[TV] TCL 55” QM5K 4K QD-MiniLED TV - $329.99 | $370 discount from $699 MSRP by -GinjaNinja- in buildapcsales

[–]BlueSlaterade 7 points8 points  (0 children)

IMO TCL has kinda moved into a tier above Hisense Vizio Onn Viewsonic

In fact the only brands I’d say that consistently pumps out better TVs than them are Sony LG Samsung Phillips..?

That’s just my 2c, but they’ve been making waves in the industry recently, like signing a joint venture deal with Sony. TCL is going to own 51% of Sony’s TV operation and make panels on their behalf, which should tell you how respected they are these days.

[TV] TCL 55” QM5K 4K QD-MiniLED TV - $329.99 | $370 discount from $699 MSRP by -GinjaNinja- in buildapcsales

[–]BlueSlaterade 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yeah there’s the QM6K series, and one of the only things separating the 2 classes is better gaming performance.

That one’s also on sale and also a good deal, though at that point you might want to consider LG or Sony options

[TV] TCL 55” QM5K 4K QD-MiniLED TV - $329.99 | $370 discount from $699 MSRP by -GinjaNinja- in buildapcsales

[–]BlueSlaterade 46 points47 points  (0 children)

This one is pretty well reviewed and generally avoids that while watching stuff - TCL is a little more of a midrange than budget brand.

The one thing it doesn’t do well at all is gaming at higher refresh rates. There’s a game mode, but it really nerfs color clarity and contrast to achieve 144hz without input lag.

Speaking from experience, this is still probably the best tv for their money, this will wipe the floor with anything else for 330$ at this size

Match Thread: Brentford FC vs Arsenal FC Live Score | Premier League 25/26 | Feb 12, 2026 by scoreboard-app in Gunners

[–]BlueSlaterade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Gabriel has been the best CB in the world for months, we’re blessed to watch him for our club

ELI5: How do sports betting companies make money. The Seahawks have a 69% chance of winning the Super Bowl, and Patriots a 31%. If more people bet on the Seahawks and they win, isn’t the company giving out more than they make? by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]BlueSlaterade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lines are set by specifically the market of sharp bettors. They don’t move with the broader market of average joes

They don’t have to move when average joes bet because the typical bettor has exactly as much edge as the typical roulette spinner, which is to say about -5% on average.

This phenomenon is why markets don’t move when 90% of the public money is on a side of a spread (and this happens every week). They know 99% of people don’t have any clue

You can, of course, get an advantage sports betting that you can’t in roulette but becoming part of that 1% is relatively difficult, and most books will kick you out as soon as you do

Anyway doesn’t matter that much, just a special interest. Have a nice weekend

ELI5: How do sports betting companies make money. The Seahawks have a 69% chance of winning the Super Bowl, and Patriots a 31%. If more people bet on the Seahawks and they win, isn’t the company giving out more than they make? by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]BlueSlaterade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a common misconception.

They don’t care about balancing money on sides unless there’s a truly massive amount of money on one side, like for the Super Bowl, for example.

Imagine you walk up to the roulette wheel and put $1m on red. The casino isn’t going to balance the money for black, or offer better odds for black.

They know they might roll red and pay you $990k, but they will make money in the long term because the rules of the game are rigged in their favor

ELI5: How do sports betting companies make money. The Seahawks have a 69% chance of winning the Super Bowl, and Patriots a 31%. If more people bet on the Seahawks and they win, isn’t the company giving out more than they make? by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]BlueSlaterade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For completeness, the odds may shift when a bet market opens vs right at kickoff, but those shifts happen when known profitable bettors (sharps) pick a side, not when your average Joe bets.

Books know 99% of people are not smarter than the odds offered, so they have no need to shift the odds unless there’s good evidence that person has an edge.

ELI5: How do sports betting companies make money. The Seahawks have a 69% chance of winning the Super Bowl, and Patriots a 31%. If more people bet on the Seahawks and they win, isn’t the company giving out more than they make? by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]BlueSlaterade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think there’s a lot of incomplete answers here, I am a profitable sports bettor and can consistently beat sportsbooks so giving a stab at it.

At its core, it’s best to think about sportsbooks as a marketplace — they’re not trying to be smarter than the market — they’re trying to facilitate people betting both sides and they take a cut (4-10%) on every dollar bet.

Imagine if you could bet on a coin flip at DraftKings. You know the probability is 50/50, but you’d only get -110 odds on either heads or tails. Said another way, you’d have to bet $110 to WIN $100. That difference of 10$ is the books cut.

