Joe Peta

Spring '95. Tiger, still largely unknown outside golf circles, is in a study hall with many Stanford athletes. They exchange Spring Break destinations. Tiger: "Going to the Masters" Greg Comella (Stanford RB): "That's the toughest tix in sports! How?" Tiger: "I'm playing."

@LouStagner I like it. I’d also suggest something similar to speed chess. 36-hole event where every round must be played in say, 3 hours.

Golf needs something like the 24 Hours at Le Mans. A grueling endurance event. 36 holes per day for seven straight days. I'd watch that. Would you?

@coopmavs Denzel Clarke requests a recount. x.com/MLBNetwork/sta…

Hate to judge em but has to be in the top 3 along with Jim Edmonds catch with the Angels vs Kansas City. and, of course Willie Mays in the 1954 World Series

@GUP_GC My favorite memory of the Giants World Series runs was Bay Area native and life-long fan, Steve Perry, leading the crowd in the 7th inning sing along to that song (if the Giants were losing.) youtube.com/watch?v=y2N_7x…

Top 5 🐐 song/performance

@samtb23 @RufusPeabody @roundrobin42 You'd be very, very wrong. Hey, that's what makes markets -- a difference in beliefs.

@MagicRatSF @RufusPeabody @roundrobin42 I know how exchanges work. How often is that scenario you described actually happening? I'd guess very little

@RufusPeabody Our latest discussion actually builds on a very cogent point you made to @roundrobin42 about PMs/exchanges wanting their patrons to "lose slow." Building on that, when there is patron-to-patron(*) matching, no matter who wins, the money never leaves the exchange ecosystem. So, absent withdrawls, it will always be recycled, to the fee-collecting exchange's benefit. This results is an enormous difference in exchange incentives and post-betting behavior. As you know, the traditional bookmaker must now attempt to get the losing patron to reup, which results in all sorts of predatory behavior. It's a never ending marketing push to extract more deposits. The exchange would like the loser to reup, of course, but it's not nearly as crucial -- because the funds are still in the exchange ecosystem. And if they do reup, unlike the traditionals, the collective customer wallet has actually grown! It's a massively superior long-term business model, to my eye, for every stakeholder. (*) My point to Issac and others trying to force PM to DK/FD comparisons, is that there are a lot more patron-to-patron matches than assumed. That has a huge effect on the business model. And, from being on the inside of an exchange, I believe there's an optimal percentage of each matching basket (MM-to-MM, patron-MM and patron-to-patron) and the best PMs will figure that out (instead of trying, to say, scalp $HOOD patrons for all they can.

That's two different aspects of the business. From a displayed liquidity standpoint, it's indisputable that exchanges need professional (institutional) market makers to attract patrons, and by extension to exist. As I like to think of it, displayed liquidity is the light the attracts moths. But that's not execution. Take a look at ATH@PHI right now on an exchange, say Novig. The inside market is +117/-121. Let's assume those are institutions offering. (Looking at the depth of the market, it's more likely "they" are at +116/-122, but whatever.) If an impatient, "buy it now" bettor pays -121 for the Phils, that's a patron-to-MM match. But if a patient bettor puts out a -117 offer to the market on the Phils, then the next Athletics bettor that pays +117 will be matching patron-to-patron. The market maker attracted the moths with displayed liquidity, but the moths mated on their own. Exchanges want patron-to-patron matches for a variety of reasons, but they also want MMs. It's a bit of an art to create -- or limit -- the incentives to optimize the mix of business. (MM to MM matches have some value too, incidentally.)

@MagicRatSF @RufusPeabody @roundrobin42 Every exchange ever has talked about needing market makers to provide liquidity. To provide liquidity you need a large bankroll. Regular patrons don't have that and if they do they aren't seeding markets. It's always a market maker on the other side youtu.be/SbIkdDzYIr0?si…

@samtb23 @RufusPeabody @roundrobin42 What evidence? I've never seen data published showing the three potential buckets (MM-MM, MM-patron, patron-patron) from an exchange. Can you point me to something? I've love to see. (The assumption from outsiders is it's all patron-to-scary "sharp" MM, but that's not data.)

