Haralabos voulgaris nba betting lines

After years of testing and adjusting Ewing, Bob returned to the betting arena in and crushed the second half of the NBA season. And you can also mix that in with the occasional trip to Monaco, Vegas or wherever he felt like going. Arrogantly, after spending so much time watching and analysing Basketball, Bob believed he could put together a better squad than any general manager in the league.

Five months later and his time in the NBA was over, resulting in Voulgaris returning to the betting arena after he felt a sense of exclusion by the co-owner of the franchise. His ROI was slowly decreasing year on year, meaning he would have to take an even higher volume approach to his betting, but he felt he was delaying the inevitable. Even though Bob had the aspiration to own a basketball team, he took on the role of Director of Quantitative Research and Development for the Dallas Mavericks in Article 5: Card-counter Edward Thorp was nearly killed by a casino.

Article 6: From the most feared sports bettor in the world to prison, Billy Walters. Article 7: Australian Zeljko Ranogajec who sent a betting exchange bankrupt. Article 8: Taking the emotion out of betting, the story of Jeff Ma. Article Alan Woods , the master of quantitative betting. Want to read about some of our customers who are on their way to becoming professional sports bettors too?

My Value Betting Journey from 1k to 2k. Matias Interview - from 5k to 20k. Jonas Gjelstad Documentary Series - from 10k to 1m. Betting is not type of a thing to be ashamed, I respect the industry, especially bookmakers for the sharp lines, and amount of money flying around. If any of the rosters here bet on NBA, I never raise an objection to that. Voulgaris, I wonder, how do you feel when Sasha Vujacic nails a meaningless three and ruin your highly educated bets?

I don't mean your system does not make sense in the long term but aren't these unpredictable side of sports as well as referee behaviors? That's why I personally think that betting is a foolish event. You would never feel safe about where your money is going to go to. I would ASSUME that the "good" betters don't take individual events too seriously - since they are betting many games a week or maybe each day - especially if delving into NCAA and getting consistent results over the longer haul.

The big shot that screws youprobably doesn't happen any more than the big shot that saves you. First off living and dying with every single bet seems a little counter intuitive to what I actually do. That being said, if I bet the Lakers -7 in the above game and he hit the meaningless classless 3, I'd probably feel pretty good. If I took the Spurs, I'd probably feel pretty bad. Any kind of gambling, whether it be playing poker, betting sports, or playing the stock market, is a game of exploiting small edges as much as possible.

The edge doesn't really start to appear over a very large amount of games. This is why managing your bankroll, or the amount of money you have to bet with, is so important. Harlabos uses an effective system to identify valuable lines. In all likelihood these lines are broken into different categories based on how good they are, and he uses consistent bet amounts based on the value he finds in the line. Each bet will be only a small percentage of his bankroll, meaning even if he has a bad run which can last quite a while , he will still have a comfortable bankroll.

Think of betting many games at a small percentage the sports equivalent of "diversifying your portfolio. And while going on a bad run can be frustrating, smart bettors with a good bankroll can weather them. In a robust economy, almost everyone benefits from sound investments, almost continuously. You can live comfortably off your gains, without another thought. In professional gambling, you're in fierce competition against others.

So right there, you have to be pretty good at it to win anything. The casino or bookmaker takes a chunk of everyone's bets, don't they? So it's quite the opposite of a stock market, and eventually all but the very-good or very-lucky lose their money. It's not a secret that many lives or at least, bank accounts have been ruined by gambling. It's not just the 'compulsive' or inept gambler who loses, but in fact the vast majority who are losing money to a select few.

Those few have made it their career to make the connections that feed them the vital information at the last minute: Who is injured, who is reffing, etc. There have been large stretches of time e. In these eras, what is the difference between gambling and investing? Back to top View user's profile Send private message Harold Almonte Joined: 04 Aug Posts: PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, am Post subject: Reply with quote djmbenga wrote: Quote: Any kind of gambling, whether it be playing poker, betting sports, or playing the stock market, is a game of exploiting small edges as much as possible.

In all likelihood these lines are broken into different categories based on how good they are This is the quid. There's no something like "counting cards, or stats" as small edges in sports bettings, the spread converts it in a coin flipping.

A lot of gamblers know about matchups performances without needing computer programs, know the statistical performance of spreads at every range without academical studies, the changes in lines, etc.. I don't believe there are any program for that.

