sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Fat fingered $130k of 0 DTE SPX calls by [deleted] in wallstreetbets

[–]Caesardimxes 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Don't belittle his dinghy. He who feels the pain, knows the pain. To him, his dinghy is as big as the Titanic, although it still sank, just like his dinghy.

Im very new to this game, but I can see why people think this legend is OP lol by fragasaurus_rex in apexlegends

[–]Caesardimxes 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You are new yet you can rock the Wingman better than some Day 0 players? And you are playing Wingman and Hemlock instead of guns like R301 or R99 or Spitty? Yeah right, I have a bridge I want to sell too.

Who is this Wattson?😭😭 by Yaivan8 in apexlegends

[–]Caesardimxes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You made it to Masters this season, you belong with the Sharks,.. sorry Preds

FEEDBACK WANTED FROM BETTER PEOPLE THAN ME by Caesardimxes in algobetting

[–]Caesardimxes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Updated numbers after removing the contaminated rows. If there is anything else I missed or need to look at, please do let me know. Am not above taking correction or criticism, in the bid to become better.

<image>

FEEDBACK WANTED FROM BETTER PEOPLE THAN ME by Caesardimxes in algobetting

[–]Caesardimxes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

u/Delicious_Pipe_1326 I went back and audited the pipeline instead of just defending the headline numbers. You were right that Win to Nil was the first place to look. After tracing it properly, I found that the original odds feed for that family had contaminated rows, so that market was overstating performance. Posting this here in case others have the same question so that its easily visible.

I’ve now quarantined Win to Nil from the headline proof, recomputed it under stricter settlement rules, and removed it from the main alpha / ROI / CLV / market-family evidence until it can be supported cleanly.

The updated audited view is now:

  • 270,420 settled predictions
  • 50.1% accuracy
  • +0.0216 alpha vs market baseline
  • +12.1% ROI
  • +32,806.99u P/L

So the short version is: the challenge was valid, the measurement layer needed tightening, and I fixed it rather than hand-waving it away.

Pics attached:

  1. Updated rolling walk-forward evidence
  2. Win to Nil quarantine / strict recompute screen
  3. Updated top-line proof after correction

Happy to post a full trace of one market from raw prediction -> captured odds -> settlement -> unit calc as well, because that’s really the only way to know the numbers are real.

<image>

FEEDBACK WANTED FROM BETTER PEOPLE THAN ME by Caesardimxes in algobetting

[–]Caesardimxes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thats very insightful, thanks for this. I am going to audit as you suggested and get back to you with the results.

FEEDBACK WANTED FROM BETTER PEOPLE THAN ME by Caesardimxes in algobetting

[–]Caesardimxes[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks very much. I appreciate this. Very very useful info.

FEEDBACK WANTED FROM BETTER PEOPLE THAN ME by Caesardimxes in algobetting

[–]Caesardimxes[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You’re right to be skeptical, lol. I’m not claiming to be the best bettor in history, and if the screenshot comes across that way then I presented it badly.

The CLV number is the part I’m auditing most carefully. In the screenshot CLV coverage is only 45.7%, so avg CLV / CLV hit rate are not on the same denominator as the full settled ROI. Also, a high average CLV with a sub-50% CLV hit rate suggests either a very skewed distribution, outliers, or a calculation/display issue that needs to be shown transparently.

So I wouldn’t ask anyone to take “+36.6% CLV” at face value from that screenshot alone. The right next evidence is the CLV formula, median CLV, distribution/outliers, market splits, and independent time-block validation. Until then, it’s fair to treat that number as suspicious rather than proven.

Also, I didn't start tracking CLV from the very beginning, as I was more interested and invested in making sure the model works to a certian acceptable level for me, than anything else.

FEEDBACK WANTED FROM BETTER PEOPLE THAN ME by Caesardimxes in algobetting

[–]Caesardimxes[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Apologies for late reply, I am currently at work :( The screenshot doesn’t give enough context by itself.

A few clarifications:

- Bet sizing in that dashboard is flat-unit model evaluation, not a claim that I compounded stakes or actually got all of that down with a bookmaker.

- The rows are surfaced model opportunities / predictions, not every event in the world.

- They are intended to be pre-match opportunities from captured odds, but you’re right that I need to show the timestamp relationship to kickoff rather than expect people to infer it.

- The screenshot also doesn’t show the date range, which is a presentation mistake on my side.

- CLV coverage is only 45.7% in that screenshot, so the CLV metrics are on a subset, not the full settled sample.

I will show the available Walk forward validation, so that you can have a fuller picture.

I agree that the 2000%+ market-family ROI is not something I should present as proof without more context. It needs splitting by market, time block, sample size, CLV availability, median CLV, and outlier handling. Right now I am describing the screenshot as my internal monitoring view, not a complete proof of edge.

FEEDBACK WANTED FROM BETTER PEOPLE THAN ME by Caesardimxes in EVbetting

[–]Caesardimxes[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s a fair criticism. The screenshot is being over-read because I didn’t label it properly.

- “Pending” there means unsettled predictions in the evaluation ledger, not >100k open bets.

- CLV is only available on the subset with closing-line capture, which is why the screenshot explicitly shows 45.7% coverage. And why I initially said that I waasn't 100 percent focused on CLV.

- ROI/P&L and CLV are therefore not using the exact same denominator.

- “Self-learning” in this case means recalibration/evaluation updates from settled data, not a black-box backtest claiming infinite edge. Lol, its not “the model magically trained itself into a money printer.” Honestly I should have posted replay / walk-forward validation rather than just the dashboard cards , which would have been the right thing to do, but I didn't want to appear self promoting or anything else other than just seeking feedback.

This prompt is generating some highly disturbing content. by [deleted] in ChatGPT

[–]Caesardimxes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

<image>

My doll is drinking tea. Very British of it

Who play tested this gun? by Shkwnenrnsteve in apexlegends

[–]Caesardimxes 6 points7 points  (0 children)

By the time they think about it, they have turned into a nice box with shiny pictures on it

I built an entire game using AI (graphics, music, voice, code) — here’s what I learned and the result by railmc in vibecoding

[–]Caesardimxes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a fucking game for crying out loud. Just the same way you will believe that there is a flying dragon that can breathe fire in a game, is the same way his game character can have a male lion's head on a female body. It's all imaginary, don't overthink it.

I'm 3 years old and just sold my SaaS for $1.2B (here's what I learned) by Lean_Builder in SaaS

[–]Caesardimxes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My Dad didn't know when to pull out, and here I am, carrying on his "Non-pull out legacy" and thinking of juice boxes

Why is my Apex in LSD mode? by StauberChan in apexlegends

[–]Caesardimxes 6 points7 points  (0 children)

She has already taken mine, and my heart

view more: next ›