Not good, not zero. Next year is the last year he'll ever be able to play for his dad. The NFL is the NFL. He should go if this continues, but the Sanders aren't about the beaten path
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Nebraska Game Week - Prime: “This is personal. That’s the message of the week.”
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
2 things I'm pretty confident about:
- CU could win this game handily while giving up 5+ YPC against NU
- Never, and I mean never, get suckered into a micro bet like this against Manhattanbuff. I think he's wrong on the spread outcome, but this stat? Yeah, 9 times out of 10 he's probably right.
Medford M.
Well-Known Member
I'd never take a YPC bet. The entire stat can be thrown out of whack with one or two big runs.
The game is going to take depend on if and when we get a double digit lead. If the Nubs get a lead or even just match us score for score, I can see them taking the air out of the ball and making this a closer, lower scoring game. If we get a 2 score lead early, it might be Katie bar the door.
The one thing that I liked this past weekend was how well conditioned we were. The 4th quarter has historically not been kind to the Nubs in Boulder.
FWIW, I bet CU -3.5 and I would have gone to -10. So I did put my money where my mouth is. But, absolutely with Manhattan and others in his circle - some of you crack me up with the way you question him as if you think gambling isn't like all other things in life where there's an ocean of difference between a professional and a hobbyist.
Quoted for fun lack of self awareness
The reason why bookies stay in business is because they trap people with prices that are bad for the bettor. Given the volume of games, bookies can’t get every game right, so there’s room for people to exploit those poor numbers.
Do poor numbers ever win? Yes.
Do good numbers ever lose? Yes.
In the long run, getting good numbers is what makes the difference between a winning and losing sports bettor. This is also why I started using the model: I wanted objective facts to guide my decisions instead of emotion.
Medford M.
Well-Known Member
I'll never not laugh at this assertion. There's nothing special about "professional" gamblers.
They just use as many analytics as possible to make the "smartest" or "safest" bets.
Ringer
Well-Known Member
Mr. Manhattan, I agree with your statements and am not calling you out. I am just wondering what your bets were on Saturday's game against TCU, and how difficult it was to bet on a game where one team has never played together.
Medford M.
Well-Known Member
I'd ask...are there teams,have there been teams that...for a long period, say an entire season... didn't play to your models form? As in...the model said they should be better than they played?
Because I think you're model will be way off on Nebraska this season.
Similar models suggested CU was 21 points worse than TCU and also a 3 win season total. They don't always get it right either.
I'm not a gambler and have no idea of the specifics of Manhattan's model other than what he has posted here but when it comes to people who are gambling as a business the model doesn't have to be perfect.
No gambler, as long as the game is fairly clean and he/she is gambling relatively frequently, is going to win on every bet. It just doesn't happen. That is why one of the first rules of gambling is never bet money that you can't afford to lose because no matter how good at it you are you will sometimes lose a bet.
For those who are doing it as a business they don't need a model to hit 100% of the time. What they need is a model that gives them enough of an edge that over a series of bets they will win often enough to cover their losses, cover their associated cost, and make enough on top to make being in the game worthwhile.
Manhattan could give a better number and that number will vary depending on the individual doing the gambling but if a model were to be correct say 65% of the time for someone betting five figures a week or above the return would solid. Others may be willing to go with say 60% or may not be comfortable below 70%.
There are always variables that can't be accounted for. Things like injuries, the bounce of the ball, etc. but if the model gives a consistent advantage over time then it does it's job.
I am not a large investor but the stock market is similar. I currently hold positions in 19 companies. Not all of those companies are or will make me money, some I will take a loss on. What is important though is that I have enough stocks making me money to make up for those losses plus enough more that I come out consistently ahead. There are some years I lose money but over time my average return is better than 11.5% so my system is working well for me.
The gambler looks at things from a similar vantage point with two differences. One is that the risks of losing money in gambling is much higher but so is the potential return. Second difference is that in stocks a significant portion of the gains are based on inputs from the companies represented by the stocks. Company value rises drawing more money to the stock, dividends are paid attracting investors, many of whom re-invest the dividends as I do. In gambling the book takes out a rake rather than adding in. The gain in value mostly comes from those gamblers who are doing it as recreation rather than as a business, the majority of whom lose money over time in the net.
Those recreational gamblers include some who think they are doing it as a business but don't have the knowledge and direction to win consistently. Many more are the one who lay down bets on "their" teams to "add a little fun" to the game.
My hope is that a lot of Nebraska supporters are contributing money that makes other gamblers happier this week.
Medford M.
Well-Known Member
Because a computer can only tell you what it sees as likely to happen. Just like KenPom...just like Sabermetrics.
Bet the alternate spread at -10.
Nah. That commercial had a zoo in it.
Nothing about that fanbase amazes me.
Close. It was bedsheets and tee shirts. Billboards cost too much and there was not enough corn in the state to pay for it with the shucking summer job.
Did you watch the game on TV? They showed the mouth breathers on the broadcast.
Bedsheets. It was an overpass, and they looked just like the people with signs who are on overpasses agitating for Texas to secede every few years. It leaves your face fixed in a way that conveys how stupid you think they are, while you are fighting to maintain RBF.
Right now, you are effectively making Manhattan’s point. It isn’t about a single game, it is about figuring out how to beat the odds more often than not over the long term. He pounded the wins season over at 3.5, but stayed away from that game, IIRC.
And now I need to take a shower.
Medford M.
Well-Known Member
One of the main points is...don't bet with your heart or on emotion. If you're going to put money on a game, do it because you have enough info on both teams to know you have a high chance of hitting.
I only bet on CU games because they're the only team I have intimate knowledge of, and I've only lost one time on us the last three years.
Dear Ringer,
I made my biggest bet on Over 59.5 points for the game. I also had healthy bets on Colorado as a team to score Over 0.5 points in the 1st Quarter and 20.5 points for the entire game. I had a small wager on Colorado +21 for the game.
The first three weeks of the college football season are always my most profitable because our model better rates players (and therefore teams) than the bookies. As the year progresses, prices get substantially worse for the bettor.
You mean other than that, there's nothing special?
Medford M.
Well-Known Member
Analytical models aren't hard to find
Manhattan's point was that he uses fact-based models rather than emotion. That is the entire point. I'm guessing that's what makes the professionals special.Analytical models aren't hard to find
No way I could bet sports. It would all be emotion-based (like when I put down money pre-season for the Buffs to win the Big XII in 2001).
For sure. I know the models work over the long term
Medford M.
Well-Known Member
Like I said. Don't use emotion. Colorado made me good money last year.
TallBuff
Well-Known Member
They put the band in that stupid little "band box" in the north stands for this game, and we were trapped there for about 90 minutes after the game because of the celebrations on the field. Nobody would leave, so we just kept playing.
I know I was aggressive with the line, but I was in the middle of practice and didn’t want to debate with him over the number. Knowing exactly where he was headed, I threw out a number that I think is achievable, yet aggressive, knowing he’d take it. I am completely comfortable in knowing our D will defend the run better this week, I will be embarrassed if they don’t. 5 ypc is a reach, but achievable. If I lose, @manhattanbuff gets an appetizer on me. If I win, I get bragging rights.
@manhattanbuff is right in with the analytics but I am in with @Buffnik on this one but I got it -3. On the edge for the analytics but as Vegas likes it I bet on my hunch which usually makes Vegas money. Not this week!
Why I am not betting Colorado -3/-3.5: that’s the correct price. I only bet advantageous lines.
Yep and that is why I am far from being a professional who makes money at it. I pick spots and do it for fun. Better that break even but definitely a fun activity for me. I wish I had that knowledge, model and experience.