Avoiding McNamara's Fallacy in Sports Betting: A Guide to Smarter Picks
Do you use McNamara's Fallacy to Pick Winners?
Most handicappers and analysts do.
Hopefully, you don't.
To keep it simple, it involves making a decision based on quantitative observations
or metrics of your own choosing to prove a point, while ignoring others.
Losing:
That's why so many demonstrative analysts who sound convincing have losing records.
Most think that:
1) What they saw this week will happen next week. If it did, handicapping would be easy.
It's not.
2) Trend results will be replicated. Almost all trends are based on limited sample sizes,
and don't or can't incorporate personnel changes.
Trends that seem viable will at best, even out over time.
Be Wary:
Stats can be manipulated by "cherry picking" data.
Politicians use statistics the same way that a drunk uses lamp posts—for support
rather than illumination.
Similarly, most handicappers improperly use statistics leading to industry wide
losing records. If their information was profitable sportsbooks would be filing for
Chapter Seven or Chapter Eleven.
They’re not.
Winning:
Football players are like animate chess pieces.
Potential game plans and matchups must be considered in every contest.
Combining the above with real statistical advantages and not trends will make you
successful in the long run.
It's not easy and involves lots of innovative homework in markets that are efficient
and always changing.
Run as fast as you can from anyone who has a “lock” or a “sure thing”.
Pay attention to the limited 1% who actually make a living wagering year after year.
John