How much of your capping is subjective versus objective?

[buckeye]

It seems to me that there are two schools of thought with handicapping.

One is espoused by Techies that numbers crunching, data mining, and purely objective methods are the way to go. Using power ratings to develop your own line is an example of more objective capping. Doesn't matter that it is the CAVS and they stink, the angle says they are a value play at home coming off two days rest. Doesn't matter that you've never seen Hidemichi Tanaka play in a golf tournament in the US, he has demonstrated that he is a closer on the Japenese tour and so he is a value +300 dog in a Sunday U.S. Open matchup with a "give up" artist like John Daly. ( These are just made up examples not real )

Another is that "seat of the pants/feel" methods are just as worthwhile and effective. Knowing the polls are down on FSU so Bowden is more likely to lay the lumber on a weak opponent to raise the rank. The Angels are too good to get swept at home by KC. The Yankees are due to have their bats get hot so I'm playin the over.

I see merits to both camps and use both "styles" depending on the sport. Staying flexible and learning is the key to getting better at cappin, IMO.

So what camp do you tend toward?

[count zero]

For all but the most experienced players, I'd say the objective "tech" approach is best. Betting by intuition is probably what we all try first, and most of us are probably familiar with how that leads to avoiding the ugly teams that have the value. Besides, unless you have complete objectivity, how can you prove or disprove anything? You'd just have to wait until you'd amassed several hundred plays before you could evaluate a method.

Once you've been playing for 20-30 years, I can see where what you'd learned would be automatically available to your intuition, and so you could probably do OK with a seat-of-the-pants approach then.

[buckeye]

cz,
I agree that a "purely" intuitive approach is not too wise. Many of us start out that way, at least in some sports. I was lucky enough to see how I did in football pools "picking" that way and not by losing a lot of money "hunch" betting. I think that I "narrow the field" with Technical capping ( stats, power ratings, matchups, angles ) and then add a dose of subjectivity to narrow down further or further differentiate the relative strength of picks. I know that JR Miller and many "pros" say it is impossible to "handicap your handicapping" and that any stratified system is ridiculous, but for sports I have success in it works fine for me. For sports I absolutely suck at, like bases, I would never attempt such a thing as i don't have the cappin skills to beat them in the first place! It is true that some days you lose due to having your larger plays lose but overall is what is important and LONG TERM is what matters!

An example of my "combination" is that some angle I use may point to a play on Mickelson -120 over Singh in the fourth round as all the stats say he should be -200. Maybe he has a better 4th round scoring average and has been closing out tourneys strong and has a better track record on the course and Vijay tends to lose interest when out of the T10 going into the last round ( statistically ). But if Phil looked like a whipped puppy at the end of the 3rd round and was playing awful but canned several snakes to save his score and maybe I look for Vijay to try harder than usual in the 4th as a "prelude" to the Major tourney coming up the next week - I will pass! So the combination of stats and objective measures are overridden by my observations and "feel for" their play and motivations and observations of how they are playing not just what score they shoot!

just some of my takes!

[Mr White]

I would have to say that 100% of my serious handicapping is objective, however, my judgments about when to bet the games are generally subjective. In other words I pick my games based on objective criteria, but then I have to decide whether the current line improve or gets worse. I make the second decision based mostly on a subjective feel for the game. I do think you can be a good subjective capper. It is a more flexible strategy in that you can continuously alter the factors you look at based on what you feel is important at the time. However, it is more difficult to access and more susceptible to mental doubt during bad runs.

It would be interesting to know if the scalpers that take leads do this based on objective or subjective criteria. I would guess that if they took objective leads it is based more on the line situations than the statistics of the games, or do the vast majority just look for gaps.

It also brings up another interesting question about betting steam. Do bookmakers consider people who bet their own games, but need to bet steam when their subjective guesses are incorrect, steam players that need to be booted?

[cash]

At the end of the day is it not all subjective.
weighing variables ypp/hfa/to etc will be
different for most.Evaluating personnel/draft/
coaching again very personal.

maybe situational issues can be seen as
objective but it seems to me those left to
fight another day have a better read
subjectively than objectively.

[Mr White]

Cash,

I don’t want to speak for anyone else, but for me objective capping means that you create a process that you replicate to evaluate every game. That would be an objective process.

For example a simple process would be.

1. Take Team A’s average home score and Subtract Team B’s average home score.

2. Then adjust 2 points for every .25 difference in turnovers.

3. Finally if this number is off more than 2 points from the line bet the game.

Of course this is a fictitious formula and very simplistic, but neither the complexity nor the accuracy characterize objectivity to me. The key criteria characterizing objectivity is the ability to replicate the findings. Anyone could reproduce the results using the same process.

Now of course an objective process can contain subjective elements. For example if step 2a in the process was to rate the two quarterbacks and adjust the line accordingly. One’s analysis of the quarterbacks could be subjective within the objective process. Thus everyone could replicate the process, but they might find different answers for each element. Thus adding subjective elements to an objective process, or you could have a subjective process using objective elements. Looking at trends that are available to everyone (objective), but you simply select the elements you see as most important in the game at hand.

My capping tends to be an objective process with objective elements. I just feel more comfortable with it. Thus, anyone could replicate my process it they knew what it was. I also must say that I don’t think that these methods are doomed to fail. From my understanding BW original system was an objective process with objective criteria, and he was very successful with it. In fact I think any combination of objective and subjective could be used successfully if corresponded with the talents of the individual applying it.

[buckeye]

Mr. White, as usual, put it quite eloquently. Even if you subjectively decide what weightings to use, say to come up with power ratings, the objective side is not fudging them or shifting them to match some pre-defined notion. And you can objectively set some criteria, say when your line is > 3pts off the offered line, that marks the pick as a PLAY.

