses to gamble or excuses to boost one's alleged expertise. Labeling personal opinions of non-random events as "EV" makes people feel better about what they're doing.
I have spelled this out a dozen times on this forum, but these Fred Flintstone gamble-holics keep saying I don't "believe in 'EV'" or something. It's all a pushback because I am telling them that, outside of arbritrage, middles-shooting, and bonus exploitation, you have no way of even ballparking "EV" for sporting events.
Opinion = Hunch
“Hunches are for two dogs fucking.” Amarillo Slim
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
And that's what people are guilty of when trying to fit "EV" into an opinion hole.
By the way, I read Amarillo Slim's "Play Poker to Win" when I was, I believe, 12.
The word opinion doesn’t appear in Billy Walters’ book.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
And that's what people are guilty of when trying to fit "EV" into an opinion hole.
By the way, I read Amarillo Slim's "Play Poker to Win" when I was, I believe, 12.
Honestly, I think the EV disparaging retard literally doesn't know what EV means.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaewoo
That's undoubtedly it. I've had ROI stats assigned to me by third parties since 1980, I have lunch with guys who taught college probability every week, and I (clears throat) was hired by Billy Walters, all of which preclude my "bein' able to cipher," as Jethro says on The Beverly Hillbillies.
Me and Jethro finished the third grade. Of course we got the EV cipherin' down pat. We just cogitate on it, and the cipherin' takes care of itself
You guys just love assigning math terms to your subjective estimates. Must be nice to go through life thinking your opinion foretells the future. Me and Jethro gotta try it sometime. The hell with actual cipherin'. Better to just have an opinion with a couple of cipherin' words thrown in.
Meanwhile, speaking of the title of this thread: I won Week One, I won Week Two, I won Week Three, I won Week Four (albeit very little), I lost Week Five, I won Week Six, I won Week Seven, and my only future is trying its brains out, but isn't very good (TTech at 125 and 150-1 to win the whole shebang).
Such is life when you be doin' actual cipherin'. Right, Jethro?
Redietz do you actually know any sports bettors?
You mock anyone using EV in reference to sports betting. You can dress it up all you want. I've pointed out the wiki article on EV that shows the term EV is used in analagous situations to how sports bettors use it. It isn't just "us" on this forum by any stretch. The "Leonardo Da'APs" (god could you be more proud of that little phrase? btw it isn't that clever and it jst shows your bitterness and jealousy.)Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
I don't "mock" the concept of EV.
I mock people who substitute "EV" for "my personal opinion is" or "my personal opinion of what the EV might be."
I think EV estimations are essential for all random probability exercises and calculations.
I think "EV" estimates (outside of bonus analyses, middles shooting, and arbitrage analyses) in sports betting are an overly grandiose exercise in self-love and Leonardo Da APing. People make the classic fundamental error of justifying wagering on non-random events by importing random probability concepts and treating them as if they were/are applicable.
There is really no justification for labeling ballpark personal estimates with the "EV" tag. Just say, "I think this" or "I think that." The edges in sports betting are small enough that importing these personal opinions and labeling them as some kind of actual math are either excuses to gamble or excuses to boost one's alleged expertise. Labeling personal opinions of non-random events as "EV" makes people feel better about what they're doing.
I have spelled this out a dozen times on this forum, but these Fred Flintstone gamble-holics keep saying I don't "believe in 'EV'" or something. It's all a pushback because I am telling them that, outside of arbritrage, middles-shooting, and bonus exploitation, you have no way of even ballparking "EV" for sporting events.
How do you know when not to bet? Of course you won't answer but .. Is it ok calling something +EV or -EV? Or is it only that you can label soemthing +EV ?( when it is bet worthy?) I guess it is assigning a specific percentage to it is where you have such an issue.
He seems to not even really understand himself. Is his problem that people assign specific EV values or is it that people use the word EV? He seems to sorta go back and forth.
Of course people can readily ballpark EV values but we've been over this.
This retard doesn't know actual sports bettors nor does know what EV is.
Case closed.
I'll stop harassing him but I'd encourage you guys to keep him straight.
[QUOTE=redietz;202404]Sounds great, how much was your profit?Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaewoo
[QUOTE=AxelWolf;202410]He won man!Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzSounds great, how much was your profit?Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaewoo
Sounds great, how much was your profit?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
(reposted to avoid confusion of who was quoted)
Quote:
Originally Posted by smurgerburgerHe won man!Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
---> NeverEverNoSanity.Quote:
Every one's a winner on VCT.
https://anagram-solver.net/every%20o....?partial=true
Quote:
A new computer worm that attacks bulletin board services spread silently and quickly around the Internet Tuesday, infecting at least 38,000 systems within a few hours, experts said. The worm does not attack home computers, but consumers might encounter its effects. Bulletin boards that are infected will show a simple text message: "This site is defaced!!! This site is defaced!!! NeverEverNoSanity."
