Reverse Jinx and Starter Bias Retention

It's always nice to have your ideas and thoughts confirmed, and a couple of recent examples have occurred.

Rufus Peabody had the opposite of a 'bad beat' on a golf bet at the weekend, and commented:

I'm not sure if I have written on this topic before, but I have a very similar approach - especially on larger sized bets. As I replied on Twitter:

I've done this myself for years. My spreadsheet goes back to 1/1/2006 and when a bet is looking lost, I enter it as a done deal. (I never do this on likely winners.) Not only does this prepare you mentally for the loss, but it's like winning twice when it does come through!

I find this approach a positive one, and Rufus confirmed:

I can attest to the psychological benefits of this.

The Logic of Sports Betting by Ed Miller and Matthew Davidow has a chapter called In-Play Betting and on page 197 gives an example of a New York Mets MLB game where pre-game they had an implied win probability of 58%.

The book relates how, at the top of the tenth inning, the prices still had the Mets with a 58% probability of winning, but as readers of this blog have known since 2013, this makes no sense as the starting pitcher is key to the starting price and once he is out of the game, that 58% is invalid. 

The cat is well and truly out of the bag on this strategy now, but my in-play baseball days are behind me. Liquidity on the Exchange markets is very poor, I don't have the time to spend four hours trading for a few peanuts, and at my age, I need my sleep.

But it was nice to see my thought process on in-play baseball prices be validated, although the account balance was proof enough that the idea had some merit.