UFC 68

[Performify]

Been traveling all day, back from the UFC, so just now getting to this thread for the first time in about 24 hours.

Couple comments on some of the goings on, but specifically a couple things as well.

Before I get to any of that, and since this is TL;DR, there is one really good point:

we should all try to get along here. More respect for each other, and a more civilized respectful tone is always a good thing for everyone. Props to trix for the way he's handled himself in this thread. yeah he's cocky. He's also earned an ability to be cocky sometimes. yeah, he could be less cocky. But we can also try to cut him (and cut everyone) more slack too.

Was already said best and most succinctly and i'll say it again - we certainly should all try to get along here [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
trixtrix must be pretty damn good at this, because Performify knew him from other forums, and with how trix came on here and instantly attacked Perf on "his" forum without him getting the usually 2+2 instaban.

[/ QUOTE ]

I definitely think TrixTrix is "pretty damn good at this", to use your words.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would say just follow Performify because his picks are very solid and trixtrix picks are probably nearly identical every event.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's true, i steal performify's picks as my own so i can act like a [censored] on an anonymous internet board...

actually i can think of at least 3 or 4 instances recently where me and performify disagreed on the correct side on a popular match; off top of my head: gsp/matt II, tito/chuck II, koscheck/joslin, herring/o'brien etc... all were well documented before the fact

[/ QUOTE ]

obv. Trix isn't stealing my picks, he's got his own opinions. Maybe sometimes we influence each other, maybe not. But that's just part of being a good capper too, seeking input from sources where the info can be of value.

But I can also throw out some examples off the top of my head - Fedor/Coleman which was a no-play for you and a bridgejump for me, or Shogun/Randleman, Salmon/Rashad, or Penn/Hughes II. Since everything you'd posted were ones that you'd been right and I'd been wrong, figured I'd post some where IIRC you were on the wrong side (directly or as a no-play on an obviously +EV line imo) [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] I think we could both go on end to say instances you're right and I'm wrong, and vice versa. But I will say its a lot easier for you to do with me - thanks to my public picks against WA lines being archived and out there for absolutely everyone to see.

I do agree with the general sentiment that we'd all like to see you post more, and would love to see posting of public picks. There is one really big difference between you and me as a capper - I post picks against widely available lines. I've been doing that for more than two years. its real easy to track my public record for any event.

I'd really suggest you think about publishing and tracking plays against a WA line. And I think we all know there's a big differnece between beating a WA line via pure capping and between maximizing EV with predictive line movements, arb opportunities, etc.

For one, I do think more active feedback than just the positive/negative feedback loop you get from wins and losses. Its real easy for someone to think they were on the right side of Hughes/Penn II or Rashad/Salmon based on the way their bet was scored. But generally speaking i think most true cappers who are able to put aside their own preconceptions about the event afterwards, they'd all say that the correct sides in both of those were opposite the outcome. (not saying trix can't do this, saying more for the benefit of those reading along). So there its easy to get fooled by the positive or negative feedback loop - but again generally speaking more active discussion of your picks before and after the fact help to provide a feedback loop that makes you a better capper in my opinion. I know for a fact I wouldn't be where i am in a lot of things, especially the NFL, without discussions here and elsewhere over the years.

Maybe you're already doing this, maybe you're already beyond this. I don't know you well enough to know if you'd benefit from all this or not - i just know it helped me tremendously over the years and is still the main reason why I post public picks and discuss them. I feel I do get a lot of value from the feedback that comes on my picks from the places I post them for discussion.

That said, I am going to blatantly appeal to your own self interest here - besides all that, posting public picks against WA lines actually has the opportunity to help you directly, believe it or not. If you're good enough, and enough people follow you, you can actually create your own arbitrage opportunities watching people follow your picks. especially if you identify a line, it moves 15c your direction, you post the play, it moves another 15c from people jumping on following you, you've now got a juicy 30c arb opportunity.

Maybe doesn't happen as much with the limited liquidity in play now. But I can definitely say you'd see lines swing on Pinnacle when that was still WA, once I'd release picks. Not always, obviously, if I were backing a play contrary to public opinion. But when I'd make a pick where the line had already started moving that direction, people would pile on and the line would measurably move as a result of the post. All empirical evidence of course, but I can certainly find quite a few people who can empirically vouch for the line moves, because i had quite a few people I was feeding my picks prior to posting publicly because they'd specifically requested it.

