603 replies to this topic

[BigDMcGee]

AmScray, on Wednesday, July 16th, 2008, 1:11 PM, said:

Download it and see what happens.Then get that pang of humiliation that occurs whenever one speaks about something they know nothing about and it turns out they're were wrong all along... (possible one has actually gotten out without password protection, but it's unlikely. If so, LOL @ me- what a drama queen D bag)

well, it turns out you need that pang of humiliation, because all I have is an non-passworded pdf file copy of the book. I did do my download from Demoniod, not the link I linked above, so it's possible the one I linked requires a password..To prove that I have the unpassworded, here's the table of contents...1 Where most investors stumble1 Speculators and unsuccessful investors2 The nature of Wall Street works against investors3 The institutional performance derby: the client is the loser4 Delusions of value: The myths and misconceptions of Junk Bonds in the 1980'sII A value investment philosophyEtc...Here's the opening paragraph from the introduction...Investors adopt many different approaches that offer littler or no real prospect of long-term success and considerable chance of substantial economic loss. Many are not coherent investment programs at all, but instead resemble speculation or outright gambling. Investors are frequently lured by the prospect of quick and easy gain and fall victim to the many fads of wall Street. My goals in writing this book are twofold. In the first section, I identify many of the pitfalls that face investors. By highlighting were so many go wrong, I hope to help investors learn to avoid these losing strategies... So, LOL @ you, drama queen.

[AmScray]

LOL @ me indeed.They were all but impossible to get up to a month or so ago, and all the ones floating around out there were PWP. Either things have changed and a non PWP copy has finally gotten out and replicated, or you just got stupid lucky and found one that wasn't as a result of chance.When I mentioned I had one on another forum (investing) I think I got 50 IMs in the space of an hour begging for a copy- about 1/2 from people who were otherwise tech savvy and knew how torrents worked. I know my own searches for it from 2007 onward all led to PWP copies.Anyway, lets not derail an otherwise big-time post.

[Shimmering Wang]

SlapStick, on Wednesday, July 16th, 2008, 4:58 PM, said:

Such a good thread. Very impressed. I'm currently helping start up a bet site(don't worry I have no control over the odds) so I'm trying to get into it. All this insight is brilliant. In Ireland all my friends gambled like crazy on horses and it just seemed like such a dead end. Do you bet on horses? does the same theory apply?Great thread but I don't know the american odds or the spreads on teams so some of it is a bit of it is lost on me but its really intriguing

I have made a few ponies bets, but only, like, "The Field" in the Belmont when Big Brown was going off as a huge favorite and other spots like that where my contrarian angles are easy to find. I tend to stick to sports I can watch on TV or my computer. Gives me a sweat.If you ever need any help with the American Odds system, just ask. As a quick example, "-110" simply means "10/11" or ".91." In English it means, "Bet 110 to win 100." "+110" means "11/10" or "1.1." "Bet 100 to win 110."When I say Yankees, you should think "Manchester United" I think. (Man U spends a TON more money than most everybody else, right? Like, they have a huge payroll, putting them at a huge competitive advantage?") Wang

[Sheiky]

Shimmering Wang, on Wednesday, July 16th, 2008, 11:50 PM, said:

I have made a few ponies bets, but only, like, "The Field" in the Belmont when Big Brown was going off as a huge favorite and other spots like that where my contrarian angles are easy to find. I tend to stick to sports I can watch on TV or my computer. Gives me a sweat.If you ever need any help with the American Odds system, just ask. As a quick example, "-110" simply means "10/11" or ".91." In English it means, "Bet 110 to win 100." "+110" means "11/10" or "1.1." "Bet 100 to win 110."When I say Yankees, you should think "Manchester United" I think. (Man U spends a TON more money than most everybody else, right? Like, they have a huge payroll, putting them at a huge competitive advantage?") Wang

Basicaly, though all the top 4 clubs (Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal) are pretty much the top 4 clubs because they have the biggest spending power. In American odds, are the team that is -110 the favourite? And also, how do you work out the overall vigourish taken by the bookmaker on a certain 2-team bet? I'm quite interested in sports betting, but as an English man who doesn't entirely understand odds yet it's a tad confusing

[Poppy_Hillis]

Sheiky, on Wednesday, July 16th, 2008, 3:55 PM, said:

Basicaly, though all the top 4 clubs (Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal) are pretty much the top 4 clubs because they have the biggest spending power. In American odds, are the team that is -110 the favourite? And also, how do you work out the overall vigourish taken by the bookmaker on a certain 2-team bet? I'm quite interested in sports betting, but as an English man who doesn't entirely understand odds yet it's a tad confusing

It's alright, I usually have to spend at least twenty minutes explaining the odds with my friends everytime we go to Vegas, even though I explained it last time.Yes, -110 is the favorite.

