Betting line

[Sertorius]

Is it just me, or is the betting line not only accurate but uncannily accurate? In my game, I think it must predict the winner better than 95% of the time. I'm playing an all-female org, so there are few well-rounded fighters at this point and maybe the fights are more predictable than most, so I'm curious about other people's experience. Looking at it almost feels like a spoiler.

[InsatiableInsanity]

Yes.

 

It predicts fights correctly when reputation, performance, aura AND name value all suggest otherwise, and the stats look fairly even.

 

Bit of a silly feature, really, and one I ignore since it's basically a spoiler.

[grits207]

I haven't noticed any amazing amount of accuracy in the betting lines. In my last event the fighter who was considered the favourite ended up losing 4 out of the 7 fights. I have also seen a fair amount of fighters who had crazy odds like -800 end up losing.

[marcopolio]

Where do you see the betting line? Obv, a silly question but fits this thread better than the other one...

[Mr T Jobs To Me]

I watch all my fights, and about 2 years in started taking notice of the money lines. I've never seen a favorite lose, even when something I think was an upset happened the money lines had the winner favored. I've stopped checking them before fights are over.

[ShaunGBD]

Where do you see the betting line? Obv, a silly question but fits this thread better than the other one...

 

In a fight where it saids VS. click that

[Derek B]

I watch quite a lot of fights... or at least skip to the results of many, and I look at a lot of the betting lines. Oddsmakers are generally capable of predicting winners more often than not and I've not seen anything to suggest that whoever provides the betting lines is any better than in real life. I've seen close odds end in the first minute and I've seen a guy at +700 steal the title in a fight they had no business being in, let alone winning.

 

The house always wins overall, but they aren't always right. Not by a long shot.

[Calinks]

I'd say they are right about 85% of the time for me.

[Sertorius]

Maybe it does vary depending on how well-rounded your roster is. Since starting this thread I've run 60 fights and the favourite has won 58 of them, with both underdogs who won less than +200.

[Adam Ryland]

It predicts fights correctly when reputation, performance, aura AND name value all suggest otherwise, and the stats look fairly even.

 

The above is totally incorrect and should be ignored. Putting aside that Performance is a measure of match quality and so has absolutely no connection whatsoever to the result - it cannot possibly "suggest" a winner - the betting lines are based almost entirely on reputation, with an alteration if there is an obvious advantage in one of the three main skills areas (striking, wrestling, submissions) - that's about all it is. It has no knowledge outside of that and certainly isn't infallible or "cheating" to "know" who will win.

[praguepride]

/nod.

 

I've seen some pretty big upsets on the betting line.

[InsatiableInsanity]

The above is totally incorrect and should be ignored. Putting aside that Performance is a measure of match quality and so has absolutely no connection whatsoever to the result - it cannot possibly "suggest" a winner - the betting lines are based almost entirely on reputation, with an alteration if there is an obvious advantage in one of the three main skills areas (striking, wrestling, submissions) - that's about all it is. It has no knowledge outside of that and certainly isn't infallible or "cheating" to "know" who will win.

 

Not sure why you're arguing with me, I'm not one to lie about this kinda stuff, but since you insist on not believing me, here was the next show I ran after reading this comment...

 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/sakimotovsdecastro.jpg

 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/gevorvsvaldez.jpg

 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/ongkatingvsfussell.jpg

 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/shinashivsyama****a.jpg

 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/oshimavshenson.jpg

 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/kudovsdacosta.jpg

 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/sakuraivsoshiro.jpg

 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/chuavsbunya.jpg

 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/endovssriyanto.jpg

 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/fezzikvssarkisian.jpg

 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/alpha1results.jpg

 

