Betting the obvious will sink you

[jjgold]

We got a break that mold many of us

 

[KingKolzig]

Nationally televised road favorite vs an unranked team? Where do i sign up?

Brock Landers

 

[BobbyFK]

If it sounds to good to be true it probably is

 

[theriver55]

Good Luck GOLD

 

[Headsterx]

It's obvious as shit to always fade you, and that has NEVER failed me.

 

[jjgold]

You’re gonna see a new gambler this fall implementing many strategies that are somewhat awkward

 

[JDS]

It's obvious as shit to always fade you, and that has NEVER failed me.

Imagine if you were discipline enough to just fade him and bet nothing else, you could be rich.

 

[djefferis]

If betting the obvious will sink you - and fading JJ and a few other posters here the obvious choice - aren’t we in a bit of a paradoxical predicament here ?

 

[KVB]

We got a break that mold many of us

The problem here is that when you think your a genius breaking the mold, you get burned and you remember how bad the obvious got you, so you might not be so bold to do it again.

Allowing one instance, one result postiive or negative, to change your betting style is always a disaster.

Best to come up with a more disciplined approach (ignoring whether something seems "obvious" or not) or lay a more rigorous structure over the concept at hand. In other words if you quantify the "obviousness" of the play or even quanitfy the "non-obviousness" of a play then you have a structure to work from.

Otherwise you are just a rudderless ship floating at sea from one play to the next and unless you are a Ragnar Lothbrock you will be lost.

Remember, a Viking is never lost.

So, in conclusion, develop a capping strategy that is solid or become a Viking before pulling that trigger.

 

[KVB]

...In other words if you quantify the "obviousness" of the play or even quanitfy the "non-obviousness" of a play then you have a structure to work from.

Full disclosure here, I do this as a small slice of the giant strategy pie that is method of the KVB Contrarian Funds.

There are a number of posters here that can appreciate these concepts.

 

[KVB]

I also want to add that if you're trading the markets you don't necessarily have to have some kind of brilliant market beating regression to come up with ratings. You can glean enough info from the market to make your own ratings work.

Just be willing to adjust as days move one.

You can start simple, with for example a rating of 1-5. Maybe you need more, maybe 1-10 or add a decimal to the 1 to 5 so you get 1.5, or 2.3, etc.

Just be willing to track and learn from your own ratings and be willing to adjust them. Pairing your own experience and notions with some kind of your own ratings and working to improve those ratings constantly will help you with trading strategies like Knowing Your Markets.

I think I mention in that video that coming up with your own ratings are essential and can help you understand why a line opens where it does and moves to where it closes...and most know my quote about that.

 

[jjgold]

The unexpected will get you the scores whether it’s horse racing or sports. Listen to me.

 

[KVB]

The unexpected will get you

That's fine, as long as you don't let the unexpected get TO you.

Always remember, there is one very predicitable thing about the very difficult to predict NFL, and that is that it's always a surprise. The unexpected is consistent in the NFL.

That even means that when you are expecting the unexpected, then the "expected" occurs, that was still unexpected.

See how the NFL can get away with being totally predictable when predicting it will be unexpected.

There's nothing in the world like gridiron football.

 

[flyingillini]

The problem here is that when you think your a genius breaking the mold, you get burned and you remember how bad the obvious got you, so you might not be so bold to do it again.

Allowing one instance, one result postiive or negative, to change your betting style is always a disaster.

Best to come up with a more disciplined approach (ignoring whether something seems "obvious" or not) or lay a more rigorous structure over the concept at hand. In other words if you quantify the "obviousness" of the play or even quanitfy the "non-obviousness" of a play then you have a structure to work from.

Otherwise you are just a rudderless ship floating at sea from one play to the next and unless you are a Ragnar Lothbrock you will be lost.

Remember, a Viking is never lost.

So, in conclusion, develop a capping strategy that is solid or become a Viking before pulling that trigger.

Once again, this is an amazing write-up, amazing as always. People here can learn a thing or two from @KVB , you did forget one important thing, if one doesn't understand "variance" and how to apply it, they will never be a successful gambler.