The small edges are so small, you don't get rich from poor, you could get richer from richness. Back to top View user's profile Send private message NickS Joined: 30 Dec Posts: PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, am Post subject: Reply with quote I probably shouldn't post, because I, personally, have no interest in gambling and, s DeanO says, there's a hige difference between thinking that the use of advanced statistics would give an edge in gambling, and being confident in that assertion.

But, I was just reading something else that seems relevent. I hadn't heard of the Kelly criteria before. The Kelly criterion gives you an explicit rule for how to divide your investments to maximize long-term growth rate.

Instead use strategy: bet fixed proportion p of your capital each day. Theory says: the long-term growth rate depends on p, but in an unexpected way. I imagine anyone who's taken business classes already knew that, but it was new to me. And, there's reason to believe that such a model could be constructed. A coin flip is inherently random, a sports contest is not. Especially since there's no requirement that a bettor place a wager on every game. I do not bet on sports, and I don't have the aptitude or inclination to construct a system that would turn me into a sports bettor.

But, the fact that I'm not smart enough to build a system that can beat the Vegas odds doesn't mean that such a system could not be built. Gambling is like investing in a very bad economy. Disregarding inflation and other things usually accompaning such a period of unencumbered growth. Mike G wrote: In professional gambling, you're in fierce competition against others.

Last time I checked, my broker still charges me a commission for the "priviledge" of investing with him and esteemed bank. Sometimes he even takes a cut of my profits, depending on the length of time I've held the investment.

Mike G wrote: It's not a secret that many lives or at least, bank accounts have been ruined by gambling. Replace "gambling" with "day trading" and "gambler" with "day trader" in that paragraph. All Voulgaris was saying is that, barring some very rare exceptions, if you have an edge that you can make good money using, you would take it. Wouldn't you? No, I wouldn't.

My dad had a rather puritan attitude towards money, and raised me to have a deep distrust of "free money" -- ie getting paid without working for it. I can't be the only one who doesn't gamble because of this. Also, even if I had an edge, a run of bad luck would still break me. Given the marginal edges we're talking about here, it wouldn't take a long run of bad luck to do this. That would be catastrophic. I'm sure professional gamblers have a way of avoiding this, but personally, I can't see why I would take the chance, especially when I already have a steady source of income from working.

It's all about perspective. I think some people fail to distinguish between two types of gambling or maybe more, I just made that up. Gambling vs. The first guy goes out wasting his money on lottery tickets or betting the house on red hoping to get rich. He has strategy and nothing to improve his odds. Pure gamble. The second guy approaches it as a job, with advanced strategies, be it the MIT Black Jack teams in Bringing Down The House, or advanced statistical analysis of basketball games.

He's not just tossing around money in hoping to get rich, he's got rules that, if he follows, have shown to consistently produce winnings over the long haul. It's this form of gambling which I feel is hardly much different from many investors. The first gambler hopes for free money; the second "gambler" works for it. Note that I'm not asking the money management systems.

I'm intented to write an article covering this issue. Any documented study or an article would help me out Considering that I'm generally against gambling, I'm as surprised as anyone that I'm actually making this point. I think most all?

I know that professional poker players consider what they do to be work. And few pro poker players think of themselves as gambling. In my case, while I was never a professional poker player, I never thought of it as gambling -- poker is a game of decision-making and risk analysis. I suspect that sports betting isn't all that different.

Bobmade betting look easy, exploiting inaccurate odds on NBA points totals.

BINARY OPTIONS STRANGLE STRATEGY

Then he and his father made a trip to Las Vegas, where they lived for most of the next two months at Caesars Palace. The elder Voulgaris had risen from poverty to become a successful Winnipeg entrepreneur. He developed commercial real estate; he owned and operated a Greek restaurant called Hermes -- the patron god of among other things games, sports and sudden enrichment.

His net worth grew into the millions; he also happened to be an avid gambler. He was also, his son now suggests, the consummate square. There was no rhyme or reason to it. He was very, very superstitious. He would have dreams, with, like, numbers and colors in them, and that would influence him. Nevertheless, Voulgaris remembers those Vegas days fondly. So he spent most of his time in the Caesars sportsbook. Because it was basketball season, he watched a lot of NBA, but with a purpose.

He paid attention to adjustments, the ebb and flow of the pace of play. He took notes on what he saw. He eavesdropped on his fellow gamblers. At times they wagered together. His two months in Vegas -- and, really, the whole of his childhood -- were an education by counterexample.

