Statistical betting

[MisGuidedAngel]

OK last newb thread for a while. If you were betting using a stat based system how many bets would you say as a trial that showed profit before you would consider it successful as opposed to a good run of luck? How much roi would you consider a successful system?

 

[lilbloaty]

stats don't work in mma don't waste ur time

 

[Roads55]

OK last newb thread for a while. If you were betting using a stat based system how many bets would you say as a trial that showed profit before you would consider it successful as opposed to a good run of luck? How much roi would you consider a successful system?

i'd say a hundred to be confident, and a couple hundred to be very confident. ROI is kinda irrelevant imo as it can heavily differ depending on your edge, your bankroll size and your overall system.

 

[Roads55]

stats don't work in mma don't waste ur time

on the contrary if your a bit more imaginative with your stats

 

[lilbloaty]

on the contrary if your a bit more imaginative with your stats

Nah there's no exceptions. Stats are completely irrelevant in pretty much every matchup.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

There was a post made by a former reg here years back who put it better than I can, so I'll just sum up what he said to the best of my memory.

Mma and fighting in general are more qualitative than quantitative by nature.

Some stats are useful for sure, but unlike other sports, say baseball, the analytics shit doesn't play nearly as much of a factor. The sample size isn't there like it is with other sports to really use stats as your main go to for analyzing a match up and there is nowhere close to the amount of stats to look at, the advancement of numbers nerds and sabrmetrics, it's a whole different game of capping.

The eye test does your capping better for a sport like this. With other sports you might be able to win just based on going by the numbers, I know baseball and basketball bettors who make a lot of money based mostly on reading into the analytics rather than actually watching tape to make their decisions on which side to take, if any.

With fighting, you need to know your fighters and their styles more than just with going by numbers alone. I make no claim to be the most successful or talented gambler in the world, but I've been doing this a pretty longtime now and some of the best calls I've made have come from watching tape and figuring out the mentality, tendencies, and skill sets against different types and levels of fighters and how they stack up.

So yes, by all means use stats, but I would suggest you watch tape first and foremost, cap your fights that way, then go from there.

 

[MisGuidedAngel]

There was a post made by a former reg here years back who put it better than I can, so I'll just sum up what he said to the best of my memory.

Mma and fighting in general are more qualitative than quantitative by nature.

Some stats are useful for sure, but unlike other sports, say baseball, the analytics shit doesn't play nearly as much of a factor. The sample size isn't there like it is with other sports to really use stats as your main go to for analyzing a match up and there is nowhere close to the amount of stats to look at, the advancement of numbers nerds and sabrmetrics, it's a whole different game of capping.

The eye test does your capping better for a sport like this. With other sports you might be able to win just based on going by the numbers, I know baseball and basketball bettors who make a lot of money based mostly on reading into the analytics rather than actually watching tape to make their decisions on which side to take, if any.

With fighting, you need to know your fighters and their styles more than just with going by numbers alone. I make no claim to be the most successful or talented gambler in the world, but I've been doing this a pretty longtime now and some of the best calls I've made have come from watching tape and figuring out the mentality, tendencies, and skill sets against different types and levels of fighters and how they stack up.

So yes, by all means use stats, but I would suggest you watch tape first and foremost, cap your fights that way, then go from there.

good analysis. Hypothetically say I was going to use stats for baseball. How many bets do you think I need to prove the system? What is a reasonable roi?

 

[MisGuidedAngel]

Nah there's no exceptions. Stats are completely irrelevant in pretty much every matchup.

I have some success using them for over/unders. Still not completely sold on it though.

 

[MisGuidedAngel]

i'd say a hundred to be confident, and a couple hundred to be very confident. ROI is kinda irrelevant imo as it can heavily differ depending on your edge, your bankroll size and your overall system.

I guess it depends how you calculate roi. I take total profit divided by total risked to get a percentage. Eg I had some basketball stats running and after 100 bets I had like 3% return . Didn't seem worth it to me.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

good analysis. Hypothetically say I was going to use stats for baseball. How many bets do you think I need to prove the system? What is a reasonable roi?

