How Did You Make Out Last Week

**Optional** · 10-10-22, 04:58 AM

Been a frustrating trend this year.

Capped well, got the good odds, played out as hoped almost, but ended up with peanuts profit.

**pologq** · 10-10-22, 06:28 AM

down $174

Jags really fcuked me

**bonzaii** · 10-10-22, 06:31 AM

Lost 9 bet points on my NFL play and won about $20 something bucks betting Balt Live right before the last drive.

**agendaman** · 10-10-22, 06:42 AM

two of my live dogs won-dalas and texans .small profit.opening lines for week 6 look sharp.

**pologq** · 10-10-22, 06:59 AM

good job on the dogs agenda. you did call dallas.

**flyingillini** · 10-10-22, 08:08 AM

Up in soccer down in football

**Brock Landers** · 10-10-22, 08:08 AM

Absolutely outstanding

Best weekend of the football season

**Cougar Bait** · 10-10-22, 08:09 AM

Hit a ton of parlays, last 2 weeks have been crazy good.

**Four33** · 10-10-22, 08:28 AM

-1200

Tilt is not good

**slayer14** · 10-10-22, 09:10 AM

We cant maintain this lifestyle in our 50s guys it affects the health

**Auto Donk** · 10-10-22, 09:32 AM

JJ, take notes:

**pologq** · 10-10-22, 09:47 AM

donk, cougarbait and brock doing very well

**Checkerboard** · 10-10-22, 09:48 AM

First, I put my arm around her and told her how beautiful she is.

**Auto Donk** · 10-10-22, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by pologq

down $174

Jags really fcuked me

nine straight losses to Black Santa's squad.......

**jjgold** · 10-10-22, 10:37 AM

Auto good run there

**pilebuck13** · 10-10-22, 11:07 AM

9 dimes up

**jjgold** · 10-10-22, 12:33 PM

Buckles a heavy hitter

**KVB** · 10-10-22, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by Auto Donk

JJ, take notes:

**KVB** · 10-10-22, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by jjgold

Big Plays hit small plays lost

Small $55 profit

If you're justifying making "big plays" and "small plays" then in the end ONLY the big plays will matter.

It's a nature of the beast and there are so few exceptions to this rule that it isn't worth considering.

Star bettors, or multiple "unit" bettors who pick some plays at 1 unit and some plays at, say 3 units or stars, will give back such a portion to vigorish that really only the big bets will count and the breakeven will be jacked up.

If you have a bet worth 3 times the risk of other bets, why not just make the 3 star bets alone?

Volume isn't a factor, as even a 5% margin increase won't justify 3 times, or even double, the risk.

Be careful changing your bet size, it is costly in so many ways, even on the luckiest of days.

**d2bets** · 10-10-22, 12:43 PM

Originally posted by KVB

If you're justifying making "big plays" and "small plays" then in the end ONLY the big plays will matter.

It's a nature of the beast and there are so few exceptions to this rule that it isn't worth considering.

Star bettors, or multiple "unit" bettors who pick some plays at 1 unit and some plays at, say 3 units or stars, will give back such a portion to vigorish that really only the big bets will count and the breakeven will be jacked up.

If you have a bet worth 3 times the risk of other bets, why not just make the 3 star bets alone?

Volume isn't a factor, as even a 5% margin increase won't justify 3 times, or even double, the risk.

Be careful changing your bet size, it is costly in so many ways, even on the luckiest of days.

Depends on the type of play, but that doesn't apply to me. I bet various amounts, mostly because its a function of max wagers. Don't even really think of wager size. I just bet value and volume. It all adds up. Sometimes I'll even just take little $40 or $50 scalps alongside 1k or 2k wagers. It all adds up in the end.

**KVB** · 10-10-22, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by d2bets

Depends on the type of play, but that doesn't apply to me. I bet various amounts, mostly because its a function of max wagers. Don't even really think of wager size. I just bet value and volume. It all adds up. Sometimes I'll even just take little $40 or $50 scalps alongside 1k or 2k wagers. It all adds up in the end.

We've had this discussion before. Clearly I'm not talking about scalps.

I'm talking about deciding one sports bet is worth 2 or 3 times another.

It doesn't even have to be that extreme. We see mlb bettors make a $100 bet on a pick em game and then turn around and make a $150 bet on a -150 favorite.

That bettor is saying that the second game is worth 50% more risk than the first. When it comes to sportsbetting math, that's a tall order and if it is the case, then why waste time and with the smaller bets.

If your wager size is dictated by limits, as is the case a lot, then you can either expand "wide" and increase your outs to get down more or you can pay yourself from the gambling funds, lower the overall bankroll, and make appropriate bets relative to the size of your bankroll.

Pay yourself a salary and work it back up, there is nothing wrong with that, even if you are still just slamming limit bets.

I think I mentioned in a video that bettors at the level of say, LT Profits, will probably do something like this. When accoutns fatten, take money off the top rinse and try to repeat.

I prefer growing wide, but I also prefer a salary from my business.

It takes quite the committment to grow wide, but it can be rewarding.

**Optional** · 10-10-22, 01:01 PM

Originally posted by KVB

We see mlb bettors make a $100 bet on a pick em game and then turn around and make a $150 bet on a -150 favorite.

That bettor is saying that the second game is worth 50% more risk than the first.

Growing up without American odds the most confronting thing I came across was this habit of blindly betting more on faves than dogs.

It seems like a Barnum & Baily trick to me.

I remember googling to try and work out why when I first saw it and one explanation, I found said it's an "expected courtesy to pay the juice up front".

Mentioned it a couple of times and people usually say that favorites win more often than dogs so that accounts for it. I dunno...

**d2bets** · 10-10-22, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by KVB

We've had this discussion before. Clearly I'm not talking about scalps.

