[Albert Pujols]

What is your rate of return on each bet if you hit 55% at -110 and 55% at -105?

Going to bed and will award points tomorrow.

[theballsflop]

Rate of Return for 55% hit rate @ -110 = -4.091%

Rate of Return for 55% hit rate @ -105 = 2.619%

Rate of Return for both concurrently = -1.472%

[Albert Pujols]

Zero correct answers so far.

[Mitchell88]

doesn't matter we don't win

[Albert Pujols]

doesn't matter we don't win

I think these numbers are key, because nobody bothers to do them and see just how profitable 55% with discipline can be.

[Living The Dream]

+2.5%

[NunyaBidness]

@ -110 0.454545%
@ -105 2.5%

[Mitchell88]

so every 100 you get 112.50 back

[Russian Rocket]

55% at -110 ROI=5%
55% at -105 ROI=5.238%

[Albert Pujols]

Leaving for the day. Award still open.

[chachi]

assuming a fixed unit size of course ...

@ -110 on 100 bets ... lose 45 units on 45 losses, win 50 units on 55 wins, net +5, 5% return average over time

@ -105 on 100 bets ... lose 45 units, win 52.38 units, net +7.38, 7.4% return average over time

edit - fixed

[Albert Pujols]

From an investment standpoint, a 7.38% gain on every bet is astounding. All you have to do is hit 55%, fellas.

[James Marques]

assuming a fixed unit size of course ...

@ -110 on 100 bets ... lose 45 units on 45 losses, win 50 units on 55 wins, net +5, half a unit return average over time

@ -105 on 100 bets ... lose 45 units, win 52.38 units, net +7.38, roughly 3/4 unit return average over time

Right, but isn't it just 5% at -110, and 7.38% at -105? Just divide each return by 100, right?

[Albert Pujols]

Right, but isn't it just 5% at -110, and 7.38% at -105? Just divide each return by 100, right?

Yes.

[chachi]

yeah I got the totals right and then ****** up when stating the average ...

on average make a nickel or make 7.4 cents per dollar or 5%/7.4%

[Russian Rocket]

7.38% on 5 cent juice

fun formula that everyone should try to apply in real life

[pavyracer]

When you pick winners you don't pay juice.

[James Marques]

When you pick winners you don't pay juice.

I prefer: "It's not whether you win or lose, but whether or not you had a good bet."

[chachi]

Ill give you +500 on all the losing props which should be -110 then that you want ...

[James Marques]

Ill give you +500 on all the losing props which should be -110 then that you want ...

How do you know they're losing props? If you haven't played the game yet, shouldn't they all be 50/50? So yes, I'll take your +500 on props when the market rate is -110. You win at gambling by finding value in the bets you make. That is the only way you'll ever win with any consistency. "Picking winners" is the quickest way to the poor house. It's called variance. If you take Chicago at +3, but the line moves to +3.5 later on, you've made a bad bet. Over time, if this continues to happen to you, you'll lose. You might get lucky and win, but ultimately variance will kill you.

[Mitchell88]

new contest, someone figure out how to get Pujos banned for his retared math shit, 300 pts

[Russian Rocket]

new contest, someone figure out how to get Pujos banned for his retared math shit, 300 pts

I thought it was a great question

[Mitchell88]

to many variables

[chachi]

How do you know they're losing props? If you haven't played the game yet, shouldn't they all be 50/50? So yes, I'll take your +500 on props when the market rate is -110. You win at gambling by finding value in the bets you make. That is the only way you'll ever win with any consistency. "Picking winners" is the quickest way to the poor house. It's called variance. If you take Chicago at +3, but the line moves to +3.5 later on, you've made a bad bet. Over time, if this continues to happen to you, you'll lose. You might get lucky and win, but ultimately variance will kill you.

Was tongue-in-cheek humor and was referring to after the fact ...

Point was I'd prefer getting on more winners late and being forced to take bad prices, than to get on at a really good price and lose

[James Marques]

Was tongue-in-cheek humor and was referring to after the fact ...

I know. I was trying to be equally tongue-in-cheek.

Point was I'd prefer getting on more winners late and being forced to take bad prices, than to get on at a really good price and lose

Wouldn't we all? But betting isn't like Jeopardy. We don't start with the answer. We start with the question. Winning a game/beating a spread/over or under is a dependent variable. We can't control that. The only thing we can control is the independent variable. In this case, that would be the spread/total/ML we get for whichever outcome we perceive to be of value. Think about the guys that got Auburn at 1000:1 to win the national title (CFB) before the season started. That's an awesome bet, tons of value! Does it suck they lost? Of course, but you could have easily hedged that bet against FSU moneyline and guaranteed yourself huge +EV. My point really is that people just spend too much time worrying about picking winners and very little time worrying about the costs of doing business.

[ChuckyTheGoat]

7.38% on 5 cent juice

fun formula that everyone should try to apply in real life

Bingo. Rocket is a winner

[Russian Rocket]

Bingo. Rocket is a winner

I made a mistake on a 5 cent line when I was calculating the profit in my first post...got the 10 cent line correct

[Albert Pujols]

When you pick winners you don't pay juice.

Winners pay vig on every bet. Point is that if you lay -105 you get 50% more profit on every bet if you are a winner.

[Albert Pujols]

Yeah, move a thread to the points forum because someone might learn something about betting. Can't have that in player's talk.

[chachi]

I know. I was trying to be equally tongue-in-cheek.



Wouldn't we all? But betting isn't like Jeopardy. We don't start with the answer. We start with the question. Winning a game/beating a spread/over or under is a dependent variable. We can't control that. The only thing we can control is the independent variable. In this case, that would be the spread/total/ML we get for whichever outcome we perceive to be of value. Think about the guys that got Auburn at 1000:1 to win the national title (CFB) before the season started. That's an awesome bet, tons of value! Does it suck they lost? Of course, but you could have easily hedged that bet against FSU moneyline and guaranteed yourself huge +EV. My point really is that people just spend too much time worrying about picking winners and very little time worrying about the costs of doing business.

Well, about 90% of my wagering is edge-based or deliberate, where I'd agree with you on line shopping. The remainder, which I should probably curtail, is spur-of-the-moment or random late-news based and then I'm restricted to phone accts with balances or other considerations and then I don't sweat it so much

[pavyracer]

Yeah, move a thread to the points forum because someone might learn something about betting. Can't have that in player's talk.

But they leave jjgold's thread about Dodgers being a cash cow..lol