Explain to me..............

[bear]

In another thread, and in MOST discussions of money mgmt in gambling...........the good folks here at MJ's talk and play in terms of ......UNITS........and MULTIPLES of their unit plays.

Yet, in discussion of what it takes to WIN at this endeavor we use PERCENTAGE terms.......54% ???

Is any 1 game 2 times as likely to cover its pointspread as another (not usually???) how about 3x as likely???...if yes.... then this (in my mind) would justify betting in units and MULTIPLE units. But such is not the case.. pointspreads ...(the great equalizers) are usually pretty tight.

SO,,,, over the long haul, % increases or decreases (way less than 100%) in unit play seem to make much more sense if ya wanna finish on the + side.. THOUGHTS??

bear

 

[Patternseeker]

bear

bear

first i'll qualify by saying that in my 10 years of gambling i have NOT made money, so others are no doubt better able to address this, if i am reading your post correctly,

the straight wager and the percentage to see profit is, as you say, around 54%, at least in wagers of 10 percent juice.

and actually when i look at what records i do have, if i would have stayed with straight wagers -- and not thought, i'm REAL sure of this one, so i'll go double units -- my record would be alot better.

so actually if you count a 2 unit wager and address it as two bets you can still address the percentage issue.

at least this is what i think on sunday night after a few brews.

(a yyz follower)

 

[bear]

Let me add....that would mean % increases or decreases of your standard unit play.....not % of your bankroll. That is nothing less than betting in multiples...2% to 4% or 6 % of bankroll.
?????????

To me it just seems far more sensible and in tune with probability to increase and decrease based on a plan to win 50 to 54 % of the time and be +++ at the end...


bear

 

[Patternseeker]

bear with me

bear with me

i am probably not understanding, but how would a % increase in betting size not actually be reflected in % of bankroll?

 

[freelancc]

its cool.. everyone has their system of qualifying picks. Part of the confusion engendered by the "touts" is their way of being vague and disceptive...

i am a 6 year sports enthusiast, winning money on 3 of the years. All i care about is cashing out money (as often as i can) or at least after the SuperBowl.

essentially the event of keeping track (W-L or or %) comes down to us and our bankroll. No one else comes into play here (unless you are a "service".

Good luck to everyone... may the season bring us many "pounders"

 

[bear]

Patternseeker..

I would suggest increasing a standard unit play of $100 by say 25% to $125 if you go below a certain overall % in your cumulative picks (say 47%) you've been cold!!! stay at 125 till you get to 50% then back to your standard unit of $ 100....and so on

that 25% increase in your unit play may only equate to a 1/2% increase if your bankroll is 5000 and YES you are right........... any increase in bet will be a larger % of bankroll than the standard unit..........its just easier to talk % in whole percentages of the standard unit........than 1/2 % increase of bankroll.
Going from a 2% of bankroll bet to a 4% of bankroll is basicallya large jump in wager to a multiple of 2....to 6% of bankroll (a multiple of 3) .........To me ....way too much.....no game is that soft???????????...........

bear

 

[yyz]

Let me ask you this:

Randy Johnson was -400 today. If he was +400 would you make a larger wager? I know I would!

The basis for risking more money on certain plays, is due to the fact that one thinks this game has a greater propensity to win, over a standard wager. Why? Handicapping, of course.

To say that a person should only risk the same amount on every wager, seems to close the window on some opportunities. Again, if you saw Florida State at +50 yesterday, would you bet the same amount that you normally do? I sure hope not.

Now, this is where you say, "Those are not realistic examples.", and you would be correct. But, in my way of looking at games, there is a point when a game has more value than another game, and the wager size should be bumped. Let's face it......if the games all ended close to the spread, it might be foolish to make multiple unit bets, but the spread gets pounded very often, and some people have a knack for knowing when it is wrong in certain spots.

I will use our old friend JT Sneaks as a classic reason for this methodology. He won something like 14 in a row last season in hoops right out of the gate. (These were his 4 unit plays........he runs the same 1-4 spread that I do.) That means he can lose over 40 single unit games, and still be up cash!

If you are not comfortable using a unit system, then you should not. Pure and simple.

 

[bear]

YYZ

My point is RJ wont be +400....and .....he loses too.
Spreads are tight......usually.........that is not to say some teams wont come close each week.......SOME WILL NOT......if you could tell me ..or if anyone could...... WHICH GAMES on a consistent basis....over the hundreds of bets made each season.....we'd never work again.....

SO,........my point is RJ is probably appropriatly priced each time out........and IF NOT.....the number is not off by enough to DOUBLE or TRIPLE your bet......Cause if he loses you'll have a tough time comin outa that hole.