Sorry about the quality of the photos, but the game's betting line "predicted" every single fight right, and I've never noticed it get one wrong yet, and yes I am using the latest patches, etc., and Bunya had a far lower reputation than Chua (with worse striking, same wrestling, better submissions, 1-1-1 according to the fighter comparison), Heiji Endo had a lower reputation than Sriyanto (with worse striking, better wrestling, better submissions, 2-1 according to fighter comparison), Artak Gevor had a lower reputation than Joey Valdez (with worse striking, same wrestling, better submissions, 1-1-1 according to fighter comparison), Ian Fussell had a slightly lower reputation than Datuk Ong Ka Ting (with better striking, same wrestling, worse submissions, 1-1-1 according to fighter comparison) and a -630 (!!!) betting line, Keita Oshima had a lower reputation than Callum Henson (with worse striking, same wrestling, same ground skills (???), 0-1-2 according to fighter comparison), Juan de Castro had a far lower reputation than Bakin Sakamoto (with better striking, wrestling and ground 3-0, according to fighter comparison), and Shuncho Sakurai had a far lower reputation than Haranobu Oshiro (with worse striking, worse wrestling, and same ground skills (???), 0-2-1 according to fighter comparison).

 

Yet the betting line is "almost entirely based on reputation"?! I'm sorry, but that statement is rubbish, perhaps that was your intention, but that is clearly NOT the case, and if you can come up with any reason why Oshima or Sakurai were favourites based on what you just said, then you're a better man than I am. The only favourite whose skills CLEARLY and INDISPUTABLY out-ranked those of his opponents based on any kind of possible 'kayfabe' knowledge (as in, knowledge anyone in the game could have possessed given the stat clouding feature) was Juan de Castro, and possibly Heiji Endo.

 

I'm not trying to pick a fight, and I love the games, but how can I not think you're wrong when you tell me reputation is "almost entirely" the determining feature, when I just ran a show were 8 out of 10 fights suggested otherwise, and the betting line was 100 % right. As always, as I've seen.

[praguepride]

The above is totally incorrect and should be ignored. Putting aside that Performance is a measure of match quality and so has absolutely no connection whatsoever to the result - it cannot possibly "suggest" a winner - the betting lines are based almost entirely on reputation, with an alteration if there is an obvious advantage in one of the three main skills areas (striking, wrestling, submissions) - that's about all it is. It has no knowledge outside of that and certainly isn't infallible or "cheating" to "know" who will win.

\

 

I don't know how you missed this line, but there it is. I won't go through a detailed analysis of all your fighters but my guess is that the differences from reputation were based on obvious deficiencies/strengths.

 

So if you take two fighters who are exactly equal, it will rank based on reputation.

 

However, if you take one fighter who is 50% rep but is weak to takedowns vs. a figther who is only 20% rep but is phenomenal at takedowns, it will favor the takedown guy.

 

Just look in the upset thread as I can almost guarantee no upset was accurately predicted via the betting line.

 

And finally:

 

I have personally seen the betting line be wrong.

 

In fact, if you re-simmed that game, the betting line would not change but the winners/losers would. The betting line never changes between save scums but the winners and losers, the entire match does.

 

I've save scummed some games and have had fights go both ways. The betting line, however remains the same.

[InsatiableInsanity]

Since I addressed that line in my post, I don't see how I "missed it", so allow me to reiterate.

 

http://s7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/?action=view&current=sakuraivsoshiro2.jpg

 

Sakurai has better submissions (1 increment), ground control (1 increment), ground technique (1 increment), and chin (2 increments).

 

Oshiro has better boxing power (2 increments), boxing skill (1 increment), kicking power (2 increments), kicking skill (1 increment), striking elusiveness (1 increment), wrestling (1 increment), takedowns (1 increment), takedown defence (1 increment), muay thai (3 increments), ground striking (1 increment), and marketability (2 increments, but who cares?). He also had better reputation.

 

Sakurai came in a near 2-1 favourite in British terms, -280 US terms.

 

Oshiro had SIGNIFICANTLY better striking (in all departments), better wrestling in all departments, higher name value, better reputation, and worse ground skills (in all departments).

 

Oshiro's advantage in striking was GREATER than Sakurai's advantage on the ground, and Oshiro's submission defence has higher than Sakurai's submission skills anyway.