[BigDMcGee]

AmScray, on Wednesday, July 16th, 2008, 2:49 PM, said:

LOL @ me indeed.They were all but impossible to get up to a month or so ago, and all the ones floating around out there were PWP. Either things have changed and a non PWP copy has finally gotten out and replicated, or you just got stupid lucky and found one that wasn't as a result of chance.When I mentioned I had one on another forum (investing) I think I got 50 IMs in the space of an hour begging for a copy- about 1/2 from people who were otherwise tech savvy and knew how torrents worked. I know my own searches for it from 2007 onward all led to PWP copies.Anyway, lets not derail an otherwise big-time post.

Well again, I got mine from Demoniod, which is a private p2p torrent community, and not a public one, so it's possible they just have a non-pw protected copy because the whole community is pw protected, in a sense. At any rate, it seems like a fascinating book from just skimming over it.

[Shimmering Wang]

Sheiky, on Wednesday, July 16th, 2008, 6:55 PM, said:

Basicaly, though all the top 4 clubs (Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal) are pretty much the top 4 clubs because they have the biggest spending power. In American odds, are the team that is -110 the favourite? And also, how do you work out the overall vigourish taken by the bookmaker on a certain 2-team bet? I'm quite interested in sports betting, but as an English man who doesn't entirely understand odds yet it's a tad confusing

Yes. In Vegas, for example, a basketball line might open:Boston Celtics -5.5 -110Detroit Pistons +5.5 -110That means the Celtics have to win by 6 to cash, and the Pistons have to lose by less than 6 to cash. The numbers to the right (-110 for each) is the vig you're paying. You're laying 110 to win 100, which is the vigorish. If you bet the 110, and win exactly 50% of the time, your equity is .5(100)-.5(110) = -5 on a bet that wins you $100, or a little more than 5% (which is standard bookie vigorish). If the books get balanced action, they'll make 5% of the total money wagered.In soccer, since you're usually playing the moneyline (like I do with baseball) it would look like:Turkey +180Germany -220(Ties are a push)If you take Turkey, you bet 100 to win 180. To take the Germans, you'd be laying 220 to win 100. The vigorish here comes from the fact that the Germans win the game almost exactly 2/3 of the time, meaning BOTH bets have negative equity. Take the favorite for example. You bet 220 to win 100. Your equity is 2/3 (100) - 1/3 (220) = -$6.67The goal for a player is to find numbers that are as close together as possible. When I place my baseball bets, the lines usually look like, WORST case scenario:New York -201Boston +199And then I pay a 1% commission on all wins. Assuming New York wins exactly 2/3 of the time, my equity on New York is: 2/3 (100) - 1/3 (201) = -1/3. That's minus THIRTY-THREE CENTS if I take the Yankees, assuming my haphazard math is correct. Subtract my commission (1% of 100 2/3 times) of $.67, and my true equity if the price is perfect is negative $1 on a wager that wins me $100, or about 1%.This has somehow turned into a lecture on the importance of reduced vig, which is not the question. The vigorish is easy to figure, as I've shown above. What am I talking about now? Any more questions?

[BigDMcGee]

Is matchbook the only place you wager?

[Shimmering Wang]

BigDMcGee, on Wednesday, July 16th, 2008, 7:42 PM, said:

Is matchbook the only place you wager?

No. I try to stay posted up on as many sites as I possibly can, since you never know what opportunities are going to show up, or when Matchbook's server is going to crash. Matchbook gets 95% of my action, but their futures markets aren't liquid enough to serve my purposes, and their golf markets are almost non-existant. I keep money on Olympic and, Bodog (some of their more obscure props have value, and their alternate golf matchups can tickle my fancy, but that's about it), and I'm trying to get posted up on Carib and 5DimesAll the Euros here can just use Pinny.WangEDIT- I also forgot to mention that I like to line-shop, just to be safe. You never know which shop is going to randomly have a line that's ten-cents better than what's being offered on MB.

[Shimmering Wang]

I lost a bet on the All-Star game last night, and as payment I will be unable to use the internet in my own home until Monday, starting tomorrow at 9AM. This is going to be torture considering how much of my bankroll is currently floating around at the British Open... Anyway, all I'm trying to say is, if anyone asks a question and I do not answer, it is only because the library is closed, or my friends are torturing me by not allowing me to use their wireless signal.

