What's the Most Money You've Spent RESEARCHING a Bet You Didn't Place?

[SharpEddie47]

Klaus that's an uncomfortable admission.

I've never fully calculated my time cost either.

I know I'm profitable. Don't know if I'm profitable relative to what I could be doing with those hours.

 

[FadeThePublic]

This thread is dismantling the economics of "serious betting" in real time.

 

[ThePuntingProf]

I once spent eleven hours over three days analyzing a specific referee's tendencies for a match I had identified as having unusual value, the referee was replaced two days before the match due to personal reasons, entire analysis irrelevant, I did not bet the match because the edge I had identified was referee-specific, I estimate the eleven hours represented approximately four hundred pounds in lost marking time as I was still teaching then, that remains my most expensive non-bet, the sunk cost feeling was significant but I managed to resist betting something I no longer had conviction in, not always successful in that resistance but that time I was.

 

[TaffyTipster]

Eleven hours on a referee.

Prof that's dedication mate.

Or something.

 

[CoachTony_Bets]

Eleven hours then the referee gets replaced.

I'd have bet something just to make myself feel better.

 

[ThePuntingProf]

I nearly did Tony. Nearly.

 

[DublinDegen]

reading this thread and realizing the most efficient betting strategy financially might be to not research anything and not bet anything...

zero cost zero loss...

thats basically where im trying to get to anyway...

 

[SharpEddie47]

Conor that's actually mathematically correct for most people.

The optimal bet for a recreational bettor with no genuine edge is zero.

 

[ParlayPrincess_88]

Okay that's very depressing lol

But also kind of freeing?

Like I don't research AND I bet and I lose. What if I just... didn't bet?

Same outcome minus the excitement.

 

[oli_sussex]

Princess identifying the core proposition clearly.

Excitement is the product being sold. Not profit.

 

[FadeThePublic]

The sunk cost thing gets me though.

Has anyone ever calculated research time going IN as a reason to stay disciplined and NOT bet?

Like "I've spent six hours on this and the edge isn't there, so I'm protecting my research reputation by not placing a bad bet."

 

[SharpEddie47]

I've tried to frame it that way.

Rarely works.

The pull to justify the time by getting action is stronger than the pull to protect methodology.

 

[Klaus]

I use strict minimum edge threshold to prevent this.

If research produces result below 2% edge: no bet regardless of time invested.

Rule pre-committed before research begins. Removes sunk cost temptation.

Has meant not betting after extensive research many times.

Feels wasteful. Is actually disciplined.