[Cheme82]

What do you sharps consider a solid ROI? How does that % have to change depending on the volume you bet.

Is a 5% ROI on a model that produces 2,000 plays a year better or worse than a model that produces only 500 plays but at 25% ROI

I know that 25% of 500 is > than 5% of 2,000

But since the 5% model produces plays more often, your bankroll will grow more often than the 25% model so you average bet would get bigger faster.

Any thoughts are appreciated.

[HeeeHAWWWW]

500 plays at 25%? Start with $50, stake 1/3 kelly, and the median outcome is almost $1 million. Not terribly plausible :-)

[Cheme82]

I was throwing numbers out there to get an idea of what was considered respectable amongst people that do (and have been doing) this successfully.

The 25% was to contrast a high-return model with few plays, to a more modest one that produces many more plays. I'm not claiming to have either one, just wondering.

[Justin7]

If you can hold 2% on 10,000 plays at close to -110, you are going to make a lot of money.

[subs]

i run at < 0.7% with lots of swings and roundabouts, but i'm not a sharp so prolly not v helpful

[Cheme82]

After how many plays would you say you have enough data to have confidence in the
model? I made another thread and apparently somewhere along 500 wasn't even close.

[Justin7]

If you are winning after 500 plays, and more than half the plays are moving your way by close, you're going to keep winning unless the market improves.

[Cheme82]

That's the thing, I didn't track closers. But I started now, how many do you think I need to get to? 300? Also, I read somewhere you had a good conversion between price difference at closing and perceived edge.

[Duff85]

Mainly as long as your beating the closer on say around 70% of your plays your golden. (Probs get roasted there because that's based only off how often i've been beating the closer)

It largely depends on how much money you can get into play. I'd suggest the one that allows you to make more plays, will allow to bet smaller - thus flying under the radar for longer and more safely managing your bankroll.

[tukkk]

Mainly as long as your beating the closer on say around 70% of your plays your golden. (Probs get roasted there because that's based only off how often i've been beating the closer)

pretty sure you are referring to closer with vig added

big markets or props?

[Cheme82]

Beating the no-vig line 70% of the time is like owning a money-printing machine.

[HeeeHAWWWW]

I was throwing numbers out there to get an idea of what was considered respectable amongst people that do (and have been doing) this successfully.

The 25% was to contrast a high-return model with few plays, to a more modest one that produces many more plays. I'm not claiming to have either one, just wondering.

Sorry, wasn't meaning to sound so sarcastic.

Basically the point I should have made was that RoI semi-compounds, so 25% does a bazillion times better than 5% over a lot of plays.

Even at a lower RoI it makes a big difference. Starting with $1k, 500 plays, 1/3 kelly, median for different RoIs....

5% $1467
6% $1737
7% $2121
8% $2672
9% $3474
10% $4659


The larger the number of plays, the more it balloons away with higher RoI. At 1000 rather than 500 plays, 10% has 10x the bankroll outcome of 5%.

[Duff85]

pretty sure you are referring to closer with vig added

big markets or props?

No vig closer obv. Big markets.

[subs]

Beating the no-vig line 70% of the time is like owning a money-printing machine.

not necessarily making a boatload all the time, what if u r only beating them in small markets and by small amounts.

i think Duff is doing well tho.

Well done mate

[tukkk]

No vig closer obv. Big markets.

Seriously? What sport & volume if i may ask?

FYI im beating no-vig closer around 64% with 1000 bets/year in big markets and 70% seems too epic (when i try to maximize monetary gain)

edit : i mean i could do 70%, but i would have to take out like bottom 30% of my bets which would mean much smaller profit ... the point is : can you do 70% and be in harmony or just theoretically

[Sawyer]

ROI is not so important. Most important stat in sports betting is Total Units Won. WE PAY THE BILLS WITH TOTAL UNITS WON, NOT YIELD.

A capper with %4 roi may make more money then a capper with %10 roi. Volume is also important. You may be a sniper bettor (selectivity), who likes picking his spots and come up with 30-40 picks/month. You may have a great yield, a great win rate but still, a handicapper with a smaller roi may make profit. Imagine a handicapper who has 200-300 picks/month..

[rsigley]

so what you're saying is the only thing that matters is ROI*amount wagered?

[cyberbabble]

rsigley -

Have you ever looked at Harville - Dr. Z for NASCAR analysis?

[Duff85]

Seriously? What sport & volume if i may ask?

FYI im beating no-vig closer around 64% with 1000 bets/year in big markets and 70% seems too epic (when i try to maximize monetary gain)

edit : i mean i could do 70%, but i would have to take out like bottom 30% of my bets which would mean much smaller profit ... the point is : can you do 70% and be in harmony or just theoretically

Fair number of the Euro Soccer leagues, all the American sports (excluding baseball), other major worldwide soccer leagues, Cricket, Australian sports, Rugby League and Union, Euro Basketball, Tennis and Golf. On track to make around 5,000 bets this year - although have not been tracking the closer since April. Had 4,000 bets tracked beating the no-vig closer at 69.5%.

I agree with you - do whatever it is that can get the highest volume of +ev plays as possible. Good money in = profit out.

Hardest thing my betting partner and I have found is staying in the game at various places.