Verolog, I understand and agree with your point that we can't conclude that the GOM casters' predictions were good purely on the basis that Soulkey won in the end. As it could of possibly been the case that innovation was actually more likely to win but due to variance the less likely player won.
However your arguments reads as "We can't conclude the predictions were good, therefore they were bad predictions. This is assertion that needs to be proven before stated as a fact.
On June 02 2013 19:03 Veroleg wrote:
"Soulkey then proceeded to win the series, proving that the predictions of Soulkey winning weren't so inept after all." they were inept predictions.
You assert that they were bad predictions, based on what are they inept. A prediction that is correct in hindsight is more likely to be good than the incorrect prediction, unless we have a specific reason to think that the correct prediction is bad.
they weren't accurate... they were way, way off. the results were about 14% chance for bogus 4-0, about 21% for bogus 4-1, about 16 for 4-2, and about 20 for 4-3. soulkey for 4-3 was probably the fifth most likely option at about 13%, and 4-2 the sixth at 7%
You say their predictions were inaccurate because they differed from the probabilities you listed. That would be true if those statistics represented the true probabilities of the different outcomes. I don't see how you can assert that the probabilities you listed are absolute considering they are based only on previous outcomes, and are expected to be inaccurate to a degree and to have limited predictive powers.
All we can tell from this thread is that the vast majority have no clue about basic probabilities and mathematics. We haven't learned anything about the casters predictions being inept or not or innovations ability compared to Soulkeys based on a 4-3 result. Of course this statement won't be understood by the majority.
The fact is, the Korean casters would get absolutely destroyed in a liquibet competition vs the Pinnacle betting market over long period of time betting on the GSL.
On June 03 2013 03:07 _SpiRaL_ wrote: All we can tell from this thread is that the vast majority have no clue about basic probabilities and mathematics. We haven't learned anything about the casters predictions being inept or not or innovations ability compared to Soulkeys based on a 4-3 result. Of course this statement won't be understood by the majority.
The fact is, the Korean casters would get absolutely destroyed in a liquibet competition vs the Pinnacle betting market over long period of time betting on the GSL.
You claim its a fact yet they just proved they know better then that silly betting site. Why is it so hard to understand that those korean casters simply know their stuff way more then the average person? They are doing it as a job for a reason.
So much false authority-appealing. Aligulac stats, and the bandwagon of Tastosis hyping InnoVation and predicting him to win, leads people to just say "InnoVation is obviously the better player". But they're just talking out their &*%. If they were Korean, listening to Korean casters, these same people would probably be saying, "Soulkey is obviously the better player".
Anyone who actually watched these two players play in ProLeague knew this could've gone either way, and there was certainly good reason to think Soulkey would win.
If you want to think you know the game and the players better than those "GOM caster noobs", because you looked at some stats and some Aligulac/sport-gambling-website predictions (pfffft), have at it.
To Veroleg and Spiral: One thing I take issue with, as Aphid pointed out, is that you are treating the betting site (or wherever you're getting your percentages) as the absolute truth. How can you be so sure that the GSL casters would be right 31% of the time? There is nothing that can actually predict the future. Betting sites are just another system, like the Korean casters are, and to determine which system is better one would generally check whose predictions are correct more often. The Korean casters' predictions were correct here, and unfortunately we don't really HAVE more samples to consider.
Anyone who plays poker would understand that Veroleg's argument is valid. Just because events proved a prediction to be right does not make it the correct bet to be made at the time. It is still simply a bad bet and they got lucky. I think the Korean casters were just being hipster. If they had to put real money down beforehand, I highly doubt they would bet on Soulkey.
On June 03 2013 12:36 pylonsalad wrote: Anyone who plays poker would understand that Veroleg's argument is valid. Just because events proved a prediction to be right does not make it the correct bet to be made at the time. It is still simply a bad bet and they got lucky. I think the Korean casters were just being hipster. If they had to put real money down beforehand, I highly doubt they would bet on Soulkey.
Please, show me the stats why it was not right when they said it. You of course have to take in account everything from nerves to preparation.
