I know that a unit should be between 2-5% depending on how agressive you are. But on any given night, what should be the limit for the amount of your total bankroll that is bet? (example: if you bet 5%/unit then you shouldn't be betting on 20 different games) Any help would be appreciated.
copied it over here
You might as well get in the habit of wagering 2% or less of your bankroll on a game, NOW rather than LATER. You WILL lose 10 wagers in a row at some point, given you make it long enough to have a sample size of more than 500 events. A lot of people agree that you shouldnt have more than 30% of BR outstanding at any time. A lot depends on what your style is. I feel it is more profitable to wager on a lot of events- diversification strategy, and applying my edge over as many events as possible. Some people prefer to hit one or two or three events REALLY hard. Both strategies can be successful. The problem that I have with hitting fewer events for a larger percentage of BR is 1. anything can happen in a given game- we are trying to predict human behavior 2. there is more of a negative psychological effect after a big loss/losses (for me) 3. the number that one may see as being WAY off may be WAY off for a reason that you personally overlooked and the books are fully aware of. There are other reasons but I'm pressed for time, there are some other threads in the forums on this, a few are better than any book you will read.
It takes more experience to wager on 20 events per day than it does to wager on 2 or 3. A lot of it is instinct and noting book maker's opinions. Probably the most important thing experience-wise is recognizing value in 20 games as opposed to betting on 20 games every day just because there are 20 games THAT DAY. I have had days when I placed more than 20 wagers with fewer than 10 games to choose from (side, total, halftimes). There are also days with about 100 games in which I can only find a handful of wagers that I feel I have a 55% chance of winning- I dont often pass.
It is just SO HARD to start at 5% of BR at lower levels, and THEN switch to 2% or less after your BR grows. The first thing you MUST REALIZE is that you WILL lose at least 8 IN A ROW at some point, and that is conservative. I stated this in another thread, but I LOSE 17 or 18 out of 20 during one stretch at least ONCE A YEAR, and I have more than a 2.5% edge over the course of more than 10,000 events. At 5% per event that would be close to BankRupt. There are so many people that think they can get away from money management, look at how few people are left posting in the NBA forum, after a month or two the baseball forum will most likely have only 25% or so of the ORIGINAL posters from the start of the season (plenty of people will change their name)..,best of luck
You might as well get in the habit of wagering 2% or less of your bankroll on a game, NOW rather than LATER. You WILL lose 10 wagers in a row at some point, given you make it long enough to have a sample size of more than 500 events. A lot of people agree that you shouldnt have more than 30% of BR outstanding at any time. A lot depends on what your style is. I feel it is more profitable to wager on a lot of events- diversification strategy, and applying my edge over as many events as possible. Some people prefer to hit one or two or three events REALLY hard. Both strategies can be successful. The problem that I have with hitting fewer events for a larger percentage of BR is 1. anything can happen in a given game- we are trying to predict human behavior 2. there is more of a negative psychological effect after a big loss/losses (for me) 3. the number that one may see as being WAY off may be WAY off for a reason that you personally overlooked and the books are fully aware of. There are other reasons but I'm pressed for time, there are some other threads in the forums on this, a few are better than any book you will read.
It takes more experience to wager on 20 events per day than it does to wager on 2 or 3. A lot of it is instinct and noting book maker's opinions. Probably the most important thing experience-wise is recognizing value in 20 games as opposed to betting on 20 games every day just because there are 20 games THAT DAY. I have had days when I placed more than 20 wagers with fewer than 10 games to choose from (side, total, halftimes). There are also days with about 100 games in which I can only find a handful of wagers that I feel I have a 55% chance of winning- I dont often pass.