I'm talking about deciding one sports bet is worth 2 or 3 times another.

It doesn't even have to be that extreme. We see mlb bettors make a $100 bet on a pick em game and then turn around and make a $150 bet on a -150 favorite.

That bettor is saying that the second game is worth 50% more risk than the first. When it comes to sportsbetting math, that's a tall order and if it is the case, then why waste time and with the smaller bets.

If your wager size is dictated by limits, as is the case a lot, then you can either expand "wide" and increase your outs to get down more or you can pay yourself from the gambling funds, lower the overall bankroll, and make appropriate bets relative to the size of your bankroll.

Pay yourself a salary and work it back up, there is nothing wrong with that, even if you are still just slamming limit bets.

I think I mentioned in a video that bettors at the level of say, LT Profits, will probably do something like this. When accoutns fatten, take money off the top rinse and try to repeat.

I prefer growing wide, but I also prefer a salary from my business.

It takes quite the committment to grow wide, but it can be rewarding.

Time commitment, and other. I used to do that, for sure. Now I grow as wide as I possibly can. but it's limited by the type of out I'm willing to do. It's not an issue of funding. I have too much money sitting in books, I know that.

Like I said, I don't decide a bet is worth 2x or 3x more. One bet I have might be a limit of $300 and another might be a limit of $2k. I'll bet both, at the limit. Should I pass on the $300 because I bet others at $2k? I don't think so. Value is value and I'll take it all.

**KVB** · 10-10-22, 01:24 PM

Originally posted by Optional

...Mentioned it a couple of times and people usually say that favorites win more often than dogs so that accounts for it. I dunno...

That's a definite misconception.

No matter the probablitiy of a team winning, which we'll say is reflected in those odds, the question here is about whether or not the bet is worth the multiple of risk.

From a standpoint of edge, EV, or whatever the reason to pull the trigger, each different line should start at zero. Whether it's -110 or -400, just because of the odds of the favorite winning goes up doesn't justify betting more, it doesn't even justify making a bet.

It isn't until we examine our overlay, the EV, edge, margin, etc on that particular line that we can then decide what to bet.

At the highest level we're talking about a confident edge or EV and an acceptable margin to calculate, perhaps, some kind of partial Kelly bet size. At lower levels, we could just be talking about trying to get a little lucky with near 0 EV bets, or the best one can do.

But in either case it will be very difficult to find bets that are worth, say, 2 or 3 times other bets.

Every line should be treated as it's own issue when determining whether or not to make a bet and how much to bet.

**Optional** · 10-10-22, 01:57 PM

100% agree KVB.

Yet probably the vast majority of this site's users will bet $100 @ +110 and $110 @ -110 I think.

Barnum & Baily designed US odds I swear.

**jjgold** · 10-10-22, 02:06 PM

Optional what’s the rates where you live with loan sharks?’

**Optional** · 10-10-22, 02:07 PM

Originally posted by jjgold

Optional what’s the rates where you live with loan sharks?’

20%/mth

How much you need JJ?

Got collateral?

**KVB** · 10-10-22, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by d2bets

Time commitment, and other. I used to do that, for sure. Now I grow as wide as I possibly can. but it's limited by the type of out I'm willing to do. It's not an issue of funding. I have too much money sitting in books, I know that.

Like I said, I don't decide a bet is worth 2x or 3x more. One bet I have might be a limit of $300 and another might be a limit of $2k. I'll bet both, at the limit. Should I pass on the $300 because I bet others at $2k? I don't think so. Value is value and I'll take it all.

Hopefully you can see the disconnect here and that your bet size being dictated by the limit of the out is really not relevant here. That's an entirely different problem and is dealt with by increasing the outs, or decreasing your bet size. If you would make the $300 bet at 6 different outs, you would.

If that one out raised a limit, you would make a bigger bet.

It really has nothing to do with what I'm talking about here. It just isn't relevant. In fact it's not really about bet sizing at all, it's about defending against risk management.

For this discussion you have to ask yourself what you would bet if you could and either make it possible to bet that, or change your bet size. It becomes an issue of profit per time spent and what's acceptable to you if you think about lowering the bet size.

For your discussion, clearly you know what it takes get around your hurdle. It can be a tough problem to have, but you have to admit it's a good problem to have, even if that means your stuck for awhile getting down where they let you and no more.

**d2bets** · 10-10-22, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by KVB

Hopefully you can see the disconnect here and that your bet size being dictated by the limit of the out is really not relevant here. That's an entirely different problem and is dealt with by increasing the outs, or decreasing your bet size. If you would make the $300 bet at 6 different outs, you would.

If that one out raised a limit, you would make a bigger bet.

It really has nothing to do with what I'm talking about here. It just isn't relevant. In fact it's not really about bet sizing at all, it's about defending against risk management.

For this discussion you have to ask yourself what you would bet if you could and either make it possible to bet that, or change your bet size. It becomes an issue of profit per time spent and what's acceptable to you if you think about lowering the bet size.

For your discussion, clearly you know what it takes get around your hurdle. It can be a tough problem to have, but you have to admit it's a good problem to have, even if that means your stuck for awhile getting down where they let you and no more.

Exactly. I look for good wagers. When I find them, I bet the max (97% of the time), whether the max is $100, $300, or $2,000. I'm not going to reduce the $2,000 because sometimes I bet less and I'm not going to pass on the $100 because sometimes I bet $2,000. I just take it all in. ROI is ROI and I have more than enough funded to bet it all. The more I bet, the more I win. My long-term ROI is "only" in the 4-5% range, so I gotta get down as much as possible.

**KRIT** · 10-10-22, 02:37 PM

Been killin football all year, continued this week.