@MagicRatSF @RufusPeabody @roundrobin42 you claim flies in the face of all other evidence and anecdata about exchanges

@samtb23 @RufusPeabody @roundrobin42 I have years of data and first-hand observation advising a sweepstakes exchange. I don't cite percentages because that's a "secret sauce" at each operator.

@MagicRatSF @RufusPeabody @roundrobin42 Do you have evidence of this? "is that there are a lot more patron-to-patron matches than assumed"

@RufusPeabody @adamlevitan Correct. Those are the patient patrons, and the best ones have some sort of originating skills. I’m defining institutional market makers as the big, bad boogeyman, commentators (many with agendas) reference like SIG, Jane st, Jump etc.

@MagicRatSF @adamlevitan Also how do you define MM? There are lots of sharp bettors doing opinionated market making that don’t fall under “institutional market maker”

Adam, have you (or anyone who writes like they are the Woodward and Bernsteins of this beat) ever asked anyone who runs a PM or sweepstakes exchange what percent of matched bets fall into the following three buckets: Patron to Institutional MM Patron to Patron MM to MM Then follow that question with, "what's the optimal mix?" If you had, you'd have a much more nuanced take, and for bloggers like @roundrobin42 a more insightful understanding of an exchange's business model vs a traditional bookmaker.

No limiting is huge for the sophisticated bettor such as yourself, smaller spreads create value for everyone as does improved price discovery. But regardless of the bettor/counterparty, each transaction can be boiled down to this: it's a transfer of value from the impatient to the patient. And there are far more patron-to-patron matches than is assumed. To that end, MMs aren't making money posting $5k two-sided markets on spreads and totals because they are "sharp"; they are making money because they are collecting "buy it now"/impatient tolls and doing it en masse. RFP's for SGPs or other exotics are a different conversation, and if that's what your first post was getting at, fair enough.

Yeah I'm not sure it really matters. I like PMs because you won't get limited, and can find good prices. It's great. I don't really care who my counterparty is. I simply disagree with the narrative that it's softer on PMs because the market makers there aren't "sportsbooks". The market makers on PMs are often sharper.

@SlangsOnSports Someone once told me . . . Birthdays matter. 😉

😭😭😭 thank you!!

@MurgesJohn You make a great point and I should be careful making a mid-game note like that. I meant only to hat tip the research that got us here.

@MagicRatSF Thank you JP! Let’s bring it home!! 🤝

He didn’t even last 4 full innings!! I hinted we were on the Cubs -135

Might try running a marathon now that I know it can be done in less than two hours

@CPowers14 It’s been years since I recorded the gradual detail of each tournament and golfer but didn’t he do a very similar thing about five, six years ago — followed by a severe drop off in performance?

I always say one thing you have to do when you are playing some of the best golf of your life at the age of 45 and you have a prime opportunity to win an elusive second major two weeks from now at a course you've won at before is to start playing new clubs made by a car brand

Dude, citing World Series MVPs as a metric for career greatness undermines every thing you aspire to be regarding “baseball education.” Sandy Koufax had a great, nay exceptional, six-year career peak. That’s it. The other six years are pedestrian — below average; above replacement. That is not close, at all, to LHP Mount Rushmore status.

Not sure how that line of thinking works in this situation when we are talking about pitching accolades. Probably because it doesn’t work. Koufax has the postseason dominance (2 MVPs) that only Bob Gibson can match. He has the regular season dominance (3 triple crowns) that only Walter Johnson and Grover Alexander can match. All were righties btw. The combination of both, as a lefty, is what makes him special and deserving of a place here. I would encourage some education on baseball history before you come swinging.

Warren Spahn was born on this day in 1921. One of the four faces on Left-Handed Pitcher Rushmore

@podoffame @HughJupside @baseball_ref “Now do . . “ I don’t think that phrase, idiomatically, means what you think it means. Boxer gets the crap beat out of him. Mutters to the victor “Now do arm wrestling.” Stop digging.

@HughJupside @baseball_ref Now do triple crowns.

@BrendanPorath . . . Half an hour later, I got this detailed picture. 🤣🤣🤣 So I think your sentiment checks out.

@BrendanPorath When my daughter did an exchange program in Scotland, she sent me this text (“At golf place” still smh) and a half-hearted picture leaning out a car window. But then . . .

It may be that the best golf course in the world resides in St. Andrews, but I know the best ice cream shop in the world does.