On June 03 2013 12:36 pylonsalad wrote: Anyone who plays poker would understand that Veroleg's argument is valid. Just because events proved a prediction to be right does not make it the correct bet to be made at the time. It is still simply a bad bet and they got lucky. I think the Korean casters were just being hipster. If they had to put real money down beforehand, I highly doubt they would bet on Soulkey.
In poker, the hands, the deck, and the probabilities are all certain. Knowing your hand, what's been drawn, and what your opponent might have based on tells, gives you a more accurate presentation of the percentages compared to Soulkey vs Innovation. Decks will most likely perform according to those probabilities. Players are far more unpredictable due to mental states, playstyles, and confidence. Aligulac only compares matchup trends and streaks. In high stakes games such as the Finals, much more is involved than just skill. It is difficult to make an argument based on statistics when those numbers can no way be believed to be close to complete. They might still be accurate, but they could also be inaccurate. The same way that some have argued that a prediction that turns out to be right might not be the "correct prediction" (correct here meaning most likely), an argument (in this case, the probability of Innovation winning) that turns out to be right might not be the "correct argument" because information was incomplete when it was made.
While the consensus was Innovation in the foreign scene, most Koreans were confident that Soulkey would win.
On June 03 2013 12:36 pylonsalad wrote: Anyone who plays poker would understand that Veroleg's argument is valid. Just because events proved a prediction to be right does not make it the correct bet to be made at the time. It is still simply a bad bet and they got lucky. I think the Korean casters were just being hipster. If they had to put real money down beforehand, I highly doubt they would bet on Soulkey.
Please, show me the stats why it was not right when they said it. You of course have to take in account everything from nerves to preparation.
umm... how do I show stats for nerves and preparation? These unknowns remain unknown and anyone who claims to know them are charlatans. Based on the stats of all games played, with an emphasis on more recent games, and even more emphasis on their respective TvZ stats, Innovation would be a moderate to heavy favorite. Of course, it is incomplete information, but starcraft, gambling, and life is played with incomplete information. You do the best with what you got. Predicting that Soulkey would win is simply a negative value bet.
On June 03 2013 12:36 pylonsalad wrote: Anyone who plays poker would understand that Veroleg's argument is valid. Just because events proved a prediction to be right does not make it the correct bet to be made at the time. It is still simply a bad bet and they got lucky. I think the Korean casters were just being hipster. If they had to put real money down beforehand, I highly doubt they would bet on Soulkey.
Please, show me the stats why it was not right when they said it. You of course have to take in account everything from nerves to preparation.
umm... how do I show stats for nerves and preparation? These unknowns remain unknown and anyone who claims to know them are charlatans. Based on the stats of all games played, with an emphasis on more recent games, and even more emphasis on their respective TvZ stats, Innovation would be a moderate to heavy favorite. Of course, it is incomplete information, but starcraft, gambling, and life is played with incomplete information. You do the best with what you got. Predicting that Soulkey would win is simply a negative value bet.
And what if those casters had more information then you or i? Once again, these people are doing this for a job, they simply know it way better. What if by their information it wasn't a negative value bet? People are so fast to decide that their personal info is completely right and that anything goes against it is wrong.
On June 03 2013 12:36 pylonsalad wrote: Anyone who plays poker would understand that Veroleg's argument is valid. Just because events proved a prediction to be right does not make it the correct bet to be made at the time. It is still simply a bad bet and they got lucky. I think the Korean casters were just being hipster. If they had to put real money down beforehand, I highly doubt they would bet on Soulkey.
Please, show me the stats why it was not right when they said it. You of course have to take in account everything from nerves to preparation.
umm... how do I show stats for nerves and preparation? These unknowns remain unknown and anyone who claims to know them are charlatans. Based on the stats of all games played, with an emphasis on more recent games, and even more emphasis on their respective TvZ stats, Innovation would be a moderate to heavy favorite. Of course, it is incomplete information, but starcraft, gambling, and life is played with incomplete information. You do the best with what you got. Predicting that Soulkey would win is simply a negative value bet.
Your problem is that you consider stuff like nerves and preparations unknowns that might just as well favour one player as the other. But there is no reason to assume that. Those casters might very well have insights we don't have. For example they might have heard from a teammate of innovation that he was very nervous beforehand. Or that soulkey made alot of progress in his practise games.
