I had a pretty frustrating run with horse betting recently. I had dabbled in exotic wagers with superfectas. I started out hot, but followed it up with a cooler.
Obviously, I was looking at a high variance scenario. It's almost an intuitive reflex for me to dial back my play when I'm running uber bad.
After running my head into a brick wall for most of the month, I decided to switch from vertical to horizontal wagers. Horizontal wagers are multi race picks, such as the daily double, pick 3, pick 6, etc.
I've been tinkering with the pick 3 because you can build a deep ticket for a small price. If your favorites come in you can still turn a small profit, but if one of your long shots win, you are looking at a very good payday.
It's been a short, but super hot run for me on pick 3's, cashing 5 of 6 tries over the last few days. I'm realizing that these wagers may be more suited to my handicapping style, where I'm able to pinpoint the best 3-4 runners each race. I can cover these combos at a very inexpensive price.
If I can ever work my way up to the pick 6's there are lots of carryover pools resulting in big money. For now, I'm not going to mess with my success - even given the small sample size.
In other news, I've been super cold in fantasy baseball, although I haven't been playing much. I swept my fantasy NASCAR last weekend. Except for that I've only cashed a few times since the first week of June. And I'm really starting to worry that football won't start on time this year.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
Choose Your Fantasy Contests Wisely
One aspect of daily fantasy sports that is overlooked is the contest structure (as it relates to the player).
Some players stick to heads-up(HU), small field or large field events. Some play all three formats. However, every player needs to figure out which structures are the most profitable.
Large field events are a great place to assess your strength against the "field", since you are playing so many opponents each time out. Taking my large field results on Draftstreet this baseball season, my average entry finished in the 75th percentile (or the top 25% of scores).
Consistently finishing in the top 25% sounds great, doesn't it? It's not. Simply put, only the top 10% of scores get paid in any large field event. Although my scores beat most of the field, more often than not they didn't win any prize money.
Draftstreet also offers small field contests. The three and six player pay 33% of the field, while the 10 player pays 30% of contestants.
If I had spent more entries on the small contests instead of the large field, I'd certainly have more coin in my pocket right now. All of those top 25% scores would have cashed.
(For comparison purposes, Fan Duel offers 5 and 10 player contests, winner take all.)
Playing HU contests can be profitable if you have some "game selection" available to you. This means you have some say over which opponents you play. Playing too many contests against just one opponent (or one TEAM) is extremely high variance. It can bust your bankroll quickly.
Remember that you must win close to 60% of your HU contests just to be profitable. This is why it's so important to vary your opponents - it gives you a chance to cash if you score poorly.
Playing some mixture of all three formats is probably the best medicine for a fantasy player's psyche. You won't freak out over the cold streaks or bad beats. It will give you enough cashes to keep a positive mindset.
Some players stick to heads-up(HU), small field or large field events. Some play all three formats. However, every player needs to figure out which structures are the most profitable.
Large field events are a great place to assess your strength against the "field", since you are playing so many opponents each time out. Taking my large field results on Draftstreet this baseball season, my average entry finished in the 75th percentile (or the top 25% of scores).
Consistently finishing in the top 25% sounds great, doesn't it? It's not. Simply put, only the top 10% of scores get paid in any large field event. Although my scores beat most of the field, more often than not they didn't win any prize money.
Draftstreet also offers small field contests. The three and six player pay 33% of the field, while the 10 player pays 30% of contestants.
If I had spent more entries on the small contests instead of the large field, I'd certainly have more coin in my pocket right now. All of those top 25% scores would have cashed.
(For comparison purposes, Fan Duel offers 5 and 10 player contests, winner take all.)
Playing HU contests can be profitable if you have some "game selection" available to you. This means you have some say over which opponents you play. Playing too many contests against just one opponent (or one TEAM) is extremely high variance. It can bust your bankroll quickly.
Remember that you must win close to 60% of your HU contests just to be profitable. This is why it's so important to vary your opponents - it gives you a chance to cash if you score poorly.
