The Well: King Yao

[ThaHero]

You said the best a capper could hope for was 53-55%. Do you think the NFL can be won at a higher pct. than that? Or are you factoring in all sports with that figure?

Is any style of capping better or worse than others? I read an article on Mickey Appleman and it seems he goes off scouting and feel. Does that type of capping have better or worse results than going the math route?

Who do you like for this weekends NBA playoff games? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[King Yao]

"You said the best a capper could hope for was 53-55%. Do you think the NFL can be won at a higher pct. than that? Or are you factoring in all sports with that figure?"

Assumptions need to be made to answer this question.
1. A great handicapper betting into widely available lines.
2. The handicapper is also a bettor that doesn't particularly care about his record, but truly cares about the money he makes.
3. We're talking about the long run, not a 35-25 record in a 16 week season.
4. Also, I'm talking about major sports...not small sports like NFL Europe, Arena or WNBA where the action is small.

Given these assumptions, I think the best handicapper in the NFL can only hit 55%, no better. Here's part of the reason: let's say he can identify some bets that can hit at 60%, but they are only 15 bets a year. Is he only going to make those 15 bets? Probably not...if he can identify 60% plays, he can probably identify 55% plays. He'll play those too. If he can identify 55% plays, he can probably identify 53% plays. He should bet those too. There are a lot more 53% plays than 55% plays than 60% plays. The higher number of 53% plays is going to drive the average down to 55% or lower.

If a 54% capper says a certain play is a 60% play..I think that is possible. He may be making 20 53.5% plays for every 1 60% play, thus averaging 54% overall (I didn't do the math, but you get the drift).

So there are two types of people who can hit greater than 55%:
1. People that are lying or fooling themselves with small sample sizes or rogue lines when they say they can hit greater than 55%.
2. People that are too risk-averse to realize they can make more money (sure, there is more risk, but with so many more bets, the portfolio will get diversified) by betting games at 53%.


"Is any style of capping better or worse than others? I read an article on Mickey Appleman and it seems he goes off scouting and feel. Does that type of capping have better or worse results than going the math route?"

I don't know if one is better than the other. I do know what I am good at, and what I am less good at (or not willing to spend the time at). I do not believe anyone can beat widely available lines by feel alone. I don't know what Appleman does...you mentioned scouting and feel. Maybe his scouting is superior. Its difficult for me to believe his winnings (if he is actually a winner, do we really know that for sure?) are on feel alone.

"Who do you like for this weekends NBA playoff games?"
I don't like anyone in particular, but if forced to make a bet, I'd take UTA -2 in game 3 (that's the line this morning, maybe it is different). Against -110 lines, I think that is a fair bet (not postiive ev, but zero ev). I'd shop for UTA -1.5 and if the market line was still UTA -2, I'd make a small wager on -1.5 (this I'd consider a slightly rogue number and not a widely available number....a good percentage of positive EV bets should be made due to shopping, as opposed to betting into widely available lines).

[Performify]

Excellent answer, Yao. I've never been able to put that in to words quite so well...

[dankhank]

as someone who has done this full time for seven years now, i am curious how you handle the emotional variance of gambling?

personally, i am a functional adult when i am running good or running breakeven, but when i am stuck i become very moody and unwilling to enjoy life until i become unstuck.

i can imagine this being more difficult with kids and a wife. or, being married would require that someone stop being moody and somehow block out the negative thoughts that come with losing. either option sounds difficult.

so, would you please talk about the emotional and psychological challenges involved with downswings, or for example, seeing one's ROI shrink to one-half size because one's industry became more difficult to beat?

[King Yao]

"as someone who has done this full time for seven years now, i am curious how you handle the emotional variance of gambling?"

I am not sure I am the best person to answer this question as it relates to sports betting. I'm not under the pressure of making money because I've already got it. Don't get me wrong, I still get disappointed when I lose, and happy when I win big. The disappointments are far worse than the happiness when winning/losing the same amount. I do bet very small relative to my net worth, the most I've ever won/lost in one day is probably 2% of my net worth. I know for most, it is tough to play at those low percentages of ones net worth, because then it is too difficult to make any real money. That's why I consider myself not a good person to answer this question because I never had to go through those stresses in poker or sports betting. I had/have a huge safety net.

When I was trading, those stresses never seemed to hit because my wife worked (she was a trader as well) and we didn't have kids until just last year. So in trading, poker or sports betting, I've never been under the "gotta feed the family" stress. I do think people that have those stresses have it a lot tougher. That's why I would not recommend anyone go into gambling as a career if they have a family and need to make money to live on. It is very difficult. I wouldn't try to stop someone either...but I'm just saying I wouldn't encourage anyone to do it. Instead, when asked, I usually tell them the negatives and to be very careful.


"seeing one's ROI shrink to one-half size because one's industry became more difficult to beat?"

The way I see it, things change, people get smarter. Nothing good stays forever. In trading, when something is great, it doesn't last too long because other traders find out about the opportunities, and they come in and want a piece of the pie. But there is always something else. You have to have the ability to adjust, adapt and be open-minded. I don't think everyone can do that.

[trixtrix]

why are automated bloomberg market data feeds, that batches out to a sql server nightly, so prone to data corruption?

how familiar are you w/ ISDA and FPML? did you have any part in the initial FPML design? what do you think is the likelihood, of FPML becoming the universal accepted standard, for derivatives communication medium industry-wide, in the near future?

[gdaily]

Since one can bet/lay the number of players in main event in WSOP at betfair, and I think the popular choice is WAY off, I would like to ask mr Yao his under/over line for #Players in WSOP?

Best regards
Ola

[King Yao]

"why are automated bloomberg market data feeds, that batches out to a sql server nightly, so prone to data corruption?

how familiar are you w/ ISDA and FPML? did you have any part in the initial FPML design? what do you think is the likelihood, of FPML becoming the universal accepted standard, for derivatives communication medium industry-wide, in the near future? "

I have absolutely no idea!

[King Yao]

Sometimes, the answer is I don't know, others know more than me. I wouldn't be comfortable in my own estimates because I don't follow tournaments, the current status of players that received their seats from offshore poker rooms or any other issue related to WSOP. I've only played in two WSOP events in my life, and those were in the previous century. I'm sure there are plenty of other people that have a better idea than I do about the number of entrants in the WSOP, and I would defer to the market versus any opinion I have given the limited information I have right now. If I gave you an answer, it can only hurt to anchor you against a fairly random number.

[rjp]

Do you know where I could find a solution to the optimal bet size for simultaneous wagers at varying odds and winning percentages using the kelly criterion?

Everything I can find relates specifically to all wagers having the same edge against -110, which we all know isn't practical (especially in baseball). I'm still searching, and I might try and work it out myself, but since you're in the well I figure it's a good question to ask. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]