It is just SO HARD to start at 5% of BR at lower levels, and THEN switch to 2% or less after your BR grows. The first thing you MUST REALIZE is that you WILL lose at least 8 IN A ROW at some point, and that is conservative. I stated this in another thread, but I LOSE 17 or 18 out of 20 during one stretch at least ONCE A YEAR, and I have more than a 2.5% edge over the course of more than 10,000 events. At 5% per event that would be close to BankRupt. There are so many people that think they can get away from money management, look at how few people are left posting in the NBA forum, after a month or two the baseball forum will most likely have only 25% or so of the ORIGINAL posters from the start of the season (plenty of people will change their name)..,best of luck
my thoughts are just that, there are plenty of other valuable opinions out there, my method is pretty much based on volume, others are successful at pounding a line that is off by 2+ points based on what they determine the line to be, I profit more personally on placing 3000 wagers or more and winning appx 55% of them(adjusted with dog ML's). I have some strong trends and angles that historically win about 60% of the time or more, and on those I do risk more. The most important thing is to find what works for you personally. Make it a point to spend some quality time each day going over boxscores and deciding on the legitimacy of each of your wins or losses for that day. In other words was a win deserved or luck (did it play out the way you imagined??) and was a loss a bad call on your part or just a bad beat?? A general rule of thumb is to add up the point differentials between your wins and losses. If you win the games for the day/week/month etc by more points than the points that total negatively against the spread on your losses, then generally that is a good sign. Of course, the bottom line is still 53.4% wins, but I never get too excited about wins by less than 2 points, and I usually try to predict the margin of victory within 2 points to see how well I can handicap the two specific teams. Just a FWIW, I never get tired of hearing other people's opinions. Here is a somewhat related thread with some pretty good info...
What is the best way statistically to increase wager size?
(on page 2 of this forum at the bottom 12-29) I cant get it to paste with the link.
What is the best way statistically to increase wager size?
(on page 2 of this forum at the bottom 12-29) I cant get it to paste with the link.
This is something I am always working on. You can play a larger percentage if you have a smaller amount of plays. Ex, in football I play one game on Saturday and one game in the NFL so I'll play 5% of my bank and get away with it because I do not play again for a week. In bases, hockey or hoops were there is action everyday it's a diferent story. I easily play more than 5 games a day with hockey and MLB so I play less than 1% of my bank. It also depends on your bank size - if your bank is 5k then you are betting $50 at 1% and it seems worthless but if you can get your bank to 25K then each games is $250 and bet 5 games a day and your laying more than a dime a day and that no longer change.
I think you have to be nuts to lay more than 10-15% of your entire bank on one day.
I play everyday all year round. I have weathered awful stretches. Winning alot is the second most important thing - the most important is avoiding losing big because when your bank is gone you don't have the opportunity to win again.
But the bottom line is the more plays you have the smaller the % on each game should be. And don't think you are a pussy if you are betting less than 1% - just get thank bank up and 1% could be a high number and add up quick.
I think you have to be nuts to lay more than 10-15% of your entire bank on one day.
I play everyday all year round. I have weathered awful stretches. Winning alot is the second most important thing - the most important is avoiding losing big because when your bank is gone you don't have the opportunity to win again.
But the bottom line is the more plays you have the smaller the % on each game should be. And don't think you are a pussy if you are betting less than 1% - just get thank bank up and 1% could be a high number and add up quick.
WoW...a lot of good Money Mgmt. tips on this thread. I think everyone needs to find the balance that will work best for them. For me, I will never expose more than 20 percent of my bankroll on any given day. My plays will range from 1%..1.5%...2%...2.5%....3%...3.5%...4%...4.5%...and 5%.
I'll stress that my 4%-5% are not that often. They are mostly dogs and l'll play about 20 of them combined in a year. Most of my plays are 1.5 to 2.5 percent plays.
I agree with ATX that you'll hit a losing skid where you will lose several in a row and the psychological effects that you will face will be tremendous and if you have a big play in the mix it can really mess with your head.
The reality of Sports Betting is this....only about 10 percent of the money bet will change hands in the long run. If your losing more than that you had better start thinking of investing in something else. Sports Betting is not for you. I'm talking about what the serious gambler does, not the recreational one.
Anyone can get hot and win a few games to where you feel you'll never lose. The winning streak will end someday and you'll start to lose. Unless you have a money managment plan to help protect you, you will bankrupt out. That I promise you. Add on the mess you'll be in psychologically and you'll be ready for the looney farm.
To really win at this game one needs to have a stong will to be able to follow a money mgmt. plan and stay straight in the head. With Stocks and Mutual Funds having a tuff time right now Sports Betting is a great way to really make some money, if your strong enough emotionally and smart enough to learn what is required. Best of Luck in whatever you decide...Scott Stalker
I'll stress that my 4%-5% are not that often. They are mostly dogs and l'll play about 20 of them combined in a year. Most of my plays are 1.5 to 2.5 percent plays.
