Dunno if Jack is back so I will post my update here. I wrote a new column below that you might want to check out. GL.
Friday, August 2, 2002
Starting 2002 bankroll: $15,000
Current 2002 projected bankroll: $13,900
Current 2002 bankroll: $15,781
2002 Record: 182-220, +$781
This month: 4-2, +$200
This week (starts on Monday): 8-7, +$110
**********
2002 MLB Record: 93-95, +865
Yesterday: 4-2 MLB, +200
A good day yesterday to start August. In favor of my traditional lead in to my plays, I?ve written a full length column today about a discussion I had in the NFL Forum.
I am sticking with my 3 plays today after yesterday having two doses, one for day games and one for night games. Lots of chalk for me today but as my main man fletcher always says, the best value is in a winning ticket. Good luck.
8/2 MLB Plays:
All posted overnight in the Message Forum.
MINNESOTA -170 over Kansas City 170/100
KC is still pretty punchless without Sweeney and Suppan struggles on the road.
PITTSBURGH +130 over San Francisco 100/130
Giants are still dinged up and Pittsburgh seems to be a team that will continue to play hard down the stretch even though they are just about out of it.
ATLANTA -155 over St. Louis 155/100
St. Louis is continuing the adjustment period with Rolen and that will make it hard to top Glavine.
**********
8/2 Quick Notes:
**********
OPPORTUNITY COST
In the Mad Jack?s football message forum, I posted a piece detailing my rules for betting this NFL season. Along with avoiding totals, teasers, parlays and half time bets, I posted a rule that I would play exactly five games per week.
This rule got a very ambivalent response from the folks who read it. They all praised the idea of setting an upper limit for the number of plays made in a certain week. They all also were against the idea of setting a lower limit as well. The logic goes that if you only find two or three plays strong enough to wager on, then why bet 5?
That seems pretty smart, huh? But what if you find 6 or 7 plays to wager on and you?ve set your upper limit to 5? Isn?t the loss of those two plays just as bad as the addition of two plays you might not otherwise make when boosting your number of plays? Yes and no. It is, but it is also an understandable strategy since one of the most common pitfalls of gambling on sports is playing too much action.
The subject of setting an arbitrary number of plays per week and sticking to it brings to mind a concept I learned about in my microeconomics class way back in college: opportunity cost.
Opportunity cost is the amount of money lost by missing out on something. For example, if you bet the Braves and they lose, your actual cost is the amount of money you lost. If you had the Braves as a play and you would have won, your opportunity cost is the amount of money you would have made by playing them. To determine true economic success, but actual cost and opportunity cost must be taken into account.
You?ll have to forgive me because much of my time in that class was spent browsing USA Today for information in betting the NFL, but I believe that adding profit and subtracting both actual cost and opportunity cost is the way to truly measure success. It is a bit different in gambling because traditional opportunity cost is derived from making sacrificial decisions. For example if you work a standard desk job then part of the opportunity cost is whatever amount of money you would have made by staying home.
In the case of gambling and setting limits on the number of games you bet, opportunity cost is more difficult to calculate. Tabulating the exact amount of games and money you would have played not only is difficult, but it is maddening. Generally it is better to not even think about opportunities lost. When you do worry about every game you should have bet, you usually end up betting too many games in the future and getting crushed.
Back to opportunity cost as it relates to football. Let?s take the example I am using of betting exactly five games per week. My opportunity costs, both for and against, are easy to calculate. In weeks where I would have played 1 to 4 games, there is actual cost to me added in any additional game I play that I lose. There is no real opportunity cost because I am not passing on any games that I would otherwise play. The only opportunity cost when playing an exact amount of plays every week is when you have more than 5 plays that you would otherwise play. Since I rarely, if ever, play more than 5 NFL games per week anyway, I will probably have almost no opportunity cost this NFL season.
It is a slightly different situation if you employ only a maximum limit. On weeks when you are playing 1 to 4 games, then whatever number of games you would have played up to 5 become opportunity cost. If you would have lost money on those games, then you made a smart decision. I have found, however, that in most cases when dealing with such a small number of plays per week adding a couple more plays to give yourself exactly five per week often will result in a greater profit.
Outside of taking opportunity cost out of the equation, playing an exact number of plays per week heightens discipline. One trap of laziness I?ve fallen into in the past is relying on hot angles to spit out plays in lieu of research. If an angle is hitting, there is a definite temptation to take the week off from handicapping and just bet one or two games in a week that come from an angle. Making yourself find five plays with true value builds a work ethic that will eventually come in handy when a cold streak hits.
If you haven?t noticed, cold streaks hit much more often when handicappers are lax. If you are used to putting in the time to find a certain number of plays, the general malaise in attitude towards working that comes with losing is easier to overcome.
I want to make one disclaimer about all of this. If you are a successful NFL handicapper, then keep doing what you are doing. If you lose money or if you feel that you are not making as much money as you are capable of making, however, you might want to consider setting an exact number of plays to make each week and sticking to that.
