3 ms·
Not sure I understand the math behind your logic - unless you're assuming that you spend an entire year researching that 1 bet to have the best odds. In DFS, th
by acconrad 11y ago
Not sure I understand the math behind your logic - unless you're assuming that you spend an entire year researching that 1 bet to have the best odds. In DFS, that would be like spending the entire off season researching Week 1 stats, so that by game day, you play 1 giant tournament hoping for a big payout, and then not playing the rest of the year.
That still seems to be dangerous because you have no diversification, in lineups or allocation of funds. Would be curious to understand your reasoning more.
- Retric 11y agoEdit: Diversification works with investment when the average return is positive. These games are negative sum for most players as the house takes part of the pool. For simplicity, let's say it's a 50:50 coin, but you win 1.99 of your stake. With one bet the house takes some of your winnings, but your odds don't change. With 2 bets, if you win both you win, if you lose both you lose, but if you win one (1.99) and lose one (0) you still lose (1.99 + 0) / 2 < 1. Sure, your odds of losing 'big' went from 50% to 25%, but your odds of winning big went from 50% to 25% and your odds of losing slightly are now 50%. Same thing applies if it's a 10% chance to win 9.99x your state, with 10 bets and 1 when you still lose. However, your odds of a 9.99x win are much smaller. (1 in 10,000,000,000 vs. 1:10) Granted, if your vastly better than other players you can get a small advantage. But, that's not going to be very significant over a small number of games.