|
|
|
|
#1
11-27-2007, 12:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Recommendation on topic of next article
My next article on sports betting for the Two Plus Two Magazine is due tomorrow. I have a few topics in mind, but wanted to get an idea of what some people think as far as timing. One topic will be on the end of the NFL season (playoffs and/or end of regular season). I am choosing whether to write that article for the December issue (out on Dec 1, this Saturday). Or for the January issue, which is right after the regular season ends and before the playoffs begin. I don't want to write about the NFL for both issues. If I wait until the January issue to write about the NFL playoffs, the content can be more directed towards the specific seedings, match-ups, etc. If I write it now, it'll be more general, but I'll be able to write about getting into the playoffs.
I'm leaning towards the latter, but wanted to get some thoughts if people are interested in commenting. 
|
|
#4
11-27-2007, 04:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Recommendation on topic of next article
[ QUOTE ]
I'm leaning towards the latter, but wanted to get some thoughts if people are interested in commenting. [/ QUOTE ] Which one do you mean by "the latter"? January is later in time but the last thing you mentioned was December. I vote for whatever would be more general, and very strongly for either one over nothing at all.
|
|
#6
11-27-2007, 04:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Recommendation on topic of next article
I agree about the more general the better. I think an analysis of the impact of various end of regualar season scenarios (teams w/ playoff hopes versus teams out of the playoffs, teams that are expected to rest players vs. others, etc.) would be very interesting. I do realize you said it's due tomorrow, so it may not be possible...I imagine you may have much of the info already though.
Looking forward to the article no matter which way you go.
|
|
#7
11-27-2007, 05:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Recommendation on topic of next article
I guess I'm the only one who would prefer a delay so that the specific playoffs can be analyzed in greater detail. He can speak in generalities now and then some other aspect comes up between now and then that actually changes things.
Personally, I don't think it would be so horrible to do both articles. Do a general one now and then a follow-up that shows how this year's playoffs work or perhaps don't work into that. It's not like the 2+2 mag articles are novel-length. Oftentimes they can be somewhat short so I have no problem with turning it into a 2-parter if it can be done in a way that doesn't completely repeat the content. Sounds like King isn't interested in doing that though because he doesn't want to do back to back football articles and I'm not sure there are many readers besides me for something like that either.
|
|
#8
11-27-2007, 06:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Recommendation on topic of next article
i would like to hear king yao's take on bet sizing
(ie how often he flat bets, how often he does multi-unit plays, how he weights things.... weighting when the numbers are clear is one thing, but how did he weigh the miami-pittsburgh under last night, for example?)
|
|
#9
11-27-2007, 08:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Recommendation on topic of next article
[ QUOTE ]
i would like to hear king yao's take on bet sizing (ie how often he flat bets, how often he does multi-unit plays, how he weights things.... weighting when the numbers are clear is one thing, but how did he weigh the miami-pittsburgh under last night, for example?) [/ QUOTE ] I asked him this when he was in the well. He bets a lot, so he's usually running into limits before he has to worry about betting too much. I assume this is because he bets a lot of lower limit/softer lines.
|
|
#10
11-27-2007, 08:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Recommendation on topic of next article
[ QUOTE ]
i would like to hear king yao's take on bet sizing (ie how often he flat bets, how often he does multi-unit plays, how he weights things.... weighting when the numbers are clear is one thing, but how did he weigh the miami-pittsburgh under last night, for example?) [/ QUOTE ] To answer this quickly: while I respect those that use Kelly, I don't use it. I go by my gut feel of how much risk I can stand for the perceived edge. Sometimes that perceived edge is due to confidence levels - meaning if I think I have 3% edge, but I'm not really sure, I may bet less with the 3% edge than when I think I have 1% edge, but I'm 100% positive I have 1% edge. For example, I'd happily bet a lot on a coin flip if I'm getting +105 and I know the coin flipper isn't cheating. But if I think fair value is -120, and I can get -105, I may bet less than in the coin-flip situation if I am not that confident that my -105 number is correct. I'm glad I don't have to quantiy risk for myself because I know what risk I'm comfortable with. At the same time, it means I have less expertise in writing about risk and bet-sizing because it would be wrong to suggest to others to "bet if you have edge until you can't stomache it anymore". As for the PIT/MIA under, I made three plays connected to the under: 1H Parlay MIA +9.5 / Under 20 (early in the day), PIT team total under 27 +105, and 2H Parlay MIA +7 / Under 14.5. I didn't take the PIT/over parlay, so I was really short PIT and taking the under at the same time. Worked out nicely last night, but it still probably had a 46% or more chance of losing. edited to add: each one I bet the max I could, which is well within my risk limits. it was more the books limits rather than my risk limits that deteremined the bet size. Again, that shows I'm not the best person to write about bet sizing since I don't think about it that much.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
