Money Management

[hutennis]

hutennis, you just proved you have no clue about edge

Well, enlighten me

[LT Profits]

Thanks for the link.
Very interesting.

Lets see how easy it is to find edges in college nowadays.

What ever has closed so far from your picks.
Market = no vig from avg CLs ( as per Odds Portal)

Market LT Edge vs CL
Western Carolina +6 -108 (101) (108) -3.22%
Oklahoma -7 -110 (102) (110) -3.60%
Wright State +6.5 -105 (103) (105) -0.94%
Northern Illinois +9 -105 (106) (105) 0.46%
Penn State +7 -101 (100) (101) -0.30%
Davidson -2.5 -106 (104) (106) -0.92%
Western Kentucky +6.5 -105 (102) (105) -1.41%
South Dakota +6.5 -108 (110) (108) 0.88%
Nebraska/TCU OVER 129 -108 100 (108) -3.70%

Average -1.42%

You must have your own definition of edge.
Would be nice to know what that is.

Based on what i see so far, my original hypothesis that there is not a lot of clue in what you are doing is getting confirmed

I'll be back with the rest of analysis later, when all games will start.

First, you conveniently omitted Kansas and second, your numbers are not even accurate. Just look at Pinny closers. That aside, you are looking at a 15-game sample. Go back and look at my whole year. And did you even notice the record? It is not a fluke. Granted I had a bad year last year (and yet still eked out a small profit), but I hit around 55% over nearly 400 plays two years ago. And that is only CBB. Then check my other sports. I am winning in everything this year except NFL.

[LT Profits]

Western Carolina +6 -108 (5 Dimes) +5.5 -105.7
Oklahoma -7 -110 (Bookmaker) -7 +100
Kansas +1 -108 (Heritage) -1.5 +100.1
Wright State +6.5 -105 (5 Dimes) +5.5 +103.8
Northern Illinois +9 -105 (5 Dimes) +8 +103.8
Penn State +7 -101 (5 Dimes) +7 +103.8
Davidson -2.5 -106 (5 Dimes) -3 +101.9
Western Kentucky +6.5 -105 (5 Dimes) +6 +100
South Dakota +6.5 -108 (Heritage) +5.5 +101.9
Nebraska/TCU OVER 129 -108 (Heritage) 129 +100
UL Monroe +20.5 -108 (Heritage) +19.5 +102.8
Montana -3 -110 (Bookmaker) -3.5 +101.9
Southern Utah +11.5 -109 (5 Dimes) +12 +100
Cal Poly -6 -105 (5 Dimes) pending
Idaho State +11.5 -109 (5 Dimes) pending

I added Pinny No Vig closer on right, I beat closer in 9 of first 13 and only bad miss was Southern Utah. Meanwhile, I beat several by full point.

[LT Profits]

Cal Poly -6 -105 (5 Dimes) -6.5 +104.8
Idaho State +11.5 -109 (5 Dimes) +10.5 -102.8

Make it 11 out of 15

[hutennis]

First, you conveniently omitted Kansas and second, your numbers are not even accurate. Just look at Pinny closers. That aside, you are looking at a 15-game sample. Go back and look at my whole year. And did you even notice the record? It is not a fluke. Granted I had a bad year last year (and yet still eked out a small profit), but I hit around 55% over nearly 400 plays two years ago. And that is only CBB. Then check my other sports. I am winning in everything this year except NFL.

Look. If you are so sure and proud of your record, why don't you run sbr spreadsheet
with all relevant numbers in it instead of all those hard to follow threads. It is way easier to follow and analyse, if needed to be.
You can even make a prediction as to your future performance and edge.
That would be nice.

You see, all those proud past performance claims can only be considered seriously if they pass a hard independent scrutiny using proper methodologies. Otherwise, its way too easy to fall pray to all kinds of fallacies and biases.
No one is immune to that, not even a great mathematicians, never mind you, me or any other deluded Nostradamus wonna be on this forum.

For example, 55% record is only worth mentioning if your implied win %% is less than 55. And yet, i does not look like you even think in those terms.
Its not how many times out of 15 you beat pinny's closer, but what is your average
after not 15 since its meaningless but after 1000s that matters.
And so forth and so on.

[statictheory]

Maybe I am just not explaining it right.

Lets say I had $500 on the books and all I bet were spreads (-110). My initial first bet would be 2%, or $10 (to win $9.09).

Let's say I won the bet, my new bankroll would be $509.09. My next bet would be $10.18.

Let's say I lost the bet, my new bankroll would be $490.00. My next bet would be $9.80.

This is not Kelly, I am not calculating at intervals, and I am not going broke sooner.

Just trying to get multiple perspectives on the topic.

go to drr bobs sports and read his articles on money management

[Professor1215]

Maybe you are right. Just trying to learn man. Getting blasted from multiple people, I will tone it down with the ignorant questions.

[LT Profits]

Look. If you are so sure and proud of your record, why don't you run sbr spreadsheet
with all relevant numbers in it instead of all those hard to follow threads. It is way easier to follow and analyse, if needed to be.
You can even make a prediction as to your future performance and edge.
That would be nice.

You see, all those proud past performance claims can only be considered seriously if they pass a hard independent scrutiny using proper methodologies. Otherwise, its way too easy to fall pray to all kinds of fallacies and biases.
No one is immune to that, not even a great mathematicians, never mind you, me or any other deluded Nostradamus wonna be on this forum.

