A betting bank in my way of thinking is a bank of which you bet a proportion - it is NOT your total betting funds. Say your total betting funds are $5000 - a typical betting bank would be $1000. I would probably have 5 bets a week for about 30 weeks in a year and have made approx $25K for 12 years doing it that way. If you're in the habit of betting for fun then yes you would have to play much smaller.
am i tight or not response - you don't get it do you - if you back a team with a 70% chance of winning at -100 then that's a good/excellent bet. What the odds reflect and how they move is immaterial. Obviously you have to hunt around for the best odds but that's not the main issue -it's identyfying where the odds makers are wrong. For my speciality jumps horse racing for example - the odds maker has to assign a price about 200-300 horses in a day - he is bound to be making some errors and thats when you cash in. If you keep doing this and have the discipline not to chase your losses when they occur you'll end up in front over the season.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by STRUT888/FISHHEAD:
AGAIN SICK IS RIGHT!!! IF YOUR PLAYING OVER 5% OF YOUR BANKROLL ON ONE GAME, YOU HAVE NO CHANCE!!!!!!! NONE, ZERO, ZILCH!!!!!! Please think about this before you make your next wager friends!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I usually find myself agreeing with your opinions. Not this time though. DIfferent methods work for different people, to say someone has no chance because they bet more than 5% (at times), is wrong IMO.
AGAIN SICK IS RIGHT!!! IF YOUR PLAYING OVER 5% OF YOUR BANKROLL ON ONE GAME, YOU HAVE NO CHANCE!!!!!!! NONE, ZERO, ZILCH!!!!!! Please think about this before you make your next wager friends!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I usually find myself agreeing with your opinions. Not this time though. DIfferent methods work for different people, to say someone has no chance because they bet more than 5% (at times), is wrong IMO.
valdosta, you do have a chance, sure. I think Fishhead probably meant that it is dangerous, that's all. If you are betting 5% of your bankroll, and you get off to a great start, you'll never look back, and you'll be happy you started at 5%, rather than 1%. As long as you never go below .500 and have a decent start, then 5% bankroll bet and even 40% bankroll bet will be better. But at 5% like you bet, if you start off just mediocre bad, meaning you go slightly under .500 in your first 100 bets, YOU ARE BROKE.. But at 1%, you would be still in the game..
And if you want to know the most important advice you'll ever get from me or anyone in gambling.. and don't ever forget this because it all boils down to this in this game..
DON'T RUN OUT OF MONEY or it's game over..That should be your main goal...
And if you want to know the most important advice you'll ever get from me or anyone in gambling.. and don't ever forget this because it all boils down to this in this game..
DON'T RUN OUT OF MONEY or it's game over..That should be your main goal...
Sorry i've caused this confusion by my terminology 25% would mean 5% of all betting funds and 10% relates to 2% of all betting funds. Its just i use a step system for my bank that refers to the bank (one fifth of all betting funds) than the total amount -this means you have to earn the right to move up to another level of betting before doing so. wasn't trying to suggest you bet 25% of all you're betting funds for an excellent bet - apologies for the confusion
Although Sick and Strut are right, TTinco, those "gambling books" mean nothing. Just like the "old~school" books on blackjack methods you are supposed to follow, I don't agree with. My method has won me much more money than any of my friends who follow such old blackjack "rules to winning" when playing. My point is, there's always new ways that come along to go about things all of the time.
I wouldn't go by a book when gambling. SOme people just have better gambling skills than others and that's something a book can't show you.What works for some people doesn't work for others because of that. Some people believe in placing there bets the same everytime. That's something that I think is a bunch of BS. Maybe it's just arrogance but it hasn't caught up with me yet. I'll let you know when I go broke
Here's one for thought...my buddy's local gave him a -260 on the Dbacks/Brewers game the other night (the one Schilling pitched). Now every offshore that I saw had it at -180 to -200. If he wouldn't have mentioned it to me, he would've been taken bigtime!
He called his local and the guy admitted he goofed on the line and that he had it at -200. So he refunded my buddy and gave him some credit! Now that's a local with some class.
It pays to shop both IMO. Also to check what your local is giving you with the offshore. I can understand paying a little more for a local just because the money stays close but there are limits to what is a little and what is a ripoff!
He called his local and the guy admitted he goofed on the line and that he had it at -200. So he refunded my buddy and gave him some credit! Now that's a local with some class.
It pays to shop both IMO. Also to check what your local is giving you with the offshore. I can understand paying a little more for a local just because the money stays close but there are limits to what is a little and what is a ripoff!
sick gambler - what makes them different is that you're betting against other bettors not the bookie and because they are turning over $70 US a week in matched bets - the juice is low. Typically for a horse race it would be 2-3% and for US sport, i would wait till the day of the game where their moneyline and vegas handicap trade at about 1%. You can lay bets there too and hedge your risk very easily. I've had an account for about 3 years with them and never had any problems - you probably didn't know that they are the biggest online betting company in the world.