[lvpro]

I love this thread.

[Shimmering Wang]

lvpro, on Thursday, July 17th, 2008, 1:02 AM, said:

I love this thread.

Thank you. I enjoy explaining my thoughts on the subject. It's fascinating to me.I'd like to mention one other thing. Value from sports betting comes primarily from the gap between perception and reality. I'll use baseball as an example. Say we have Team A playing Team B. Pitcher A is toeing the slab for Team A, and Pitcher B is starting for Team B. For simplicity's sake, let's assume they're playing at a neutral field (something that never happens in baseball). Team A is 6 games under .500, and Team B is is 6 games over. Pitcher A is 4-7 with an ERA of 4.6, and Pitcher B is 8-3 with an ERA of 3.15. Team B opens at -110. For the sake of simplicity, there will be no juice in this scenario, so Team A is +110. Well, the public sees this, better team with the better pitcher, only a -120 favorite? And, boy, do they go off. Team B gets 65% of the action. It certainly appears the price is a little short, but let's dig deeper. Team B has actually been outscored by their opponents this year; they've given up more runs than they've scored, but their record in 1-run games is 13-3. Team A has outscored their opponents by 49 runs this year, but their record in 1-run games is an abysmal 2-9. Let's look at the pitchers.Pitcher B's ERA is 3.15, but he's walking a lot of batters, and stranding 83% of the runners he allows to get on. His opponents' Batting Average on Balls in Play (the average not counting strikeouts and homeruns) is a staggeringly low .210. Pitcher A's ERA is 4.6, but his peripheral statistics look great. He's striking out almost 9 hitters/9 innings, and he has walked very few batters. Unfortunately, almost 40% of the runners he allows to reach base manage to score against him, and his opponents' BABIP is .342. As far as the pitchers are concerned, the things the pitcher can control -- strike outs, walks, etc. -- seem to favor Pitcher A. Batting Average Against for non HR and strikeouts is almost TOTALLY uncontrollable by a pitcher; anything way over about .290 is unlucky, and anything way under is lucky. It just means a few balls have dropped in, or snuck through a hole. By all accounts, Pitcher A is more likely to be successful in the future than Pitcher B, and he's just had some bad breaks. His ERA will regress to a lower mean, while Pitcher B's will balloon. Most of the players making a wager in this spot will see what they thing is "Better Team, Better Pitcher, Cheap Price" and hammer Team B. You, me, and the books, however, know differently. There's a huge gap between perception -- that Team B is more likely to win than Team A -- and reality -- that Team A has been unlucky so far this year, but is still the better team. The book uses these gaps to punish square players.Value comes from betting against a severely overvalued squad -- a team on a hot streak, or a team that has been played up in the media lately -- or backing a severely undervalued squad. Sometimes you'll be betting on THE WORST TEAM IN THE LEAGUE, because the public overreacts, and perceives that they are worse ("NO WAY THEY CAN WIN") than they really are ("THIS SUCKS. THE MARINERS ARE SO BAD, BUT EDDIE BONINE SHOULD NOT BE LAYING -180 TO ANYONE. GOD I HATE THIS TEAM."). So just because a team is BAD doesn't mean they can't be the best value on the board. And just because a team is GOOD doesn't mean you there is value in backing them. Always remember that you want to be backing teams that appear to be much worse than they really are, and fading teams playing over their heads. Sometimes, this is tough to do. In that case, I simply trust that the books would never put out a bad number that allows a bettor to have an overlay by taking a super-public side.

[Jadaki]

Shimmering Wang, on Thursday, July 17th, 2008, 12:51 AM, said:

Thank you. I enjoy explaining my thoughts on the subject. It's fascinating to me.

Enjoyable read so far.I hope you get into some examples of lines you pick during the football season.

[Poppy_Hillis]

Pre-spam for his soon to be constructed handicapping website, IMO.

[AmScray]

If he is indeed constructing such a website, contact me. I have brown people in far away places who do good website work for cheap. (forgot to email that MOS PDF. I'll definitely do it later this evening)

[Dirtydutch]

Awesome thread, Wang-Wang.

BigDMcGee, on Wednesday, July 16th, 2008, 12:18 PM, said:

Oh where oh where will I ever find a book like this? I was going to PM Scram, but he's made that abundantly clear it's not an option. Fck, what's a nigga gonna do? oh wait..http://www.torrentz....419df1e5a057771God damn, you're a drama queen.