 

I'm sorry that you felt the need to ignore my post and reiterate a point I already addressed, but if you can solve this one, give yourself a deerhunter hat and a pipe because your name must be Sherlock Holmes. There is no WAY Sakurai should have been favourite, end of. I don't care that he won, and I'm all for surprises, but this is silly.

[Adam Ryland]

InsatiableInsanity: I wasn't calling you a liar, I was saying that your analysis of the situation was wrong. It's not a question of "not believing you" - I believe that you think the betting line is infallible, I just know that you are 100% wrong because I know how the code works...and infallibility isn't in. As several other posters have demonstrated, you are indisputably wrong because the betting lines are NOT always correct - that one of your shows was 100% right doesn't prove anything other than the fact that it got a very small sample correct.

 

That said, I will happily give you an exact breakdown of one of the matches that you are unhappy with to show you precisely how it works, because, as I already stated, betting lines are based on the reputation of the fighter, then adjusted by their stats. I am not going to use any of your examples for the sole reason that you are already years into the game and therefore the stats have changed - instead, kindly use the Quick Sim feature on any of the default fighters and tell me the names of the fighters and the betting line you are unhappy with.

[praguepride]

Since I addressed that line in my post, I don't see how I "missed it", so allow me to reiterate.

 

http://s7.photobucket.com/albums/y256/InsatiableInsanity/?action=view&current=sakuraivsoshiro2.jpg

 

Sakurai has better submissions (1 increment), ground control (1 increment), ground technique (1 increment), and chin (2 increments).

 

Oshiro has better boxing power (2 increments), boxing skill (1 increment), kicking power (2 increments), kicking skill (1 increment), striking elusiveness (1 increment), wrestling (1 increment), takedowns (1 increment), takedown defence (1 increment), muay thai (3 increments), ground striking (1 increment), and marketability (2 increments, but who cares?). He also had better reputation.

 

Sakurai came in a near 2-1 favourite in British terms, -280 US terms.

 

Oshiro had SIGNIFICANTLY better striking (in all departments), better wrestling in all departments, higher name value, better reputation, and worse ground skills (in all departments).

 

Oshiro's advantage in striking was GREATER than Sakurai's advantage on the ground, and Oshiro's submission defence has higher than Sakurai's submission skills anyway.

 

I'm sorry that you felt the need to ignore my post and reiterate a point I already addressed, but if you can solve this one, give yourself a deerhunter hat and a pipe because your name must be Sherlock Holmes. There is no WAY Sakurai should have been favourite, end of. I don't care that he won, and I'm all for surprises, but this is silly.

 

 

 

First of all, the betting line doesn't go line by line, it breaks it down into "striking, ground control, and submissions"

 

Sakurai has a 2 increment better chin, which could easily nullify Oshiro's striking advantage. Meanwhile, although Oshiro is better at wrestling, Sakurai is better at submissions which can be at the top OR bottom. If Oshiro ever takes it to the ground, Sakurai will have a distinct advantage.

 

Meanwhile, despite Oshiro's better overall standup game, chin is vitally important in a striker so if Sakurai, a non-striker has better chin, perhaps Oshiro is particularly vulnerable so if Oshiro keeps things standing up, Sakurai could still tap in out or down.

 

Having a superior chin and submission skills versus a striker seems to be why Sakurai is favored.

 

HOWEVER 2:1 odds are NOT that favorable odds. It's only slightly better then even odds.

 

Now, if it rated Sakurai as 5:1 (-500 or lower) THEN I'd start to question things. BUT as you've stated, the game is basically viewing Sakurai's as slightly better then even odds at beating Oshiro and I don't see anything that crazy about it's analysis.

[Adam Ryland]

Incidentally, as I was testing something else I had reason to run Marlon John vs Affonso Villar several times - John (+290) beat Villar (-370) on three out of five matches, so there's a concrete example of the betting line being incorrect for anyone who believed that it was "cheating" with regard to knowing the result.

[InsatiableInsanity]

Okay, fair enough, and thanks for the responses. I don't think the betting line is infallible, as such, but I honestly haven't seen it predict anything wrong except one fight where it said "Fighter A had a bad camp going into this fight". Literally, that was the only time. I am sure it happens more often than that though, just as I'm sure if I ran a fight over and over and over, the better fighter WOULD lose, because it's always been that way with the series, that's why it's so damn addictive.