The worm only attacks widely used message board software called PHP Bulletin Board. Other than displaying the text message, it does nothing malicious to infected computers, according to antivirus firm Kaspersky Labs. Because it spread rather quickly Tuesday morning, F-Secure Corp. issued an alert about Santy.
Even Mrv, who thought he was wrong, by losing $70,000, turned out to be right by a dazzling display of self control. Ha.Quote:
Within 24 hours of its release on 20 December 2004, about 30,000 to 40,000 websites were attacked by Santy. The worm holds a record of spreading worldwide within three hours of its release. It caused writable files (of formats such as .php and .html) on the infected servers to display the message "This site is defaced!!! This site is defaced!!! NeverEverNoSanity WebWorm generation X", where X is a number representing the generation of the worm.
There have been variants of the worm, some that use alternative search engines after Google blocked queries from the Santy worm, and an anti-Santy anti-worm that attempts to patch vulnerable installations
The phpBB Group had released a patch for the vulnerability a month before the attacks, in phpBB 2.0.11.
Come on, V, there is a Santy Claus.
https://youtu.be/oN8n99BUO-A.Quote:
A "sanity clause" refers to the humorous concept from the Marx Brothers movie A Night at the Opera, where Groucho Marx attempts to explain a nonsensical business contract to Chico Marx, claiming there's a "sanity clause" within it, to which Chico famously replies, "You can't fool me, there ain't no sanity clause!". The phrase is also the title of a 1980 song by the band The Damned.
It is time to take a deeper dive into Bob Dietz's EV vs opinion and Leonardo DaAP statements. But before I do that I want to address Red's claims of having won 6 of the first 7 weeks (which is strange since there has only been 6 weeks of college football and 5 weeks of NFL football). :rolleyes:
So like most of you probably, I get both snail mail and email advertisements from services wanting to sell me sports picks. I am guessing I landed on those lists as a result of signing up at multiple sports books 2 years ago when I started my bonus sports betting play.
Now the wording on many of these advertisements is remarkably similar to redietz's claims. 6 out of 7 weeks winners....that kind of thing. THAT must be a tout thing. :D
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, now the deeper dive into Reds EV vs opinion comments. The "change" in redietz occurred when several APs started doing things at an advantage involving sports betting. Axelwolf was the first AP to talk about some of what he was doing, although there was probably others doing things that didn't mention it. And frankly it was Axelwolf that peaked my interest. In particular a statement to the effect that "almost anyone could make 50k playing the sports betting bonus hustle without even that much effort".
So frankly Dietz's Leonardo daAP statements were directed mostly at Axelwolf and myself. I think it was me that really put Dietz over the top.
So we have gotten these strange EV statements about EV being opinion during that same time period. Now I don't know what all every other AP is doing involving sports betting, but for those of us like myself that are making our money off of the bonus play (bonus whoring), the expected value couldn't be clearer. It is just as crystal clear as the expected value from my blackjack play. It is a mathematical formula, and pretty easy to figure the EV. The bonus money less whatever you churn through hitting the rollover is the EV. And you can figure that out and see what it should be before you even start.
So for me, who I believe is the target of all this "Leonardo daAP" nonsense, and what I am doing, there is ZERO opinion involved. The EV is a mathematical formula. So like most things with this bitter tout, it is very disingenuous for him to keep repeating this bizarre goofiness.
Now, if you want some opinion, Deitz, I will offer some opinion. :cool:
I don't know what Bob Deitz has or hasn't made involving sports betting (including his tout business) over his lifetime. I defer to Kim Lee's expertise (based on having seen many of the publications Dietz has used to cherry pick contest results), where Kim Lee concluded: Dietz maybe broke even betting sports or made a small amount of money, if he had someone basically supporting him. Unfortunately for Mr Dietz, THAT isn't the story he has wanted and tried to tell for the last 10 years that I have been on this forum.
And speaking of opinion, let me go here: :p Dietz claims he has started receiving social security in the past several years. Unless he worked other jobs for parts of all those years he claims to have been a professional sports bettor, he wouldn't have paid into social security so wouldn't be eligible to collect on his own. BUT he would be eligible for 1/2 the amount his late wife had earned. :rolleyes: So I am guessing she is STILL supporting him 20 years after her passing. :cool:
Feel better now, KJ? That you got all of that off your chest, again, for the thousandth time, to people you'll never know.
One of the things that triggered Red was when I said anyone with an avrage (or even below)intelligence, along with dedication, can make a living via sports betting without years of experience, and they don't even need to know anything about the sports they are betting.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
.
I didn't say handicrapping, I said sports betting.