[ebelisle22]

what would you consider a reasonable startup bankroll to be betting 100$ per bet?
thinking 1k but what do u all think?

[hutennis]

It depends on a edge you have.

[Djohns04]

2K if you really want to gamble.... Otherwise 5K

[BennyBigNuts]

what would you consider a reasonable startup bankroll to be betting 100$ per bet?
thinking 1k but what do u all think?

If you're betting $100 units you should have no problem lasting a whole MLB season with 2k. If you're down 20 units you need to change your way of picking games though.
I am a very disciplined MLB bettor. I bet anywhere from 1-5 units on games throughout the season (My units are a little bigger than $100) and bet one game a day about 75% of the time. I avg about 4 to 5 games a year where I risk over 5 units. It's always exciting to take a shot one in a while on a big heater as long as you don't get carried away and stay in control which more gamblers don't.
If you're betting parlays you're going to have more variance obviously and will be risking your 2k a lot easier.
BOL

[HeeeHAWWWW]

what would you consider a reasonable startup bankroll to be betting 100$ per bet?
thinking 1k but what do u all think?

$50k or so. If you average $100 with a $1k bankroll you will prolly bust, regardless of how good you are - variance is the great killer of bankrolls.

[MDRTYson]

$50k bankroll for $100 = 1 unit? Huh?

[hutennis]

$50k bankroll for $100 = 1 unit? Huh?

Whats wrong with that?

[MDRTYson]

Whats wrong with that?

Seems rather large to me. I guess we'd need to define "bankroll". I took this as a casual bettor asking a question based on one season

[hutennis]

Seems rather large to me. I guess we'd need to define "bankroll". I took this as a casual bettor asking a question based on one season

I guess we need to define "casual bettor"
Is that like a "fish" in poker?

If that's the case then nothing matters and anything goes. The final result is inevitable.

Otherwise, as I stated above, it depends on your edge.

[MDRTYson]

I guess we need to define "casual bettor"
Is that like a "fish" in poker?

If that's the case then nothing matters and anything goes. The final result is inevitable.

Otherwise, as I stated above, it depends on your edge.

Here's the thing: I was curious about how Heehawww came up with $50k, genuinely curious. That seemed like a high number to me.

You leading me back to "it depends on your edge" with your snarky, condescending jabs isn't clarifying anything.

[HeeeHAWWWW]

Here's the thing: I was curious about how Heehawww came up with $50k, genuinely curious.

Typo, sorry, was meant to be $5k :-) The justification is that $100 w/ $5k roll is the half-Kelly stake for 4% edge.
However, that's assuming you've actually proven 4% (which might need say 1000 bets), and you are mentally prepared for the wild bankroll swings that half-Kelly can produce. More reasonable starting points might be 2% and 1/3 Kelly, which would require $15k roll.

[hutennis]

Here's the thing: I was curious about how Heehawww came up with $50k, genuinely curious. That seemed like a high number to me.

You leading me back to "it depends on your edge" with your snarky, condescending jabs isn't clarifying anything.

Fair enough. I will clarify.

It is a mathematical fact that the best way to establish the proper size of your bets is to bet to win your edge.
If your edge is 2%, you want to win BR * 2% and you bet whatever odds require you to bet to win product of BR*2%.

So, as you can see, it all depends on your edge, as I said above.

[MDRTYson]

Thanks for the clarification fellas. I have some reading to do!

[tto827]

You got some pretty good answers here, more simply 2%-5% of your bankroll on any play is acceptable, so 2-5k.

5% is a bit high every play, so probably error closer to the 5k than the 2k.

[Sawyer]

It depends on your playing style (1 pick/day, 3 pick/day or 10 pick/day) and your bankroll.

My advice is,

2000 or lower %5
2001-5000 %4 (Minimum stake 100$, so even if your bank is 2200, don't bet 88$! Bet minimum 100$)
5001-10.000 %3 (Minimum stake 200$, so even if your bank is 5500, don't bet %3 of 5500. Don't bet 165$)
10.001-20.000 %2.5 (Minimum stake 300$, so even if your bank is 11000, don't bet 275$. Bet 300$)
20.001-50.000 %2 (Minimum stake 500$. Don't reduce your stakes when you're on a losing streak)
50.001-100.000 %1.5 (Minimum stake 1000$. Don't bet below 1000$ even if you're on a cold losing streak)
100.000+ %1 (Minimum stake 1500$)

Good luck!

[armin]

Whats wrong with that?

srb troll right here

50k for 100$ per unit and your saying whats wrong with that ?

[Sawyer]

Whats wrong with that?

troll detected

Hutennis,

You're a chicken if you're betting 100$ with 50k bankroll. And do you have 50k bankroll? I don't really think so hahaha

Anyone who bets 100$ with 50k bankroll probably has some self-confidence problems, lol.

Hutennis, maybe you better bet %000000.1?

[PAULYPOKER]

Sawyer is the man you want to take advice from.........

[BennyBigNuts]

If you're betting $100 units you should have no problem lasting a whole MLB season with 2k. If you're down 20 units you need to change your way of picking games though.
I am a very disciplined MLB bettor. I bet anywhere from 1-5 units on games throughout the season (My units are a little bigger than $100) and bet one game a day about 75% of the time. I avg about 4 to 5 games a year where I risk over 5 units. It's always exciting to take a shot one in a while on a big heater as long as you don't get carried away and stay in control which more gamblers don't.
If you're betting parlays you're going to have more variance obviously and will be risking your 2k a lot easier.
BOL

Same answers.
But this guy went to college.
I dropped out after 2 months.

LOL

[stevenash]

20K
Gives you 200 flat bets (before juice)

[dbartinbwgc]

$5-10,000
.5-2% per bet

[bihon]

It's mostly about risk of ruin.
It is up to you to determine your acceptable percentage.


Risk of ruin/drawdown calculator

[suicidekings]

Depends on whether you're a 1u per game kind of guy or make multi-unit bets. For flat wagering of 1u = $100 per game, set $3K aside as bankroll, but hold half of that back in reserve where you can't make an impulse wager with it if you go on tilt. Bet like you only have $1500 to work with and you'll find yourself making smarter choices, risking less at one time.

The actual bankroll size is irrelevant if you have poor money management skills.

[JoeyBagels]

If you have no edge you have a budget not a bankroll. You should be able to determine it yourself if you do have an edge tbh.

[daringly]

If you have no edge, your BR is irrelevant. Assuming you have some edge, 10k is fine for $100 bets.

[hutennis]

If you have no edge you have a budget not a bankroll. You should be able to determine it yourself if you do have an edge tbh.

There you go! Now we are talking!

Without proven edge, all the money you set aside for sportsbetting is simply a budget.
Entertainment budget I might add.
And the longer you wish to stay entertained the larger the ratio between total and the smallest part should be.

Note, I did not say that 50k to $100 is what it should be (as some here are trying to present)
I simply asked why not?
If you don't have an edge, 50K to $100 ratio would be a prudent way to provide a life long amount of intertainment for yourself, which is good.

If you do have an edge then what is it?
Let's say you have a proven edge of 0.2% on your wagers.
This is an extremely respectable number! If you have it you are top 2% of all sportsbettors at least!!!!
This means that in -105/-105 situation where you need to be right 51.22% of the time just to break even (no edge, no money but still very hard to do!) you are actually right 51.32% of the time and are making money.

So, with so very respectable edge of 0.2%, according to mathematical facts, how large your BR should be if you want to win $100 every time you bet?

P.S.

For those who are getting frustrated reading it.

I know. This logic and critical thinking thing is a bitch.