I agree with ATX that you'll hit a losing skid where you will lose several in a row and the psychological effects that you will face will be tremendous and if you have a big play in the mix it can really mess with your head.
The reality of Sports Betting is this....only about 10 percent of the money bet will change hands in the long run. If your losing more than that you had better start thinking of investing in something else. Sports Betting is not for you. I'm talking about what the serious gambler does, not the recreational one.
Anyone can get hot and win a few games to where you feel you'll never lose. The winning streak will end someday and you'll start to lose. Unless you have a money managment plan to help protect you, you will bankrupt out. That I promise you. Add on the mess you'll be in psychologically and you'll be ready for the looney farm.
To really win at this game one needs to have a stong will to be able to follow a money mgmt. plan and stay straight in the head. With Stocks and Mutual Funds having a tuff time right now Sports Betting is a great way to really make some money, if your strong enough emotionally and smart enough to learn what is required. Best of Luck in whatever you decide...Scott Stalker
I play 1% of my roll on every play. No exceptions. I update the roll every Monday. 10 game losing streak is short imo for baseball for a streak unless you play all chalk. 3 plays a day is about 500 plays a season. 12-15 streak loss should happen somewhere. More for me. 3/4 of my plays are dogs.
flat betting is a great strategy, especially when starting out. And by no means do I mean only amateurs flat bet. I flat bet on the vast majority of my wagers, when I wager at higher levels it is usually on some sort of subset that I determine (ex. playoffs, or strong angle that historically produces +60% winners).
The advantages of flat betting IMO (feel free to add or subtract from this):
1. it keeps one from losing big on the "lock" strategy- the fallacy that there is virtually NO WAY a given team can lose the event. Probably the biggest pitfall for bettors is putting a huge chunk of BR on ONE event only to be on the wrong side of a "fix" Boxers like Klitschko lose, as do pitchers like Pedro. I have come across many "professional grade" gamblers that think it is very foolish to flat bet- most of these same people all too often try to explain why this line they determined was 10 points off didnt cash. Whenever I find a spread that seems to be way off (CHI o/u 12) I try very hard to find the data that leads the bookmaker to this conclusion. If I cant reasonably determine what I might have missed, I usually watch line movements VERY closely. If the flow of money doesnt change the line, then usually that is a good indicator of how solid the book maker feels his opinion is on a line (esp. on home dogs). It is generally a bad idea to bet against what I call "bookmaker opinion" over time, and if you are wagering a large chunk of BR on these "locks"...
2. Flat betting helps keep things simple. I have been pissed off at myself plenty of times for going 3-1 and LOSING money. Continuously stressing over the 3X BIG play each day in order to make money sidetracks a lot of people from what the goal should be- spotting enough value to win +52.4% of the time. If each wager is the same size, then one must only spot events that have a 55% chance of winning to do fine (sounds a little too simple...). If you feel that you have enough experience to vary wager size, set parameters for those types of wagers. A great starting point could be a home conference in NCAA sports where you could have more time and info access than the bookmaker and have a bit more of an edge. Write down something like- I have decided to wager 1% on NCAA basketball games, but 2% on Big Sky inter-conference games because last year I won 59% of those bets. All too often those double bets will stray to random top 10 teams (on the road), and that will usually take away from the edge you are trying to establish. Keeping accurate records is really the only way to see what kind of edge, if any, that you have over the house, and it is a LOT harder to go broke when you are flat betting at a low percentage of BR WHILE you are tracking how those BIG wagers would have done over time.
Stay away from parlays. Just stay away. The worst thing that can happen to someone starting out is winning a couple of parlays. Nothing builds that invincible feeling more than the winning parlay. Ever see the Hilton NFL Parlay Contest? Ever see anyone anywhere post only parlays? nope. Not only will you pay more juice on them (except 3teamers), but you will PROFIT MORE by playing each play straight up, over time. And worst of all is playing a few games, and then parlaying all of them together on top of the straight wagers...I do play a few parlays, but almost the only time that I play them is when I can reasonably determine that one outcome is correlated to another- same game side and total. I generally play this parlay when I am worried that if I played the side straight up and the total straight up that if the other team scored just x amount of points it could very easily cause both bets to lose, these are few and far between.