Sorry bud, I'm probably the worst guy to ask for a question like this. I have a love/hate relationship with baseball. I rarely bet it at all anymore after the horror stories that I've compiled with that God damned sport over the years. And I really don't calculate roi, haven't done it for years now. I keep track of my bets, study where I've gone right and wrong, all that good stuff, but I don't usually bother to calculate roi anymore so I can't help you with that unfortunately.

I would say the more the better. The numbers will even out with the bigger sample size you accumulate, obv, but as far as the exact number that would tell me "yeah this is or isn't working" I'd just be the wrong guy to ask in that regard since I don't really use a structured, numbers based system.

If 100 bets wasn't working out then up it to 200. If it's still not working for you then I'd probably move on. But as I said I'm not right guy to give you that type of advice, so take that with a grain of salt.

 

[joenewbie]

I don't look at my stats as a better because I don't have a "system". It all varies based on the fight card. I do keep track of the stats in regards to how often an oddsmaker is right or wrong and fight stats and figure this into my plays. This is in addition to watching tape obviously.

As far as ROI it just depends on how much time and effort you put into this and how much your time is worth. That's all up to you. Is a 5% ROI enough? 10%? 20%? If someone really likes watching MMA and this is fun for them maybe breaking even is good enough. It's been said that you can make 10% in the long run in the US stock market but you will probably be paying someone to manage your account. You can also buy gold or sliver and simply watch that market move up and down and sell at the right time. Is investing in stocks or bonds, or metals a better idea? Maybe. Is it as much fun? Probably not.

 

[Yotsuya]

Montecarlo-simulations are a good way to figure out how well you’re doing with your betting compared to what you could do just be chance. They could be a lot of work though depending your skills on coding/excel, so I’m not sure it’s worth the trouble.

 

[Roads55]

Nah there's no exceptions. Stats are completely irrelevant in pretty much every matchup.

on the contrary there's plenty of exceptions, I'm speaking about mma in general though not individual matchups, but even then statistics can play a factor to a certain extent but maybe not in the way you are thinking.

 

[Roads55]

Sorry bud, I'm probably the worst guy to ask for a question like this. I have a love/hate relationship with baseball. I rarely bet it at all anymore after the horror stories that I've compiled with that God damned sport over the years. And I really don't calculate roi, haven't done it for years now. I keep track of my bets, study where I've gone right and wrong, all that good stuff, but I don't usually bother to calculate roi anymore so I can't help you with that unfortunately.

I would say the more the better. The numbers will even out with the bigger sample size you accumulate, obv, but as far as the exact number that would tell me "yeah this is or isn't working" I'd just be the wrong guy to ask in that regard since I don't really use a structured, numbers based system.

If 100 bets wasn't working out then up it to 200. If it's still not working for you then I'd probably move on. But as I said I'm not right guy to give you that type of advice, so take that with a grain of salt.

so you do keep track of stats lol, but yeah in general almost everyone in these threads rely very heavily on watching tape and quantifying information that your can't really translate into statistics. the way i look at it, is then if you can find stats that are relevant to getting an edge then you have an edge (so to speak) on most sharps that might well outlast the way most ppl bet through watching tape due to lines becoming more accurate over time. the way sharps bet in here though represents fantastic risk reward opportunities that arise from the unique qualities of mma compared to more traditional sports where edges have been eroded over time and vastly more ppl bet, and odds are generally much more accurate leaving less room for + ev picks without additional information or statistics.

I still tape study and bet accordingly from analyzing that as much as many in here but I think trying to find ways to keep ahead of prices becoming more accurate is vital in this fast changing landscape. even just a couple years ago prices/limits were much better for a few reasons. and when you take into consideration limitations and outright bans that seems to be an ever increasing part of bettors life it seems to be a big limiting factor for many in here when you realize how much we can take from the bookies under the right circumstances.