**********
PAST PERFORMANCE:
Final 2002 World Cup Record: 1-8, -1370
Final 2001-2002 NHL Record: 89-106, +1857
Final 2001-2002 NBA Record: 67-81, +5469
Final 2001-2002 UEFA Champions League Record: 3-6, +175
Final 2001 NFL Record: 51-44, +773
Final 2001 NFLX Record: 5-6, -315
Final 2001 MLB Record: 145-165, +3946
Friday, August 2, 2002
Starting 2002 bankroll: $15,000
Current 2002 projected bankroll: $13,900
Current 2002 bankroll: $15,781
2002 Record: 182-220, +$781
This month: 4-2, +$200
This week (starts on Monday): 8-7, +$110
**********
2002 MLB Record: 93-95, +865
Yesterday: 4-2 MLB, +200
A good day yesterday to start August. In favor of my traditional lead in to my plays, I?ve written a full length column today about a discussion I had in the NFL Forum.
I am sticking with my 3 plays today after yesterday having two doses, one for day games and one for night games. Lots of chalk for me today but as my main man fletcher always says, the best value is in a winning ticket. Good luck.
8/2 MLB Plays:
All posted overnight in the Message Forum.
MINNESOTA -170 over Kansas City 170/100
KC is still pretty punchless without Sweeney and Suppan struggles on the road.
PITTSBURGH +130 over San Francisco 100/130
Giants are still dinged up and Pittsburgh seems to be a team that will continue to play hard down the stretch even though they are just about out of it.
ATLANTA -155 over St. Louis 155/100
St. Louis is continuing the adjustment period with Rolen and that will make it hard to top Glavine.
**********
8/2 Quick Notes:
**********
OPPORTUNITY COST
In the Mad Jack?s football message forum, I posted a piece detailing my rules for betting this NFL season. Along with avoiding totals, teasers, parlays and half time bets, I posted a rule that I would play exactly five games per week.
This rule got a very ambivalent response from the folks who read it. They all praised the idea of setting an upper limit for the number of plays made in a certain week. They all also were against the idea of setting a lower limit as well. The logic goes that if you only find two or three plays strong enough to wager on, then why bet 5?
That seems pretty smart, huh? But what if you find 6 or 7 plays to wager on and you?ve set your upper limit to 5? Isn?t the loss of those two plays just as bad as the addition of two plays you might not otherwise make when boosting your number of plays? Yes and no. It is, but it is also an understandable strategy since one of the most common pitfalls of gambling on sports is playing too much action.
The subject of setting an arbitrary number of plays per week and sticking to it brings to mind a concept I learned about in my microeconomics class way back in college: opportunity cost.
Opportunity cost is the amount of money lost by missing out on something. For example, if you bet the Braves and they lose, your actual cost is the amount of money you lost. If you had the Braves as a play and you would have won, your opportunity cost is the amount of money you would have made by playing them. To determine true economic success, but actual cost and opportunity cost must be taken into account.
You?ll have to forgive me because much of my time in that class was spent browsing USA Today for information in betting the NFL, but I believe that adding profit and subtracting both actual cost and opportunity cost is the way to truly measure success. It is a bit different in gambling because traditional opportunity cost is derived from making sacrificial decisions. For example if you work a standard desk job then part of the opportunity cost is whatever amount of money you would have made by staying home.
In the case of gambling and setting limits on the number of games you bet, opportunity cost is more difficult to calculate. Tabulating the exact amount of games and money you would have played not only is difficult, but it is maddening. Generally it is better to not even think about opportunities lost. When you do worry about every game you should have bet, you usually end up betting too many games in the future and getting crushed.
Back to opportunity cost as it relates to football. Let?s take the example I am using of betting exactly five games per week. My opportunity costs, both for and against, are easy to calculate. In weeks where I would have played 1 to 4 games, there is actual cost to me added in any additional game I play that I lose. There is no real opportunity cost because I am not passing on any games that I would otherwise play. The only opportunity cost when playing an exact amount of plays every week is when you have more than 5 plays that you would otherwise play. Since I rarely, if ever, play more than 5 NFL games per week anyway, I will probably have almost no opportunity cost this NFL season.
It is a slightly different situation if you employ only a maximum limit. On weeks when you are playing 1 to 4 games, then whatever number of games you would have played up to 5 become opportunity cost. If you would have lost money on those games, then you made a smart decision. I have found, however, that in most cases when dealing with such a small number of plays per week adding a couple more plays to give yourself exactly five per week often will result in a greater profit.
Outside of taking opportunity cost out of the equation, playing an exact number of plays per week heightens discipline. One trap of laziness I?ve fallen into in the past is relying on hot angles to spit out plays in lieu of research. If an angle is hitting, there is a definite temptation to take the week off from handicapping and just bet one or two games in a week that come from an angle. Making yourself find five plays with true value builds a work ethic that will eventually come in handy when a cold streak hits.
If you haven?t noticed, cold streaks hit much more often when handicappers are lax. If you are used to putting in the time to find a certain number of plays, the general malaise in attitude towards working that comes with losing is easier to overcome.
I want to make one disclaimer about all of this. If you are a successful NFL handicapper, then keep doing what you are doing. If you lose money or if you feel that you are not making as much money as you are capable of making, however, you might want to consider setting an exact number of plays to make each week and sticking to that.
**********
PAST PERFORMANCE:
Final 2002 World Cup Record: 1-8, -1370
Final 2001-2002 NHL Record: 89-106, +1857
Final 2001-2002 NBA Record: 67-81, +5469
Final 2001-2002 UEFA Champions League Record: 3-6, +175
Final 2001 NFL Record: 51-44, +773
Final 2001 NFLX Record: 5-6, -315
Final 2001 MLB Record: 145-165, +3946