Playing some mixture of all three formats is probably the best medicine for a fantasy player's psyche. You won't freak out over the cold streaks or bad beats. It will give you enough cashes to keep a positive mindset.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Semi-OT: The Life Decision Questionnaire
I'm imparting on a short trip to visit some family and take care of personal matters.
The last two years have pretty much been a whirlwind of seriousness. I've tried to deflect a bunch of that with friends, drink or two-wheeled transportation. (Never combining the last two, obv.) Sometimes it works, sometimes not so much.
I read somewhere recently that most people reach their peak pessimism at mid 40's. So I wonder if the funk in my life is part of the growth curve - as opposed to the actual circumstances I'm facing.
Anyway, I would really like feedback on the following questions I often find myself pondering. Some unique perspective from my internet friends might help me figure out some things.
Consider the following parameters:
-You are single, with no spouse or significant other.
-You have no children, no dependents and no pets.
-You have no debts.
-You have no illiquid assets other than your personal belongings.
-You have enough savings on hand to maintain your current lifestyle for 4-5 years.
-You have three diseases which are all potentially fatal. One has a 90% mortality rate. Another has a 33% survival rate. The third is manageable but still kills many people.
-Given the most optimistic projection, you have 10 years to live.
Based on that information, answer the following questions:
1) How long would you continue your job or career? Do you love your job so much you would continue as long as possible?
2) How hard would you pursue a relationship? How important is it for you to NOT die alone?
3) Would you ever consider elective surgery (such as a cosmetic procedure) even though it's likely you will die just a few years later.
4) On the other hand, would you spend a significant chunk of your net worth on medical care just to extend your life a year or two?
5) Would you travel more or less? Would you develop a specific "bucket list" for your remaining years?
6) Would you be more likely to use illegal substances or engage in illegal activities, knowing your potential punishment is diminished by your life expectancy?*
7) What is the ONE most important thing to accomplish in your remaining years?
(*Consider yourself qualified for medical marijuana, all you can consume.)
Now I want to emphasize specifically this is not my exact personal situation. It is a combination of my circumstances combined with two others I know.
I'm in the process of writing two wills, including my own. Making end of life decisions really makes you think about some heavy stuff.
Anyway, if you respond to any of the questions please frame them in the parameters stated above.
Thanks for reading this.
The last two years have pretty much been a whirlwind of seriousness. I've tried to deflect a bunch of that with friends, drink or two-wheeled transportation. (Never combining the last two, obv.) Sometimes it works, sometimes not so much.
I read somewhere recently that most people reach their peak pessimism at mid 40's. So I wonder if the funk in my life is part of the growth curve - as opposed to the actual circumstances I'm facing.
Anyway, I would really like feedback on the following questions I often find myself pondering. Some unique perspective from my internet friends might help me figure out some things.
Consider the following parameters:
-You are single, with no spouse or significant other.
-You have no children, no dependents and no pets.
-You have no debts.
-You have no illiquid assets other than your personal belongings.
-You have enough savings on hand to maintain your current lifestyle for 4-5 years.
-You have three diseases which are all potentially fatal. One has a 90% mortality rate. Another has a 33% survival rate. The third is manageable but still kills many people.
-Given the most optimistic projection, you have 10 years to live.
Based on that information, answer the following questions:
1) How long would you continue your job or career? Do you love your job so much you would continue as long as possible?
2) How hard would you pursue a relationship? How important is it for you to NOT die alone?
3) Would you ever consider elective surgery (such as a cosmetic procedure) even though it's likely you will die just a few years later.
4) On the other hand, would you spend a significant chunk of your net worth on medical care just to extend your life a year or two?
5) Would you travel more or less? Would you develop a specific "bucket list" for your remaining years?
6) Would you be more likely to use illegal substances or engage in illegal activities, knowing your potential punishment is diminished by your life expectancy?*
7) What is the ONE most important thing to accomplish in your remaining years?
(*Consider yourself qualified for medical marijuana, all you can consume.)
Now I want to emphasize specifically this is not my exact personal situation. It is a combination of my circumstances combined with two others I know.
