Are sites like ProphetX, NoVig, and Kalshi on the roadmap to be added to the odds screens? All have golf odds now with good liquidity - it’s quite painful manually reviewing all of these sites.
Also, please an “add all” button to the prop tool (for winner w/out markets)
Thanks!
Would love to see NoVig, ProphetX, and and other exchanges like Kalshi on the odds screens. There is a ton of liquidity available in these markets and it really is painful manually looking through them. It is downright one of the best ways to get money down. It would be some serious value add to the tools at DataGolf!
2nd on the add all!
Would love this too. Please consider adding
Noted… was looking at Kalshi the other day.
For winner without markets, if you are a Scratch Plus subscriber, you can use the custom sim tool (just set the pred for the player you want to exclude to -100).
Wonder how quickly the ‘make it easy for me, the process takes a bit of work’ users become ‘the odds move too fast for me to get down’ posters.
Post of the year right here by Top20andTies
This is it exactly. It’s not a surprise that the three people advocating for this have never posted before on the forum.
Not sure why providing feedback on how to make a product better & more competitive is getting ridiculed.
Every odds screen and betting tool is adding these sites - that’s the future. Anyone making any money betting golf is limited to pennies on 90% of the books available on DG’s screen… adding the exchanges would be a net positive.
You can call me lazy, but I value my time - that’s why I pay for these types of products.
Not only have you directed every person who reads this thread to sign up to those sites, you’re also wanting to take away any sort of difficulty with regards to barrier of entry.
Every edge in betting is either diminished or outright killed by too many people getting involved. That’s the very reason you’re not getting your stakes down on conventional bookmakers.
Apart from you and your two mates who all signed up to the forum yesterday, I’d imagine that the majority of people making money on those sites through DG don’t want you giving the game away.
The reason I’m not getting down on conventional bookmakers is because they limit winners… it has nothing to do with leaking edges. And DG certainly isn’t your edge to gatekeep.
I hope everyone reading this does sign up. The more liquidity, the better; period. Does it diminish some of the edge? Maybe, but not on the aggregate. I’d rather be able to get down as much as I need on 2-4% edges than pennies on 10% edges. Some won’t be able to adapt to that but that’s okay.
FWIW, I’ve been using DG a long time just not the forum. I came on here because the betting landscape is changing rapidly. Not providing easy access to some of the most commonly used betting platforms today is outdated. I hope DG doesn’t decide to intentionally exclude these platforms from their screen, as you are suggesting, in order to somehow benefit the small subset of customers that think like you do.
I am fully onboard with more betting options, but I think the issue with how DataGolf fits in, and it’s been discussed here in the past, is in terms of keeping the data fresh. The odds screen on DG isn’t real time, and the lines for exchanges move fast, so would the effort of pulling in their data make any sense?
I’m team don’t add books but where are you seeing a “ton” of liquidity on these sites? Right now I can get down 200+ dollars on Min Woo and Wyndham on ProphetX and that’s it for above 200 unless you take really bad odds. Admittedly I haven’t been checking it during major weeks.
Between rounds the liquidity is definitely much worse, for now. Pre-tournament on Mon-Wed there was a ton of competitive liquidity on most outrights (both YES and NO sides) as well as matchups. There will likely be better liquidity tomorrow morning for r2 matchups FWIW.
Have you had success betting at 2-4%? Most long-term forum contributors have discussed wanting at least 5% for match-ups/3-balls and 10% for outrights/places.
You say that it’d be a good thing if all the DG members signed up to those sites because it’d create more liquidity, but these people are almost exclusively going to be taking the same bets as you are.
It’s not necessarily “gate-keeping” (although there have been threads discussing limiting members in return for a higher subscription fee from the existing user base).
It’s being crafty and quiet about any edges you as a user do have in order to preserve them for as long as possible.
To give a personal example, Fanteam (UK fantasy sports/bookmaker) and Jazzsports (offshore bookmaker which is pretty much bankrupt) used to copy bet365’s place prices and pay out in full on ties. I can’t have been the only one who knew about this, but nobody ever breathed a word and as such the edge lasted a lot longer.
To be clear, my hypothetical was referencing 2-4% actual returns, not the displayed DG edge.
And sure, if DG decided to change the target audience and increase the price point (substantially) in order to preserve edges and support power users then I would understand that. Maybe even support it. But the reality is that’s not where the product is positioned today at all. In current state, I think adding more outs is a net positive for the majority of users.
I understand gatekeeping an edge specific to a book or angle. This is different - we’re all customers of a product and shouldn’t want to hold its improvement back. Again, I understand that may diminish some of the edge in the short term as we all race to the liquidity - but that’s already happening. My opinion is exchanges are the next frontier in the next few years so just seems shortsighted to try and hide from that. One man’s opinion.
I think we will try to add Kalshi soon as their API is easy to use. My view of the role of our odds screen is primarily just to provide an overview of the market (as opposed to trying to add as many books as possible regardless of how similar they are to our existing books), and I think adding an exchange or two would be additive in that regard.
From what I can tell on Kalshi you can only offer prices in whole cents, meaning that the longest possible odds are 100 or 1%. So it won’t be useful for longshots in the outright markets. Not sure if the other exchanges you mentioned are like this as well.
More generally, from our perspective we aren’t particularly motivated to add new books or exchanges to the odds screen because:
I think with our current slate of books you can get a good enough sense of where the market is relative to our model for every player, and quickly figure out who might be potential value at an unlisted book / exchange. e.g. If Aldrich Potgieter is -60% EV at every book on our odds screen… no need to look him up at your book of interest.
It’s frustrating for us to go through the effort of adding a book only for it to be basically a sea of light red (i.e. no value) every week. And then even if there were quite a few outlier prices at this new book initially, I do agree with people here that adding it to our odds screen accelerates the convergence of that book’s prices to our model’s (both within a given week, and over time with their opening odds). An exchange is a bit different, as we don’t have to worry about a couple sportsbook employees waiting for our odds screen to update on Monday to adjust all their prices. So for DG users overall adding the exchange could be a net positive, but it will reduce the current edges or make them vanish more quickly, as everyone here seems to agree.
Will and I are much more invested in improving golf or model-related stuff on the site than pure betting tools. Even for people who are only interested in DG from a betting standpoint, our main value-add is the model probabilities. We could put more effort into improving our odds screens but it’s not very interesting for us to work on, and I don’t think it adds that much value to the overall product (for reasons given above), which is probably partly why we aren’t that interested in investing time into it.