Posted by odiousgambit
Dec 20, 2021

The House Always Diddles

I'm working with a new online sportsbook. I wanted to check to make sure it wasn't diddling with the odds when you set up a parlay, since they don't say how they figure them. I was getting very interested in a +EV situation. If it doesn't pan out, and it looks like it won't, I'll blog about that too. 

In any case, I set up a parlay that was 3 legs, odds for straight bets were -450, -110, and +100, resp. The math seemed simple to me, that's 1/5.5 , 1/2.1, and 1/2 in probabilities ... but I was making the mistake of forgetting I was taking the fat end of the odds on two legs and crunched the wrong number ... the site showed it should be +366 and I was coming up with +2210 LOL. 

I realized that I was doing it wrong but was stumped and had to get help by searching ... this evidently is usually done by the so-called "decimal odds" gambling sites use, which is still somewhat of a perversion of regular math if you ask me. But then I woke up in the middle of the night and knew all of a sudden how to get the right answer with math I already knew. This working it out asleep thing happens to me a lot!

So for the 2 legs where I was on the fat side of the odds of 1/5.5 and 1/2.1, I needed to change those probabilities to 4.5/5.5 and 1.1/2.1. [derived directly from 450:100 and 110:100] The probability of a +100 bet, the last leg, is still 1/2. Multiplying these together gets 0.2142857142857143 which is 1 in 4.6666 ... 

Yep that means +366 is correct for that parlay. Actually, +367 I think, which shows they can't quite resist a little diddling!


ksdjdj Dec 27, 2021

I have always resided in Australia (mainly use "decimal odds" here).

I prefer "decimal odds" ( ` for 1) when betting on markets that have 3+ options you can bet on, mainly because it is easier for me to work out the "implied bookmaker's % " / "market % " (some online bookmaker's show you this at the bottom of the market, but most that I used don't).

It makes sense to me that most table games in casino's state it in "fractional odds" ( ' to 1)

I actually like "American odds" when betting on most sports (2 options to be on ), since you can see quite easily that "implied %" is in the bookmaker's favor,

eg -130 and +110 .

odiousgambit Dec 29, 2021

it took me a long time to get used to American odds. This is funny, but I imagined that if you bet at a brick and mortar sportsbook, you were expected to bet $100 minimum bet!

That seems so ridiculous now, but that whole world is fairly new to me, even now

Posted by odiousgambit
Dec 12, 2021

Cherokee November 2021

I started, and then erased, a blogpost about a November 7-9th trip to Cherokee NC a couple of times now. I'm finding I just don't want to repeat what I observed in my last post about it ... you can just read the one titled "Cherokee May 2021" if you missed it. It was a repeat in most ways, including seeing elk in the National Park, and we again enjoyed ourselves immensely. Again we stayed and played at Harrah's Cherokee Hotel and Casino, to be precise. 

There are a few things worth noting. Met up with Doc and his wife again, always a good time with that admirable couple. This time also met up with Tuttigym! And as always some thoughts about the gambling. 

Had two nice dinners with Doc and his wife, and Doc and I got to play some Craps. I don't think there was much notable in the way of win/loss for either of us, but Doc came out ahead for sure. I definitely did not in the same sessions, but had a nice one to offset that, played at a different time. Doc and I mused how we missed the company of some members that we don't see anymore, not having much contact even. A real crowd showed up sometimes in past years, and those were good times. 

Doc now had left, but on my last day Tuttigym surprised me by deciding to meet up, even though it was just to be briefly. We visited for a bit and then of course had to play some Craps. I decided to go darkside as that was working out for me at another unwitnessed session. We were separated by the Stick, but after what I think was less than 30 minutes I see T-gym dumping a bucketfull of green chips in the middle of the table, coloring up. He had benefited from a shooter's long roll and didn't want to give it back I guess. I didn't get hurt darkside as I was only playing one number on the Don't line, more about that below. The shooter was rolling a lot of numbers but 7'ed out on the line number as I remember. T-gym said he was up about $300 which looked about right. We chatted a little more but then he was saying farewell. Since he clearly only had a small amount of time he could give me, it was nice of him to come by. Next though a woman went on a long roll and she was hitting the pass line number one after the other, making me replace them. She was *killing* me and I finally had to surrender, just betting no more and waiting for her to 7-out. Finally I gave up and colored up while she was still going, the session also killing my shot at breaking about even at Craps for the visit. 

I had quite a build-up of anticipation for playing Ultimate Texas Holdem on the machines with the $1 minimum. One shot at getting a seat went south fast when I realized how drunk the other people were. I made my excuses and left. I did have it to myself in the wee hours of another occasion ... something like 4 hours in fact. Naturally that meant I was more likely to lose, but I couldn't seem to get ahead at any point and wound up down about $50. Playing with no one else at the table didn't normally seem to matter much, except several seats out of 4 are plagued with glare so you want to be able to pick. As far as I could tell, without making a test obnoxious to the others, the game waited for you to make a decision no matter how long you took. That potentially was a problem as I sometimes study a strategy card I brought, plus one of my own making. But my last shot at it early in the morning was solo again, though. Unfortunately bad luck crushed me so bad right off the bat I just bailed out right away and went to the dice under glass machine and played the darkside for 2x odds. This was one thing during the visit that kept paying off for me. It had a sign that said $1 Craps, but it was $5 for the pass/DP ... I think I remember that right. 

