Originally posted on 09/25/2012:

You should never be betting amounts that are significantly more than other bets (unless you only plan on making a few bets a year instead of hundreds or thousands).

If you analyze the edge you perceive that you have, you are looking at a 14% edge. This is the same edge you would achieve by estimating a -110 bet has a 60% chance of winning.

Exp : You think Team A wins 98% of the time. The market (-600) says they win 85.71% of the time. Pretend you bet this game $100 to win $16.67 (-600) 100 times. If you win 98 of those bets, you get back $11,433. A profit of $1433.

You think team Z wins 60% of the time. The market (-110) says they win 52.38% of the time. Pretend you bet this game $100 to win $90.91 (-110) 100 times. If you win 60 of those bets, you get back $11,454. A profit of $1454.

The nice thing about betting Team A, is you have less variance if your perceived edge is true. If you bet 100 games where the actual chance of winning is 98% at a price of -600, you would need to lose 15 or more out of 100 to lose money, which has around a 58 million to 1 chance of occurring. However, I must agree with most of the others on this thread that I highly doubt a true 98% chance is being offered at -600. But, if you think you do, great. Just don't fall into the trap of loading up all you eggs in one basket, it is a sure recipe for losing eventually.

The key is to continually find edges, and spread your bankroll around evenly on each one at a 2%- 3% stake of your bankroll. This is how you conquer variance and keep your sanity.

To be fair, some gamblers have made a big score betting most of their stake on a few games and going on a "roll". But be forewarned, most who have tried this method of attack are living in shacks, and are up to their eyeballs in debt.