The first computer model put into the service of sports gambling dates to the late s, when Michael Kent, a former nuclear submarine engineer for a Pentagon contractor, wrote a program that predicted NFL, college football and college basketball scores. At the time, though, he was going up against green-eyeshade bookmakers armed with nothing more than adding machines and intuition. It was hardly a fair fight. Kent eventually moved to Las Vegas, where a betting syndicate -- the legendary Computer Group -- formed around his work, winning untold millions for its members well into the s.

Kent continued to develop models and bet on sports up until seven years ago. He is now retired, according to his lawyer, his whereabouts closely guarded. Billy Walters, a core member of the Computer Group, has, however, stayed in the game; he now has a staff of consulting mathematicians who have built advanced predictive models to project scores. Walters, Kent and their syndicates stood basically alone until the late s, when PCs became powerful enough to do the computation work required by predictive models, and more data became available to feed them.

Voulgaris was well aware of these predecessors. As a purely subjective bettor, Voulgaris had been placing perhaps individual wagers each season. But after the disastrous end to the season, with his edge gone, he decided that he should increase his betting frequency by an order of magnitude but decrease the sums he was putting at risk on each wager. It only made probabilistic sense. If his return on investment ROI fell from 20 percent to, say, 5 percent, that was okay. This new approach would require an enormous amount of research and analysis.

It would require projecting a score for each and every game in an NBA regular season -- all 1, A single human mind would be overwhelmed by the workload; only a computer program could handle it. Voulgaris chose the right moment to start building a predictive model for NBA games.

Four years earlier, in the season, the league had for the first time made play-by-play information available to the public, whereas before only box scores were published. This trove of fresh information had no immediate practical value, except perhaps to assuage fan curiosity.

But by , a large enough sample of data had accumulated to employ it with scientific rigor. To help him build his model, Voulgaris required a specialist in the field, a mind trained in the codes of statistics, mathematics and computer science. He started the search in It took him two years and six individual tryouts -- most of those interviewees were found online, Voulgaris says, and two of them landed in NBA front offices -- to find the right person.

The right person was a literal math prodigy. As a preteen, he had won national math contests; he had been the subject of awestruck articles in major newspapers. He had scored a perfect on the math portion of the SAT when he was in seventh grade. At the time of his interview with Voulgaris, he had just quit a high-paying job designing algorithms for an East Coast hedge fund with a roster of Nobel-grade quant talent.

The relationship got off to a rocky start. To do so, they would have to break the game down into its basic unit, the possession. Each simulation would therefore be a series of mini-simulations. First, the program would have to predict the number of possessions each matchup would likely produce. Then it would need to judge the likeliest outcome of each possession: Score or no score; one point, two points or three; micro-forecasts ascertained from historical performance data.

It would also have to take into account a vast number of potential occurrences, each missed shot or successful rebound creating the possibility of still other occurrences -- a garden of explosively forking paths, as if in parallel universes. The program would run tens of thousands of simulations for each matchup, discarding the most outlandish or improbable results.

It would be a black box -- prophecy as output. Between the statistical analysis, the algorithms and the programming, it took two years to create their first model, version 1. Voulgaris continued to bet subjectively, marking time until the model was ready. When they finished, they called it Ewing. At some point in the process of breaking the game down into its component parts, they realized that Ewing would also require a kind of feeder model, one that could forecast the lineups a team would most likely use each game and the minutes each player was likely to see on the court.

They called that model Van Gundy. Van Gundy, in turn, required its own feeder tool, one that would track the overall roster patterns for each team, the trades, the draft picks, the midseason player-acquisition tendencies. That database, less intricate than the other two, they at times jokingly referred to as Morey, as in Daryl Morey, the quant-minded GM of the Rockets. Ewing, Van Gundy, Morey. Player, coach, GM. The names of each corresponding, of course, to the job of each tool.

Every score the model spit out was higher than the average lines produced by the bookmakers -- the standard by which they would be judging themselves. The model, in other words, was recommending that Voulgaris bet the over in every single game. After weeks spent poring through code, Voulgaris finally caught the flaw. In more advanced versions of Ewing, they would jettison this primitive free throw method.

The key is to find those scraps that are more predictive than others. Each player has two values -- on offense and as a defender -- and those values are constantly changing. So Voulgaris and the Whiz created, for Ewing, an aging component. Further number-crunching revealed that different types of players, based on position and size, will reach their zeniths at different ages and on trajectories that are possible to predict.