I was playing real table Craps in the way I've come to do it when I don't like the table minimum. There's a lot to like about this casino, especially now that it's easier to get a room comped. But they are determined to keep table minimums high, and now it seems $10 tables are a thing of the past. I wind up exploring ways to keep my total action under control without going to the extreme of just making a few large bets in a short session. Instead, I keep to making a max bet of about $50 to include the line bet plus free odds. Additionally, only the one bet until it resolves. At Cherokee the free odds are 10x, but if the line bet minimum is $15, you can't put down 10x odds and keep to about $50, of course. So lately I have avoided completely any Come bets; this means missing out on the excitement of a shooter who's hitting all the numbers. In fact it can be boring somewhat until you remind yourself what you have on the line, which is plenty. If I play darkside, I skip the DP and play the DC only when the shooter is on my side of the table. This usually makes for a small wait period, limiting my action even further. 

So it means playing at roughly 2x odds instead of the available 10x odds. 2x makes for a 0.606% HE, while at 10x, it's 0.184% . Now I've been telling myself 'who cares?' as long as it's below 1%, but I've gone with this for a while and I just feel like I notice the difference. 2x it seems makes for more than three times the house edge of 10x. One problem is I've previously been pretty lucky at the Cherokee Craps tables. Sometimes the minimum was lower, and sometimes the Teddys method was available. I don't have control over these things.

I could do 10x and keep my action the same. That means one short session with big bets. I'd have to tell anybody who wanted to play Craps with me I wouldn't be there long. I'd miss out myself on the escape you get bellying up to the Craps table and saying goodbye to the real world for a while. So, I don't know. I think I really should go to this.

Posted by odiousgambit
Oct 08, 2021

Forget the Darseks

I've gotten the message that my previous blogpost was too cryptic, suggesting people didn't 'get it'. 

I'll try to make it clear this time. 

I've got a problem taking advantage of the +EV offers that I'm getting from my online sports betting platform. Most of the problem comes from arbitrarily limiting my funds, I'm determined to use only the winnings I've gotten to take advantage of the offers. In case you haven't heard of it, the Kelly Criterion states that you will lose your bankroll under the normal course of events, if that bankroll is too small vis a vis the size of your bets. Even if those bets are +EV. This can easily be understood with a coin toss game where you keep both coins if you have the closest toss to the wall. One guy brings 1000 coins and one guy 2 coins. Even if guy #2 is a marginally better coin tosser, guy #1 is going to go home a winner every time, save for the most extraordinary luck for #2. 

So, for me, I've created a Kelly situation in that every time I try an offer that represents risking a good % of my bankroll, it will be in effect. Let's say the offer requires a $10 bet [as many do] win or lose on an even money bet. The difference in outcome is $20 on that particular bet, if it wins or loses. I am forcing myself to be such a piker that either outcome is quite noticeable to this arbitrarily limited bankroll. 

The latest development is that I am reaching another arbitrary limit. I can't have $600 in winnings unless I know they are going to subtract losses in any report they would generate. Though I am nowhere near that after losses are subtracted, I am now nearing it as a total with losses not subtracted. Though this is extraordinarily cautious it means I have to stop soon. Seeing what report is generated at the end of the year is going to tell me a lot.

Posted by odiousgambit
Oct 04, 2021

Kelly is One of the Gods, Lesson Learned

In Greco-Roman times they believed if you showed arrogance, the gods would soon humble you. It's 2021 now, but I managed to diss the great god Kelly in an arrogant way, and am paying the ancient price with my online sports gambling. 

I'm talking about the god who's scripture takes the shape of the Kelly Criterion. In defense of my arrogance, I realized kind of late that I was probably doomed to have a problem. As usual, early luck kind of misled me. 

What arrogance? Well, I bragged to my poker buddies that my online gambling was +EV and it was like hitting an ATM all the time [with someone else's bankcard]. The god Kelly heard this. I had built up my online gambling bankroll to about 1100 Darseks* not counting any initially deposited money, which I had withdrawn 'plus some', thus being like an ATM. The 1100 Darseks were pure profit, in other words. I was quite pleased about this of course, and decided it meant I would just be able to withdraw money, no more deposits of my money, ha, and this would continue until the house figured out I was cherry-picking their offers, only wagering a few Ds here and there on random bets unconnected to offers. 

What I didn't realize was, I was setting up a Kelly situation. I've blogged about why I decided not to use online gambling to make larger bets, even though +EV. Declining to deposit more in the face of the offers I was getting** meant the amounts I was wagering on the offers was too large of a % of the 1100 Ds that was basically my bankroll limit. Once the NFL offers came in, picking winners has been pretty tough, just when they upped the number of offers. I've been on a losing streak and my bankroll has been cut to @ 755 Darseks. 