The advantages of flat betting IMO (feel free to add or subtract from this):
1. it keeps one from losing big on the "lock" strategy- the fallacy that there is virtually NO WAY a given team can lose the event. Probably the biggest pitfall for bettors is putting a huge chunk of BR on ONE event only to be on the wrong side of a "fix" Boxers like Klitschko lose, as do pitchers like Pedro. I have come across many "professional grade" gamblers that think it is very foolish to flat bet- most of these same people all too often try to explain why this line they determined was 10 points off didnt cash. Whenever I find a spread that seems to be way off (CHI o/u 12) I try very hard to find the data that leads the bookmaker to this conclusion. If I cant reasonably determine what I might have missed, I usually watch line movements VERY closely. If the flow of money doesnt change the line, then usually that is a good indicator of how solid the book maker feels his opinion is on a line (esp. on home dogs). It is generally a bad idea to bet against what I call "bookmaker opinion" over time, and if you are wagering a large chunk of BR on these "locks"...
2. Flat betting helps keep things simple. I have been pissed off at myself plenty of times for going 3-1 and LOSING money. Continuously stressing over the 3X BIG play each day in order to make money sidetracks a lot of people from what the goal should be- spotting enough value to win +52.4% of the time. If each wager is the same size, then one must only spot events that have a 55% chance of winning to do fine (sounds a little too simple...). If you feel that you have enough experience to vary wager size, set parameters for those types of wagers. A great starting point could be a home conference in NCAA sports where you could have more time and info access than the bookmaker and have a bit more of an edge. Write down something like- I have decided to wager 1% on NCAA basketball games, but 2% on Big Sky inter-conference games because last year I won 59% of those bets. All too often those double bets will stray to random top 10 teams (on the road), and that will usually take away from the edge you are trying to establish. Keeping accurate records is really the only way to see what kind of edge, if any, that you have over the house, and it is a LOT harder to go broke when you are flat betting at a low percentage of BR WHILE you are tracking how those BIG wagers would have done over time.
Stay away from parlays. Just stay away. The worst thing that can happen to someone starting out is winning a couple of parlays. Nothing builds that invincible feeling more than the winning parlay. Ever see the Hilton NFL Parlay Contest? Ever see anyone anywhere post only parlays? nope. Not only will you pay more juice on them (except 3teamers), but you will PROFIT MORE by playing each play straight up, over time. And worst of all is playing a few games, and then parlaying all of them together on top of the straight wagers...I do play a few parlays, but almost the only time that I play them is when I can reasonably determine that one outcome is correlated to another- same game side and total. I generally play this parlay when I am worried that if I played the side straight up and the total straight up that if the other team scored just x amount of points it could very easily cause both bets to lose, these are few and far between.
my strategy is to wager flat but with gradations say about 15% to 30% percent higher or lower than my set unit. I also bet different amounts on the leagues and/or sports i can cap more succesfully. And sometimes i do go for the killing, betting up to 5 times my unit, but no more, and i ve had my ass handed to me many a time by overstaking a bet, but with time i ve become better at: a. chosing my spots where i ll bet more. b. making it a rule not to wager more than 5 units, even if i am going for the "killing".
btw, let me add here, that there two more important things than money management.
a. keeping your head together during losing streaks and bad beats. No one will go chasing a loss due to ignorance of money management principles, he/she will do that because they ve let the betting game get to them.
b. know your sport. If you dont know your sport inside out and upside down, you ll never make it. It's like knowing your field of investment, no matter how well i manage my funds i know i ll never do well in medical equipement co.'s stock market, because i know shit about the field. You might have mastered all that there is to betting in general, and be some sort of guru, but if you dont know the particular sport, forget it. I ve met for example some older sports bettors that might not even have a clue about what juice is or line shopping, and just because they ve been that particular sport's fans for ages, have the experience and insight to make money, reaching the right conclusion via feel, while another might go through stats/trends/news etc. for hours and still end up a loser because they havent got that feel for the game.
a. keeping your head together during losing streaks and bad beats. No one will go chasing a loss due to ignorance of money management principles, he/she will do that because they ve let the betting game get to them.
