 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
What's an acceptable % of BR
to have pending at the same time? If it matters, assume your wagers are achieving at least moderate success vs the closing number. Also assume 90% of wagers are 2 to 3% with an occasional 5%.
What's a fair range of percentage to have out on any particular day?
15-20%.
But if you're having success with higher rates out there then I would think that's ok.
If you are having moderate success with beating closers and showing a profit long term, then any amount is acceptable. This borders more to the psychological aspect of people in general and the stress element being too high with a whole bankroll at risk (if you do indeed bet upwards of 5% sometimes), but as long as you have an edge on each of those wagers, growth is growth. Numbers don't lie.
People have always said "never have more than a few wagers a day", but the only reason this is said is because these people lose long term and/or risk too much per wager. If you feel your risk of ruin for your bankroll is acceptable according to your hypothetical edge and average wager size, I'd say feel free to hit any/every line that you believe is off, even if this puts your whole bankroll at risk. From mid-week to Saturday during peak football season, when it overlaps with hockey+basketball (as it is now), I have approx. 50% of my bankroll at risk on that given Saturday (1% per wager with 50 or so wagers). That's not including scalps.
Last edited by curinator; 11-01-09 at 01:20 AM. Reason: Spelling
Thanks for the responses.
Curinator that was particularly helpful. I have not been a successful gambler in the past, but am beginning to understand a way to make money. Instead of focusing on which teams to play I'm concerning myself mainly with which lines to play and why. I wanted confirmation that it's OK to keep betting when opportunities present themselves, regardless of how much is already out at the time.
I think I should consider lowering my standard wager amount though. One percent huh?
I have had a good percentage of my br in play at any given time. I've had over 60% in play...... I know people give a percentage but if they are all +EV bets the more the merrier.
20four7 good call bro
Keeping in mind that this assumes you are an advantage player looking to pull down real money...
If you are taking advantage of arbitrage opportunities, and your bankroll is small (which means you don't move the market or want to exceed limits) then it is a myth to think that you should limit yourself to anything less than 100% of your bankroll in play at one time, although with no arbitrage at all you should keep some amount in reserve and that's generally a good idea anyway in case something come up. With all the props and alternate lines and other opportunities out there, there is no excuse for money sitting idle over a football weekend if you're a true advantage player. Many times I've waited for money to come back so I could put it into play again on the next set of games.
There are three keys to this. One, you have to make sure your money is in play in such a way that a true disaster is either impossible or nearly impossible, and two you have to realize that if disaster does strike and you lose it all one day, you don't have infinite negative utility. Three, this is only true if you're in it to win it rather than for the entertainment or educational value; if you're not trying to make a living you don't need to be anything like this aggressive.
Yes, I realize this is a radical suggestion, but if you're trying to make a living off a limited bankroll you need to make the most of your opportunities and most strategies posted for doing so make that either impossible or require some absurd winning percentage to do so.
I have 100% in play every single Saturday at 2.5% per bet.
If you are arbing and have less than 80% of the BR in play your an idiot. If your not arbing, and strictly playing +ev lines then having the most of your BR in play as possible is always good. But you have to make sure your playing +ev...... If you have a large bankroll and will be limited you HAVE to play some 0ev and some -ev lines to keep them from booting ya.
Anywhere from 0-100%.
ThisOriginally Posted by MonkeyF0cker
1% of your BR maximum for each bet or no more than 10% per interval (day, session, simul bets, etc) until you can learn to track your win% over time and accurately place wagers with that win %.
Once you can do this (don't worry, 99.9% of folks never get this right), then you can think about Kelly Criterion.
How do I calculate percentages if I am trying to middle NBA lines? For instance today I have played both sides of 4 NBA totals with at least a full 3 point middle on all. These will most likely (and at worst) end in a 50% strike rate so do you just throw those opportunities out of any overall percentage calculation?
One other question while we are drifting off subject:
If a half point equals 10 cents, and one can consistently average beating the closing number on their wagers by (for argument's sake) 0.5 points, does that effectively mean they are getting and average of -120 valued bets for the cost of -110?
Related question: Which book's closing number would be the sharpest to use when figuring the above? I have been using Pinny for this reference.
Thanks durito. That's a nice tool that I didn't even know existed.
So today I took MIN when they hit +9.5 (-110) at my book. They are now at +8 almost everywhere. If I'm using that calculator correctly it seems that my line should cost -147.5 now. Does that sound right?
I'm not using any handicapping anymore. I'm simply trying to beat the lines. Common sense tells me that if I can continually get lines at -110 that should be at least -120 at tip, then this should be profitable in the long run.
Another example: I took HOU/UTA under 206, then took the over 202.5. Is it smart to do this whenever I have the opportunity? Will this type of wagering be profitable over the long haul?
Am I headed down a good path here or no?
Input -110 into the Dog price @ +9.5 then select another input box and the "dog edge %" will change from -4.55% to +8.55%.
Aha. Got it byron. Thanks.
I am not mathematically inclined, but even I know if I can consistently get + on that number then I should be profitable.
Still wondering if my middling strategy on totals is a good idea or not. I'm sure it is a good idea with certain parameters. I guess what I want to know is how many points I should look for minimum before taking the other side. Same with point spreads on basketball. What size middle should I strive for to be profitable?
While I have smart people answering my questions, one more very important one. If you get stuck on a bad number (I misread two today - a total and a spread - that have moved 1.5 points against), is it ever wise to get off of that side by buying the other end (assuming you are not leaving yourself open for a reverse middle). Or should you just eat it and hope for the best?
Last edited by jellobiafra; 11-02-09 at 03:14 PM.
a -120/100 close implies a 52.2% chance of winning for the favorite which is not profitable at -110 odds.
Click the odds you get into the calculator to see your edge (positive or negative). All 1/2 pts are not equal, especially not in football.
If you're limiting yourself to 1% of BR on any given thing and 10% in play, might as well keep the bulk of your BR in the bank, cause at least there it will earn some interest while it's not being used.
Middling reduces expected growth on +EV wagers unless the middle itself is +EV. So unless you find an off number or anticipate a bottom and subsequent bounce on an efficient market, you shouldn't middle. And even then, full middles aren't likely to be optimal for growth.
This, as well as the second question, has already been well-addressed in this thread by Ganch:
http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/handicappe...readsheet.html
Go straight to Kelly, do not pass GO...and you will be a broken man (woman, tranny?) by mid-season...
Last edited by Flying Dutchman; 11-03-09 at 07:13 PM. Reason: add on...
Only if you're not doing something right...
Monkey hit it on the head. Unless you can get +EV on both sides of the wager, middles will limit your long term growth. It's much easier just to time your first wager and get that at +EV than to try and time both sides. This also goes for buybacks. If the line goes against the line you initially got, there is no point in buying it back unless you literally place the second wager right when the market starts moving against your initial wager, and only then if you can find a line at a book that hasn't reacted as quickly. To sum it up, middles and buybacks are generally a bad idea, especially for anyone who doesn't have time to watch the market for a good amount of time each day.
Thanks guys. I'm abandoning any middle strategy.
Is there an advantage to beating both the opener AND the close, as opposed to just beating the close?
For instance taking DET today at +10, after it opened at +8.5, and assuming it closes at +8.0 or lower.... is that any higher of a +EV wager than if the line had opened at +10 and closed at the same +8.0 or lower?
Reply With Quote