Aditionally it could also be based on previous games, for example some people just do better under pressure than others.
And that is all stuff that is not included in just the stats. It stays ridiculous that people are called inept for making correct predictions...
On June 03 2013 01:57 Zenbrez wrote: It shocks me that people like Veroleg actually defend themselves in situations like this.
whats shocking is your lack of arguments. there are none though since theres no faults in my logic, but dont act as if there is if you cant even try.
On June 03 2013 01:57 Zealously wrote: There are two ways to argue. You can bring solid, clear arguments that attempt to disprove whatever it is you argue against, or you can turn your weaker arguments into a convoluted mess that is very difficult to break apart and respond to properly. Your posts fall in the second category, and I'm not willing nor able to spend the time needed to dissect your posts and try to make you understand my viewpoint in this case. I'll just point out that statistics got the GSL finals wrong and bid you a good day/evening and politely step away from this subject.
theres many ways to handle an argument, you can be methodical and go through the points listed or you can start gibbering about how unclear and terrible (you would think something so obviously bad and faulty would be easily dismissable) someones arguments are the moment you run out of your own. i would ask you to clarify just what about my posts are so unclear and terrible but i suspect i wont be getting an answer. the statistics didnt get anything right or wrong, thats not what statistics do. i just told you that in my last posts
On June 03 2013 02:20 StarStruck wrote: Take what they say with a grain of salt please. We already know how well Artosis is at predicting stuff. It's well documented like Mr. Kim Carrier. They might live and breath the game, but it doesn't mean they're all knowing.
where has artosis estimation abillity been documented at?
On June 03 2013 02:39 Aphid wrote: However your arguments reads as "We can't conclude the predictions were good, therefore they were bad predictions. This is assertion that needs to be proven before stated as a fact.
i said that the predictions were almost guaranteed to be bad. pinnacle put soulkey at 39-41% per map. the amount of times theyve ever put it that off are absurd. that was the odds before the match started, it was shaped by the best bettors, and the odds the best bettors would be that off is even more absurd. then you can make some analysis to help refine ones estimations. what can yo come up with that spoke in soulkeys favour?
they weren't accurate... they were way, way off. the results were about 14% chance for bogus 4-0, about 21% for bogus 4-1, about 16 for 4-2, and about 20 for 4-3. soulkey for 4-3 was probably the fifth most likely option at about 13%, and 4-2 the sixth at 7%
You say their predictions were inaccurate because they differed from the probabilities you listed. That would be true if those statistics represented the true probabilities of the different outcomes. I don't see how you can assert that the probabilities you listed are absolute considering they are based only on previous outcomes, and are expected to be inaccurate to a degree and to have limited predictive powers.
i clearely asserted that they werent absolute. see those 4! "about"s in there? i didnt base them off of previous outcomes, thats not how you base how well someone will play off of.
On June 03 2013 03:07 _SpiRaL_ wrote: All we can tell from this thread is that the vast majority have no clue about basic probabilities and mathematics. We haven't learned anything about the casters predictions being inept or not or innovations ability compared to Soulkeys based on a 4-3 result. Of course this statement won't be understood by the majority.
yeah, i thought most at least had some idea about it since its so basic
On June 03 2013 03:07 _SpiRaL_ wrote: All we can tell from this thread is that the vast majority have no clue about basic probabilities and mathematics. We haven't learned anything about the casters predictions being inept or not or innovations ability compared to Soulkeys based on a 4-3 result. Of course this statement won't be understood by the majority.
The fact is, the Korean casters would get absolutely destroyed in a liquibet competition vs the Pinnacle betting market over long period of time betting on the GSL.
You claim its a fact yet they just proved they know better then that silly betting site. Why is it so hard to understand that those korean casters simply know their stuff way more then the average person? They are doing it as a job for a reason.
On June 03 2013 07:09 Leporello wrote: Anyone who actually watched these two players play in ProLeague knew this could've gone either way, and there was certainly good reason to think Soulkey would win.
