Arbusers

ouzoun wrote: ↑

Mon May 22, 2023 11:06 am

You are all very good theoreticians, but in European basket there are 2 words eliminating everything. Euroleague Mafia.
Real Madrid should not be at the final 4, we all know it, and even if Llull lose the final shot, something else would happen within the next 3 remaining seconds.

I was reading a very recent interview of Giannakopoulos and he politely spoke about how some teams including Panathinaikos tried to clean Euroleague from what you call ''Euroleague Mafia''. Now you have it. It remains to be seen if it is only the head, or if it is a mechanism left behind that will continue working like before. For the shake of the sport, let's hope it is clean now.

A question for Mr. Arbusers as a basketball expert if I may.
While Serbia vs. Italy didn't surprise me at all, I can't explain to myself the fourth quarter of Spain against Latvia. Please comment on Q4.
I was amazed at the way the Spanish team stopped playing in a constructive way and lost mentally. I watched carefully Lithuania vs Latvia friendly game a few days ago and I explained to myself why exactly Latvia is Underdog vs Spain.
Also, at a current score of 58:50 or perhaps 58:52, BETDAQ and BETFAIR published MoneyLine odds of something over 1.03 in favor of Spain, while Pinnacle had odds of something like 1.005 at this stage if I'm not mistaken. This is a much higher percentage quota in terms of published odds for the exchanges against the bookies than usual at that stage. Was that a reliable signal for the turnaround?
Later at 59:52 or something, all the agencies tended to "predict" that Spain would win...
Thanks in advance.

I do not have a favourite explanation right now, but I would like to examine things from both ends. In this case, I am wondering what went wrong with Spain, AND what went correct with Latvia. I have a theory in my mind that might be very dubious. The absence of Kristaps Porziņģis works in favour of Latvia and not against. I believe it makes other players achieving an outstanding performance.
I would like to add in the quotation the weak performance against Canada. I believe there is something there. I am not a know it all guy in Basketball, so I don't have something credible to say here.
Also, since the last Eurobasket, we see the resurrection of the Baltic Basketball (Poland, Finland, Estonia, are now added to Lithuania.

Generally speaking, according to the simplified basic variant of the Kelly criterion, the best approach (theoretical) is when the calculated advantage generates the calculated Kelly fraction f* of the money involved in a market position to ensure geometric growth in the long run.

I set up the appropriate way Model for pre-selected World Cup playoff matches - SRB vs LTU and USA vs ITA.

fₐᵦᵦ₍ₛₑᵣᵦᵢₐ₎ = [(Calculated advantage₍ₛₑᵣᵦᵢₐ₎) / (Decimal odds -1)] x S₍ₛₑᵣᵦᵢₐ₎,

fₐᵦᵦ₍ᵤₛₐ₎ = [(Calculated advantage₍ᵤₛₐ₎) / (Decimal odds -1)] x S₍ᵤₛₐ₎,

where fₐᵦᵦ₍ₛₑᵣᵦᵢₐ₎ is the computed fraction of the appropriate basketball bankroll for that investment in Serbia’s favor vs Lithuania,
respectively fₐᵦᵦ₍ᵤₛₐ₎ is the computed fraction of the appropriate basketball bankroll for that investment in USA’s favor vs Italy,
S₍ₛₑᵣᵦᵢₐ₎, S₍ᵤₛₐ₎ are security coefficients aiming to neutralize additional risks, not included in the computation of the (Calculated advantage ₍ₛₑᵣᵦᵢₐ₎/ ᵣₑₛₚₑ𝒸ₜᵢᵥₑₗᵧ ₍ᵤₛₐ₎) components of these formulas.
0 < S₍ₓ₎ < 1, so de facto the multiplier S₍ₓ₎ is playing its role as a fₐᵦᵦ₍ₓ₎’s divisor for the appropriate basketball bankroll’s protection.

My reasoning behind the calculation of the variable S₍ₛₑᵣᵦᵢₐ₎ also included uncertainty about Svetislav Pešić's tactics without Nikola Jokić in some critical moments, and an additional weight factor was included due to all agencies' predictions of a Lithuania win, and other factors, of course. Naturally, the projected influence of Domantas Sabonis’ absence was incorporated in the (Calculated advantage₍ₛₑᵣᵦᵢₐ₎) variable. And so on.
When it comes to the S₍ᵤₛₐ₎ variable, here I put into the Model a lot of things, for example, the USA's ability to make ,,jokes" on the pitch (no NBA top-notch players such as Jimmy Butler, LeBron James, Steph Curry and so forth). I was pretty convinced that the USA's "joke" loss to Lithuania was prompted by their goal of avoiding Serbia in the quarterfinals. But I take very seriously the fact that even with their jokingly selected team, they conceded a total of 110 points and 39 points in the fourth quarter. Also, an extra safety margin versus a systemic risk was included here, partly due to Brasil's strange win vs Canada and also stunning Latvia's one vs Spain.

