Gambling theory videos

[Stillriledup]

Found a 15 minute video from Dylan Evans where he talks about the differences between expert gamblers and non expert gamblers and a horse racing study, among other things. I found it interesting, hopefully you will too.

I love watching videos or reading articles on stuff like this, always looking to learn, so, if you have anything else along these lines you want to post, go ahead and post it up, i'd love to watch it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jyokhjUCyk

[AndyC]

Interesting, thanks for posting the link.

[stuball]

I am 71 yrs old and now I finally know why I lose at horse racing as
my score is 35.20 of possible 100...very low at analyzing risk..now how do
I fix it? I will never win $$$$ with a score that low...

Stuball

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by stuball

I am 71 yrs old and now I finally know why I lose at horse racing as
my score is 35.20 of possible 100...very low at analyzing risk..now how do
I fix it? I will never win $$$$ with a score that low...

Stuball

I think that score means you are cautious, maybe too cautious.

[glengarry]

Originally Posted by stuball

I am 71 yrs old and now I finally know why I lose at horse racing as
my score is 35.20 of possible 100...very low at analyzing risk..now how do
I fix it? I will never win $$$$ with a score that low...

Stuball

If you have a low score, that means the things you think you know you don't really know. Put another way, think back to your school days (yes, a long time ago for many of us). Some kids take a test, think they did great, then get a C or a D. They think they know things, but obviously don't have the awareness to understand where their knowledge is lacking.

Translate that to a horse race. You cap out a race. You leave out a horse that has been off for 6 months even though his figs put him right there. He is 8 to 1 on the M.L. He beats your horse at the wire and pays 7.40. You scratch your head as you rip your tickets in little pieces. You thought you knew that the layoff would get to him. What you didn't know, or even calculate, was why he was laid off, the general health of the horse, or how he had trained up to the race. The pounding he took at the windows should have told you 2 things: 1. The general public, who all think alike, were not the ones making this horse 5 to 2 off an 8 to one M.L. 2. You threw out a fast horse assuming he wasn't ready instead of realizing that you just had no way of knowing. The obvious question then is: Well, when do you have knowledge of every variable? The answer is never, but you can cut down your risk by turning the page, especially when you see the non public money on the horse. Or bet against a layoff horse when he figures to be too slow, or you have some other basis to pitch the horse based on something you do know.

[Robert Fischer]

It's a great thing any time one of these speakers adds legitimacy to the skill set required by horseplaying.

[glengarry]

To see risk intelligence, and therefore risk assessment, in action, it's worth renting "Along Came Polly". Ben Stiller plays an insurance company risk assessor, who uses his proprietary formula to assign risk to a variety of activities. Plus you get to look at Jennifer Aniston, and laugh at the late great Phillip Seymour Hoffman.

All top level players not only see the risk, but assess it as well. They can't eliminate it, but understand its chance of biting them in the rear, and make their decision with that in mind. The average player (lifetime loser) will usually see the risk, but summarily dismiss it or underestimate it.

[BettinBilly]

Thanks for the post SRU.

Interesting presentation. I took the test while I was listening to the video.

72.25.

[olddaddy]

I got a 62, I figured that because I have always been a bet hedger. My life director got a 77, I figured that also because she has to be a risk taker to take on someone like me.

[glengarry]

Originally Posted by olddaddy

I got a 62, I figured that because I have always been a bet hedger. My life director got a 77, I figured that also because she has to be a risk taker to take on someone like me.

My reading of the test score is that a higher score doesn't mean you are a risk taker. It really means the opposite of a risk taker, or better put, a good evaluator of risk. It means that you correctly assess risk. In other words, you know when there is little risk in taking a strong position, because you know when you are right. Some people think they are right, but are usually wrong. I gave the test to a very well read friend. Jeopardy contestant level well read. He scored very high. The questions, for the average person, are beyond their knowledge level. The test assesses how able you are to know your own level of knowledge. For my friend, he is so well read, the test really assesses something different. He really knows the answers to many of these, or knows enough to make truly educated guesses, thus reducing the risk.

[BettinBilly]

That's how I read it GG.

My 72 is probably where I thought I'd be, for what it's worth.

Interesting test. You can only take it once as you figure out at the end how to run the numbers if you want to. I thought I knew that 1/2 way through, but stayed the course as I wanted to know where I would end up in reality.

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by glengarry

To see risk intelligence, and therefore risk assessment, in action, it's worth renting "Along Came Polly". Ben Stiller plays an insurance company risk assessor, who uses his proprietary formula to assign risk to a variety of activities. Plus you get to look at Jennifer Aniston, and laugh at the late great Phillip Seymour Hoffman.

All top level players not only see the risk, but assess it as well. They can't eliminate it, but understand its chance of biting them in the rear, and make their decision with that in mind. The average player (lifetime loser) will usually see the risk, but summarily dismiss it or underestimate it.

I'm sorry, you shouldn't use these words in the same post. I've lost my train of thought.

[rupiefied]

I got a 45 but after seeing why if you just answer the middle every time you will get a high score. Seems to me it also gagues if your risk averse as well.

[Johnny V]

Thanks for posting that link. Interesting video but I thought the test was pretty obvious since it is a true/false test. 50% chance either way. Just bet (0% or 100%) when you are absolutely sure. Of course I missed some of those. My final score was 80 but I am very far from being even close to an expert gambler although I would like to sometimes think of myself as one until the actual reality always sets in.

[raybo]

69.79, a bit lower than I thought I'd get, but, I've never been able to create a good odds line either - LOL. I suppose this is why I believe in flat betting as being the best measure of how likely one is to remain profitable, long term. I don't vary my wagers according to any "perceived" edge in individual races, but rather, I look at the long term, knowing that sometimes I'll lose money and sometimes I'll win money, but in the end I'll win more money than I lose.