If you want to think you know the game and the players better than those "GOM caster noobs", because you looked at some stats and some Aligulac/sport-gambling-website predictions (pfffft), have at it.
i would put my life on the line that if the predictions from the gom casters predicting soulkey as favourite were 100%honest they would lose money betting sc2. as i said earlier you dont claim a coin has any clue what its doing after getting 50% of its predictions on gsl winners right. the coin severely outperformed the casters in this match
On June 03 2013 07:14 slowbacontron wrote: To Veroleg and Spiral: One thing I take issue with, as Aphid pointed out, is that you are treating the betting site (or wherever you're getting your percentages) as the absolute truth.The Korean casters' predictions were correct here, and unfortunately we don't really HAVE more samples to consider.
if they were the truth then the truth sure moves around a whole lot. i specifically said they werent and spiral obviously knows that too. noone knows anything for certain, everything is probabillities. and i think we have plenty of prediction samples if one were to go look. im not sure about saved odds though
On June 03 2013 12:36 pylonsalad wrote: Anyone who plays poker would understand that Veroleg's argument is valid. Just because events proved a prediction to be right does not make it the correct bet to be made at the time. It is still simply a bad bet and they got lucky. I think the Korean casters were just being hipster. If they had to put real money down beforehand, I highly doubt they would bet on Soulkey.
In poker, the hands, the deck, and the probabilities are all certain. Knowing your hand, what's been drawn, and what your opponent might have based on tells, gives you a more accurate presentation of the percentages compared to Soulkey vs Innovation. Decks will most likely perform according to those probabilities. Players are far more unpredictable due to mental states, playstyles, and confidence. Aligulac only compares matchup trends and streaks. In high stakes games such as the Finals, much more is involved than just skill. It is difficult to make an argument based on statistics when those numbers can no way be believed to be close to complete. They might still be accurate, but they could also be inaccurate. The same way that some have argued that a prediction that turns out to be right might not be the "correct prediction" (correct here meaning most likely), an argument (in this case, the probability of Innovation winning) that turns out to be right might not be the "correct argument" because information was incomplete when it was made.
all games matter in different degrees, finals are exaggerated from the others. we have little to no insight into players mental state except in rare cases. when having no information, either one is just about as likely as the other to be the better one mentally. so this area affects probabillities very little. it affects it in the tiny way of less nervousness on both sides favours the better player, and a lot favours the worse. so comparing a match with little on the line vs a finals, a finals is on average a teeny bit more helpful to the worse player. unless one has pretty solid info on mental states, the fact of it being a final changes probabillities very little
On June 03 2013 12:54 lichter wrote:While the consensus was Innovation in the foreign scene, most Koreans were confident that Soulkey would win.
source?
On June 03 2013 15:12 Zenbrez wrote: The ridiculousness of some people in these forums baffle me.
our arguments are baffling, yet an apparent lack of counters
On June 03 2013 20:42 Sissors wrote: And that is all stuff that is not included in just the stats. It stays ridiculous that people are called inept for making correct predictions...
a coin has no iq, is it not intelligence wise, inept? yet it gets 50% of gsl matches correct. theyre not called inept for making "correct" predictions, theyre being called inept for making bad predictions
This coin comparison is beyond retarded. A coin has no IQ like you said, these casters do and they gave the reasons why they thought soulkey would win. You keep saying its bad prediction but you got no stats to back it up.
On June 04 2013 06:25 Assirra wrote: This coin comparison is beyond retarded. A coin has no IQ like you said, these casters do and they gave the reasons why they thought soulkey would win. You keep saying its bad prediction but you got no stats to back it up.
he praised the casters for making "correct" predictions and called it impressive based on the result. so lets say you make a poll before the finals on TL and 70%-30% in bogus favour and people explain their decisions. meanwhile you ask profitable bettors for just a vote of whos the favourite and 100% votes for bogus. people on TL is a better source because they gave reasons? the coin example is showing people how they cant praise the casters for one result. they may have a 46% success rate and you would be better off listening to a coin. people praising them for hitting a 30%er if anything is beyond retarded when they should be embarrassed for being so off. nobody has even listed whats so reasonable about their arguments i did back it up some up there
since when do people need to make multiple predictions to proof they are right once? This whole discussion is so incredible dumb and used as an excuse to still call the korean casters inept and liars when it was proven they were indeed correct. You can't come up with stuff like "they may have a 46% success rate and you would be better off listening to a coin" when it was about a single prediction. That is making stuff more complicated then it is. They were right and 90% of this thread was wrong. You are willing to come up with all the stats in the world if you want to why innovation should have won and why their predictions were wrong but since they proven those stats wrong with actual results, it does not matter. But please, keep on going theorizing why they were less reliable then a bloody coin.