 

[iGnP]

good analysis. Hypothetically say I was going to use stats for baseball. How many bets do you think I need to prove the system? What is a reasonable roi?

i actually use a math model for baseball and ive finished in the black (albeit, with varying results) each of the past 3 years. but it took a very long time to put together and my buddy does most of the player analysis while i do the math side of it. if you have specific questions, PM me

 

[BluntTrauma21]

so you do keep track of stats lol, but yeah in general almost everyone in these threads rely very heavily on watching tape and quantifying information that your can't really translate into statistics. the way i look at it, is then if you can find stats that are relevant to getting an edge then you have an edge (so to speak) on most sharps that might well outlast the way most ppl bet through watching tape due to lines becoming more accurate over time. the way sharps bet in here though represents fantastic risk reward opportunities that arise from the unique qualities of mma compared to more traditional sports where edges have been eroded over time and vastly more ppl bet, and odds are generally much more accurate leaving less room for + ev picks without additional information or statistics.

I still tape study and bet accordingly from analyzing that as much as many in here but I think trying to find ways to keep ahead of prices becoming more accurate is vital in this fast changing landscape. even just a couple years ago prices/limits were much better for a few reasons. and when you take into consideration limitations and outright bans that seems to be an ever increasing part of bettors life it seems to be a big limiting factor for many in here when you realize how much we can take from the bookies under the right circumstances.

In a very limited capacity, yes, I keep track of my bets and look to see where I've over bet and under bet, what I rely on too much or too little. For instance I realized a few years ago that parlays didn't work for me, they were actually costing me money. I also stopped betting favorites nearly as often as I used to b/c I noticed I was just laying too much juice and losing money.

That type of stuff, which are numbers for sure but my point was more that I almost never use the actual numbers to look at a fighter/match up. Fight metrics, etc. Strikes per minute, td's attempted per rd, stats like that I almost never use for mma/boxing. I've looked at em but they don't do much for me personally. I just watch tape for the most part.

That said, everyone is different and I definitely see where you're coming from with your overall point as well, tho. The more info you have to digest can work for some while others like myself might take myself off a lean b/c the metrics say that my eyes are deceiving me. That could be right and could be wrong but I'd rather keep it simple in regards to fight sports, if that makes sense.

I have nothing against you or anyone else using stats to cap fights, just to be clear. I just think tape study is far more important, at least for me.

 

[Roads55]

In a very limited capacity, yes, I keep track of my bets and look to see where I've over bet and under bet, what I rely on too much or too little. For instance I realized a few years ago that parlays didn't work for me, they were actually costing me money. I also stopped betting favorites nearly as often as I used to b/c I noticed I was just laying too much juice and losing money.

That type of stuff, which are numbers for sure but my point was more that I almost never use the actual numbers to look at a fighter/match up. Fight metrics, etc. Strikes per minute, td's attempted per rd, stats like that I almost never use for mma/boxing. I've looked at em but they don't do much for me personally. I just watch tape for the most part.

That said, everyone is different and I definitely see where you're coming from with your overall point as well, tho. The more info you have to digest can work for some while others like myself might take myself off a lean b/c the metrics say that my eyes are deceiving me. That could be right and could be wrong but I'd rather keep it simple in regards to fight sports, if that makes sense.

I have nothing against you or anyone else using stats to cap fights, just to be clear. I just think tape study is far more important, at least for me.

know what you mean about parleys, i hardly bet them at all now, a few years ago half my bets were probably parleys but prices aren't that generous anymore. yeah I don't bother with fight metrics in any real detail I'm more talking about other statistics, but tbh don't really want to go into much detail here as it could make them less profitable for me. im in a weird situation atm where i have to be more conservative with my bankroll as im living of them while travelling so cant re-invest winnings right now, and having multiple strategies to consistently make money is more important for me atm, and it helps make results less volatile. generally i agree atm watching tape is probably the most important thing but i have limited time to do that atm. also im having to adopt different strategies due to limitations and bans and rely more on the exchanges than almost anyone in here, I've been kind of anticipating that mma would attract more money to them but the bookie industry wants to keep them in the shadows for now.

 

[DevilsPt2]

stats don't work in mma don't waste ur time

Lol first post killed it, I just came in to say the same thing. Stats play a factor in betting but MMA is just too dynamic and chaotic, see Black Beast for a perfect example, to rely on stats.

 

[Gugabe]

stats don't work in mma don't waste ur time

There's a few interesting correlations that I like to keep aware of, but it's unlikely that anybody's gonna Moneyball MMA betting.

If you'd played every guy who was shorter with longer reach over the last 6 years, you'd be up 10% ROI on average per bet, for instance.