Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
Originally Posted by redietz View Post
Originally Posted by smurgerburger View Post
So the use of "expected loss" must have been due to his ghost writers, but the non-use of "expected value" must have been due to Walters himself.

There is no reference to "Expected Value" in the book. Zero. There are plenty of uses of the word "value," but no use of "expected value."

You can make up whatever you like (as "APs," many of you do anything to find excuses to think you have an edge). But if Walters had wanted "Expected Value" in the book, it would be in the book. "Expected Loss" is not synonymous with "Expected Value." Of course -- LOL -- the "APs" like the idea of a phrase that has a positive prediction for their activities. There is also, if you read the book, no reference to "Expected Wins" or "Expected Profit."

But I mean, really, have any of you even read the book? Because if you haven't, why would you even comment?

Is it because -- cough, cough -- you're "APs?"
I don't need to have read the book, nor even be an expert in sports betting to know what expected value is in terms of gambling. It is based on the mathematics, not opinion. Red, seriously, you have started to go in some odd directions in your attempt to convince everyone you are an expert in the field of sports betting. Your comments on expected value over the last 6 months or so, the oddest. Just bizarre.

Advantage players don't "think" they have an edge. They have an edge. If they don't, the many that make a living wouldn't be able to pay the rent or buy food. And those that don't play for a living or have other income source, they would know very quickly as well. AP's are not like your ploppies that after years of losing and replenishing funds, claim "yeah I am about even", when they KNOW they are far in the red. For AP's it is about the money, whether professional or recreational. So just give that idea up.
Bottom line: using the term "EV" in sports betting is flat-out wrong. You are using the math of random events to try to estimate future results or profit/loss for non-random events. If you think results are random when you apply a spread, you are simply incorrect in a fundamental sense. And you don't understand how spreads and totals are assigned to games.

Why do you insist on trying to use the math of random events for non-random events?

For example, there is no way that NFL totals this season are yielding random results. The idea is simply silly.