re: Season Record Prediction Using Mathematical Analysis of Point Spreads 2015

I think you should use your time more constructively.

quote:

---

Dude he's not calculating a probability, he's calculating an expected value. The formula for that is E(X)=sum[p(x)*x] with each x being a trial. If we want the expected value of wins in 12 trials and have the associated probability of winning for each, then this equation states that we multiply the value of a win (1) by the probability of a win (.7 for instance) and add these up across all 12 trials. The loss probabilities are all multiplied by the value of a loss (0) so they all drop out. Here's a link to help you out LINK.

Again, he's NOT calculating the probability of anything. The probabilities are just a component of the expected value formula.

---

I appreciate the post, but I am afraid that you severely underestimate the stupidity and obstinacy of CptBengal.

He NEVER provides the correct answer. He knows that I post the correct answer. His only strategy is to merely peck at the corners in a vain attempt to find some minor and irrelevant flaw.

He probably leapt five feet in the air when he saw that I mistakenly added only 10 games in a 12 game season, nevermind that the rest of my post was accurate and helpful.

His misguided indictments of your math were getting too many upvotes for me to sit idly by.

With each page I read, I keep flip flopping on whether CptBengal of Gueva Jelly is stupider. Both of them are truly impressive.

AtlTiger is a wildcard candidate pending my review of his 1717 posts. Based on his evaluation of the time wasted with this analysis, I expect all 1717 of his posts to be of absolute top-notch quality.

quote:

---

Dude he's not calculating a probability, he's calculating an expected value.

---

I will add that a probability of a certain win total(12,11,10, etc) COULD be calculated. Just not by most of the clowns posting in this thread.

quote:

---

His misguided indictments of your math were getting too many upvotes for me to sit idly by.

---

I think it's solidly established that CptBengal is the dumbest poster on this site.

Nevertheless, he's not dumb enough to come back to this thread.

He was thoroughly abused and humiliated . . . as usual.

Dude.. if you used spreads, just look up the over/under. I think it's 8.5.

Vegas wouldn't allow for an arbitrage opportunity by making it different if you bet on all the lines, spreads versus betting the over/under.

Between this and your JJ suck fest, it's apparent you don't have much to do in your life.

quote:

---

I feel almost certain that we all understand that expected values might not reflect actual values. Of course, a penny might not land on heads every other coin flip. Of course, a penny might land on heads 10 times in a row.

The purpose of a a preseason prediction is predict the expected outcome and, of course, it might not reflect the actual outcome. That is fundamental.

---

Well, you claimed your prediction is based on mathematical analysis and I am just pointing out where the analysis doesn't make much sense mathematically. Ever heard the quote "averages without variances are meaningless - or worse misleading"? You were trying to predict using mean value but totally ignored the small variance assumption this methodology based on. In your case, one single event's variance for many events is large enough to make the prediction based on mean value useless. For example, in 50% odd case the variable is as large as .25. What makes things much worse is that you are taking summation of these variables. Based on your assumption that these events are independent, if you ever heard of Bienayme formula you can calculate the variance of the summation variable which is the summation of all independent variance - that's huge! The variance of summation variable is large enough so that its mean value means a little better than nothing.

quote:

---

You are really trying HARD to throw mud in the water. The fact that Vegas uses, IN PART, the history of a team (previous games) to predict the result of future games is IRRELEVANT to the correlation between the odds/lines for a game and the outcome of that game. In short, the odds/lines for a game are highly predictive of the outcome of that game.

---

It seems I overestimate your level and you seems didn't understand what I was talking about. I was not arguing about whether an odd/line is correlated to event outcome at all. Let's put it in easy to understand way - after game X happened, will the the odd/line be adjusted for future games? Do you think using adjusted odd to calculate then leads to more actuate prediction at that point? If your answers to both problems are yes, then can you tell the difference between your independent events model and a different model that takes account for prior probabilities? Ever heard of the word random process?

quote:

---

This sentence makes zero sense.

In what universe are the pregame odds for a game different from the current odds for a game. I'd like to make wagers in that universe.

The relevant odds/lines for a game are always the pregame odds for the game. (Unless you made a bet on the game and want to collect.)

---

It seems you cannot even understand plain English without math. Your number is predicted using current, today's, 8/22/2015's odd for all games, and do you think the pregame odd before each game is exactly the same as current odd? If your predict is totally based on current odd, then the number doesn't mean much since the odds change a lot.

In summary, I don't have any problem with you doing some high school math exercise and call it your prediction. But I wouldn't calling it mathematical analysis - the method and model have some systematic flaws and leads to meaningless results. To me the model performance is probably similar to a dummy model that picks a random number from a few numbers.

quote:

---

quote:
quote:
I tend to agree with both of your statements. A team reacts to how if performed earlier in the year. Your second statement is reflected in the fact that betting lines change over time to reflect these affects.
This is the polar opposite of the purpose of the coin flip analogy.
Dear Guava Jelly,

The analysis in this thread appears to be over your head.

My conclusion is based soundly on three of your posts. First, you incorrectly defined and used the "gambler's fallacy." Second, you accused my analysis of averaging odds when, in point of fact, it did not; rather, it was you who was averaging odds. Third, you fail to recognize the distinction between the cumulative effects on a coin and a football team based upon the frame of reference of the prediction.

The coin flip demonstrates the mathematical accuracy of my analysis. And while a coin has no memory, a football team's chance for victory is affected by its previous games. HOWEVER, the prediction, at the time it is made, whether at the beginning of the season or midway through the season, cannot foresee the results of future games; THUS, from the frame of reference of the person making the prediction, the games have no cumulative affect on the football team, AND each game must be considered an independent event. THEREFORE, like the coin flips, the football games odds can be added together to predict the outcome for the season, or remaining games as the case may be.

---

As stated above, the prediction cannot foresee the results of future games. The ship sank while you guys were arguing over placement of the deck chairs.