For example, 55% record is only worth mentioning if your implied win %% is less than 55. And yet, i does not look like you even think in those terms.
Its not how many times out of 15 you beat pinny's closer, but what is your average
after not 15 since its meaningless but after 1000s that matters.
And so forth and so on.

I'm at the point now where I can't be bothered putting plays in a spreadsheet because it is an additional step that again is a waste of time. I am no spring chicken and I have nothing to prove to anyone. Filling in all the pertinent data (and I do agree with you there for an accurate read) is more time consuming than a simple list of plays in a forum. I am experienced enough where I can spot things without proving anything it to be so first. Also, how can anyone believe a 55% success rate over 400 plays in a -110 sport would be less than the implied win % of those plays in any way? (I should add there were no money line plays higher than -125 and some money line dogs, but over 90% of plays were ATS/Totals for games/halves). And most importantly I have winning records every year, if not for MLB, I'd never lose (LOL). Anyhow, we are straying WAY off topic here, my whole original point was than finding 60 plays (or more) on a busy Saturday is quite easy. And I didn't even say that the 60 plays had 2% edges, I just threw that number out as an easy-to-use whole number to demonstrate my point (i.e., better to have 60 x 2 than 20 x 5). I don't see how you feel 60 plays at over 1% is unrealistic. If you play small edges, volume is your friend. Discussion of anything else besides that belongs in a separate thread.

[goblue12]

Understanding Kelly Criterion by Justin7

[Wrecktangle]

Maybe you are right. Just trying to learn man. Getting blasted from multiple people, I will tone it down with the ignorant questions.

It's not you Prof, this forum has been out of control for a few years now.

I'm lobbing to have the name changed to Shark Tank.

[Professor1215]

Good call evo.

I am a novice when it comes to sustaining a long-term profit, because I am unfamiliar with modeling and all the math that needs to be done to succeed. I don't put money on books anymore because of this reason.

I am NOT a novice when it comes to picking winners and analyzing sports themselves.

When I used to bet recreationally (and traditionally), I estimate that my win% was between 53-55%. But I did everything wrong. I bet different amounts, I went to the online casino, etc etc etc.

This site is changing me, one day at a time. I now have a general understanding of the concepts of advanced sports wagering. Like I keep saying, now I just need practice applying it. The only way one can be judged is by his bankroll, not how smart or stupid he looks on this forum.

Special thanks to Justin7, Ganch, LT Profits and many more for taking the time to help a brother out.

[stake]

When using kelly does your chances of winning directly correlate to the line? For example if i get +100 I'm 50%? And if I get +200 then I'm 33%? This might be a simple question or answer but I'm learning just like Professor1215.

[jolmscheid]

I still cannot find a definitive answer to this question : in the long-term, if one has an edge over the the books andhave wants to wageryou the same amount on each game, is it better to RISK 1-2% per play or TO WIN 1-2% per play using odds of between -150 to +250?

I would assume RISKING 1-2% on each play would avoid the ups and downs of playing TO WIN 1-2%??

[marky85marky]

I don't think there is much danger. In blackjack, we play with a 1% advantage, having 1000 units gives us a .5% chance of ruin before doubling our bankroll. Same should apply to sports betting. Plus, if you are a successful handicapper, you'll be winning and increasing your bet over time.

Agree. You must understand that there is a small chance of going bust. Betting 2% means you win more but you also increase your chance of going bust.

I came across an excel program for projecting results based on a given winning percentage. Seems pretty useful but I'm no excel expert so would love if someone could let me know if its legit. Interestingly, it shows you the expected ups and downs you can expect.

[LT Profits]

I still cannot find a definitive answer to this question : in the long-term, if one has an edge over the the books andhave wants to wageryou the same amount on each game, is it better to RISK 1-2% per play or TO WIN 1-2% per play using odds of between -150 to +250?

I would assume RISKING 1-2% on each play would avoid the ups and downs of playing TO WIN 1-2%??

No, it.s TO WIN edge%, which is exactly what Kelly Calculator does, meaning you don't really need calculator unless you are dealing with simultaneous plays.

[jolmscheid]

Thanks LT...what if one has more than 15 simultaneous events? How will this change the kelly readings?

[LT Profits]

Thanks LT...what if one has more than 15 simultaneous events? How will this change the kelly readings?

Didn't 4LC post a spreadsheet for you? He definitely posted a Kelly spreadsheet somewhere, but I forgot for which poster.

[jolmscheid]

Yes 4lc did post one for me..however I was not able to get the readings to work out...perhaps I was doin it wrong..

[Marginalis]

Recalculating daily is not optimal. Kelly is.
Kelly is optimal for growth and it is applied to every bet. Not once a day or once a month or at certain %% up or down Every bet.

And it really easy too. Just make sure you have an edge in every bet you make and then apply a simply formula.
That's it.

Alternative is not that complicated either
If you dont have an edge or dont know what is your edge and where it comes from then don't bet at all.

[hutennis]

Is that whole quote funny?
Or just some part of it?

Unless you can intelligently argue what makes you ROFL, posts like yours point in one direction and one detection only - overall stupidity.

Edit.
One thing I would add to that quote though.
I would define simple formula.
Here it is:

$$ you want to win = $$ available to bet * edge%.

For example:

Available line to bet -160.
Your handicapped line -172
Theoretical edge +2.68%
(Why "theoretical"? Because it is. And it is your job to make sure it is actual.
If your "edge" exists only in your wild imagination and has nothing to do with real life, you will get raped).

Available BR $9684.
$$ you aim to win $9684 * 2.68% = $260.
Size of the bet at -160 $416.

That's it. It is that simple.

Now go ahead, ROFL some more.