[Post-Oak]

[ QUOTE ]
That probability was arrived at via a highly robust and historically accurate player projection model coupled with a Monte Carlo simulation engine.


[/ QUOTE ]

OK. Crockpot supplied a link in which 4 historically accurate projection systems (Chone, Diamond Mind Projections, PECOTA, and Zips) were coupled with a Monte Carlo engine (Diamond Mind Baseball Simulator).

Here are the results for a run of 1,000 seasons in each instance:

Chone
TB averaged 71.3 wins and won the division 2 times (0.2% of the time)

Diamond Mind Projections
69.3 wins and 0 times (0.0%)

PECOTA
77.5 wins and 8 times (0.8%)

Zips
67.6 and 1 time (0.1%)

Cumalative results:
71.4 wins and 0.0275%


Diamond Mind themselves also runs a Monte Carlo simulation (using their own player projections only). Although they only run the sim 100 times, TB averaged 70 wins (they round off) and won the division 0 times.

Hardball times has TB averaging 68 wins and having a 0.2% chance to win the AL East.

PECOTA seems to have TB winning 78 games (I don't pay for that garbage so can't see the whole page). Even with this seemingly overly optimistic estimate (based upong a comparison with other projection systems/the LV line/expert consensus), there is no way that a team expected to win 78 games would win the AL East 3.5% of the time. A team with a true winrate of .4815 (78/162) would win 90+ games 3.5% of the time. The benchmark for winning the AL East should be set a little higher. 92+ games brings us down to 1.7%

Las Vegas had the over under at 68.5 if I remember correctly. A team whose true win rate is .4228 (68.5/162) for each of 162 games won't even win 81 games 3% of the time.

You're number is such a ridiculous outlier that it is simply ABSURD to claim 3.5% as a CONSERVATIVE estimate.

[ QUOTE ]

I trust my numbers and they indicate that Tampa was a favorable bet though obviously unlikely to cash.


[/ QUOTE ]

The season has barely started and it is apparent that your numbers are a complete and total joke. The slew of robust, historically accurate projection systems I have mentioned, combined with a highly sophisticated Monte Carlo engine (Diamond Mind), has not surprisingly produced better numbers than your absurd >>3.5% estimate. Oh, Las Vegas also thinks your numbers are a joke too. And they were right.

[ QUOTE ]

You can go on the theory that "Tampa suckz yo"


[/ QUOTE ]

Um, no.

[ QUOTE ]

and use some poorly applied statistics to justify not taking the same bet.


[/ QUOTE ]

Again, no. I am clearly WAY ahead of you on this one. First of all, I was smart/experienced enough to consult MULTIPLE projections. I also didn't completely ignore Las Vegas/handicapper/consensus expert estimates because I was so proud of my own CRAP projections.

[ QUOTE ]

That difference of opinion is what makes this thing go.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this is clearly what makes sports betting beatable.