Originally posted on 12/01/2006:

I have been betting on sports for about 25 years and my stand on flat betting is: that's all I do. I determine a unit size and bet it like clockwork when I have an angle.

I periodically reevaluate and change my unit size but that still qualifies as flat betting.

I used to vary my bet sizes. In fact I have tried MANY systems of variable bet sizes over the decades. Flat Betting is where I have arrived.

There is good theory behind the use of variable bet sizes. I don't doubt there are people who do it properly (mathematically) and with discipline. However my observation has been that most people use variable bet sizes to accomodate their own psychology. They will tell themselves they have good capping reasons for placing a larger bet - and probably really believe themselves - but really they are just rationalizing facts to fit the conclusion they want to reach, and they are really chasing/impatient/feeling invincible/whatever.

I have done my share of that over the years.

As I say though, I don't doubt there are people who use variable bet size properly.

If I ever found an angle that was just SO MUCH BETTER than my other angles, I could see myself using variable bet sizes. For example if I found an NFL angle that produced a unit profit for every 3 bets and it was based on a really big sample - like hundreds and hundreds of games - that would get my attention and I would bet more than I would on my normal angles which are all in the same range (producing roughly a unit every 8-12 bets.)

But should I bet more on an pointspread angle that has hit at 57% for a long time than one that hits at 55.5% ? I guess maybe. Should I bet 3% more; should I bet three times as much? I don't know. I just place my bets and I'm happy with the results.

I simply don't have any spectacular angles that are way out of that range and I just grind it out with flat bets.