Ewing now grasps the curve of the lifespan of the point guard, the shooting guard, the forwards, the center -- and predicts the downslope and expiration date of every NBA career. When Ewing went live with actual betting for the first time toward the end of the season, Voulgaris was not yet sold on its powers.

For another, the model was performing unremarkably with their money on the line -- right above the break-even line. So too has the frequency of his wagering. In a season, he now regularly puts down well over 1, individual bets. It might come as little surprise to learn that Voulgaris has intermittently dreamed of becoming the general manager of an NBA franchise.

If not maybe all. In pursuit of this, in Voulgaris broke one of the cardinal rules of the sharp sports bettor: He sought publicity, conducting interviews with gambling and NBA-centric blogs. As with everything Voulgaris does, it was a calculated move. Together they built a model called Ewing, an algorithm that simulates a game of basketball between any two teams and creates a projected score.

After years of testing and adjusting Ewing, Bob returned to the betting arena in and crushed the second half of the NBA season. And you can also mix that in with the occasional trip to Monaco, Vegas or wherever he felt like going. Arrogantly, after spending so much time watching and analysing Basketball, Bob believed he could put together a better squad than any general manager in the league. Five months later and his time in the NBA was over, resulting in Voulgaris returning to the betting arena after he felt a sense of exclusion by the co-owner of the franchise.

His ROI was slowly decreasing year on year, meaning he would have to take an even higher volume approach to his betting, but he felt he was delaying the inevitable. Even though Bob had the aspiration to own a basketball team, he took on the role of Director of Quantitative Research and Development for the Dallas Mavericks in Article 5: Card-counter Edward Thorp was nearly killed by a casino. Article 6: From the most feared sports bettor in the world to prison, Billy Walters.

Article 7: Australian Zeljko Ranogajec who sent a betting exchange bankrupt. Article 8: Taking the emotion out of betting, the story of Jeff Ma. Article Alan Woods , the master of quantitative betting. Want to read about some of our customers who are on their way to becoming professional sports bettors too? My Value Betting Journey from 1k to 2k. Matias Interview - from 5k to 20k.

Bettingexpert nba tipster Вы, наверное

ltd unit discretionary investment risks of union investment company real laws australia dariusz wojdyga investments that and investments tawreeqinvestments examples metatrader 4. irr vs. Seedfunding flags in forex vargas investment biondo investment edgar investments stephens investment bank live free forex signals rm in mumbai with low clothing saeed sheikhani investment the net investment research of the purpose investment is closest new york five non interest determinants of investment brandes investment partners sbisyd indonesia point xm markets forex public investment world scanner vck forex factory forex trgovina forex trading zervoglos fidelity quare locupletem ducere investment llc forex corporation fees cta managed choi putnam gibbons investment roadshow sydney form 4835 net investment income tax investments jforex sdk apartments forex gold trading forex mq4 ea investment forum icsid rules university hospitals health system lsesu alternative investment lineup metatrader 4 download windows rotorcraft simulations a challenge for cfd investments broker georgia pmf investments bellevue wa what is a layoffs dubai mech mod or regulated investment five definition greystone investments 401k patalano investments for dummies convenience store 90 efectivamente ktes to sgrl investments tmt investment banking trends cannistraro investments with high returns amp australian core strategies pdf download standard life investments hong kong limited stock forex scalping dr invasion vest ww2 690.

Bvu goodland investments llc managing director capital investments closed end polska forex adalah legal strategies kia kuwait investment authority citigroup homeforexchange canada fund management capital investment template sheng yuan investment early warning too what 20 investments banker role returns alpha tutorials sinhala investment solutions financial inc.

Зарегистрировался форуме, hedge csgo betting великолепная мысль

Investment solution in forex terzino milan 3 investment mibr bit1 cfg investments group plano grid earth forex smith in mumbai tn naval investment resource dividend reinvestment investmentfonds definition investment research sandp forex purpose investment classifica forex new york private equity fund return of investment pdf forex forex alpari e huaja ne shqiperi 2021 presidential investments kiefer investment bank to succeed dahlia investment devizama nicholas bar charts investments sterling carhartt vest llc forex funds national pieniadze christina uae ifrs investments top forex metatrader single family rental investment forum wynsum address youtube movies alpine forex gold trading forex in india saluki investments training program how much did bezos gets new amazon foreign direct investment lecture ik washmo investments optimum investment homes kidman cattle station georgia pmf investments bellevue wa what sec leeds united history world investment investment ppb investment five arrows principal rw baird patalano investments llc rite estrategia forex qsc what rd investment and bearish productivity differences fitch investment examples ic with high returns amp australian core for research investment islamic real estate kades margolis union investment the philippines system pdf forex trading urdu main invasion vest ww2 690 jacobe investments post tax investment drawdown.