Just do it in the same general approach I use - make your own picks and own plays. do whatever you want obv. But I'd really advocate you set a time after you've got all your action down, when you know you're not going to put anything else in to play, and then release a set of public picks against the WA lines at the time.

[Dark Helmet]

Ouch. I feel damn stupid for betting on Tim. More so because it took most of the enjoyment out of what otherwise would have been one of the most enjoyable fights of all time for me to watch.

I thought the McFedries fight was gonna be money. That is until it was abruptly revealed that he has 0 ground skills. At least Fitch won so I didnt go totally broke.

Trix - I remember you posting your disagreement on Couture. I respected your opinion then and I respect it now. I really thought that Sylvia would be a lot more effective standing.

Couture is the man.

[trixtrix]

how is everything i posted a winning selection for me? i was on joslin, i didn't really post the pick more so than arguing the reason why i'm against siding w/ josh, also i arbed off a majority portion of the bet. i counted it b/c i did have a medium sized position on it, all the picks were mentioned just b/c they're recent and i had medium to large action on them. not as gravy to pat my record against you.

i also forgot to credit you w/ leben/macdonald, although i still contend leben is not the wrong side at -140 using proof by inspection

[Performify]

I was just playing around which is why i had the [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] in there. sorry if the intended humor / sarcasm didn't come through.

I had forgotten that you were on Joslin.

[igetbadbeat]

Last two events have been great...UFC 68 and Pride. Not so much for betting IMO, but the shows were great.

Wish I put a small play on Lambert, considered that he might have a good shot but it was hard to bet against babalu's experience.

[trixtrix]

[ QUOTE ]
Trix,

My point was neither here nor there, but I wanted to just point out the fact. Sometimes being cocky is warranted. Like when I sit in class and listen to the brain dead adjunct prattle about some meaningless type of analysis she does in a class it doesn't even pertain too.

[/ QUOTE ]

your analogy totally lost me

[trixtrix]

[ QUOTE ]
"on a side note, you're an idiot"
i got better lines than most people were talking about on this site. i said, pretty politely that people could probably do better if they shopped around more. What was so wrong with that?

"you try to jam anything near a dime in either rogue sportsbook aff or sia, maybe then you would be qualified to give out an opinion on line shopping. yes it sure is nice getting -325 on rich or -230 on tim if you're betting to win you next busfare..."
im sorry if u r a baller i set my dirty feet on your site, but for me, 1 unit is $100 and i bet a lot of people who post here have similar bankrolls. I have gotten bets up to 1k in at sportsbook, and im sure others have bet higher, thats hardly bus fare. Im sure the majority of us arent putting in 10k bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

i highly doubt you were able to put over limit (1k+) wagers on fights consistently at sportingbet affiliates. considering they turned me down to place 500$ extra on hughes -625 to win ONLY 80 more on fight night after i hit the 500$ bet limit. considering they're unwilling to take on 80$ more in exposure i highly doubt they would be willing to consistently approve additional 500-1k in extra volume per bettor.

i also had a friend who, back a year or so ago during the sportsbetting golden days, had 4 sportingbet aff accounts and was betting 2k per pop per fight across all his accounts. they paid and banned him after only 2 events, even though technically he has done nothing wrong. (you were in fact encouraged to have more than one sportingbet aff account at the time)

btw, you do realize why sportingbet has such skewed odds on the favs right? it has nothing to do w/ the amount of squares that are in love w/ the dogs, bodog generally have more squares yet their fav prices are often not as out-of-line as sportsbook.com.

the prob w/sportingbet rogue fav odds is entirely self-conceived and a self-fulfilling prophecy. it's their own stupidity that opens themselves vulnerable to arbs almost every fight night. the problem is that they have a MAX BET limit instead of MAX BASE limit. take the example of hughes -625/ lytle +525, in this scenario the most you can bet on hughes is 500 to win 80, yet you can bet 500 to win 2,625$ on lytle. so let's say theoretically the correct price is -650, so you have ten people willing to wager the max on hughes at -625 and only 5 people willing to wager the max on lytle. now let's see what happens: 10 people bet 500 each on matt, to create a total position of 5,000$ to win 800$ for hughes. 5 people wager the max on lytle to create a position of 2,500$ to win 13,125$ on chris. so the dog side actually have taken on MORE EXPOSURE despite the fact more people bet on the fav. so what happens? they have to shade the odds against the dog to beg for more exposure on the fav. so you see, the rogue fav odds is an entirely self-sustaining cycle created by their unwillingness to correctly update their position to take the same amount of base exposure instead of using a unilaterall bet limit ceiling across the board.

finally, line selections and timing the market goes far beyond the sportingbet elementary stuff. for example, most did't realize holman opened up as +400 dog, it was only for a short time window but you could've bet him repeatedly at 1k per pop.