I'm in the process of writing two wills, including my own. Making end of life decisions really makes you think about some heavy stuff.
Anyway, if you respond to any of the questions please frame them in the parameters stated above.
Thanks for reading this.
Thursday, June 09, 2011
Is Proline The Answer To Sports Betting?
The warm weather has finally hit Buffalo and I've been out scooting every nice day recently. I've also acquired some serious allergy issues, including a running stuffy nose with sneezing and watery eyes. I've been taking medication that treats the symptoms, but it makes me feel a little zoned out.
I have been playing daily fantasy baseball regularly, sticking mostly to Draftstreet and Fan Duel. I generally fare better at Draftstreet with their deeper rosters and scoring tables.
I'll keep plugging away hoping for a big score at some point.
So when I'm not busy being a broken down old man, or busy cooking out with friends, I've been researching sport betting options. I even considered trekking out to Vegas again, presuming I could gather enough action to make it worthwhile.
Most recently, Proline has piqued my interest. It is a parlay game run by the Ontario lottery. You must parlay 3-6 events and you can wager $2-$100 per ticket. Payouts are based on the odds listed per event.
Thanks to a couple of great resources, I was able to put Proline in perspective with other sports betting products. Surprisingly, Proline is a much better value than the only area sportsbook (Casino Niagara).
However, when comparing Proline odds to Pinnacle Sports, the offerings don't look very attractive. Pinny is the sharpest online book, offering lower juice than Vegas. Since all online books are not an option for me, I'm back to comparing Vegas with Proline.
There are two beautiful aspects to Proline that cannot be discounted:
1) It is completely legal to play/purchase Proline whenever I'm in Ontario.
2) If I pull a winner I know I will get paid, no questions asked.
Although I'm not a fan of parlays in general, my methodology on totals seemed to produce results. I'd like to give it another shot.
While a flight to Vegas would cost me at least $300, I can take a bus round trip to Fort Erie for $3.50. (Yes, tree fiddy.)
So while Vegas odds are probably the best available to me, Proline odds are worth taking a small shot, given my proximity to Canada.
I have been playing daily fantasy baseball regularly, sticking mostly to Draftstreet and Fan Duel. I generally fare better at Draftstreet with their deeper rosters and scoring tables.
I'll keep plugging away hoping for a big score at some point.
So when I'm not busy being a broken down old man, or busy cooking out with friends, I've been researching sport betting options. I even considered trekking out to Vegas again, presuming I could gather enough action to make it worthwhile.
Most recently, Proline has piqued my interest. It is a parlay game run by the Ontario lottery. You must parlay 3-6 events and you can wager $2-$100 per ticket. Payouts are based on the odds listed per event.
Thanks to a couple of great resources, I was able to put Proline in perspective with other sports betting products. Surprisingly, Proline is a much better value than the only area sportsbook (Casino Niagara).
However, when comparing Proline odds to Pinnacle Sports, the offerings don't look very attractive. Pinny is the sharpest online book, offering lower juice than Vegas. Since all online books are not an option for me, I'm back to comparing Vegas with Proline.
There are two beautiful aspects to Proline that cannot be discounted:
1) It is completely legal to play/purchase Proline whenever I'm in Ontario.
2) If I pull a winner I know I will get paid, no questions asked.
Although I'm not a fan of parlays in general, my methodology on totals seemed to produce results. I'd like to give it another shot.
While a flight to Vegas would cost me at least $300, I can take a bus round trip to Fort Erie for $3.50. (Yes, tree fiddy.)
So while Vegas odds are probably the best available to me, Proline odds are worth taking a small shot, given my proximity to Canada.
Thursday, June 02, 2011
The Stacked Team Experiment
Everyone in daily fantasy baseball is smitten with the concept of the "stacked" roster. You load up with hitters all from one team, with the hope that they post a huge score that day. This methodology seems to have won a few tournaments lately.
So what if you could cover all of the outcomes? Taking an example from roulette, which has three possible color outcomes (red, black and green), what if you could bet all the outcomes and still make a profit?