I had located and completed the download (mine was a .doc on an [u]open[/i] tracker) before I even scrolled down to this. The drama isn't what I find annoying here; it's the fact that he had no problem stealing the thing, but wouldn't give the three or so other people on here who would even care an email that he believed would save them days of searching or thousands of dollars. Is it the hassle or the morality? Because the morality seems like a hypocrisy, even if you believe in it, and as far as hassle, it would arguably be easier to Sharebee the ****ing thing for everyone. I'm enraged.

[BigDMcGee]

Dirtydutch, on Thursday, July 17th, 2008, 4:49 PM, said:

Awesome thread, Wang-Wang. I had located and completed the download (mine was a .doc on an [u]open[/i] tracker) before I even scrolled down to this. The drama isn't what I find annoying here; it's the fact that he had no problem stealing the thing, but wouldn't give the three or so other people on here who would even care an email that he believed would save them days of searching or thousands of dollars. Is it the hassle or the morality? Because the morality seems like a hypocrisy, even if you believe in it, and as far as hassle, it would arguably be easier to Sharebee the ****ing thing for everyone. I'm enraged.

I think he considered it a "hassle" issue, since he got like 50 emails from another forum about it. BUt I also imagine that it wasn't so much a "moral" issue, as in stealing is wrong, as it was " Wang is giving me something of worth, and the rest of you are giving me fck all, so fck off" issue. And also he probably takes a little sadistic, childish joy in having something no one else has, or can have. Like when you were a kid and had a super expensive/rare pokemon or transformer or what ever, and were a cunt to your friends about playing with it.

[Dirtydutch]

Here's a parable from my youth that I feel will melt Scram's icy heart: when I was 17, I started hanging out with a friend of my friends, of whom I'd always heard stories, but had never met. He always sounded awesome, but quickly I realized he was kind of a dick. He always embarked on all kinds of stupid "handy" hippie projects, like building his own beanbag sofa or making bracelets for girls who didn't want to have sex with him. He would flip out if someone teased him about it, and would overreact and try to hurt them or make it way too personal, and pretty much was a turd about everything and had no sense of humor. One day, he came into my livingroom, where a few of us were playing Halo or something gay like that, raving about how he needed chainsaw to extract a prized piece of burrald wood from some place, so he can carve his own backgammon set. But he wouldn't tell us where. I refused to lend him my father's chainsaw, partially because I thought it was weird that he wouldn't tell us, but mostly because I didn't like him. He left, absolutely steaming.Later that day, our other friend, Paul, came to us, asking what exactly we had done, because he was talking about kicking my ass and telling my parents I did drugs and shit. We told him he was acting weird and wouldn't tell us where he was taking the saw, so I wouldn't give it to him. It turned out that he was convinced that because I didn't like him I was going to steal his wood if he told me where it was. We all laughed for a while. As it turned out, he had told Paul where it was, we assembled, extracted, and then poorly caved the wood into several terrible, mismatched, unrecognizable chess and backgammon sets, and threw the rest away. There's also a story about the actual extraction, but I'll save it for another time.The point is...the point is that I'm spiteful and I steal things. I'll be havin' them duckets.

[Dirtydutch]

Upload time: 7 seconds.http://sharebee.com/4bcd90e2(My outrage should not be interpreted as any type of problem with Scram. Scram remains my reigning favorite poster, probably.)

[Shimmering Wang]

No drama in gambling thread please. Actually, you know what? I don't even care. I actually like drama. I'm not picking sides, since I like all of you equally (untrue), but I will continue to passively encourage you. Anyway, Scram still has my gratitude. As far as the "handicapping website" idea, I will never, ever, ever fucking do that. I am not a tout, and I will never sell my picks. I have no respect for anybody that relies on short-term variance and has an incentive to pick super-public favorites over and over again so he has a better chance of going on a 12-2 that he can trump up. My bases record is under .500 for the year, and I'm up 25+ units, and that's just fine with me. I manage money for some of my friends, totally free of charge. Some of them are up over 40 units, and I haven't charged them a cent. Any of my friends can throw in with me on the conditions that they pay any fees involved with moving money in and out, they don't bitch and moan when I lose, they remain patient if I don't get all our action posted when I change directions on the fly, and they follow my strict bankroll rules. I've done well for them, and every single one of them has returned the favor in kind, even though it wasn't necessary. Anyway, I hate touts, and some of the "ideas" I am trying out for the British Open this year (with my own personal account, of course) are going terribly. If things end as they stand today, I'll be stuck at least 15 units. I'm scared to check. If I get out of this down 10x, it'll be a huge relief.Wang