What I learned about gambling as a stock market investor ... part 3

BigDog

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 13, 2001
170
0
0
Springfield, Illinois
Value. Everybody seems to kick this word around without definition. Value is a very abstract term. Value is often determined by Price. A lawn mower from Sears might cost $200.00 but at Best Buy it's $189.95. One might say that Best Buy is the better value when what they really mean is that it's the cheapest. Quality is another important determinant of value. Perhaps the Sear's mower has a longer guarantee or free maintenance agreement. These additions could make the $200.00 seem like the better value because the quality assurance is included in the price. And lastly, Time is a determinant of value. If one store is on your way home from work and the other is 30 minutes across town you would have to consider the value of your time.

I have learned to always use these three determinants in assigning value to my day trades...the lowest price possible for the highest quality possible in the fastest amount of time possible. This spells Value to me. A day trader has a very short time span to make his money, often only a few days and sometimes a matter of hours. If you tie up your capital with something that isn't moving, or moves slowly, you make ZERO. When I make ZERO, I consider it a loss...as in a "lost opportunity cost". Make no mistake, a lost opportunity costs you something!

Now accessing Value in sports gambling is similar to stocks AND lawn mowers.

PRICE - You have seen expensive favorites and inexpensive favorites. If price were a sole determinant we'd all be taking the inexpensive favorites. But we are willing to pay more for the expensive favorites because of a higher perception of Quality.

QUALITY - Some teams are just better than others. Better pitching ... or better hitting ... or better managers. Some teams have all three. Some have none of the above. We make money betting on high quality and/or against poor quality. Successful gamblers (and investors) never underestimate the importance of Quality. It's not the price that is going to make the team win. Does Tampa Bay +220 sound like it's going to win any more often than Tampa Bay at +120? Heck no. I have read messages in this forum from some gamblers who pick a team +180 and justify their decision by saying that " This is a good value at this price." It implies that the +190 was the only reason they were on this pick...that at +120 they would have simply ignored the play irregardless of the teams Quality or liklihood of winning.

I never look at the lines until AFTER I have analized the matchup. As I analyze, I list the matchups that I think I can pick a winner in. I compare the pitchers, weather (if applicable), trends, and the teams state of mind. Then, after listing these 10 or 12 teams, I check the lines and see where I can get the most bang for my buck. Price is secondary. Always.

TIME - All resources are scarce. Your time spent in analyzing games, placing bets, keeping a record, etc., are the investment of Time that you should expect a return on. This is Time taken away from the pursuit of income, from playing with your kids, from visiting your Mother, from enjoying life. If gambling is just a pleasant distraction for you, like any other hobby, then enjoy yourself. But if you are seriously trying to use gambling as a source of income, then it must be treated like a job. And as with any other job, Time must be spent producing income.

These guys we see on this forum whom are gambling for a living probably spend 5, 6, or even 8 hours a day on their "job". I am only guessing, but I bet I'm close.

As with the stock market, invest your Time before you invest your money, and pick Quality before Price.
 
I

Investment Executive

Guest
quote:
These guys we see on this forum whom are gambling for a living probably spend 5, 6, or even 8 hours a day on their "job". I am only guessing, but I bet I'm close.

:end of quote


try 13 or 14 hours per day...seven days a week...anything less...you won't be around long.
 

BigDog

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 13, 2001
170
0
0
Springfield, Illinois
I knew it was a lot but I wouldn't have guessed it that high. I will consider that to be one of the differences between day trading and gambling. I should be grateful that the option market is only open 6.5 hours per day for 5 days a week.
 

Wizard of Odds

Registered User
Forum Member
Dec 5, 2000
107
0
0
Chicago
I have to disagree with your post. If I have a team that I believe has a 50% chance to win a game and they are +130 that is considered good value. Now if there is another team that I believe has a 65% chance of winning the game but they are -200, there is no value in that game. Even thought the second team has a better chance of winning the risk does not justify the reward. Now if TB is +190 I might find value and bet them if I determined that they had a 35% chance or better to win the game, but if they were +120 and I have them at a 35% win rate it would not justify a play. A +190 would have to win at only a 35% rate while a +120 would have to win at a 46% rate to win money in the long run.
 

BigDog

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 13, 2001
170
0
0
Springfield, Illinois
Gee, Mr. Wizard,

I'm afraid you are zeroing in on a few sentences and disregarding the relativity issue of my post.

You stated ... "If I have a team that I believe has a 50% chance to win a game and they are +130 that is considered good value."

Now I would never in a million years put my money on a team that I thought had a 50% chance of losing. I don't care if it's +200. I would pass and find a more worthy investment.

You stated ... "Now if there is another team that I believe has a 65% chance of winning the game but they are -200, there is no value in that game."

I agree that -200 would be too pricey for only 65% certainity. However; if the certainity were 75%...or 85%, you might then find value. At whatever the % of certainity, as it increases, so does your willingness to pay more. This is the relativity between quality and price that was the content of my post.

You stated ..."Now if TB is +190 I might find value and bet them if I determined that they had a 35% chance or better to win the game, but if they were +120 and I have them at a 35% win rate it would not justify a play."

Once again I can not fathom anyone finding value in a team that has a 65% chance of losing. There is no quality here. None. Nada. Zip. I would once again pass this game up.

I assume that you are using these extremes to validate your point and would never seriously consider wagering in that fashion. I have read many of your successful picks and have never noticed these extremes to be a consistant part of your betting strategy. But even if my assumption is incorrect, you seem to be enforcing my arguement...and that is that Value can NOT be measured by Price alone any more than it can be measured by Quality alone. The less affluent tend to place a higher weight on Price, while the more affluent place the value higher on Quality. It is ALWAYS, and must ALWAYS be a trade off between the two. You NEVER get the highest Quality for the cheapest Price. Not at Walmart, not in the stock market, and certainly not in gambling.