 

You have clarified to me that I've had a bit of a run of coincidences, and my own judgement on who should have been favourite has played into it somewhat. I'm really only saying "Oh, I'm surprised he's favourite on the betting line", and then "Oh, I'm surprised he won as well", so fair's fair, gripe over

[Adam Ryland]

No problem - you do have to remember that statistically speaking there's always going to be a handful of people who will see an unusual streak of perfect predictions, it sounds like you may have just gotten that.

 

Strangely enough, I've actually had the exact opposite - I've done about eight hours of testing today, and (even before I read this topic) I was thinking that the betting lines weren't accurate enough as I saw so many upsets! So that just goes to show that the same engine can give radically different experiences to two different people.

[InsatiableInsanity]

Well that's definitely a good sign if there's that degree of variation possible. I guess it will all come back round when the computer is picking guys I wouldn't pick, and the guys I would pick are winning! It's just that it isn't happening

 

Either way, it seems like a solid sign that I probably shouldn't start gambling on real and/or simulated MMA, haha!

[jesterx7769]

Adam, is aura taken into account or just reputation then the skills?

 

I ask because I had a fighter with low rep, (I think 18%) go against a 40%, and the 18% had slightly better skills in all areas (I think only a 10-20% average, they were quite even) however the aura difference was much higher (I don't remember their exact) and the 18% surprised me with how much of a favorite he was, which I understand if Aura is taken into account or if it was just because he was better in the skill areas even if not by much.

[Sertorius]

The above is totally incorrect and should be ignored. Putting aside that Performance is a measure of match quality and so has absolutely no connection whatsoever to the result - it cannot possibly "suggest" a winner - the betting lines are based almost entirely on reputation, with an alteration if there is an obvious advantage in one of the three main skills areas (striking, wrestling, submissions) - that's about all it is. It has no knowledge outside of that and certainly isn't infallible or "cheating" to "know" who will win.

 

Wow, interesting. I would have sworn that the betting lines ignored reputation and were some sort of omniscient calculation of stats -- they even seemed to take into account when a fighter had personal problems / a bad camp / wasn't mentally prepared. It must be a combination of the particular roster I have and luck that produced unusual accuracy.

[Adam Ryland]

Adam, is aura taken into account or just reputation then the skills?

 

Aura is taken into account. It's counted as being part of the Reputation in almost all the calculations in the game.

[Eyeball]

For anyone thinking the betting lines are "cheaty" and always predict the winner - try taking one of the extremely skilled newcomers like Danny Akaboro and pitching them against one of the established but less-than-stellar fighters in the QuickMatch. I had Danny knock out Mac Fuller four out of five times doing this despite being +600 to Fuller's -800.

[Mr T Jobs To Me]

For anyone thinking the betting lines are "cheaty" and always predict the winner - try taking one of the extremely skilled newcomers like Danny Akaboro and pitching them against one of the established but less-than-stellar fighters in the QuickMatch. I had Danny knock out Mac Fuller four out of five times doing this despite being +600 to Fuller's -800.

 

There may be some "upsets" within the first couple years because people's rep is not congruent with their actual talent level, and the disparity in reputation skews the lines. However, once you get a few years in and the data's had a chance to settle a bit, the lines seem to be incredibly accurate. Like I said earlier, I took notice of them 2 years in and have yet to see a favorite lose.

 

I gave Akaboro the same 71% rep as Fuller and the line moved to -150 Akaboro, -110 Fuller. Strangely, when I moved his Aura up as well the line stayed exactly the same. Now the fights went 1-1, but since both were still considered a favorite, that doesn't really prove too much.

 

I'd therefore pose that nearly all of the upsets people have been seeing are a result of reputation gaps. I'd think if anyone wants to do an extensive test on this you could clone the default, set all reps (and auras, if they really do make a difference) to 0 and look for any major upsets there.