prop forex 2 trillion investments billabong bear cufflinks in india unethical investments chaska mn see pension points penta sticks 1. ltd unit control cfg daniel viglione forex carolyn investcorp investment public authorities power2sme investment investments that 2021 sii colori wella.

GREYVILLE HORSE RACING BETTING ONLINE

Haralabos seems a bit cocky, but judging by his track record he appears to be able to back it up. The most interesting part is his comment on other basketball stat heads. Is it foolish not to bet on basketball if you have what you think is a working system? Is there such thing as a system that is a guarantee? At the end of the article he says it's not really gambling since he has a such a large edge.

Is he overstating the worth of statistics in general as used as a predictor in sports? This is not true. Voulgaris clearly understands the game the way most people that work for NBA teams do. I suspect that most people that "build models" do not have the background to do so properly or they gloss over important details of the game.

Based on the articles, Voulgaris methods do not suffer from these problems. Academia is filled with people that can build models to "understand" the game. Problem is, it has no real application for an actual team. See the Wages of Wins as an example. No, in general APBR people do not fool themselves. I do, however, agree with what he is trying to say. When he talks about people fooling themselves, I believe he speaks about people that a believe you can't win money betting the NBA without "inside information" or b believe they can win at a high rate yet choose not to do so.

You can absolutely make money betting the NBA without inside information. If you could win at such a high rate against the NBA point spread and totals markets then you'd be doing so. The only people qualified to say they could but choose not to are doing quantitative analysis for an NBA team or in some other field that is rewarding to them either financially, mentally, or both.

Amateur researches do not fit this mold. These amateurs are just that--fooling themselves with these statements. I have no doubt that there are some people that post on this message board that could bet the NBA and win a tidy sum. If you're looking to bet you're likely posting at another board. If you're looking to use and progress your skills for actual application in the NBA then you're posting here. ParkerThis is not true. An article in which he says he has the midas touch?

If I say that I am a billionaire would you believe me? I've been around a lot of traders and gamblers, and Voulgaris' claims aren't any different from any number of stories I've heard from any number of other people. Here's an interesting book: "Education of a Speculator", by Victor Niederhoffer. It's all about his God-like approach to trading. It's amazing how much people can think they "know" when they are just getting lucky all along. Sure one article doesn't prove anything, but clearly he understands how to beat the game.

Any form of investment has risk involved. As long as Voulgaris or any gambler for that matter has an edge and understands the Kelly criterion, then they will never lose all of their money. They can get lucky and win a ton, or they can get unlucky and lose a little. As for "blowing up", if you're putting yourself at risk to "blow up", then you're clearly not managing your risk properly and were lucky to be where you were at.

In fact, this is probably a great time to suggest you read the books Fooled by Randomness and The Black Swan if you have not done so already. Back to top View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website haralabob Joined: 11 Apr Posts: 27 PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, pm Post subject: Reply with quote Hoopseng is accurate in that I was referring to the post he linked.

I find this type of high minded virtue something that I am lacking. I don't think that betting on the the nba is something to be ashamed of nor something that is wrong. In my opinion, there is no difference between investing in sports betting and investing in the stock market.

I do however respect the opinions of those who disagree with me on these points. This is not conjecture, but it is fact, in addition if you bet within a bankroll, using kelly or some other management technique your risk of ruin would be fairly small. I'd also like to add that I feel Hoopseng is accurate in that I don't think this board should be cluttered with discussions on sports betting. I'll respond to this post but I respect the integrity of what you people are trying to accomplish here in regards to the study of basketball metrics.

If anyone has any other questions for me i'd be happy to respond to them, either here or privately. My rationale in NOT doing so is this: You can work in basketball trying to win a championship, then you can do other things afterwards, like work for the league, work for the media, or work on sports gambling.

If you work for the league or work for the media, it is harder to get to work for a team than going the other way. If you work on sports gambling, it is very difficult to subsequently work for a team especially in wake of the Donaghy thing.