b. know your sport. If you dont know your sport inside out and upside down, you ll never make it. It's like knowing your field of investment, no matter how well i manage my funds i know i ll never do well in medical equipement co.'s stock market, because i know shit about the field. You might have mastered all that there is to betting in general, and be some sort of guru, but if you dont know the particular sport, forget it. I ve met for example some older sports bettors that might not even have a clue about what juice is or line shopping, and just because they ve been that particular sport's fans for ages, have the experience and insight to make money, reaching the right conclusion via feel, while another might go through stats/trends/news etc. for hours and still end up a loser because they havent got that feel for the game.
Very good topic and intelligent answers from some posters that I have a lot of respect for on this forum. Hopefully CJH034 you can take all this info in and make your wagering sucess more profitable. I will add a couple things that I do to profit from wagering. I agree with ATX about playing a lot of games. Any game that I have the slightest egde even if it is only a 54% winner of the time is worth a play. There is no reason not to play it when over the course of time you will have an advantage and your going to make money over that period of time. By not betting those you are just costing yourself money along the way. If I see value I am betting it. I also agree that by playing alot of games you will lose close to 10 wagers in a row and maybe more at some point over the course of the year and probably 17-18 out of 20 once a year. It is the law of averages and is bound to happen. Bear in mind that you will also have winning streaks of 10 and winning 17-18 out of 20 games more often than you will have losing streaks if you are consistently picking winners. If you can cap a bunch of sports you can cut down those numbers for the losing streaks. From personal expierence it is hard for me to losing at hockey, basketball, football all at one time. Usually if one sport is on a losing streak the others are picking up small profits to cut down the loses that the one sport is accumulating. I can think of examples last year that I went 0-5 on a Saturday in football but swept the board 4-0 in pucks and went 4-1 in baskets or vice versa. By no means does this guarantee that you won't have losing months but it will cut down loses drasticlly.
As for how much you can lay in a day of your banrkoll I don't really have a set percentage to go over or under but I can tell you that there are days that I have had 35-40% of my bank on the line. When you play a lot of games that is going to happen. This only happens when Football, Basketball, and Hockey are going on a Saturday and I find a lot of value. Just becuase I have already risked 20% of my bank I am not going to pass on games becasue I have too much bankroll on the line when I have a statistical advantage on other games. To clarify 99% of my wagers are 2% or 3% of my bankroll with the occasional 4% on a game I feel very strong about. Sometimes 3 times a month sometimes 0 in a month. For the most part an average day I have 15-18% on the line daily.
Something I wanted to add to the discussion is that when taking a percentage of your bankroll it should always relate to your current bankroll for that day. Example is lets say your bankroll is $5,000 today 1 unit would = $50. If you won $200 for that day you would add the profits up to your previous bankroll and you would now have $5,200. For today's games you would be betting $52 a unit. By doing this you maximize profits during winning streaks and cut your loses during losing streaks. You can never lose your entire bankroll by betting 2-3% of your current bankroll and this is how smart players survive losing streaks and how they also make a ton of money over an extended period of time.
In closing if you don't have a strong money managment system down you will not make it long betting on sports. Good luck with your wagering guys.
As for how much you can lay in a day of your banrkoll I don't really have a set percentage to go over or under but I can tell you that there are days that I have had 35-40% of my bank on the line. When you play a lot of games that is going to happen. This only happens when Football, Basketball, and Hockey are going on a Saturday and I find a lot of value. Just becuase I have already risked 20% of my bank I am not going to pass on games becasue I have too much bankroll on the line when I have a statistical advantage on other games. To clarify 99% of my wagers are 2% or 3% of my bankroll with the occasional 4% on a game I feel very strong about. Sometimes 3 times a month sometimes 0 in a month. For the most part an average day I have 15-18% on the line daily.
Something I wanted to add to the discussion is that when taking a percentage of your bankroll it should always relate to your current bankroll for that day. Example is lets say your bankroll is $5,000 today 1 unit would = $50. If you won $200 for that day you would add the profits up to your previous bankroll and you would now have $5,200. For today's games you would be betting $52 a unit. By doing this you maximize profits during winning streaks and cut your loses during losing streaks. You can never lose your entire bankroll by betting 2-3% of your current bankroll and this is how smart players survive losing streaks and how they also make a ton of money over an extended period of time.