I know several players that use handicapping software and once their "formula" is set they play the plays it spits out w/o adding any subjective biases. If it spits out some FUGLY MATCHUP like play SEA ov CIN they just do what the formula tells them to.

There is a poster of note, who shall remain nameless, that claims to use purely NUMBER CRUNCHING methods for capping and says he doesn't watch or care about the sports he bets. the teams might as well be numbers to him instead of names. As long as his methods put him at a positive EV, there is nothing wrong with that, IMO. But many of us have some "fan" interest in the sport, even if not necessarily on that particular game, that we play on.

I agree with Mr. White though that the balance between the two methods, and the skill one brings to them, is the bigger differentiator. I think that many players would benefit by adding more objectivity to their capping. It sure made a big difference, positively, for me and I take it for Mr. White as well.

GL

[Mr White]

Actually Buckeye,

I use purely number crunching methods. I cannot claim that I don't watch games or sweat scores, but it does not enter my handingcapping methods. I have tried adding subjective components, but it doesn't work with my personality. I start doubting myself and wondering if losing or winning is making me change how I do things. My plays are totally formed through number crunching. Now when I bet them is a subjective process for me. I try and think how the public and wiseguys will act and either bet early or wait out a line move and different factors enter into each decision.

I think this method would not work for other personality types. The key is to figure out a method that is successful for you and doesn't give you ulcers.

[ChuckyTheGoat]

85% objective, 15% subjective

I've proven to myself that I just can't trust my eyes most of the time. The realist's contrarian view would be that everyone could win if they just follow their eyes and ride the strong teams. Count Zero makes a good point, though. If you've been around the block a time or two, the intution you've developed is such that it's worth paying attention to. No longer are you viewing gms thru the eyes of a novice.

[Alan]

Objective or Subjective??? Interesting as what some may say is Objective, others would say is Subjective. Every successful handicapper (save one) that I know, starts with solid power ratings. Every one of these guys formulates their OWN PR's ---- some of the numbers are strictly objective and others are subjective as it rates to such things as quality of opponent when the game occured. (A 500 yd rushing day vs a very poor rushing defense would not merit as much significance as against a strong defense vs the run). Matchups when dealing with personnel is purely subjective. I do not know but one handicapper who is successful that does not factor both subjective and objective information into the ultimate handicap. But then again, I did not know the computer group nor do I know every successful handicapper.

And yes, after you have 20-30 years experience in your pocket, if you have learned how to do the work, you will have instincts that will lead you more often than not into the right situation.

Then, after you have done all of this, you must shop like a maniac to get the best number available. This means that your work must be mostly done by Sunday night for the next week.

[cash]

very good thread.

Mr.White:

I don't think that we differ that much, maybe only that the
subjective considerations whether they are 15% or
50% act as the final filter before pulling the trigger to bet.

It's the engine's carbureator,when tuned properly your
ats success will outpreform a computer generated model.

It's my opinion that BW's success is overwhelmingly a
result of incorporating a subjective opinion into a
measurable criteria.Asking the right questions usually
precedes successful research and that is a subjective matter imo

[cecil]

I would say its close to 50-50 for me. I won't let the numbers make me bet a team I don't think has a chance. I also won't bet a team I am sure is going to win, if the numbers don't support it at all...

[XXGameXX]

Nice thread


For the people who bet mainly on stats and formulas

Do you bet games when YOU KNOW 1 or more major players are hurt, which the status is questionable?

If yes, how would you incoporate that into the mix

If no, when do you make that decision not to even caculate that game?

Thanks

[MadameX]

It's really interesting seeing these different approaches to capping techniques.

I tend to be from the "what have you done for me lately" school, when picking bases. Teams that have gotten hot bats the last 5-7 games, pitchers that have been tough last couple times out....if these two things come together, I give it high priority!

Also, I don't like to go with or against long streaks and avoid those matchups generally. Same with certain teams that I think I am jinxed with: Cubbies, Devil Rays, Chisox. I just won't bet 'em - I can hear the laughter!!

But all in all, this has worked pretty well. I'm fairly new to sportsbetting, having learned about it about in the summer of 2000. I still have plenty of stupid questions and ideas, and appreciate your taking the time to answer when I ask for your help.

Good luck to all!!

[KingOfTheSquares]

I'm one of those 100% tech 'cappers.

Big reason is, after doing a ton of survey work with the military and seeing how variable everyone can be even in black and white situations I rapidly came to the conclusion that everyone is basically mapped by their emotions. So, in order to take it (subjectivity) out of my decisions, I turn everything into a number and the cool thing is, you are betting against a number.

How do I do injuries? Mostly ignore 'em out as I've not been able to quantify 'em or just don't bet on the game if critical players are out. Matter of fact, what little research that has been done on this has shown a slight lift to the team whos star is injured. Seems as if the team is playing harder to compensate.

[XXGameXX]

KOs
thanks for response


for people like you who only cape on #'s

injuries MUST THROW YOU OFF

Lines can change more than 3 points due to an injury.

[KingOfTheSquares]

XXGameXX: Lines can change more than 3 points due to an injury.

Yep, and I usually bet into it...because on a 3 point swing you're saying that the injured player is responsible for the win% changing some 20%

Usually the backups and coaching changes will fill in that gap...

[ChuckyTheGoat]

I normally cap w/o injuries being a major factor in my decision. I've found that the line is normally pretty efficient in handling injuries, especially in pro sports where the injury info is very good. I actually like backing the injury-depleted team if I have a technical reason for backing that team, as that gives me a reason to like them that not many others are thinking about.

[AussieVamp2]

If long term injuries, ratings etc. will adjust for that themselves anyway.