Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Economist says Rose's insider info didn't produce winning wagers

  1. #1
    RZ Chamber of Commerce Unassisted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    13,463

    Economist says Rose's insider info didn't produce winning wagers

    http://www.nysun.com/blogs/economics...better-in.html

    Why Pete Rose Didn't Fare Better in His Bets

    Posted by Colin Gustafson
    Mon, 10 Mar 2008 at 10:17 AM


    Insider knowledge doesn't always bring a higher payoff — especially when inside experts try to cheat in a market full of other, well-informed participants.

    That's the conclusion of a paper written by a Rutgers University economist, Douglas Coate, and posted yesterday on the Marginal Utility blog
    (http://atbozzo.blogspot.com).

    Examining the baseball bets of a disgraced former Cincinnati Reds manager, Pete Rose, Mr. Coate found that Mr. Rose lost $47,200 on bad wagers on the performance of dozens of Major League Baseball teams in April-May 1987. More than $4,000 of those losses were from bad bets on his own team.

    So how could this major league insider with nearly three decades of experience in baseball lose so much money to gamblers who had never played the sport professionally, and had no access to any of the league's players or coaches?

    Mr. Coate suggests that Mr. Rose, even as a baseball insider, did not possess as significant an informational advantage as he might have thought. In fact, the famed athlete probably failed as a gambler because he was participating in an "informational-efficient market," where other gamblers knew as much as he did about teams' strengths and weaknesses.

    Mr. Rose's expertise was not an "advantage when betting on his own team, on other teams in his league that he studied and competed against, or on teams in the other leagues," the author writes.

    That, or he was just unlucky: In some cases, Mr. Rose "was a better gambler when he didn't have access to information," the blogger behind Marginal Utility, Kenneth Houghton, writes.

    Whatever the case, Mr. Rose's losses in the betting market provide a lesson for participants in the financial markets, Mr. Coates suggests. "The team sports betting markets provide another test of how well markets process information," the economist writes.

    "Markets are efficient if the prices of the individual stock at any moment in time reflect all that is known by market participants."
    /r/reds

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Vampire Weekend @Bernie's camisadelgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    11,491

    Re: Economist says Rose's insider info didn't produce winning wagers

    No harm, no foul. Let's go ahead and get this part of the discussion out of the way . . .

    Let him in the Hall!

  4. #3
    Haunted by walks
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    6,732

    Re: Economist says Rose's insider info didn't produce winning wagers

    I've said this before. You're not betting on the game. You're betting on the bookie's game, and he's using your money.

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,758

    Re: Economist says Rose's insider info didn't produce winning wagers

    Quote Originally Posted by camisadelgolf View Post
    No harm, no foul. Let's go ahead and get this part of the discussion out of the way . . .

    Let him in the Hall!
    No one ever suggested that him profiting from gambling was ever at issue or even relevent. And it wasn't and isn't.

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    princeton, nj
    Posts
    9,482

    Re: Economist says Rose's insider info didn't produce winning wagers

    Pete's a loser?


  7. #6
    Passion for the game Team Clark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Posts
    8,105

    Re: Economist says Rose's insider info didn't produce winning wagers

    Now that this is all cleared up..... When is he eligible for the Hall?
    It's absolutely pathetic that people can't have an opinion from actually watching games and supplementing that with stats. If you voice an opinion that doesn't fit into a black/white box you will get completely misrepresented and basically called a tobacco chewing traditionalist...
    Cedric 3/24/08

  8. #7
    Member redsrule2500's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    3,217

    Re: Economist says Rose's insider info didn't produce winning wagers

    My take on the Pete thing is that if Barry and steroid friends are allowed in baseball, so should he. They disgrace the game and it affects their play.

    I would be fine with accepting Pete's banishment if Barry and friends were also banished.
    redsrule2500
    Go Reds!
    Baseball Bliss
    Im a normal guy blessed with the ability to hit a baseball. - Sean Casey


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25