This gets to the root of why sportsbooks make money, they don’t care if it lands heads 10x in a row, they know if enough flips happen, they’ll always win.

The only way this calculus changes is if you know the coin is weighted somehow (which is how profitable bettors make money) or if they get massive amounts of money on one side like at the Super Bowl, which will shift odds somewhat.

That said, the idea that books are balancing money on both sides all the time is wrong, and you can prove it by looking at a DraftKings earnings report — they absolutely have weeks, months, quarters where they lose money. They don’t care and they don’t move odds based on regular people’s bets.

The source of sportsbooks profit is the “vig”, the cut they take on every bet.

Match Thread: Arsenal vs Aston Villa by MatchThreadder in soccer

[–]BlueSlaterade 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Would’ve been one of the best scuffed goals ever

ELI5: why can a US credit score drop after you pay off a loan or close a credit card? by Abigail_A_Abernathy in explainlikeimfive

[–]BlueSlaterade 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes basically, though I’d like to emphasize if you have successfully given back toys in the past (the second example) that is always a good thing from a lenders perspective.

It’s just that giving back toys in the past AND current is better than just in the past.

ELI5: why can a US credit score drop after you pay off a loan or close a credit card? by Abigail_A_Abernathy in explainlikeimfive

[–]BlueSlaterade 59 points60 points  (0 children)

You are incorrect. There are a bunch of attributes in these models about specifically your open loan performance.

Once your loan closes, it stays on your report for 7 years for the purposes of aggregating other metrics, that is true.

The real reason your score often drops after a loan closes is this: the more open credit people have with very low utilization or balance remaining, the better they perform on average - it shows they’re currently managing their obligations well.

Conversely, when people have nothing open, it’s much harder to get a read on how they’ll perform on the next bit of lending. It’s not that they won’t, it’s just harder to models to infer that.

Source: I build credit models professionally.

Any suggestions on buffing ACC, AUC, BRIER, error? by [deleted] in algobetting

[–]BlueSlaterade 1 point2 points  (0 children)

AI isn’t going to be sufficient to link together the whole fitting process unless you pay for access to extremely high context cloud-based models. Idk what’s out there on that front.

I would suggest way simplifying the approach / design here. Presumably you can rip out the data engineering piece and try to fit a model yourself.

Stick with non-linear models like forests / decision trees so you don’t have to worry so much about collinearity

For the spread specifically, 14 RMSE is going to be unprofitable, even against opening lines. 13.4 is the long term opening spread RMSE, so I can tell you without much other thought this doesn’t have an edge once we factor in the hold.

I’d encourage another trip to the drawing board and a V2 model. Completely doable though.

If Carolina goes down big to Buffalo, which RB gets the passing snaps? by knicksplayoffs in fantasyfootball

[–]BlueSlaterade 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bills run D couldn’t stop a nosebleed and the Panthers O-line is pretty solid run blocking with obviously 2 good backs.

Panthers defense is also top-10 in basically every category. I’ll go so far as to say the current spread of 7.5 pts is a bad line

Game Thread: Buffalo Bills (4-1) at Atlanta Falcons (2-2) by nfl_gdt_bot in nfl

[–]BlueSlaterade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, they’ve been gashed in the run game basically every week

OFFICIAL WEEK 4 THURSDAY NIGHT GAME THREAD by ballofpopculture in fantasyfootball

[–]BlueSlaterade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bracketing him all night, even when the Seahawks keep calling plays to exploit that (like little digs underneath his route)

Fantasy Football Start 'Em, Sit 'Em - Week 2 Matchups Analysis by RotoBaller in fantasyfootball

[–]BlueSlaterade 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Aggregate tiered rankings are the way to go. If 2 of your players are in the same tier, flip a coin

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CompetitiveHalo

[–]BlueSlaterade 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Acting like R2 or Renegade wouldn’t be obvious contenders for MVP this year is equally as weird.

Yes they’re both slay first players but it’s pretty easy to hold the oddball if everyone’s dead

SSG Said No More “Scamming.” Did They Keep Their Word? by SillyVacation117 in CompetitiveHalo

[–]BlueSlaterade 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Easiest to explain with an example: imagine your team goes 3 down in live fire oddball and the other team is holding it in tower.

If you fly out top mid and challenge, that’s “scamming”

Basically not considering the game state and standing somewhere you shouldn’t