On June 04 2013 06:25 Assirra wrote: This coin comparison is beyond retarded. A coin has no IQ like you said, these casters do and they gave the reasons why they thought soulkey would win. You keep saying its bad prediction but you got no stats to back it up.
he praised the casters for making "correct" predictions and called it impressive based on the result. so lets say you make a poll before the finals on TL and 70%-30% in bogus favour and people explain their decisions. meanwhile you ask profitable bettors for just a vote of whos the favourite and 100% votes for bogus. people on TL is a better source because they gave reasons? the coin example is showing people how they cant praise the casters for one result. they may have a 46% success rate and you would be better off listening to a coin. people praising them for hitting a 30%er if anything is beyond retarded when they should be embarrassed for being so off. nobody has even listed whats so reasonable about their arguments i did back it up some up there
what, so in order to be smart/correct/not inept you have to bet on who the majority of the people think is going to win or something. why would you be embarrassed for "being off" if you're right, if anything, the foreign scene (the majority) should be embarrassed for being wrong because they fell to the bogus hype.
you think somehow putting money on the line changes the way people view odds. did you consider that maybe the korean/gom casters actually believed that soulkey was going to win over bogus and not trying to hype the match. but because bogus went 3-0 in the first 3 matches, you think that he was supposed to win, you think that what you predicted was more correct than theirs. pinnacle odds are the same as any odds, theyre what the majority think, not what the best think.
On June 04 2013 06:25 Assirra wrote: This coin comparison is beyond retarded. A coin has no IQ like you said, these casters do and they gave the reasons why they thought soulkey would win. You keep saying its bad prediction but you got no stats to back it up.
he praised the casters for making "correct" predictions and called it impressive based on the result. so lets say you make a poll before the finals on TL and 70%-30% in bogus favour and people explain their decisions. meanwhile you ask profitable bettors for just a vote of whos the favourite and 100% votes for bogus. people on TL is a better source because they gave reasons? the coin example is showing people how they cant praise the casters for one result. they may have a 46% success rate and you would be better off listening to a coin. people praising them for hitting a 30%er if anything is beyond retarded when they should be embarrassed for being so off. nobody has even listed whats so reasonable about their arguments i did back it up some up there
You know people who make money in sports betting don't do it by just betting on the favourites all the time right? Bogus was the favourite in this case, but not the heavy favourite the tastosis hype would lead you to believe. They were 1-1 in recent proleague matches and the games were pretty close. Bogus should not have been that heavy of a favourite.
Your pinnacle example is a bit flawed because esports betting is a niche market with very low betting maximum caps. This means there is more leeway for the set odds to be wrong. Odds being that wrong would never happen in the NFL though for example because of the volume of money bet on that market, any kind of error like that would be corrected shortly by the market.
There's too little money in esports betting to have the same type of market correction be done. Heck pinnacle even says on their site that esports is new and their lines could be flawed. They can get away with being wrong sometimes due to the low betting maximum cap, since they won't lose much money in the end. I don't know the gsl finals betting limit, but I just checked the max for tonight's up/down matches and it's set at $362CDN. That is a pathetically low limit, but also protects pinnacle in cases where their odds were wrong such as the case with the gsl finals.
It’s not just Major League Gaming professionals that need to keep up-to-date with eSport updates – the traders at Pinnacle Sports need to stay just as updated. With new tactics being discovered and widely adopted over a period of just weeks, no other sport is as dynamic as the world of eSports.
Because the world of eSports is so fluid, it’s quite possible for a well-informed eSport fan to know more about a match than a bookmaker and take advantage of inaccurate odds, and use your eSports betting knowledge and Pinnacle Sports account to make money.
EPT
