|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
So let's say a relatively small group of people have created their own currency, "moonbucks," with which they bet on sports matches with each other.
Let's say you can bet however many moonbucks you want on a match. Let's also say that, after you bet, you can change the team you're betting on or cancel your bet entirely, as long as you act before betting closes at the start of the sports match.
How are odds determined in this scenario? Well, let's say they're based on how many moonbucks have been waged on each team.
Team Aardvark: 4 people bet 100 moonbucks (total) on this team.
Team Baboon: 20 people bet 300 moonbucks (total) on this team.
In this case, if Team Baboon wins, the people who bet on them will draw from the pool of 100 moonbucks (supplied by the Aardvark bettors) to collect their winnings. The people betting on Team Aardvark stand to triple their money.
If someone in the pool of bettors somehow managed to gather a significant amount of moonbucks; that is, perhaps 1/3 of the total amount of currency commonly used in the total bets on a specific match, how might that person rig the betting? Can anyone figure it out?
Gosugamers might be interested in the answer to this question.
  
|
United States15275 Posts
By placing their bet early on and switching/canceling their bet at the last minute? We had that problem all the time when eSBL was running.
|
so this is whats going on in abl..
|
Hong Kong9157 Posts
this is why you do not show the actions of other players before bets are finalized in this kind of system
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On September 06 2014 09:55 itsjustatank wrote:
this is why you do not show the actions of other players before bets are finalized in this kind of system
If actions by players aren't shown, you can't run a betting system where the odds are set by the bets themselves. The admins of the system would have to set the odds, which is fine for Vegas but maybe not as fine for a small-time esports betting league.
|
This is how I got to the top of the cider/potato leaderboards.
|
Hong Kong9157 Posts
On September 06 2014 10:17 motbob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2014 09:55 itsjustatank wrote:
this is why you do not show the actions of other players before bets are finalized in this kind of system If actions by players aren't shown, you can't run a betting system where the odds are set by the bets themselves. The admins of the system would have to set the odds, which is fine for Vegas but maybe not as fine for a small-time esports betting league.
no. the odds are still created by the players based on their commitment level, they just dont need to see what they are and how they are developing until bets are final because they begin to try to play the odds instead of predict who will win.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On September 06 2014 10:27 itsjustatank wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2014 10:17 motbob wrote:On September 06 2014 09:55 itsjustatank wrote:
this is why you do not show the actions of other players before bets are finalized in this kind of system If actions by players aren't shown, you can't run a betting system where the odds are set by the bets themselves. The admins of the system would have to set the odds, which is fine for Vegas but maybe not as fine for a small-time esports betting league. no. the odds are still created by the players based on their commitment level, they just dont need to see what they are and how they are developing until bets are final because they begin to try to play the odds instead of predict who will win.
Wat. In this system you are describing, are payouts Liquibet-style (set number of points for winner) or Gosubet style (reward is based on how big of an underdog you bet on)?
|
Hong Kong9157 Posts
http://www.saltybet.com/
you dont see odds until you finish betting and bets are finalized, and yet you still manage to have player-set odds based on commitment
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On September 06 2014 10:35 itsjustatank wrote:http://www.saltybet.com/you dont see odds until you finish betting and bets are finalized, and yet you still manage to have player-set odds based on commitment
OK. Earlier you said that a "hidden" odds system like saltybet is better because, with visible odds, "[bettors] begin to try to play the odds instead of predict who will win." The problem with that statement is that if Gosubet started hiding odds, people would still "play the odds," except it would be harder than before because you'd have to infer bet percentages.
Like, if I look at past bets, and the odds on Na`Vi vs Lesser-CIS-Team have generally been 90/10 for a Bo1, I'm gonna bet on Lesser-CIS-Team because that's obviously a winning bet, even though I can't see the odds and even though I think Na`Vi is probably going to win. So I'm playing the odds anyway.
If people playing the odds is inevitable (and it is, even in a Liquibet fixed-point system), I'd rather have a system where the odds are visible and where I can make decisions like, "Hmm, is LGD vs LGD.CDEC really 3.3:1?" instead of having to determine a) what the odds will be and b) whether those odds are correct.
|
Hong Kong9157 Posts
your system encourages playing the odds and purposefully either making bad decisions or gaming the system. it in fact privileges this style of play.
hidden odds rewards people who consistently make accurate and predictive bets, while leaving some amount of volatility for the risk-takers.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On September 06 2014 10:58 itsjustatank wrote:
your system encourages playing the odds and purposefully either making bad decisions or gaming the system. it in fact privileges this style of play.
hidden odds rewards people who consistently make accurate and predictive bets, while leaving some amount of volatility for the risk-takers.