I'm still able to go for the offers, but I'm going to be a little more humble about it. It's not impossible that I'll have to add funds. For now I'm saying I don't think so, but the fact remains you have to win *some* of your bets, +EV or not, no?

* For some reason I don't like to reveal real figures, probably from being embarrassed about what a piker I am. Darseks it is. You can google it.

** you can check out the Wizard Livestream thread to see what they are, typically 


OnceDear Oct 04, 2021

Are you going to cling on to this fantasy?

I know you to well, in that I cannot see you wagering at such an unregulated, online, off-planet establishment.

odiousgambit Oct 04, 2021

>unregulated, online, off-planet


What? It's BetMGM regulated by Virginia. I found many things that made me say "I'm not doing this" but the biggest reason not to was that they will send an income reporting form to the IRS if you bet big enough. $600 in winnings, to be exact. It's even possible they don't subtract losses first, they don't say. At the end of the year there will be a win-loss form to look at and make a judgement on. For this year it will be no where near $600 even before losses are subtracted! [I won't tell you how many Darseks that is!]

You'd have to read the others posts to see how it evolved into me sticking with it, won't repeat it here

odiousgambit Oct 04, 2021

Yes I see what you did there with Cling on and Klingon

OnceDear Oct 04, 2021

I know there's 6000 darsaks to an Archer

odiousgambit Oct 04, 2021

it slowly occurs to me your entire initial post was tongue in cheek. Sorry, I think I am a little touchy about it. After all you, for sure, are aware that my doctor thinks of me as a walking vessel of despicable vices!! she probably just has accidentally avoided accusing me of gambling addiction

If you want to convert Darseks to Dollars to Pounds, you need to know which decade it was in Klingon history. There was terrible inflation at times. Ha!

abel1221 Jan 04, 2022

It is really possible to get home or home loan with bad credit?

Posted by odiousgambit
Oct 01, 2021

Review: "The Great War of Archimedes"

Quote: wikipedia page on the Yamato

The 2019 Japanese film Archimedes no Taisen (アルキメデスの大戦, Arukimedesu no Taisen, "Great War of Archimedes") based on a manga by Norifusa Mita tells the story of a dispute within the Japanese Navy over whether to fund the construction of aircraft carriers or a new battleship that would become Yamato. The film begins with the sinking of Yamato* and ends with its commissioning

The Wikipedia page says that manga "are comics or graphic novels originating from Japan."

Kai, the math whiz, is a fictional character, I know now. I was fooled by this, thinking that the character was based on a real person, I guess because we see a lot of that with Hollywood. Perhaps I shouldn't have fast-forwarded through the opening credits. I imagine it's likely, though, that the Japanese are simply used to movies made from all kinds of Mangas. Over here, if a movie was based on a comic book, we expect it to be of the outlandishly imaginative super-hero type, well tipped off that it is fiction. This movie, though, shows that such a movie from Japan can seem to purport real history. The smart, adult movie-goers over there may largely just be aware, but others surely are often fooled, some willingly maybe. You have to be Japanese, maybe, to really get this. 

Certainly I realized right away that it was a concocted story, all the elements are there. You just knew things were over-dramatized, for example Kai has a love interest with the daughter of the villain. Thinking it was based on a true story, I found myself quite bothered by other things that had me saying "it couldn't have happened exactly like this". Kai, for example, is such a whiz at things that he becomes a battleship construction expert overnight, producing valid blueprints in minutes. I could go on. 

The math is not really shown in any interesting way. Kai's use of differential equations is shown as critical [without going into what that is], but really what we are to believe is that Kai is such a phenomenal genius that he can do in a few days what normally takes a large team months or years to do. He succeeds in showing that the battleship advocates are fraudulently presenting too low actual cost, having boiled it down to the correlation between the amount of steel used and the ultimate final cost of any ship. There's no easy way to know if any of this has an historical basis [using the internet. ]

I think it is important to know that what we would call nerds are held in high regard in Japan, to be one is to be another Einstein, practically. What I think is likely to be historical is that the Japanese navy realized in the 30s that they really needed advanced engineering and math produced by the universities to build the kind of modern navy that they needed. This is a dramatization of that. The battleships got built anyway, conceded today to definitely not have been worth the cost. How that happened got dramatized as well, and the end of the movie has a twist. I won't reveal it here other than to say I thought it was kind of stupid. However, it also brought out how much Japanese pride was involved with these creations. 

Should you see this movie? I'd say, only if you want an insight into Japanese culture. In this case it's a pretty small reward, but I'm happy enough that I saw it. 

* sister ship Musashi is not mentioned in the movie


jpfromla Oct 10, 2021

It was the Japanese failure of strategy, thinking that the war against the US would end in a mammoth battleship fight in the Pacific (like how they defeated the Russians in 1906). The aircraft carrier, like ground based planes proved to be a decisive element in WW2 strategy vs. WW1 strategy. (Along with other technologies)