On June 05 2013 02:35 Assirra wrote: since when do people need to make multiple predictions to proof they are right once?
if you flip a coin it will be right 50% of the time, it also means that it will guess the favourite wrong 50% of the time. you claim they were right about the favourite this time because the result proved it. so when the coin wins, it also analysed the favourite right? i dont understand how hard it can be to understand you need to make quite a few predictions to have any kind of solid idea that the person making the prediction has a good clue.
On June 05 2013 02:35 Assirra wrote: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.
im calling the korean casters inept because peoples ideas about how the casters predictions gain them better status because of this one result is incredibly frustrating and its mindboggling to me how people do it.
On June 05 2013 02:35 Assirra wrote: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.
thats the reason i am doing it, because the sample size is retarded. many people claim that it proves the casters competence.
On June 05 2013 02:35 Assirra wrote: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.
you dont prove stats wrong, stats arent wrong unless someone lied about them or got them wrong in some way. they didnt prove anything wrong with this result... sometime you hit your 30% and sometime you dont. whats so hard to understand?
On June 05 2013 02:35 Assirra wrote:But please, keep on going theorizing why they were less reliable then a bloody coin.
didnt say that anywhere. their prediction for this match was worse than a coins odds of predicting it though.
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.
to be correct you have to say that the favourite is who the favourite is
On June 05 2013 03:09 eX Killy wrote:why would you be embarrassed for "being off" if you're right
because they werent right. they would be embarrassed for claiming a 40% being 50+. in a game like sc2, thats quite hard to get wrong
On June 05 2013 03:09 eX Killy wrote:if anything, the foreign scene (the majority) should be embarrassed for being wrong because they fell to the bogus hype.
how do you know they fell for the hype?
On June 05 2013 03:09 eX Killy wrote:you think somehow putting money on the line changes the way people view odds.
do you mean to say that profitable bettors arent better than the others? theyre not better because theyre putting money on the line, theyre special because theyre profitable
On June 05 2013 03:09 eX Killy wrote: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. pinnacle odds are the same as any odds, theyre what the majority think, not what the best think.
yeah i wrote that above, and that would be a huge tell that theyre clueless.
On June 05 2013 03:09 eX Killy wrote: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.
that has nothing to do with anything. i keep saying in every post how results are meaningless, dont you guys read? and if the results would have gone 4-0 bogus, the casters would have been dead wrong and are bad analysers? they cant be both good+correct and bad+wrong at the same time
Yeah no one will be able to convince veroleg he's wrong because his argument is based on the false assumption that bogus was the heavy favourite. All his reasoning is based off this false assumption. Bogus was the favourite, but not a heavy favourite to win. The betting odds that he likes to quote were wrong and too heavily in bogus's favour. It happened because esports is a niche betting market so mistakes like that can happen.
you think responding to every sentence of an argument like they each carry their own argument in of themselves proves your point or something. it actually just makes your own argument garbage. no one has a clue what you're even trying to say, you just make it confusing for everyone when you dont address the counterpoints to your argument and end up with stupid statements like below:
1. x predicts soulkey will win 2. soulkey beats bogus 4-3 3. x is right 4.
On June 05 2013 05:09 Veroleg wrote:because they werent right.
5. therefore x is actually wrong.
"soulkey won like they predicted but theyre wrong because i said so" this isnt how it works.
On June 05 2013 05:09 Veroleg wrote: they cant be both good+correct and bad+wrong at the same time
Yea, i gave up. When you start comparing knowledgeable proven casters (otherwise they wouldn't do this at this level) with a freaking coin just to support your argument that they could be wrong as well it's so god dam pointless to keep on trying. Believe what you want, seems like you are the only one left.
On June 05 2013 02:35 Assirra wrote: since when do people need to make multiple predictions to proof they are right once?
if you flip a coin it will be right 50% of the time, it also means that it will guess the favourite wrong 50% of the time. you claim they were right about the favourite this time because the result proved it. so when the coin wins, it also analysed the favourite right?
So you flip your fucking coin, then it suddenly starts thinking on what side would it fall on and why, analyzing with its non-existent brain? That's one unique coin. Last time I checked coins don't predict shit but just fall on one side based on pure chance, with no other reason at all than it fell on a particular side by chance. I guess I'm wrong thinking that your coin doesn't know the players, doesn't understand their playstyles, doesn't know jack shit about their emotional states and mental strength.
I'm getting what you're saying now, Veroleg. You're saying that predicting an underdog to win against a favorite is forever a bad thing to do. Whoever does that is inept and dumb as fuck, because statistics always favor the favorite, and statistics is God. And that there are no other factors than their past results. They can't "claim a 40% being 50+" with silly reasons like + Show Spoiler [this] +
"I think Soulkey will play a little better in a big game on the big stage"
. And if they predict the underdog winning and the underdog won, then they're right but still dumb as fuck.