Although the Model "captured" the thin value in Serbia's victory and a huge value in the USA's (some agencies offered a region of odds 1.07 - 1.09 compared to my model's computed interval of true odds of circa 1.011 - 1.019), I spotted that due to calculated value of the S₍ₓ₎ components of the formulas, the computed fractions of the investments fₐᵦᵦ₍ₓ₎ aren't at all proportional to the Kelly fractions f*.
I spotted that big disproportion in the quarterfinals SRB vs LTU and USA vs ITA only. I've almost never gotten any triggers through my model that show too big of a discrepancy in terms of computed investment fractions compared to classical Kelly Theory so far. On one hand, the undersized fractions than Kelly's ones provide your comfort in the business in case of a longer negative trend, but on the other hand, let's say that it is much better to just look for optimization of these fractions to ensure more optimal growth in the long run.

Although I am only describing the case of value positions in this post, let's say we have left the area of value market positions and are moving into trading/hedging for a while.
In order to mitigate the hypothetically suboptimal influence of the suboptimal calculated S₍ₓ₎ variable, in future tests I'm going to try these ideas via different settings of the Model:
- Tradeable events of this kind, such as SRB vs. LTU, can basically go into trading mode until S₍ₓ₎ is optimized.
- Appropriately selected series of a few short stop losses and further optimization of their number and size if possible.
-Obviously, events like USA vs ITA are not that friendly for pure trading (short-prized Fav starts great). Let's say one or a maximum of two appropriate pre-selected long stop losses plus testing of additional market entries under given circumstances, based on Price Action.
- Others.

But I'm afraid there is a likelihood that long-run advantage could be shrunk that way, compared to fₐᵦᵦ₍ₓ₎ value positions, while the risk component will be similar, due to S₍ₓ₎ settings, whose arguments drive even some stop loss positions.
If that tournament was the NBA, testing would be easy, with plenty of similar events and unchanged teams almost every day, but the World Cup and Internationals are way harder. Various Model settings are being backtested now in order to find my suboptimal settings inside.

Any opinions of those who do modeling or Basketball value markets investors?

nice point.

I think you are getting too deep in the math side of the action. Some things can work as an algorithm in our brains without having to express them within an equation.

I m coming back in this thread to share some thoughts on Basketball and the ways this sport evolved during these last 3-4 decades.

First of all, don't get me wrong, but I do remember Jordan, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird and Kareem Abdul Jabbar. Don't be impressed, but I also remember Julius Erving at the sunset of his career. On the right side of Atlantic, I remember Gallis, Petrovic, Sabonis and even McAdoo.
This is because I was stuck with basketball since I was very young.

Believe it or not, these Gods of Basket (or GOATs), today they wouldn't make it. They would be average to low rank players in their teams in both sides of the Atlantic. Reasons?
1. Today's players are faster and stronger. In the 80s, only 3 NBA players would dunk from the free throw line. Today, it should be more than 30.
2. Shooting ability. In the 80s, a team would be very happy with a 35% rate for the 3 pointers. How many teams have 55% today? Can you compare Larry Bird with Steph Curry?

Dunking and 3pointers changed the game. If you are not good in the 3 points, you are going to lose, no matter how good you are in lay ups and 2p jump shoots. The dependence of every outcome in the 3 point performance inevitably brought luck and instability in the game. You no longer see monstrous differences in the final scores. You no longer see 1.15/6 odds in any bookmaker. That is why many times you have the feeling that the best team did not win the game.

Is it for good or worse?
I believe it is for good. The game is a festive to the eye to watch. Especially when the big stars fight against each other. On the other hand it seems to me that today some bad habits, ethics and behaviours are accepted when they should be cut from the very start.

arbusers wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 19, 2023 8:16 am

I m coming back in this thread to share some thoughts on Basketball and the ways this sport evolved during these last 3-4 decades.

First of all, don't get me wrong, but I do remember Jordan, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird and Kareem Abdul Jabbar. Don't be impressed, but I also remember Julius Erving at the sunset of his career. On the right side of Atlantic, I remember Gallis, Petrovic, Sabonis and even McAdoo.
This is because I was stuck with basketball since I was very young.