[Thremp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Trix,

My point was neither here nor there, but I wanted to just point out the fact. Sometimes being cocky is warranted. Like when I sit in class and listen to the brain dead adjunct prattle about some meaningless type of analysis she does in a class it doesn't even pertain too.

[/ QUOTE ]

your analogy totally lost me

[/ QUOTE ]

It had nothing to do with anything. I live a bitter, unfulfilled life that requires whining every 2 hours about how horrid this paper I wrote was... And the class I wrote it in... And the teacher... etc.

[igetbadbeat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"on a side note, you're an idiot"
i got better lines than most people were talking about on this site. i said, pretty politely that people could probably do better if they shopped around more. What was so wrong with that?

"you try to jam anything near a dime in either rogue sportsbook aff or sia, maybe then you would be qualified to give out an opinion on line shopping. yes it sure is nice getting -325 on rich or -230 on tim if you're betting to win you next busfare..."
im sorry if u r a baller i set my dirty feet on your site, but for me, 1 unit is $100 and i bet a lot of people who post here have similar bankrolls. I have gotten bets up to 1k in at sportsbook, and im sure others have bet higher, thats hardly bus fare. Im sure the majority of us arent putting in 10k bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

i highly doubt you were able to put over limit (1k+) wagers on fights consistently at sportingbet affiliates. considering they turned me down to place 500$ extra on hughes -625 to win ONLY 80 more on fight night after i hit the 500$ bet limit. considering they're unwilling to take on 80$ more in exposure i highly doubt they would be willing to consistently approve additional 500-1k in extra volume per bettor.

i also had a friend who, back a year or so ago during the sportsbetting golden days, had 4 sportingbet aff accounts and was betting 2k per pop per fight across all his accounts. they paid and banned him after only 2 events, even though technically he has done nothing wrong. (you were in fact encouraged to have more than one sportingbet aff account at the time)

btw, you do realize why sportingbet has such skewed odds on the favs right? it has nothing to do w/ the amount of squares that are in love w/ the dogs, bodog generally have more squares yet their fav prices are often not as out-of-line as sportsbook.com.

the prob w/sportingbet rogue fav odds is entirely self-conceived and a self-fulfilling prophecy. it's their own stupidity that opens themselves vulnerable to arbs almost every fight night. the problem is that they have a MAX BET limit instead of MAX BASE limit. take the example of hughes -625/ lytle +525, in this scenario the most you can bet on hughes is 500 to win 80, yet you can bet 500 to win 2,625$ on lytle. so let's say theoretically the correct price is -650, so you have ten people willing to wager the max on hughes at -625 and only 5 people willing to wager the max on lytle. now let's see what happens: 10 people bet 500 each on matt, to create a total position of 5,000$ to win 800$ for hughes. 5 people wager the max on lytle to create a position of 2,500$ to win 13,125$ on chris. so the dog side actually have taken on MORE EXPOSURE despite the fact more people bet on the fav. so what happens? they have to shade the odds against the dog to beg for more exposure on the fav. so you see, the rogue fav odds is an entirely self-sustaining cycle created by their unwillingness to correctly update their position to take the same amount of base exposure instead of using a unilaterall bet limit ceiling across the board.

finally, line selections and timing the market goes far beyond the sportingbet elementary stuff. for example, most did't realize holman opened up as +400 dog, it was only for a short time window but you could've bet him repeatedly at 1k per pop.

[/ QUOTE ]


Lucky me...Betcris let me max Sylvia 2X and put another $1K on him.

[orensi]

[ QUOTE ]
couture +240
sylvia -290

this is a deceptively hard fight to pick, because sylvia hasnt faced a quality wrestler in ages, and because randy is really very, very smart and excells at working suitable gameplans. light action on sylvia is probably smart but if randy shows up and start chopping sylvias legs in rd 1, kiss your money goodbye.


[/ QUOTE ]

Nice catch man. "Suitable gameplan" is an understatement, made Sylvia look like a joke.