^tl;dr version of Veroleg's posts. I give up too. My last post in this thread.
On June 05 2013 03:40 Canucklehead wrote: You know people who make money in sports betting don't do it by just betting on the favourites all the time right?
did anything i say lead you to believe i would think this?
On June 05 2013 03:40 Canucklehead wrote:Bogus was the favourite in this case, but not the heavy favourite the tastosis hype would lead you to believe.
and where is the proof for this?
On June 05 2013 03:40 Canucklehead wrote:They were 1-1 in recent proleague matches and the games were pretty close. Bogus should not have been that heavy of a favourite.
wait, you base it on this? yeah and an 70% favourite goes 2-0 in two games 49% of the time. and do you watch starcraft? ret and bly played close games against flash in last mlg, just about anyone can make a sc2 game look close, and you use that as any kind of argument when relating to two top2-7 players in the world? you seem to lack some understanding on this topic
On June 05 2013 03:40 Canucklehead wrote: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.
its not flawed. as i said earlier the likelihood of pinnacle having a favourite wrong when that favourite is put at 61%/map in a game like sc2, in a highly contested gsl final is absurdly low. then theres the problem of there being rediculous amounts of money available to be had and not a single soul takes it. you have hundreds of proffesionals in korea, especially the kespa practice partners should have some clue, their coaches and trainees, and not to mention the far more numerous amateurs in korea. theres tons of people with potentially inside information. has not one of these people ever heard of this betting site, perhaps the biggest one and more or less the only one that deals sc2 bets? do they not have enough money to make big bets enough to make a dent in the odds? impossible, because if the site is incompetent enough to ever realistically make an underdog a 61%/map favourite in such a bigtime match with such large amounts of information and stats available, with such well established players- then these people would be able to build a bankroll for many successive in very short time.
On June 05 2013 03:40 Canucklehead wrote:There's too little money in esports betting to have the same type of market correction be done.
huh, they wont change it if they receive plenty of action? has little to do with the amount of money put on a sportbet, its about the weight they reckon the bet carry
On June 05 2013 03:40 Canucklehead wrote: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.
and what interest would pinnacle have in telling the truth? anything helpful towards making the market seem easier sounds like a good move to me. they dont even have any need to mention the quality of their odds in this case, yet they do. they get away with being wrong due to more money on the bad side than the good side. the limit was 1kusd. then you can bet again after a 1-3% decrease or something. i suppose you would be able to get in 12k+ before you would touch 2, although not really as 1.people would bet against you because of the crazy good odds and 2.pinnacle probably wouldnt decrease the odds as youre making bad bets.
On June 05 2013 03:40 Canucklehead wrote: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.
def not salestalk
On June 05 2013 05:17 Zealously wrote: The casters never specifically called anyone the favorite, They just said SK would win
Besides, no one is ever going to make Veroleg understand this- he is dead set on his viewpoint being perfect
understand what? ive alraedy discussed the different possibilities in whether the casters actually believed what they said or had ulterior motives (and if they were they are almost certainly terrible predictions). most of the rest of the time has gone to trying to correct peoples fallacies about probabillities and such.
On June 05 2013 06:02 Canucklehead wrote: Yeah no one will be able to convince veroleg he's wrong because his argument is based on the false assumption that bogus was the heavy favourite. All his reasoning is based off this false assumption. Bogus was the favourite, but not a heavy favourite to win. The betting odds that he likes to quote were wrong and too heavily in bogus's favour. It happened because esports is a niche betting market so mistakes like that can happen.
i dont make assumptions, i estimate probabillities. you made quite the assumption though, how did you come up with the certainty of bogus being a favourite and not a heavy favourite (however you define that)? so the odds were wrong, did you bet on them?
On June 05 2013 06:59 eX Killy wrote: you think responding to every sentence of an argument like they each carry their own argument in of themselves proves your point or something.
i do it because theres often so many crazy fallacies and bad logic all over the place to go through, it makes it a lot clearer
On June 05 2013 06:59 eX Killy wrote:it actually just makes your own argument garbage. no one has a clue what you're even trying to say, you just make it confusing for everyone when you dont address the counterpoints to your argument and end up with stupid statements like below:
ive looked through my posts, i find it very clear. im not sure how to make it clearer. what counterpoints do i not adress? it seems from my view that its you people are the ones ignoring huge parts of my posts
QUOTE]On June 05 2013 05:09 Veroleg wrote:1. x predicts soulkey will win 2. soulkey beats bogus 4-3 3. x is right 4.
On June 05 2013 05:09 Veroleg wrote:because they werent right.
