@jamestanton It’s not 100% clear what your question is. If my guess is correct, it could be restated as “Are you more likely to see more heads or more tails or exactly the same probability?”
Heads greater is more likely.
@Not_the_Bee Instantaneous communication across vast distances is precisely the kind of thing quantum entanglement CANNOT do. Sadly, at least for star trek fans.
@JackThompsonFOX When you realize that women don’t try to ascertain truth but rather “what will other people be ok with me believing to be true” a whole lot of nonsense makes more sense.
@BettingIsCool obviously your approach is very “pure”, and can be made to handle any combination of odds (some even money and some long shot underdogs for example). Was this why you didn’t just use the binomial distribution?
@Barry_Carter i totally think this is a funny post. But Witteles was respectful and quickly learned and admitted that the person in question should be given the benefit of the doubt. I think he provides a good service to the community. Making fun of him is allowed though :)
@d_feustel I have a question about data. Which leagues are you including in your dataset? If it’s not special sauce. How similar are the various tier 1 leagues around the world?
@GuardianBetEU@Pinnacle It depends how big you are betting and your reputation with the books. The sharper your image and the larger you bet, the more you create your own CLV, with or without edge.