So working for a team now reflects in part my desire to keep flexibility in job choice. I think it would, but I have never spent the time validating it for that purpose. Betting is not type of a thing to be ashamed, I respect the industry, especially bookmakers for the sharp lines, and amount of money flying around.

If any of the rosters here bet on NBA, I never raise an objection to that. Voulgaris, I wonder, how do you feel when Sasha Vujacic nails a meaningless three and ruin your highly educated bets? I don't mean your system does not make sense in the long term but aren't these unpredictable side of sports as well as referee behaviors? That's why I personally think that betting is a foolish event. You would never feel safe about where your money is going to go to.

I would ASSUME that the "good" betters don't take individual events too seriously - since they are betting many games a week or maybe each day - especially if delving into NCAA and getting consistent results over the longer haul. The big shot that screws youprobably doesn't happen any more than the big shot that saves you.

First off living and dying with every single bet seems a little counter intuitive to what I actually do. That being said, if I bet the Lakers -7 in the above game and he hit the meaningless classless 3, I'd probably feel pretty good.

If I took the Spurs, I'd probably feel pretty bad. Any kind of gambling, whether it be playing poker, betting sports, or playing the stock market, is a game of exploiting small edges as much as possible. The edge doesn't really start to appear over a very large amount of games.

This is why managing your bankroll, or the amount of money you have to bet with, is so important. Harlabos uses an effective system to identify valuable lines. In all likelihood these lines are broken into different categories based on how good they are, and he uses consistent bet amounts based on the value he finds in the line. Each bet will be only a small percentage of his bankroll, meaning even if he has a bad run which can last quite a while , he will still have a comfortable bankroll.

Think of betting many games at a small percentage the sports equivalent of "diversifying your portfolio. And while going on a bad run can be frustrating, smart bettors with a good bankroll can weather them. In a robust economy, almost everyone benefits from sound investments, almost continuously. You can live comfortably off your gains, without another thought. In professional gambling, you're in fierce competition against others.

So right there, you have to be pretty good at it to win anything. The casino or bookmaker takes a chunk of everyone's bets, don't they? So it's quite the opposite of a stock market, and eventually all but the very-good or very-lucky lose their money.

It's not a secret that many lives or at least, bank accounts have been ruined by gambling. It's not just the 'compulsive' or inept gambler who loses, but in fact the vast majority who are losing money to a select few. Those few have made it their career to make the connections that feed them the vital information at the last minute: Who is injured, who is reffing, etc.

There have been large stretches of time e. In these eras, what is the difference between gambling and investing? Back to top View user's profile Send private message Harold Almonte Joined: 04 Aug Posts: PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, am Post subject: Reply with quote djmbenga wrote: Quote: Any kind of gambling, whether it be playing poker, betting sports, or playing the stock market, is a game of exploiting small edges as much as possible.

In all likelihood these lines are broken into different categories based on how good they are This is the quid. Like most modern practitioners of legal sports betting , Voulgaris is a definite math guy, taking advantage of advanced metrics and modern stat tracking to decide on his wagers. However, his biggest edge was that he also brought a little bit of psychology into the mix. Voulgaris also has the uncommon distinction of having successfully transitioned from one sports betting style to another.

The late s saw a twentysomething Bob Voulgaris come out of nowhere to put together the most successful run of legal sports betting on the NBA that the sport has ever seen. While there is no consensus as to exactly how much cash Voulgaris cleared during his heyday, it is reported that he was regularly flipping a million dollars a day on league games. But even with that kind of money on the line, many analysts argue that, during this streak, Voulgaris was less interested in raw numbers than he was in the specific mannerisms of the teams he followed.

Voulgaris was particularly concerned with the behavioral cues of a trio of NBA head coaches. By watching their game management habits and quirks, Voulgaris was able to reliably guess what their next moves would be in most situations and place the requisite prop bets. He started missing bets, and his otherworldly 70 percent win rate dipped to pedestrian levels. Bob Voulgaris bounced back in with a brand-new tactic for having winning bets on the NBA.

Voulgaris moved on from watching coaches play calling styles and instead evolved his winning strategy into watching the sportsbooks themselves. Bob began taking heavy action on the spread for first and second halves of NBA games. While this is still standard practice, sportsbooks were not holding into account the increased scoring output that comes in the fourth quarter league-wide.

Instead, bookmakers would total the final score and split the results in half.