That is the essense of what my post was trying to convey and I believe that outside of our own personal levels of acceptable risk, we actually agree.

Thanks for your reply. I look forward to seeing more of your picks.

Dave


------------------
If you're not the lead dog, your view never changes.
 

cavs1234

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 25, 2000
372
0
0
New York City
Hows it going Dave...I know this is off the topic, but I was wondering how you enjoyed that line of work your in, I just got a job day trading and begin in a couple of weeks....I am actually taking the Series 7 on Friday, then some classes to learn some of the finer points of the industry....I was curious what you thought, I have a lot of friends here in New York that do very well at it so I decided to give it a shot.....
 
I

Investment Executive

Guest
Favorites Underdogs
-105 - 51.2% +105 - 48.8%
-110 - 52.4% +110 - 47.6%
-115 - 53.5% +115 - 46.5%
-120 - 54.5% +120 - 45.5%
-125 - 55.6% +125 - 44.4%
-130 - 56.5% +130 - 43.5%
-135 - 57.4% +135 - 42.6%
-140 - 58.3% +140 - 41.7%
-145 - 59.2% +145 - 40.8%
-150 - 60.0% +150 - 40.0%
-155 - 60.8% +155 - 39.2%
-160 - 61.5% +160 - 38.5%
-165 - 62.3% +165 - 37.7%
-170 - 63.0% +170 - 37.0%
-175 - 63.6% +175 - 36.4%
-180 - 64.3% +180 - 35.7%
-185 - 64.9% +185 - 35.1%
-190 - 65.5% +190 - 34.5%
-195 - 66.1% +195 - 33.9%
-200 - 66.7% +200 - 33.3%
-205 - 67.2% +205 - 32.8%
-210 - 67.7% +210 - 32.3%
-215 - 68.3% +215 - 31.7%
-220 - 68.8% +220 - 31.3%
-225 - 69.2% +225 - 30.8%
-230 - 69.7% +230 - 30.3%
-235 - 70.1% +235 - 29.9%
-240 - 70.6% +240 - 29.4%
-245 - 71.0% +245 - 29.0%
-250 - 71.4% +250 - 28.6%
-255 - 71.8% +255 - 28.2%
-260 - 72.2% +260 - 27.8%
-265 - 72.6% +265 - 27.4%
-270 - 73.0% +270 - 27.0%
-275 - 73.3% +275 - 26.7%
-280 - 73.7% +280 - 26.3%
-285 - 74.0% +285 - 26.0%
-290 - 74.4% +290 - 25.6%
-295 - 74.7% +295 - 25.3%
-300 - 75.0% +300 - 25.0%
 

BigDog

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 13, 2001
170
0
0
Springfield, Illinois
cavs1234,

I day trade on my own account and stay strictly with equity and index options. I love it, I have always loved it, I will always love it. It's the first "job" I've had where I can actually relax after work. The market closes at 3:00 my time. I have no employees, no frantic phone calls, no picky customers. There is nothing that I can do about anything between 3:00 pm and 8:30 am the next morning.

Did I mention that I really like it?

Dave
 

Wizard of Odds

Registered User
Forum Member
Dec 5, 2000
107
0
0
Chicago
Big Dog, why would'nt you take a team that has 50% of losing if they are +200. If I could find a team that had a 50/50 shot for +200 I would do it every day as much as I could find. I don't have to do the numbers to know that would turn out good. I read your first 2 post and thought they were great, not trying to start trouble, just respectably disagreeing.
 

BigDog

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 13, 2001
170
0
0
Springfield, Illinois
Wizard,

I guess my opinion lies in the fact that at +200, a 50/50 team will consistantly win you zero, if they win exactly 50% of the time. I believe the standard deviation would be 47% to 53%. I do not have stats to back me up but I would guess that +200 teams DONT win 50% of the time. It would be interesting to find out. I am sure it's simply a matter of our own differing styles and tolerance for risk. But I see no long term profit potential in those types of wagers, at least not for me. It seems that one would be wasting a lot of time making a minimal amount of money, in any. Would you not agree that +125 teams win more often than +200s? I assume you would. But HOW MUCH more often would need to be known for either of us to be certain.

I appreciate opposing views and never once considered you to be starting trouble. I'm not one of the "crybabies".
smile.gif


Dave
 

Randercity

Wait til HT
Forum Member
IE... thanks for those stats. I was going to do that very table for myself. So... if I understand this correctly, at -200, you break even winning 2 out of 3, so there is some "value" in laying -160 to -180 on like SEATTLE for instance if they are winning at better than 70% or when the pitching matchup gives you a projected 70% of winning??

Granted, I rarely lay that kind of wood, due to simple fate, luck, etc... that determines so many outcomes, but I find it interesting to know that one could make a profit doing so. Obviously, one would have to be wagering $1000 a unit or more to justify the small % of profit involved, but this at least helps me see how FLETCHER for instance, can increase his bankroll significantly while consistently playing favorites. If you wager $1000 a unit on 5 -160 Fav's for instance and go 3-2, or 60%, you'd lose .2 units or $200. Next day go 3-1, and you make 1.2 Units or $1200. That's 6-3 or 66.7% to make $1000 for two days... With an outlay of $14,400 to make it, a 6.9% return on investment. BUT, one 1-4 day, you lose $11,800
eek.gif
or almost 28 days of profits!! Whew... very interesting once you get into it.

[This message has been edited by Randercity (edited 06-20-2001).]
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top