Interview with Edward Golden of Right Angle Sports

Most services that try to sell people picks are essentially useless; this much is obvious. It's rare to find a "tout" that actually has a legitimate and extensive history of winning, and is widely respected. Right Angle Sports is one of those rare cases, as they fit into each of those categories. And if you've seen how much the line moves after RAS releases a play on a total, you know that the market respects them as well.

With college basketball being their specialty, I thought it'd be interesting to ask Edward Golden, the owner and founder of RAS, about his service and the upcoming season. My questions are in bold, his answers follow.

How did you get started with handicapping? How long did it take you to become a winning player?

My father is a lifelong horseplayer, so I was introduced to handicapping at a young age. Being an avid sports fan, I quickly made the transition to sports handicapping. It took many years to become a winning handicapper, and to this day I continue to evolve and improve in many areas of my game.

Why did you choose to sell your picks rather than just playing them on your own? Given the less than stellar records of almost all touts, it seems like this is a rare decision for someone who wins at the rate you have.

I started the service in 1996, I was 22 and not nearly as proficient of a handicapper as my team and I have become. If I had the choice today of whether or not to start a service, I wouldn’t, but now the service is so well established that it makes sense to continue it.

Obviously you're not going to want to go into too much depth on your handicapping methods, but can you give a summary of your approach?

Our approach is to combine subjective analysis with statistical analysis. While most are able to do one or another at a high level, and even one is usually enough to be successful, we strive to do both at a high level. This more than anything I believe is what gives us a competitive edge.

The volume of your college hoops plays has increased over the past 2-3 years, while this has not been the case in CFB. Why?

At the start of the 2007-08 season, we started a separate CBB totals service, that is the main reason for the increase in play volume. The year prior we released just 11 total (over/under) plays. Over the next three years we released 144, 272 and 204 total plays. Some talented people have been added to our team over the years, which has made us better overall and allowed us to cover more teams and games.

At least in college football this season, it seems that your second half releases don't move the line nearly as much as your pregame plays. This surprised me, since the 2H limits are much lower, and the market moves a lot. Has this been the case in other years/markets, and what do you attribute the difference to?

It is a very small sample size, but we haven’t been profitable on college football second half plays (23-22) over the past two seasons. Perhaps there is more liquidity in the second half market, and not all of our followers are around for all second half plays. The college basketball second half plays generate a lot more movement (from an edge standpoint comparable to the full game releases) and we have been much more successful on them.

What do you think of using the Kelly Criterion for bet sizing? Do you personally use it? For this purpose, what do you expect your edge to be going forward (can obviously be different numbers for different markets)?

By definition it is the optimal way to size your bets in order to maximize bankroll growth, so I believe it has merit. However, it is very difficult to estimate true edge, and full Kelly carries too high of a risk of ruin, so most pros use fractional Kelly, something like 1/4 of whatever Kelly says to bet. Also, some markets such as CBB totals do not have high enough limits for some pros to execute Kelly.

With markets constantly changing, and our handicapping constantly evolving, it is very difficult to estimate what our edge will be going forward. I’ll go out on a limb and say 53-55% on CFB sides, 54-56% on CBB sides, 55-58% on CFB totals, and 56-59% on CBB totals, although over the past 4 seasons we have surpassed those ranges in 3 of the 4 subsets.

Duke is pretty much everyone's consensus #1 heading into the new season; do you agree? After that, it gets a little less clear; who else do you have in the top five?

I concur with Duke. I like what I have seen from Illinois and Ohio State so far. We focus a lot more on smaller conferences so I do not get to see the big name teams in action often.

Finally, how much Arkansas St. Red Wolves memorabilia do you own? Do you think you are their biggest fan? Top five?

LOL. I don’t own any. We have a good source who follows that team closely, so we have ended up with a lot of plays involving ASU over the years.

Thanks to Edward for taking the time out to answer my questions, both serious and nonsensical.

Vegas Watch Top 16: November (2011)

We did this about three weeks earlier than last year, so in March some of these are going to look even worse than last year's do now. Here's the summary of the 63 completed entries, using our standard 6-5-4-3 scoring:

Sean S. was the only one to leave Duke off the top line. I suspect that will work out as well for him as the two people who had Kansas as a #2 last year, but we'll see.

No surprise with Sparty at #2. I was a bit surprised that we gave KU the last #1 over KSU; I suspect the two teams' rankings the the preseason Pomeroy ratings (#3 and #8 respectively in the book) had something to do with that. There's a clear dropoff after #13, which is about where I started having trouble finding viable options myself. I was disappointed to see Gonzaga included in our ranking, but not as disappointed as the six people who had them as a #2 were after Tuesday night.

Round 2 won't be until early January, at which point we'll have actual data to base our opinions off of, so that'll be different.

Guessing the Seeds 2011: My Entry (Part 1)

I realize I should have posted this earlier, but if I was cheating I wouldn't have put Florida or Virginia Tech as high as I did. On the other hand, I'm significantly more "confident" in my Ohio St. pick than when I originally put them as the fourth #1. Anyway:

1. Duke
1. Michigan St.
1. Kansas St.
1. Ohio St.

2. Kansas
2. Pitt
2. Baylor
2. Florida

3. Syracuse
3. Villanova
3. North Carolina
3. Kentucky

4. Wisconsin
4. Virginia Tech
4. Illinois
4. Georgetown

Thanks to everyone who entered, I have to start compiling all the picks now.

2011 College Hoops Contest: Guessing the Seeds

Same format as last year, except this time we don't have the guidance of conference previews. I suspect College Basketball Prospectus 2010-11 will have just about everything you'd want to know on that front. The details of last year's contest are re-printed below; the only change is that the deadline for this round of picks will be Saturday, November 13 at noon. I'm hoping to post my picks, along with explanations/analysis, throughout next week.

The rules are very simple -- each entry will have to guess which four teams will earn #1 seeds, which teams will receive #2 seeds, on and on down to the fourth line. So your entry should look something like this, although possibly with different teams:

Entry Name: JWS

1. Emory
1. Rutgers
1. VCU
1. Richmond

2. Harvard
2. Iowa St.
2. Cleveland St.
2. NJIT

3. Ohio St.
3. Indiana
3. Texas Tech
3. Georgia Tech

4. Florida A&M
4. Georgia St.
4. Kansas
4. North Carolina

There is no tiebreaker. If two people tie, they'll both have to submit tournament brackets to determine the winner. This is a great idea, and will save me a ton of time.

The scoring will be six points for each #1 seed you get right, five for each #2, four for #3, and three for #4, for a grand total of 72 possible points. Please e-mail your entries to vegaswatch@gmail.com by noon on Saturday, November 13. Entrants will be required to submit picks once again in January, February, and March. If you forget to submit picks one month, your picks from the previous month will carry over. The four rounds of picks will be weighted at 100%, 75%, 50%, and 25%, respectively.

The winner will receive $200, unless it's The TMLJ again, in which case the money will be carried over to the baseball contest. Ask any questions you may have in the comments.