MathProf said:There's more than one "Mad Bumper"
You know, your consistency seems worth graphing;
I can't be sure since I'm not writing down each day
but a line graph would be very interesting
Meanwhile, good luckto us!
Thanks Prof....i try not to get too high over the wins, and too low over the losses.....thats why i limit my units, and try to play about the same each day....whats the point of upping units on every single game just to get a "positive" record.....Is a guy who loses 10 straight 10 units plays, then wins 1 (1000) unit play so he is +900 units...
Would u rather follow that, or someone that hit 10 straight 2 units plays and is 20 units ahead.......its about money management, and winnings,thats all..
Bucsfan and Choptalk,
Of course I agree with you both; the optimal formula for
any wager is the correct % of existing bankroll.
That % should probably fluctuate between 5% to
(rarely 15%) which if I understand your "Units" concept,
means 1 to 3 units.
Larger investments really cannot be justified,
unless one has a enormous expectation of winning (which is
probably inflated).
Of course I agree with you both; the optimal formula for
any wager is the correct % of existing bankroll.
That % should probably fluctuate between 5% to
(rarely 15%) which if I understand your "Units" concept,
means 1 to 3 units.
Larger investments really cannot be justified,
unless one has a enormous expectation of winning (which is
probably inflated).
MathProf said:Bucsfan and Choptalk,
Of course I agree with you both; the optimal formula for
any wager is the correct % of existing bankroll.
That % should probably fluctuate between 5% to
(rarely 15%) which if I understand your "Units" concept,
means 1 to 3 units.
Larger investments really cannot be justified,
unless one has a enormous expectation of winning (which is
probably inflated).
For me to put even 15% of my bankroll on a game, it would have to be the game of the decade:lolBIG: . Poor money management kills more than poor handicapping. Bucsfan seems to have this figured out, if he bets the same way he post.
MathProf said:Bucsfan and Choptalk,
Of course I agree with you both; the optimal formula for
any wager is the correct % of existing bankroll.
That % should probably fluctuate between 5% to
(rarely 15%) which if I understand your "Units" concept,
means 1 to 3 units.
Larger investments really cannot be justified,
unless one has a enormous expectation of winning (which is
probably inflated).
WOW!!! 5% of your bankroll would be a small play?? 15% for a large play? I think a vast majority of bettors would consider betting 3% of their bankroll on a play aggressive. Ever have a 0-6 or 7 day? Unless you can re-load your bankroll without any stress or hardship you're staring failure in the face with 5%+ plays.
degenerategambler said:
I agree...15% of your bankroll on a play, it better be a good one....especially if you are like me, and like to bet different sports at the same time...
As much as I like bases, i will certainly be playing some nba tomorrow, and probably the ARena league tv game on sunday, so i tend to use a smaller %, so that i can enjoy the various sports....
I dont have the "neverending" bankroll that some people seem to have when making plays, therefore i make mine stretch.....however, i do stick to the units i play here as far as how small or how large i play....
I dont really think it matters if a guy has 500 to play with, and uses 10.00 as a unit, or if he has 10,000 and uses 500 as a unit, as long as you are consistant in your betting, and %, its the same deal to each guy..
Optimal formula assumes non-simultaneous plays and is always a % of
your current bankroll. With simultaneous plays the % wagered
should be reduced but betting 30% of bankroll at once is
certainly reasonable over numerous plays.
Losing seven consecutive plays at 10% of bankroll still leaves
you with 48.5% of original bankroll. If you are truly a 60%
handicapper, the chances of losing seven consecutive plays
is 1.6 out of 1000.
The problem with most gamblers is that they significantly
over-estimate their winning ability and therefore bet too
much on any given play (which is the surest way to
achieve bankruptcy).
There is no such thing as a ten* play unless the fix is in!
your current bankroll. With simultaneous plays the % wagered
should be reduced but betting 30% of bankroll at once is
certainly reasonable over numerous plays.
Losing seven consecutive plays at 10% of bankroll still leaves
you with 48.5% of original bankroll. If you are truly a 60%
handicapper, the chances of losing seven consecutive plays
is 1.6 out of 1000.
The problem with most gamblers is that they significantly
over-estimate their winning ability and therefore bet too
much on any given play (which is the surest way to
achieve bankruptcy).
There is no such thing as a ten* play unless the fix is in!
Too each their own, for those that don't much about money management, I would suggest starting a thread in the main forum and asking the opinions of others before betting 5%/play as a base play. I have had days where I have had 15 plays for the day or more accross many sports. If you can pick 60% winners, you can probably bet 5%/play. I don't personally know of anyone who has a long term winning record of 60%. Mathprof, if you are in the .001% of cappers who is a long term 60% capper, you are probably underbetting. But for anyone who is starting out, and isn't one of the most elite handi-cappers on the planet, you would be wise to consider a much smaller % per play. Bucs, sorry we hijacked your thread on this topic, I'll leave it alone now, but I would hate to see someone who doesn't know any better start making unreasonable bets based on what they may have read here.
I agree - we shouldn't hijack Bucsfan's thread; maybe
I'll open a thread elsewhere (still new to this, not sure where).
Overbetting is the curse that ruins gamblers; bookies and
casino's thrive on this.
Underbetting relegates your efforts to "entertainment"
rather than maximizing profits.
Thanks Bucsfan for putting up with this diversion -
just keep doing what you're doing and we'll all be
happy!
I'll open a thread elsewhere (still new to this, not sure where).
Overbetting is the curse that ruins gamblers; bookies and
casino's thrive on this.
Underbetting relegates your efforts to "entertainment"
rather than maximizing profits.
Thanks Bucsfan for putting up with this diversion -
just keep doing what you're doing and we'll all be
happy!
MathProf said:I agree - we shouldn't hijack Bucsfan's thread; maybe
I'll open a thread elsewhere (still new to this, not sure where).
Overbetting is the curse that ruins gamblers; bookies and
casino's thrive on this.
Underbetting relegates your efforts to "entertainment"
rather than maximizing profits.
Thanks Bucsfan for putting up with this diversion -
just keep doing what you're doing and we'll all be
happy!
Not worried about hijacking my thread....my plays are listed, you are doing no harm....And i always enjoy reading stuff like this, different theories, etc. about gambling.....I dont think we can ever have TOO MUCH info...
Good stuff