Rather.......smaller % increases/decreases on standard bet.....trying to pick the W's at 54% will get the job done systematically and handily.

bear

 

[bear]

No question.....people get HOT and people get Cold, knack, biorhythems, intuitive.....whatever

AND some are very good handicappers....I dont have the confidence to know which 1 game is so good it warrants a 400% increase in my bet. so if I bet 4 x my standard unit ( and I do) I'm just trying to "send it in" cause I'm up and trying to score in a much bigger way.............Thats Gambling ....and not the smartest way to play IMHO

bear

 

[Patternseeker]

bear

i see what you're saying.

but, it's a question i've read much about on this board: do linesmakers know the sport so well (after playing ten years and seeing the randomness of the game i highly doubt this) that the lines are somehow almost prophetic,

or, is it that the linesmakers want to create a line that will evenly distribute the juice. i know if i were a linemaker, i wouldn't give a dam about who won, but in a perfect world i'd like 50 bets for and 50 against. that way i'm making money.

and for my two cents, bear, i'm siding that the bookmakers aremore into popular psychology (remember old days of dallas always being favored?) than some kind of knowledge about how the game will end.

i think the game is too random for that.


(yyz follower)

 

[bear]

patternseeker,

I do indeed remember the days when contrarian psychology produced BIG winners and it still does....but with the dissemination of information what it is today........the data, news, weather....up to date info....etc... at everyones fingertips...........including some very bright people...... lines (it is my guess) are more mathematically derived than ever before and usually tight...much tougher than 20 years ago.

There are situations where soft lines result.
Example: BC -35 vs CT (early line) BC beat CT by about 50 last time they met.
This year ....CT much more competitive than that team and BC IMHO is not as good.
CT is something like 6-1 as dogs of 21 or more in recent past.

BIG team vs newcomer........kicked their ass last time out
35 seems reasonable to get 50-50....but to me its soft!!

Worth 400% more than Maryland +1 over Notre Dame
NOPE! I gotta be smarter to try to win these days!

bear

 

[yyz]

bear,

You are right, RJ won't be +400, and I even said that you would say that.

That doesn't mean that the Redskins won't be a 1 point favorite some day, when you figure them to be a 10 point favorite. Just like anything, some see it one way, some see it another.

I can only assume that a person who bets a standard sum on every game, or plays by increasing/decreasing the amount of a wager only based upon total bankroll, handicaps games as "win or lose" propositions.

What I mean is, you either have a bet on a game, or you have no play. There is no varying scale in your mind. You don't say, "I really like this game!", as it is wieghted the same as a game that just makes your criteria of an acceptable wager. That I will never understand. So, if you do ever see a line that seems quite a bit off to you, and don't risk more on it, I compair that to not doubling down on an 11 hand against a dealer's 16 hand. You are missing a chance to make some extra cake.

Sometimes you don't win.....true enough, but as you said, if we always won, we wouldn't be working. And if I won every double down and split in blackjack, I wouldn't need to work, either.

 

[ferdville]

Some great points here - I have to side with yyz. Everything lies in the eyes of the player - Value is what you search for on a regular basis. It certainly doesn't guarantee a win every time, but that isn't realistic under any terms. If you are going to bet a game just because it is on tv and you have nothing else to do, you probably wouldn't or certainly shouldn't make a standard bet on that game. And if you have capped a game every which way or have some information that isn't available to others and you feel the line is off in your favor, you will also adjust your bet accordingly. I think what causes many people to lose money over a course of time is that their betting size is more haphazard than logical. I know that I have had that problem in the past.

 

[bear]

Ferdville....

Haphazard betting styles....a good way to put it!
that is why I would suggest some discipline and a workable money mgmt. system that will allow the 50% picker to Win.

There are a lotta 55-60% players who lose their ass!
Because they are always trying for the big score and betting big multiples of their standard unit. 1 loss kills a lotta good capping profits.....a couple of interceptions, fumbles and the team that Wins all the stats loses!!!!!!!!!!!

No, I'm not suggesting .........no variance in bet size if ya love a game.....and think ya can hit this type of game 70% or 60% or 65% of the time. (I'd like to see it). If I KNEW I could hit a particular spot 60 to 70% .........I'd be a rich man. But if ya love a game up your standard bet by 50%....maybe 70% ....not 400% and plan on being around at the end of the season with a profit!

AND if ya have those 4x games each week....I suggest playing only those and make the big bucks.
Most of us cannot identify lines that soft with any degree of consistency.

bear

 

[ferdville]

Bear - you are exactly right. Reminds me of the too many days I have spent at the race track and seen guys have 4 or 5 winners in a day and still lose money? How - not playing the winner straight; tying up money in exotics that don't hit, etc. Not having a sound money management system will drown anybody that doesn't hit 58% or more.

 

[kcwolf]

Bear,

Very good subject, and as a very good internet friend, I'd like to reply. I have a feeling you might be drawing me into this conversation. If not, I apoligize.

yyz put it very well. I'd like to elaborate, briefly.

