Have kept metacullious(sp) record for a few years. Have tried many different methods and over a 1,000 bet sample I am lucky to have a ROI of 2.5 %. Not good or bad I would say average. Always try to get to the 4%(54% ats) range that to me is good? Do you guys keep this number and know yours? What do you think would be a good goal for 1000 bet sample?
ice man said:
Tracking of records and bankroll is different from tracking of ROI.
An goal for ROI is useless and so is tracking it unless its broken down.
If your ROI is -2.5% and you have a goal of +4%, do you now start forcing plays? Do you now start increasing your wager size?
Corporations and upper management use this to determine which department, which branch, which product is doing well because they want to compare apples to apples. When I'm gambling with my own money, why do I have to compare my ROI with anyone else's?
Aside from that, ROI would only be useful in tracking MLB and NHL plays. Because of the changing vig, the winning percentage doesn't mean a heck of a lot - but just having an ROI doesn't mean much either.
For example:
You could be hitting 60% winners and have a negative ROI.
Does that mean you're playing too many favorites and have to lay off and play more dogs?
It might not. Further breakdown of the records might show you are losing money on -110 to -150 favorites but actually winning money when laying -150 to -200.
I calculate ROI for my plays, because of different unit values for different sports. This helps for "apples to apples" comparisons between sports. I believe that anything 3% and over is outstanding over a season of plays.
Money is the name of the game, I agree, and too much analysis of stats like ROI can be a waste of time. However, one spot where I think it really helps is to compare handicappers when "borrowing" plays from posting forums. Take the Tracker Forum Standings. Not knocking anyone here, but take Journeyman's baseball for instance. Many of his plays are $500 and $600 plays. Now, he finished the season up about $25K or something like that, which is a great season (congrats Journey). But how much better is he than a guy who posted the same amount of plays, but played them for $100. Without ROI, you will never know. There might be a guy who is in the middle of the list in $ gained who is killing the man, but is overshadowed because his risk amounts are lower.
HW
Money is the name of the game, I agree, and too much analysis of stats like ROI can be a waste of time. However, one spot where I think it really helps is to compare handicappers when "borrowing" plays from posting forums. Take the Tracker Forum Standings. Not knocking anyone here, but take Journeyman's baseball for instance. Many of his plays are $500 and $600 plays. Now, he finished the season up about $25K or something like that, which is a great season (congrats Journey). But how much better is he than a guy who posted the same amount of plays, but played them for $100. Without ROI, you will never know. There might be a guy who is in the middle of the list in $ gained who is killing the man, but is overshadowed because his risk amounts are lower.
HW
Don't get me wrong I keep records of all my plays, but to worry about meeting a certain ROI would lead you to wager inconsistently, as your bankroll size is always changing. ROI is more of a descriptive tool than a strategic one, which is what makes it useful in evaluating the records of other bettors.
i find it odd that a 3% ROI would be considered a success. So if you start out with $1000, you would be happy with a $30 gain at the end of the season?
Why not put the money into a CD then? They often yield 6% at the end of the year and theres no risk involved at all.
Or am I missing something while im reading this post?
Why not put the money into a CD then? They often yield 6% at the end of the year and theres no risk involved at all.
Or am I missing something while im reading this post?
ROI would be the total return divided by the total amount of the wagers risked; your investment would not be $1,000. Depending on how many games you play and for what amount, your investment could be $10,000.
So, if you play 2 games a week at $50 at -110, your investment is $110 a week. Over a 17 game season, using same amounts, your total yearly investment is $1,870, and a good season at 3% ROI, would be a gain of $56.10.
So, if over these 34 games above, you go 18-16 at $50 a game and -110, you would be up $20 for an ROI of 1.1% and a winning percentage of 52.9%. A 19-15 record would net you $125, an ROI of 6.7%, and a 55.9% winning percentage.
HW
So, if you play 2 games a week at $50 at -110, your investment is $110 a week. Over a 17 game season, using same amounts, your total yearly investment is $1,870, and a good season at 3% ROI, would be a gain of $56.10.
So, if over these 34 games above, you go 18-16 at $50 a game and -110, you would be up $20 for an ROI of 1.1% and a winning percentage of 52.9%. A 19-15 record would net you $125, an ROI of 6.7%, and a 55.9% winning percentage.
HW
5% ROI is pretty solid, 12% is probably about as good as you can hope for over any extended period of time. ROI is a very useful tool for managing your bankroll. If you don't keep track of how you are doing on an ROI basis, you are going to be prone to making bet sizing mistakes and even worse, you will take too much out of your bankroll to the point where someday it could come back to haunt you. A good way to manage this is to know your expected ROI, calculate your volume of plays to come up with an expected return, then discount it for safety to say 75%, and then you know what you should be able to safely take out of your bankroll or how you should size up your bets.
ROI is also extremely useful if you bet baseball or hockey. No win/loss records mean anything when you have a money-line attached to your bets. ROI is really the only number you should pay attention to on money line bets.
ROI is also extremely useful if you bet baseball or hockey. No win/loss records mean anything when you have a money-line attached to your bets. ROI is really the only number you should pay attention to on money line bets.
I suppose that is correct, however I think there are more intuitive things that are important in wagering that are bigger factors in winning money, i.e. which game to risk 5 units vs. which game to risk 1 unit. I guess the ROI might dictate how much money = one unit, and admittedly that is something I will have to take a look at. Most people adjust unit size in direct correlation with the size of their bankroll, it seems like, rather than ROI. I agree that won-loss records in money line sports are to some degree irrelevant.
However, what happens if you start a season with an expected ROI of say 7% and you come out of the gates with a bad losing streak, what do you do?
However, what happens if you start a season with an expected ROI of say 7% and you come out of the gates with a bad losing streak, what do you do?
I would adjust downward. When estimating a 7% ROI over a season, I think it is unsafe to assume, with a bad start, that you will still hit your 7% ROI for the season.
I use ROI to estimate unit sizes and wager size increases, but what I do is to try and estimate a season ROI based on my results so far that season. So, if I start out an have a -30% ROI, I estimate how much will be wagered the rest of the season, and assume that I will break even on these units wagered, and then calculate an estimated season ROI, which, with this type of bad start, will be probably somewhere between -1 and -3 percent, depending on what season you are talking about. When your estimated ROI for the season drops below a certain figure, I cut back the amount bet. When it gets above a certain number, I increase it. I recalculate this number weekly for all sports.
HW
I use ROI to estimate unit sizes and wager size increases, but what I do is to try and estimate a season ROI based on my results so far that season. So, if I start out an have a -30% ROI, I estimate how much will be wagered the rest of the season, and assume that I will break even on these units wagered, and then calculate an estimated season ROI, which, with this type of bad start, will be probably somewhere between -1 and -3 percent, depending on what season you are talking about. When your estimated ROI for the season drops below a certain figure, I cut back the amount bet. When it gets above a certain number, I increase it. I recalculate this number weekly for all sports.
HW