Both systems encourage "bad decisions" as you put it. In fact, hidden odds systems reward "bad decisions" more than visible odds systems, since fewer participants are thinking about the fact that they should be playing the odds (and therefore you'll see unreasonably lopsided bets for the favorite, which people playing the odds can exploit).
What does "bad decisions" even mean in a variable payout system? Is betting on the underdog at 90/10 a "bad decision" even when they have a 25% chance of winning? To me, a bad decision is a decision that isn't +EV, and I think that, under that definition, hidden odds systems do a good job of encouraging casual bettors to make bad decisions.
|
Hong Kong9157 Posts
your assumption that a team in an esports game has a fixed and knowable percentage chance of winning is severely flawed. past performance does not guarantee future results. your system of playing the odds and encouraging people to do so is like the charlatans who predict stocks will go up and dump their shares before they tank, because they have nothing behind it.
you concede two very important things: 1) that gaming the system is possible, and that 2) hiding the odds makes it harder. those are two very important net benefits to hiding the odds in any player-generate odds betting system.
id rather have a system that rewards consistent people, but also rewards people who do make excellent calls against the grain of public opinion. presenting odds taints people's opinions as to how they essentially vote, and it does not serve as an effective predictor of match results in that way. it also leaves it wide open to big players shifting the playing field because they have perfect knowledge of the playing field and how to game it.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On September 06 2014 11:14 itsjustatank wrote:
your assumption that a team in an esports game has a fixed and knowable percentage chance of winning is severely flawed. past performance does not guarantee future results. your system of playing the odds and encouraging people to do so is like the charlatans who predict stocks will go up and dump their shares before they tank, because they have nothing behind it.
you concede two very important things: 1) that gaming the system is possible, and that 2) hiding the odds makes it harder. those are two very important net benefits to hiding the odds in any player-generate odds betting system.
id rather have a system that rewards consistent people, but also rewards people who do make excellent calls against the grain of public opinion. presenting odds taints people's opinions as to how they essentially vote, and it does not serve as an effective predictor of match results in that way. it also leaves it wide open to big players shifting the playing field because they have perfect knowledge of the playing field and how to game it.
I believe that a team in an esports game has a true chance of winning, not a knowable one. I believe that when two Dota teams sit down to draft their heroes in game 1 of a match, there is some true set of odds to that match. I'm not sure how that can be argued against. The trick is guessing that set of odds.
I guess I have conceded that gaming the system is possible if you define gaming as "doing something that gives you an edge other than choosing which team is more likely to win," which is the definition I glean from what you're writing. I think gaming, under that definition, is fun as hell. I don't want it to be impossible.
"Big players shifting the playing field" is impossible as long as you can't cancel your bet. If big money gets thrown around, it's always to the detriment of the guy doing the big betting, if, again, the bet can't be cancelled.
|
Hong Kong9157 Posts
On September 06 2014 11:36 motbob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2014 11:14 itsjustatank wrote:
your assumption that a team in an esports game has a fixed and knowable percentage chance of winning is severely flawed. past performance does not guarantee future results. your system of playing the odds and encouraging people to do so is like the charlatans who predict stocks will go up and dump their shares before they tank, because they have nothing behind it.
you concede two very important things: 1) that gaming the system is possible, and that 2) hiding the odds makes it harder. those are two very important net benefits to hiding the odds in any player-generate odds betting system.
id rather have a system that rewards consistent people, but also rewards people who do make excellent calls against the grain of public opinion. presenting odds taints people's opinions as to how they essentially vote, and it does not serve as an effective predictor of match results in that way. it also leaves it wide open to big players shifting the playing field because they have perfect knowledge of the playing field and how to game it. I believe that a team in an esports game has a true chance of winning, not a knowable one. I believe that when two Dota teams sit down to draft their heroes in game 1 of a match, there is some true set of odds to that match. I'm not sure how that can be argued against. The trick is guessing that set of odds. I guess I have conceded that gaming the system is possible if you define gaming as "doing something that gives you an edge other than choosing which team is more likely to win," which is the definition I glean from what you're writing. I think gaming, under that definition, is fun as hell. I don't want it to be impossible. "Big players shifting the playing field" is impossible as long as you can't cancel your bet. If big money gets thrown around, it's always to the detriment of the guy doing the big betting, if, again, the bet can't be cancelled.
