How ClutchTip Was Built

ClutchTip didn't start as a business idea. It started as a pattern recognition problem that I couldn't stop thinking about.

The Background

I've always had an obsession with pattern recognition. In 2015, I wrote a paper predicting economic patterns that, looking back, accurately anticipated several major market movements including aspects of the GFC aftermath.

When I started applying the same analytical approach to sports data, I noticed something: prediction markets are inefficient in predictable ways. Not always, not dramatically, but consistently enough that a systematic approach could find edges.

The Build

What started as a simple statistical model evolved into something far more sophisticated through years of iteration. The current system incorporates bespoke features developed through pattern recognition analysis - identifying edges in the data that standard approaches miss.

We've refined these proprietary inputs across thousands of historical games, continuously testing and improving. The specifics of what makes our model different remain confidential - that's our competitive edge - but we're committed to full transparency on results.

The system continues to evolve. We're always working to improve overall accuracy to the highest possible level, adding new features and refining existing ones based on what the data tells us.

Why Go Public?

I could have kept this to myself. But I wanted to build something that forced accountability. When every prediction is public, tracked, and timestamped, there's nowhere to hide. That transparency is what separates ClutchTip from the tout services that cherry-pick their correct calls and bury their misses.

This blog will document the journey - the correct predictions, the incorrect ones, and the lessons learned from both.

Our Prediction Methodology

Transparency means explaining not just what we predict, but how. Here's the high-level approach without giving away the secret sauce.

Data Inputs

The model processes extensive data streams across multiple categories - team metrics, player availability, situational context, and market indicators. Beyond standard statistics, we've developed bespoke features through pattern recognition analysis refined across thousands of historical games.

These proprietary inputs identify edges that traditional analysis misses. We don't publish the specifics of what makes our model different - that's our competitive advantage - but we're fully transparent about the results it produces.

Model Architecture

We use an ensemble approach combining multiple analytical methods, weighted dynamically based on game context. The system continues to evolve as we identify new patterns and refine existing features to improve accuracy.

What We DON'T Do

Equally important is understanding our limitations:

  • We don't predict injuries - all picks are pre-game only
  • We don't adjust for mid-game events - lineup changes, ejections, coach decisions
  • We don't claim certainty - every pick has a confidence level for a reason
  • We don't reveal proprietary features - our edge stays confidential

Backtest vs Live

We show both metrics separately because they're fundamentally different. Backtest accuracy (94%) reflects how well the model fits historical data. Live accuracy (72%) reflects real-world performance on unseen games. The gap between them is normal and expected - any service showing only backtest numbers is misleading you.

Why We Show Every Miss

Most prediction services hide their misses. We do the opposite - and here's why.

The Tout Problem

The sports prediction "tipster" industry is plagued by dishonesty. Services claim 80%+ accuracy while conveniently forgetting to mention incorrect streaks. They screenshot correct calls and delete incorrect tweets. They sell "locks" that somehow always need yesterday's miss explained away.

Our Approach

Every prediction we make is:

  • Timestamped before game time
  • Publicly visible on our results page
  • Permanently recorded - we never delete incorrect predictions
  • Included in our stats - our accuracy is real, not cherry-picked

Incorrect Predictions Are Information

When we're wrong, we analyse why. Was it bad luck (a last-second shot, a questionable call)? Or was it a model blindspot we need to address? This blog documents both - because incorrect predictions are often more instructive than correct ones.

If you're evaluating prediction services, ask yourself: do they show their full record? If not, why not?

Daily Recap: January 8, 2025

4-1
Record
80%
Accuracy
+2.8u
Units
5
Streak

Pick Breakdown

Celtics -6.5 vs Heat (W by 12)
Model confidence 78%. Our proprietary matchup analysis favoured Boston in this spot.
Lakers vs Suns Over 228.5 (Hit 241)
Tempo indicators aligned with the over. Game flow matched our projections.
Nuggets -3.5 vs Mavericks (W by 7)
Home court factors played out as the model expected.
Warriors +2.5 vs Kings (W by 4)
Market undervalued key situational factors our model identified.
Thunder -9.5 vs Jazz (L by 3)
Prediction didn't hold. Reviewing fatigue weighting for future refinement.

📝 Lesson Learned

Identified an area for model refinement on schedule-related factors. Adjustments being tested for future iterations.

Daily Recap: January 7, 2025

5-1
Record
83%
Accuracy
+3.6u
Units
4
Streak

Strong day across the board. The model's handling of rest advantages proved valuable with three of our correct predictions coming from well-rested home teams.

📝 Key Takeaway

Situational factors continue to be one of our strongest edge indicators. Model performed well in spots where multiple proprietary features aligned.

SAM

SAM

Sports Analytics Machine

SAM
G'day! I'm SAM, ClutchTip's AI assistant. Ask me about our predictions, methodology, subscription plans, or anything about how ClutchTip works. 🏀