Re:Nate Silver: Some personal news
by RC_ITR on Tuesday May 02, 2023 @07:28PM
(#35795642)
Literally the Vegas line?
Nate put 2021/22 warriors at 0.5% to win, Vegas was +900.
Nate put 2020/21 bucks at 10% to win, Vegas was +550.
If you can’t even come close to beating the line, you’re not a good model. He’s just transparent about his variables.
> EDIT: (cause I can't reply to the below comment) my question was what model beats 538, not which betting market beats 538. yeah, duh, the Vegas line beats 538, because it beats literally all publicly available models. It'd take a really disastrous gambling
Lines aren’t built that way. They’re set by books to offset their risk. They’re based on a bunch of (usually drunk) wetware computers with huge biases (don’t believe me, look at any Dodgers line when they have an obviously bad pitcher matchup).
If your model is worse than that, then what’s the point of a model?
Nate put 2021/22 warriors at 0.5% to win, Vegas was +900.
Nate put 2020/21 bucks at 10% to win, Vegas was +550.
If you can’t even come close to beating the line, you’re not a good model. He’s just transparent about his variables.
> EDIT: (cause I can't reply to the below comment) my question was what model beats 538, not which betting market beats 538. yeah, duh, the Vegas line beats 538, because it beats literally all publicly available models. It'd take a really disastrous gambling
Lines aren’t built that way. They’re set by books to offset their risk. They’re based on a bunch of (usually drunk) wetware computers with huge biases (don’t believe me, look at any Dodgers line when they have an obviously bad pitcher matchup).
If your model is worse than that, then what’s the point of a model?