that true chance of winning is so completely divorced from presented odds before bets are finalized. they are also extremely divorced from the odds that are set after bets closed. in a system that presents those odds, i will say that people are not making decisions about the game they are about to watch (if they watch at all); they are making decisions about how many ESPORTS dollars to put on X to win or lose. it also opens the wide open maw of matchfixing, because depending on the benefits, you now have an incentive to have people throw matches for you, knowing the odds.
i dont like that, but that speaks to the motives behind the creation of any betting system. i want a system to be based and rely on an esports game and predicting winners. in your system, the esports game is not even necessary to have the experience you seek because the game itself is the betting and a computer could set up two or more opponents and choose one to win instead. id just play progressive slots instead at that point.
big money being thrown around isn't about cancelling. it is about influencing how people vote in a system. when people see 90/10 split between two opponents in a pre-close odds, they will tend to vote for the 90 because who wants to lose money and go against the grain. the big money can then switch to who they actually intended to vote for, and screw the people who dont switch with them at the last minute.
|
About the strategy you asked for: You bet very early a huge amount on the underdog. This mostly prevents other users to bet on the underdog, as the odds look very good for the favorite.
Then in last second you recall your big bet, replace it with a very small bet. As you have driven away most other bettors from the underdog, you know get insanely high odds on your underdog bet.
Like quick example:
You have 1000 Fantasy$, you bet them all on underdog A.
Ppl will see the very good rates for Fav B, and you may end with something like 3300F$ on B, and only another 100F$ on your A. Looks like a 3:1 bet. (You would gain 3000, but risk 1000) But then you change your betsize to 100F$. Now you would suddenly win 1650 F$, but only risk 100 F$., 16,5:1 odds. AWESOME!
|
How would i game the system?
I would all in the favourite till the end and then change to a 10% bet to the favourite.
For example, if i had 1/3 the total game money ($333/1000), i would:
1) all in team A (favourite). This will severely make the odds lopsided.
2) wait for last minute before switching off team A.
Due to the 333 that i placed at team A, and we assume 1/3 of the remaining people chooses to try and bet the non - favourite and try to make a killing, that leaves a $222 bet on team B and $444 on Team A.
Now the odds will be: 777:222, or 3.5:1.
However, if i change my bet to a $33 (10%) bet at last minute, the bet becomes 2.14:1. I stand to earn more marginally while significantly reducing my risk of losing.
|
A couple of notes: A system like this should have a maximum bet in place so not any one bettor can swing the odds too much.
Why would this betting system allow for bet canceling? All bets should be final.
The odds should remain hidden (bettors could be given projected odds, a la horse racing opening lines) until a minimum number of bets have been made. If that minimum is never reached all bets would be canceled.
Edit: note that my proposed changes depend on having the administrator of the betting system to be decent at projecting odds, a skill which can be learned. This is the thing about sports betting. The handicapper is important. No way around it, IMO.
|
Hong Kong9157 Posts
On September 07 2014 00:34 sc2isnotdying wrote:
A couple of notes: A system like this should have a maximum bet in place so not any one bettor can swing the odds too much.
Why would this betting system allow for bet canceling? All bets should be final.
The odds should remain hidden (bettors could be given projected odds, a la horse racing opening lines) until a minimum number of bets have been made. If that minimum is never reached all bets would be canceled.
Edit: note that my proposed changes depend on having the administrator of the betting system to be decent at projecting odds, a skill which can be learned. This is the thing about sports betting. The handicapper is important. No way around it, IMO.
if you read the OP, the system described does not use handicappers or house odds. the 'odds' are generated based on the ratio of commitment each option gets and is thus set by the players themselves. if 90% of the money goes to option a and 10% to option b, the 'odds' are 9:1. if it's 50/50, odds are 1:1.
|
On September 07 2014 01:39 itsjustatank wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2014 00:34 sc2isnotdying wrote:
A couple of notes: A system like this should have a maximum bet in place so not any one bettor can swing the odds too much.
Why would this betting system allow for bet canceling? All bets should be final.