If you really enjoy handicapping, you first of all have had some sort of level of success. Why else would you enjoy it?

You wouldn't.

Show me someone who plays all games equal over ten years, he or she will be an under achiever as a good handicapper. They could have made more, rating their plays.

Complicated, nothing is easy, but food for thought.

Think about it. I have strong thoughts on this subject. I'll leave you with a quote from the best, and sure is hell wasn't me:

"Show me someone who plays every game the same, I'll show you a loser"

Personally, I call them under achievers. Loser is to brash for me. Get the point?

 

[bear]

Ah, KC....

My good friend....Capper of great excellence, and high standards!!

NO...no intent to draw anyone into this discussion! I simply believe that while there are many who enjoy this pastime..there are precious few........who are successful with any degree of regularity!And you are one of the best!!................ Sure everyone has their big hits but I think that most find it hard to beat the vig.........Add money mgmt problems and we find a lotta people chasing the dream of being one of the few who can live off this biz!!!

Now,
My premise is NOT necessarily to play a standard bet for 10 or more years..........or even one year for that matter! It is ..."Bet with your head and dont get your ass kicked" .............AND.....when a person becomes successful and is WINNING $$$ then UP THE STANDARD UNIT.........and perhaps the risk on games they "LOVE"
but........not 400% 500% increases in unit.......when.......with the (usually pretty accurate pointspread) most games are at 50/50 .....................(even with computer analysis....Harvard MBAs...etc trying to figure them out) To me .....the public may not see a particular game as a 50/50 proposition...and thats when people start to load up (watch out!).......but thats a whole different discussion.

So, flip a coin.......100 or 200 times ........bet on heads $100 per flip.......Go below 47% winners up your bet to 125.......Over 53%
go down to $80..............See how ya make out

Example: 12 games at random W, +100...L,-88..W +100,..L -88,..L -110,..L -137.5,W,+ 125..L, -137.5..W+125..L -137.5,W +125..,W +125, .....Results/ 50% Winners and money mgmt beats the vig...............This is just hypothetical........BUT......suppose ya can hit 54% or 60% (Yer in the $) ....thats the idea.. Great Cappers, like yourself, don't need these suggestions.........But they MAY make sense to the few who MAY be, as Ferdville said "haphazard" in their betting...

bear

 

[SLAM DUNK]

I am going to explain my take on why one would want to play 1 to 4 units per play. To me a unit would be 1 % of bankroll. In order to play a game for 4 units a game should have an expected hit rate of 60% +. 2 unit games should be in the say 55% range, 3 unit games in between, 1 unit games would be more like action plays. (By the way the reason you bet twice as much on a 60% game as a 55% game is because you CAN-these are the percentages(of bankroll) you can afford to bet without tapping out the bankroll over the long run assuming your estimations are accurate).


In theory, your long term percentages will look something like

1 unit 52%

2 units 55%

3 units 57 %

4 units 59%


Of course we know that 95 of 100(if not more) players that try the above format will fall well short of the expected percentages(especially in the 3 and 4 unit range). So what that means is that should you struggle badly on your 3 and 4 unit games(one of those dreaded bad streaks) you have a far greater risk of losing your bankroll(the point of this thread).

Which brings on the more important question "how does a player know what constitutes a 60% game or a 55% etc". The answer is the majority do not. Either you have to do some extensive database analysis (to determine what situations hit what % over large samples and even that is subject to aberrations or misineterpreting data or incomplete data). This type of analysis is not done by most players so your typical player has to use a less scientific approach. Something to the tune of rating each game 1 to 4 "units", charting their long term results for each category and find out what their own personal percentage is. The problem with this approach is consistency. Gambling is a very emotional hobby and what may be a 2 unit play one day may be a 1, 3 or 4 unit play two months later just because of circumstances(too timid, too agressive, just got burned or scored on a similar type play....) Another problem is the evolution of the player. I made a whole lot of plays 3 years ago that I would not make today and vice versa. So if I was basing my unit approach on the fact that I hit x% on 3 unit plays over the last 5 years my estimation is hardly indicative of what my 3 unit plays will do this season.

Just some thoughts on the subject. Tend to agree with the message brought up that players need to be careful. It is far better to error on the side of caution and stay in the game(even if you fail to maximize profits by "underbetting" your strong games). Also inexperienced players may actually run into an opposing phenomenon where they actually hit higher percentages on the 1 and 2 units plays than the 3 or 4 unit plays thus minimizing profits or maximizing losses-whichever the case might be.

I think the bottom line if you are an experienced(many years of experience) winner and keep very good records the 1 to 4 unit approach can serve you well. Until then tread cautiously. We all have different styles and temperments. Keep good records and learn what works best for YOU.