In closing if you don't have a strong money managment system down you will not make it long betting on sports. Good luck with your wagering guys.
Money Management is directly related to your ability to handicap.
I have spent an unholy amount of time trying to find a winning handicapping method for college football and college basketball.
I have spent years in this pursuit.
When I first began handicapping, I bet a three team parlay which lost to the number by 97 points.
When your handicapping is this bad, you have one of two options...bet the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM (minimize your stupidity) OR DON'T WAGER AT ALL (get smart in a hurry).
Going O-3 is not a crime...losing to the number by 97 points is a handicapping felony.
When your handicapping reasoning is this far off the track, Money Management should not be an issue.
You should have enough sense to tell yourself, "I don't know what the hell I'm doing and I better re-think my handicapping approach before I risk another penny."
ATX wrote, "The first thing you MUST REALIZE is that you WILL lose at least 8 IN A ROW at some point, and that is conservative."
Losing 8 in a row is not good, but how much did you lose those games by is the question.
Let's take football for example, if you lost 8 in a row by less than 3 points each, that's one thing, but if you lost 8 in a row by more than 10 points each...your handicapping is in need of serious repair. Money Management can and will protect poor handicapping, but the fact remains poor handicapping is the issue.
Let's take the opposite view...
Let's assume you win 8 in a row...
Is there a difference if you win 8 in a row by less than 3 points each game or win 8 in a row by more than 10 points each game?
You're damn right there is!
Winning 8 in a row by more than 10 points each is 8 solid covers and in my book, that amounts to sharp handicapping.
When you're doing something right and the outcomes follow your line of reasoning which results in several consecutive solid covers, then Money Management can be gradually increased because you have a proven method of being able to identify a probable side.
And that is not easily accomplished.
I have spent an unholy amount of time trying to find a winning handicapping method for college football and college basketball.
I have spent years in this pursuit.
When I first began handicapping, I bet a three team parlay which lost to the number by 97 points.
When your handicapping is this bad, you have one of two options...bet the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM (minimize your stupidity) OR DON'T WAGER AT ALL (get smart in a hurry).
Going O-3 is not a crime...losing to the number by 97 points is a handicapping felony.
When your handicapping reasoning is this far off the track, Money Management should not be an issue.
You should have enough sense to tell yourself, "I don't know what the hell I'm doing and I better re-think my handicapping approach before I risk another penny."
ATX wrote, "The first thing you MUST REALIZE is that you WILL lose at least 8 IN A ROW at some point, and that is conservative."
Losing 8 in a row is not good, but how much did you lose those games by is the question.
Let's take football for example, if you lost 8 in a row by less than 3 points each, that's one thing, but if you lost 8 in a row by more than 10 points each...your handicapping is in need of serious repair. Money Management can and will protect poor handicapping, but the fact remains poor handicapping is the issue.
Let's take the opposite view...
Let's assume you win 8 in a row...
Is there a difference if you win 8 in a row by less than 3 points each game or win 8 in a row by more than 10 points each game?
You're damn right there is!
Winning 8 in a row by more than 10 points each is 8 solid covers and in my book, that amounts to sharp handicapping.
When you're doing something right and the outcomes follow your line of reasoning which results in several consecutive solid covers, then Money Management can be gradually increased because you have a proven method of being able to identify a probable side.
And that is not easily accomplished.
JackDee wrote:
"know your sport. If you dont know your sport inside out and upside down, you ll never make it. It's like knowing your field of investment, no matter how well i manage my funds i know i ll never do well in medical equipement co.'s stock market, because i know shit about the field. You might have mastered all that there is to betting in general, and be some sort of guru, but if you dont know the particular sport, forget it."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THIS IS TRULY EXCELLENT ADVICE
"know your sport. If you dont know your sport inside out and upside down, you ll never make it. It's like knowing your field of investment, no matter how well i manage my funds i know i ll never do well in medical equipement co.'s stock market, because i know shit about the field. You might have mastered all that there is to betting in general, and be some sort of guru, but if you dont know the particular sport, forget it."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THIS IS TRULY EXCELLENT ADVICE