The odds should remain hidden (bettors could be given projected odds, a la horse racing opening lines) until a minimum number of bets have been made. If that minimum is never reached all bets would be canceled.
Edit: note that my proposed changes depend on having the administrator of the betting system to be decent at projecting odds, a skill which can be learned. This is the thing about sports betting. The handicapper is important. No way around it, IMO.
if you read the OP, the system described does not use handicappers or house odds. the 'odds' are generated based on the ratio of commitment each option gets and is thus set by the players themselves. if 90% of the money goes to option a and 10% to option b, the 'odds' are 9:1. if it's 50/50, odds are 1:1.
I got that. It's very similar to parimutuel betting used in horse racing, except without a vig. You can still use projected odds. Your handicapper predicts where the money is going to be placed and thus generates the opening line, an approximation of the true odds. Once enough money is in the pool, the actual odds can be released. The early money is an unreliable indicator of what the bettor can expect his odds to be because each bet that comes in is going to swing the odds too far. This is why you still need a handicapper. Most of the money will be coming in last minute and the bettor needs to be able to approximate what his/her odds will be at the time they place their bet. The addition of the handicapper, all bets being final, and a maximum bet all make the system harder to game. People have been betting on sports for centuries and this is the proven system.
|
Hong Kong9157 Posts
On September 07 2014 02:58 sc2isnotdying wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2014 01:39 itsjustatank wrote:On September 07 2014 00:34 sc2isnotdying wrote:
A couple of notes: A system like this should have a maximum bet in place so not any one bettor can swing the odds too much.
Why would this betting system allow for bet canceling? All bets should be final.
The odds should remain hidden (bettors could be given projected odds, a la horse racing opening lines) until a minimum number of bets have been made. If that minimum is never reached all bets would be canceled.
Edit: note that my proposed changes depend on having the administrator of the betting system to be decent at projecting odds, a skill which can be learned. This is the thing about sports betting. The handicapper is important. No way around it, IMO.
if you read the OP, the system described does not use handicappers or house odds. the 'odds' are generated based on the ratio of commitment each option gets and is thus set by the players themselves. if 90% of the money goes to option a and 10% to option b, the 'odds' are 9:1. if it's 50/50, odds are 1:1. I got that. It's very similar to parimutuel betting used in horse racing, except without a vig. You can still use projected odds. Your handicapper predicts where the money is going to be placed and thus generates the opening line, an approximation of the true odds. Once enough money is in the pool, the actual odds can be released. The early money is an unreliable indicator of what the bettor can expect his odds to be because each bet that comes in is going to swing the odds too far. This is why you still need a handicapper. Most of the money will be coming in last minute and the bettor needs to be able to approximate what his/her odds will be at the time they place their bet. The addition of the handicapper, all bets being final, and a maximum bet all make the system harder to game. People have been betting on sports for centuries and this is the proven system.
unless the house is tossing in money into the pot, i see no reason why this is any different from people signalling to each other what they think the odds will be in a blind odds system; except the false signalling is being done by the system itself in your case.
the creation of odds really only makes sense in you versus the house betting, a la vegas. it also works in person-to-person negotiated bets, a la sidebets in fighting games.
|
On September 07 2014 03:15 itsjustatank wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2014 02:58 sc2isnotdying wrote:On September 07 2014 01:39 itsjustatank wrote:On September 07 2014 00:34 sc2isnotdying wrote:
A couple of notes: A system like this should have a maximum bet in place so not any one bettor can swing the odds too much.
Why would this betting system allow for bet canceling? All bets should be final.
The odds should remain hidden (bettors could be given projected odds, a la horse racing opening lines) until a minimum number of bets have been made. If that minimum is never reached all bets would be canceled.
Edit: note that my proposed changes depend on having the administrator of the betting system to be decent at projecting odds, a skill which can be learned. This is the thing about sports betting. The handicapper is important. No way around it, IMO.
if you read the OP, the system described does not use handicappers or house odds. the 'odds' are generated based on the ratio of commitment each option gets and is thus set by the players themselves. if 90% of the money goes to option a and 10% to option b, the 'odds' are 9:1. if it's 50/50, odds are 1:1. I got that. It's very similar to parimutuel betting used in horse racing, except without a vig. You can still use projected odds. Your handicapper predicts where the money is going to be placed and thus generates the opening line, an approximation of the true odds. Once enough money is in the pool, the actual odds can be released. The early money is an unreliable indicator of what the bettor can expect his odds to be because each bet that comes in is going to swing the odds too far. This is why you still need a handicapper. Most of the money will be coming in last minute and the bettor needs to be able to approximate what his/her odds will be at the time they place their bet. The addition of the handicapper, all bets being final, and a maximum bet all make the system harder to game. People have been betting on sports for centuries and this is the proven system. unless the house is tossing in money into the pot, i see no reason why this is any different from people signalling to each other what they think the odds will be in a blind odds system; except the false signalling is being done by the system itself in your case. the creation of odds really only makes sense in you versus the house betting, a la vegas. it also works in person-to-person negotiated bets, a la sidebets in fighting games.