5. therefore x is actually wrong.[/QUOTE]
1. coin predicts soulkey will win 2. soulkey beats bogus 4-3 3. coin is right 4. see! coin has amazing analysis and knows what its talking about.
thats one of my main points, many of you are trying to argue that theres some kind of proof for the casters being good by 1 sample of prediction. what if bogus would have 4-0, then they would be bad analysists and have bad sc2 knowledge? they cant be both...
On June 05 2013 07:11 Assirra wrote: Yea, i gave up. When you start comparing knowledgeable proven casters (otherwise they wouldn't do this at this level) with a freaking coin just to support your argument that they could be wrong as well it's so god dam pointless to keep on trying. Believe what you want, seems like you are the only one left.
ah, so you understand the coin examples? you understand how you no longer have any argument for them having analysed this match well?
[QUOTE]On June 05 2013 09:40 NicksonReyes wrote: [QUOTE]On June 05 2013 09:40 NicksonReyes wrote:I'm getting what you're saying now, Veroleg. You're saying that predicting an underdog to win against a favorite is forever a bad thing to do.[/QUOTE] im saying they extremely likely missanalysed the match badly, i dont know what kind of values you want to put on the act though.
[QUOTE]On June 05 2013 09:40 NicksonReyes wrote:Whoever does that is inept and dumb as fuck[/QUOTE] no, there may be many reasons. the field they are judging may be extremely hard, they may be new to that field, or they may have a bad brain for that area making them gain knowledge slowly, but make up for it by being better than verage in other areas. theres many possibillities.
[QUOTE]On June 05 2013 09:40 NicksonReyes wrote:because statistics always favor the favorite, and statistics is God. And that there are no other factors than their past results.[/QUOTE] theres many potential factors, i and others have listed many in the thread. statistics can whatever. what do you mean statistics alwayw favor the favourite?
[QUOTE]On June 05 2013 09:40 NicksonReyes wrote:They can't "claim a 40% being 50+" with silly reasons like + Show Spoiler [this] +
"I think Soulkey will play a little better in a big game on the big stage"
. And if they predict the underdog winning and the underdog won, then they're right but still dumb as fuck. they can claim what they want, the question is about the quality of their claims yes predicting the underdog winning would be a bad prediction, surely you can see that?
On June 05 2013 11:33 Veroleg wrote: yes predicting the underdog winning would be a bad prediction, surely you can see that?
Nope because that would mean betting would be child's play and everyone should just go to vegas and bet on the favourites every time. The other person had it correct. You think unless someone bets on the favourite, they're an idiot for betting on the underdog.
I said pinnacle had bogus as a heavy favourite due to the line. Last I saw bogus was at -287, which is pretty damn high and happens in sports when you have a top team vs a shit team. I thought bogus would win myself, but never thought it would be a cakewalk and wouldn't have been surprised if soulkey won. It wasn't really worth the risk for myself to bet on bogus with those odds.
On June 05 2013 11:48 Assirra wrote: You know Veroleg, if you wanna continue (i don't) on at least be a reply in this thread rather then sending childish insulting PM's.
On June 05 2013 11:33 Veroleg wrote: yes predicting the underdog winning would be a bad prediction, surely you can see that?
Nope because that would mean betting would be child's play and everyone should just go to vegas and bet on the favourites every time.
lol what? they made a prediction of flat odds, they were to pick the one they thought the most likely to win
On June 05 2013 11:44 Canucklehead wrote:The other person had it correct. You think unless someone bets on the favourite, they're an idiot for betting on the underdog.
no, i think that if someone claims the underdog as a favourite, its an incorrect prediction
On June 05 2013 11:44 Canucklehead wrote:I said pinnacle had bogus as a heavy favourite due to the line. Last I saw bogus was at -287, which is pretty damn high and happens in sports when you have a top team vs a shit team. I thought bogus would win myself, but never thought it would be a cakewalk and wouldn't have been surprised if soulkey won. It wasn't really worth the risk for myself to bet on bogus with those odds.
yeah, and profitable betters existed that thought that -287 wasnt quite good enough as well as just good enough, whats your point? i said earlier in the thread that i had money on soulkey too, but i later changed my mind by a tiny margin. fortunately i had already made the bet i have no clue what that thing -287 means though, imo that is just an absurd measurement. its like the whole fahrenheit thing
On June 05 2013 11:48 Assirra wrote: You know Veroleg, if you wanna continue (i don't) on at least reply in this thread rather then sending childish insulting PM's.
youve been insulting my intelligence in this thread, and you said you were done with this thread after multiple replies of not countering my arguments in any way. how were i going to reach you otherwise?
On June 05 2013 11:48 Assirra wrote: You know Veroleg, if you wanna continue (i don't) on at least be a reply in this thread rather then sending childish insulting PM's.
lol i got one too, joke pbu i bet
nope you didnt. you insulted my post ("joke post") in another thread then i pmed you telling you that you had no argument. what a surprise- you didnt. everyone keeps insulting me but keeps showing no arguments
EPT
