[BetfairUser]

Hi all, just wondering why some people choose to bet this way: 1 units to win 0.5, and some choose this way 1.333.... units to win 1.

What would you recommend? Which is "better" and why? Thanks.

[staf]

I've tracked my bets both ways.
Laying the juice always results in more profit, but using an equal stake always results in a better ROI.

[kpoutlaw]

Hi all, just wondering why some people choose to bet this way: 1 units to win 0.5, and some choose this way 1.333.... units to win 1.

What would you recommend? Which is "better" and why? Thanks.

A lot of people bet the first way because it's easy. Risk the same amount on each game. It's also much easier for those who use decimal odds. Risk $100 to win $85 at odds of 1.85. The second way is preferred by others because they want to win a set amount on each game - $110 to win $100.

Can't say which is better because I haven't won much money doing either, but whatever method you choose, make sure that your units risked are within reasonable limits of your bankroll.

[the_mathman]

Hi all, just wondering why some people choose to bet this way: 1 units to win 0.5, and some choose this way 1.333.... units to win 1.

What would you recommend? Which is "better" and why? Thanks.

the feel change, but on the long period, matematically, it is the same thing.

[subs]

bet to win is better because it takes into account the odds as long as u r not overbetting, IMO. if u have a 99% chance of an event happening and an event with 1% chance of happening. if u estimate the edge as equal would u really want to bet the same amount on each event?

bet more on stuff more likely to win and less on something less likely to win.

[Peregrine Stoop]

the best answer is whatever is kelly appropriate assuming you are not hitting limits
people write shorthand either cuz they are stuck in flat-unit betting (>98% of those are losing bettors) or to make it easier to follow

should be betting things like 1.38u on -104 and whatnot

[BetfairUser]

thanks everyone, am betting to win atm and will prob carry on that way

[necro]

just don't overbet and you will do fine!

[staf]

Going through my notes here's my numbers:
When laying the juice, risk is increased by 15-20%, but profits only increase by 10-15% compared to equal stakes.
Equal stakes result in an increased ROI of 5-10% over laying the juice.

[LT Profits]

Going through my notes here's my numbers:
When laying the juice, risk is increased by 15-20%, but profits only increase by 10-15% compared to equal stakes.
Equal stakes result in an increased ROI of 5-10% over laying the juice.

More PROFIT with lower ROI is better than higher ROI with less profit. More absolute MONEY is always better.

[That Foreign Guy]

I agree with you but it does depend on the risk that was taken to obtain that money. There's a lot to be said for lowering variance.

[LT Profits]

I agree with you but it does depend on the risk that was taken to obtain that money. There's a lot to be said for lowering variance.

Sticking strictly within the context of the original question though, as long as you are making +EV bets, its is better to risk 1.XXX to win 1.00 than it is to risk 1.00 to win .XXX. As long as the "to win" amount is not more than your edge %, you should not get hurt from an overall risk standpoint.

[cc440unn]

for me 1 unit = 1% of bankroll. and i bet between 0.5 to 2.5 unit on each game. depdning on the value of the lines.

and anyway I find stupid poeple who are saying there is a difference. its all depend the kind of line you re using. (american or decimal). the guys who is betting 110 to win 100 (-110) is not better than the guys who bet 100 to win 91 (1.91).

[cc440unn]

the best answer is whatever is kelly appropriate assuming you are not hitting limits
people write shorthand either cuz they are stuck in flat-unit betting (>98% of those are losing bettors) or to make it easier to follow

should be betting things like 1.38u on -104 and whatnot

Lol to this

[dogman]

This is what I decided to do this year. If I like the favorite at -150 I bet $60 to win $40 and if I like the dog, say at the same price I will bet $40 to win $60. The risk or a better name is return is $100 in both cases.

[Inspirited]

If you don't use kelly you might want to use fix profit staking .

I've noticed that it's demonstrably more difficult for neophyte handicappers to determine unbiased and consistent estimators of the likelihood of any particular bet's winning. As such, an advantage bettor may actually be giving up EV by utilizing a betting scheme such as Kelly.

If lowering the variance of your bankroll's growth is of great concern to you (and it certainly should be) and you frequently find yourself betting across a wide variety of money lines, then you might want to consider moving away from fixed unit staking towards a "fixed-profit" staking plan. Fixed-profits staking refers to betting to win a constant amount on all bets. So in other words, if a fixed-profits staker were to bet 1 unit at a line of +100, he would be betting 1.1 units on a money line of -110, and ½ of a unit on a a money line of +200.

Joseph Buchdahl in Fixed Odds Sports Betting: Statistical Forecasting and Risk Management demonstrates how a bettor engaging in fixed-profits staking can reduce both his standard deviation and his risk-of-ruin versus a flat bettor with the same average bet size.

(Fixed-profits staking, btw, is actually implicit in Kelly betting.)

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/players-ta...nd.html?slf=67

[staf]

Here's another way to bet:
http://vegaswatch.net/2008/04/flat-b...-baseball.html