The difference between bettors signaling each other what they think the odds will be versus a dedicated handicapper is that the handicapper has no incentive to send false signal. In a parimutel type system, the bettors are competing against each other. The addition of a handicapper makes everything much more accessible. Players are given some idea of the price of their bets. How many people do you know who would place a bet on an underdog if they had no idea what their odds might be?
|
Hong Kong9157 Posts
if they play their own system or tell the odds to their friends, yes they do
as for your last question, lots. they dont need to see odds to wager.
|
Yeah, this described is an issue with Gosugamers, but can't really be abused in big betting websites.
When max bets are $100-$1000 (the upper bound for big events), a $1000 bet wont be able to swing the $50,000-$1,000,000 in bets placed. All that needs to be put into place is have a betting limit of a certain percentage of the current money bet.
Anyway, I much prefer the system that Pinnacle uses, and it works well and can't really be abused.
|
Surely the simplest way to make sure all these workarounds aren't effective or simply do not work is to apply a small 5min or so cooldown on bets under the initial betted amount after a bet has been withdrawn giving the other players time to adjust their bets?
|
On September 07 2014 02:58 sc2isnotdying wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2014 01:39 itsjustatank wrote:On September 07 2014 00:34 sc2isnotdying wrote:
A couple of notes: A system like this should have a maximum bet in place so not any one bettor can swing the odds too much.
Why would this betting system allow for bet canceling? All bets should be final.
The odds should remain hidden (bettors could be given projected odds, a la horse racing opening lines) until a minimum number of bets have been made. If that minimum is never reached all bets would be canceled.
Edit: note that my proposed changes depend on having the administrator of the betting system to be decent at projecting odds, a skill which can be learned. This is the thing about sports betting. The handicapper is important. No way around it, IMO.
if you read the OP, the system described does not use handicappers or house odds. the 'odds' are generated based on the ratio of commitment each option gets and is thus set by the players themselves. if 90% of the money goes to option a and 10% to option b, the 'odds' are 9:1. if it's 50/50, odds are 1:1. I got that. It's very similar to parimutuel betting used in horse racing, except without a vig. You can still use projected odds. Your handicapper predicts where the money is going to be placed and thus generates the opening line, an approximation of the true odds. Once enough money is in the pool, the actual odds can be released. The early money is an unreliable indicator of what the bettor can expect his odds to be because each bet that comes in is going to swing the odds too far. This is why you still need a handicapper. Most of the money will be coming in last minute and the bettor needs to be able to approximate what his/her odds will be at the time they place their bet. The addition of the handicapper, all bets being final, and a maximum bet all make the system harder to game. People have been betting on sports for centuries and this is the proven system.
And Horse racing kicks ass. I won 140 bucks on that this weekend.
|
This is why in the stock market, they have some called open interest.
|
Can you only bet for one team or the other?
I could imagine a way of splitting your bet so you can't lose money. There might also be holes depending on how you round the pay outs if things aren't exactly even.
|
Regardless, if you're wrong, you're wrong
This is more like 60:40, and there is an outside chance someone will predict what you're doing
I'd bet you're only gaining about 25% profit versus what you'd be making anyways
|
On September 14 2014 02:45 Artisian wrote:
Can you only bet for one team or the other?
I could imagine a way of splitting your bet so you can't lose money. There might also be holes depending on how you round the pay outs if things aren't exactly even.
I did the math on that, though, and it really balances out, because if the team with the better odds wins you're winning (say you're betting 15 on both) 5, and if the team with the worse odds wins you're winning 39
You spend 30$ and you either pull 20$ or 54$ with the more likely pull being 20$ (because people will bet on the favorite) sure winning 24$ would be 1.8x your money which is great but losing 33.3% sucks
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