Last night was the ideal scenario to try this in daily fantasy baseball.
There were only 7 games on the schedule last evening. There was also a very strong top projected pitcher (Tommy Hanson).
So in a $5 tournament I decided to stack all 14 rosters playing that evening. I entered 14 times for a total of $70.
Now there were some circumstances where I couldn't use ALL hitters from a team. I filled in those spots with quality players from other teams. Also, if I had substantial money left over, I upgraded the bottom feeders with better players from another squad.
So every team was covered, I just had to sit back and collect my cash, right? here are the results:
Minnesota + Hanson 32.75 (176th place)
Detroit + Hanson 35 (153rd)
Cleveland + Hanson 57.5 (7th) $30
Toronto + Hanson 38.25 (113th)
San Diego + Marcum* 39 (103rd)
Atlanta + Hanson 36.50 (131st)
Pittsburgh + Hanson 34.25 (160th)
NY Mets + Hanson 46 (38th)
Milwaukee + Hanson 39.25 (99th)
Cincinnati + Hanson 33.5 (166th)
San Francisco + Hanson 42.25 (69th)
St. Louis + Hanson 38 (116th)
Colorado + Hanson 30 (217th)
Los Angeles + Hanson 20.75 (259th)
(*Since the Padres were facing Hanson, taking Hanson on this roster would have negative expectation. If SD hits a ton, Hanson likely gets shelled. If Hanson throws a shutout, the Padres likely put up squadoosh.)
So as you can see, stacking every team gave me only one cash with a net loss of $40.
Now, before you can utter the words "sample size", let me say a few things. Stacking every team does give you the possibility of a positive outcome, but only if you catch lightning in a bottle.
And that is my point - stacking rosters is a high risk, high reward strategy. however, it is not the highest EV strategy to winning a large field event. You need the best pitching & hitting combinations to get closest to an optimal score. In order to do that, diverse rosters are better on most nights.
Disagree? Tell me why in the comments.
So what if you could cover all of the outcomes? Taking an example from roulette, which has three possible color outcomes (red, black and green), what if you could bet all the outcomes and still make a profit?
Last night was the ideal scenario to try this in daily fantasy baseball.
There were only 7 games on the schedule last evening. There was also a very strong top projected pitcher (Tommy Hanson).
So in a $5 tournament I decided to stack all 14 rosters playing that evening. I entered 14 times for a total of $70.
Now there were some circumstances where I couldn't use ALL hitters from a team. I filled in those spots with quality players from other teams. Also, if I had substantial money left over, I upgraded the bottom feeders with better players from another squad.
So every team was covered, I just had to sit back and collect my cash, right? here are the results:
Minnesota + Hanson 32.75 (176th place)
Detroit + Hanson 35 (153rd)
Cleveland + Hanson 57.5 (7th) $30
Toronto + Hanson 38.25 (113th)
San Diego + Marcum* 39 (103rd)
Atlanta + Hanson 36.50 (131st)
Pittsburgh + Hanson 34.25 (160th)
NY Mets + Hanson 46 (38th)
Milwaukee + Hanson 39.25 (99th)
Cincinnati + Hanson 33.5 (166th)
San Francisco + Hanson 42.25 (69th)
St. Louis + Hanson 38 (116th)
Colorado + Hanson 30 (217th)
Los Angeles + Hanson 20.75 (259th)
(*Since the Padres were facing Hanson, taking Hanson on this roster would have negative expectation. If SD hits a ton, Hanson likely gets shelled. If Hanson throws a shutout, the Padres likely put up squadoosh.)
So as you can see, stacking every team gave me only one cash with a net loss of $40.
Now, before you can utter the words "sample size", let me say a few things. Stacking every team does give you the possibility of a positive outcome, but only if you catch lightning in a bottle.
And that is my point - stacking rosters is a high risk, high reward strategy. however, it is not the highest EV strategy to winning a large field event. You need the best pitching & hitting combinations to get closest to an optimal score. In order to do that, diverse rosters are better on most nights.
Disagree? Tell me why in the comments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)