Believe it or not, these Gods of Basket (or GOATs), today they wouldn't make it. They would be average to low rank players in their teams in both sides of the Atlantic. Reasons?
1. Today's players are faster and stronger. In the 80s, only 3 NBA players would dunk from the free throw line. Today, it should be more than 30.
2. Shooting ability. In the 80s, a team would be very happy with a 35% rate for the 3 pointers. How many teams have 55% today? Can you compare Larry Bird with Steph Curry?

Dunking and 3pointers changed the game. If you are not good in the 3 points, you are going to lose, no matter how good you are in lay ups and 2p jump shoots. The dependence of every outcome in the 3 point performance inevitably brought luck and instability in the game. You no longer see monstrous differences in the final scores. You no longer see 1.15/6 odds in any bookmaker. That is why many times you have the feeling that the best team did not win the game.

Is it for good or worse?
I believe it is for good. The game is a festive to the eye to watch. Especially when the big stars fight against each other. On the other hand it seems to me that today some bad habits, ethics and behaviours are accepted when they should be cut from the very start.

Thanks for sharing your Personal viewpoint, backed by your analytical skills and long-term love for that wonderful Game!
I think that will help rethink some of the media-covered postulates, and to harden other ones, backed by some personal impressions.
Thanks again!

arbusers wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 19, 2023 8:16 am

Especially when the big stars fight against each other.

I was watching Giannis against Luka yesterday. What a game! Can you imagine the finals with these 2?

Goojybooboo wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 19, 2023 5:50 pm

I was watching Giannis against Luka yesterday. What a game! Can you imagine the finals with these 2?

This game fulfilled all of my betting criteria for a successful trade. As I was expecting the lead changed and whenever a team got a difference of 10+ points I bet against it. Backs made it in the 2nd quarter and then Mavs turned everything up early in the 3rd quarter just to lose everything in the end. I wish every game was like this. Indeed it felt like a final, but, without the stress of a final. Long story short, a great betting night.

Games between Celtics and Bucks are always special. I m watching them for almost 4 years now and yesterday was no exception. There is a pattern I noticed during the years. Even when Bucks is a superior team, they play with an inferiority complex against Celtics. I am not saying that Celtics is not a good team, quite the contrary.
So what changed yesterday. Lillard on the one side, Jrew on the other. Would that complex continue? Well, it did. Straight from the very start Celtics were dominant in the court. Giannis did not make the extra step needed, and Lillard was not enough to make the difference.
Since I was not sure about the impact of the new players, I started betting very humble for Celtics. The bet stood until the end and there was no point in game where an upset would be possible. The final score also is not showing the real difference between the 2 games. I will be more aggressive the next time they play in Boston.

The same happens in Europe when teams play against Real Madrid.
Inferiority complex.
It's the only explanation for the Champions League 2021/22.
Every team was far superior than Real Madrid, but at the end, Real Madrid won.
As a FC Barcelona Supporter, you can believe me. We have studied Real Madrid a lot.

CharlieSheen99 wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 23, 2023 11:13 am

The same happens in Europe when teams play against Real Madrid.
Inferiority complex.

You are right with this. But, when it comes to Ream Madrid BC (not FC), there are other parameters in play.

arbusers wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 23, 2023 10:04 am

...
There is a pattern I noticed during the years.
...

Greatly said!
Yeah, that's one of the eternal and almost hard-as-a-rock-solid fundamentals: when sustained confirmation of your observed pattern is highly likely to be available in the next series of events or in the next game, the next triggers on the time scale by your side are almost instinctive.
Naturally, when the likelihood of breaking the spotted-by-you pattern in the very next game is very dominant, further analysis of whether and when exactly to play certain positions against the trend is crucial.
That's a quintessence of long-term market observations. Unfortunately, going from one stable and proven profitable state of your observed pattern to another level of a proven stable and profitable pattern (when observed things change in time) is a very difficult and time-consuming process due to endless backtests etc.
For example:
- the Sunset of the Gods ( the Golden State Warriors team) in the long term period:
- the "unusual" breakthrough of the Miami Heat team from hardly qualified for the Play-Offs to the NBA 2023 Final;
- and so forth.

Aris Thessaloniki vs PAO at the moment, the second half is in progress.
The PAO team's conditional stability under Ivan Jovanović (in terms of a pseudo-calm, slowly accelerating pace of play and lots of other things) has quite different live characteristics when the team is a points table leader or a member of non-leader top teams.
The potential triggers to attack the leading Handicap lines appeared in today's Model tune-up after the big mistake by the goalkeeper Brignoli in the 43rd minute, covered by:
- The probability of higher activity by Mancini on the right flank in the second half.
- The pre-estimation of the Aris defensive department correction, when it comes to better cover of the left PAO flank, but I await some things by Mancini and more passes by Verbič.
Let's see what happens.