Forum: Classic Threads From The Past - Visit here for a great "blast from the past" and view some terrific, informative and interesting "Classic Threads" posted by thousands of savvy sportsbettors over the years here at The Rx.com.....

Thread: how high of "ROI" would be considered good

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
  1. #26  
    Rx Wizard Iceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    LasVegas...okay?
    Posts
    11,732
    just baffles me that some guys argument is that this a waste of time. Gambling involves a ton of math related situations and I guess people are to scared or lazy to figure this out, makes no sense. Anyone betting moneyline sports should know is ROI, how do you keep score?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #27  
    RX Senior
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,385
    it late and my math may be wrong. but 1500 playsat 100 a play is 150,000 of investment worth 7500 net wheres as 14 percent of 300 plays is 5000 net. seems like a lot of work for an extra few bucks.

    I understand the philosphy and use it in the stock market daily.
    by the way i work in d.c. near mazza gallery. if your near there we could do lunch as they say. if it works my email is elbokas@aol.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #28  
    RX Senior edub69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    3,443
    Quote Originally Posted by ice man
    just baffles me that some guys argument is that this a waste of time. Gambling involves a ton of math related situations and I guess people are to scared or lazy to figure this out, makes no sense. Anyone betting moneyline sports should know is ROI, how do you keep score?
    I could easily calculate and give more weight to my ROI, I just feel that it would prevent me from taking what the board gives me, so to speak, if I were aiming for a specific target.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #29  
    2006 People Magazine's Sexiest Handicapper Alive Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    1,201
    Quote Originally Posted by heart222
    it late and my math may be wrong. but 1500 playsat 100 a play is 150,000 of investment worth 7500 net wheres as 14 percent of 300 plays is 5000 net. seems like a lot of work for an extra few bucks.

    I understand the philosphy and use it in the stock market daily.
    by the way i work in d.c. near mazza gallery. if your near there we could do lunch as they say. if it works my email is elbokas@aol.com

    what you wrote is true, it is a lot of extra work for only an extra $2,500....

    but that's assuming you're wagering only $100/play...

    i was referring to the guys who do this for a living...and trust me, they're not wagering $100/play.

    i can't speak for anyone but myself, but when you're risking $1,000/play and up, an extra 50% profit each year is definitely worth the time it takes.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #30  
    Rx Wizard Iceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    LasVegas...okay?
    Posts
    11,732
    Quote Originally Posted by pb&j
    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?
    The differnce is the word "leverage". If you play 2,500 plays a year at $550 a play that is $1,250,000 invested, at a 3% return that is a profit of $37,500. Do I have $1,250,000 to take down to a broker tomorrow? NO. This is why sports gambling is so much more profitable for the little man than the market( not saying safer). When you make alot of plays you end up putting your money to work harder for you than just sticking it in the market. Much like real-estate "leverage" in sports gambling is getting the most out of your money/bankroll.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #31  
    Rx Wizard Iceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    LasVegas...okay?
    Posts
    11,732
    It's not return on bankroll, it's return on on all bets added together(investment)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #32  
    RX Senior wantitall4moi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    1,563
    Anything over 5% is good. If you are scalping, arbitraging, buying back etc, 5-6% is probably a high estimate. 3-4% is probably a good target.

    That is calculated by taking every bet you make, adding it all up, and figuring out what profits you showed at the end of the cycle. If I put $1 through the windows, and I make a profit of 50K, that is 5% ROI. Might not be the classic way to figure it out, but that is how I do it. Every bet I make I consider an investment, whether I can lose it or not.

    I could just as easilly say my ROI is 105% at the same figure. If I am gauranteed a 5% scalp then my "investment" is only what I have to "lose" to "win". Sine I am not losing anything, then it is all profit. Even though one side does in fact "lose" the other side is above a 100% expectation.

    But if a guy puts $3-4 million in bets a year, he generally is looking to make 150-200K. He will settle for 100-150, but it is always better to aim a little higher.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #33  
    RX Wizard cincy_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    8,834
    Quote Originally Posted by wantitall4moi

    I could just as easilly say my ROI is 105% at the same figure. If I am gauranteed a 5% scalp then my "investment" is only what I have to "lose" to "win". Sine I am not losing anything, then it is all profit. Even though one side does in fact "lose" the other side is above a 100% expectation.
    I have kept saying that there are so many variables to consider that it is USELESS to just calculate ROI like it's such a big deal. It is simply ONE NUMBER OUT OF MANY that we can use, and we can certainly do without.

    and wantitall brings up a valid point - If I scalp -110 against a +115 what is my ROI? Anyone want to take a shot at answering that?

    If you say it's 5/225*100% and follow the normal procedure, then you're not taking into account that the risk is ZERO.

    The bottom line is that the ROI by itself is useless and there are MANY MANY ways to track your wagers/bankroll etc. Just because a guy doesn't calculate his ROI doesn't mean diddly.

    This past week I have been trying to roll my money over at Legendz by scalping so I can keep the 20% bonus. If I ever try to track that with an ROI, it gives me USELESS information. There are too many variable to say that one piece of information is so important.

    Categorizing plays (dogs, favs, unders, overs, NBA, NFL) is far more important that ROI.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #34  
    RX Senior wantitall4moi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    1,563
    Quote Originally Posted by cincy_
    I have kept saying that there are so many variables to consider that it is USELESS to just calculate ROI like it's such a big deal. It is simply ONE NUMBER OUT OF MANY that we can use, and we can certainly do without.

    and wantitall brings up a valid point - If I scalp -110 against a +115 what is my ROI? Anyone want to take a shot at answering that?

    If you say it's 5/225*100% and follow the normal procedure, then you're not taking into account that the risk is ZERO.

    The bottom line is that the ROI by itself is useless and there are MANY MANY ways to track your wagers/bankroll etc. Just because a guy doesn't calculate his ROI doesn't mean diddly.

    This past week I have been trying to roll my money over at Legendz by scalping so I can keep the 20% bonus. If I ever try to track that with an ROI, it gives me USELESS information. There are too many variable to say that one piece of information is so important.

    Categorizing plays (dogs, favs, unders, overs, NBA, NFL) is far more important that ROI.
    Actually it is 5/225*100/2 = 1.11% And only if you get a perfect balance which most guys don't really do, especially on a 5 center.

    But there is zero risk involved, but even so you have to "invest" the money to get the profits. As with anything. As long as the money is tied up and unuseable, it is considered invested. If it is a long term arbitrage, then you can maybe take a loan out on it and use the play as collateral. But generally speaking unless it is an interest free loan then it isn't worth it. So if you have an NFL future of Over 8 -110, and Under 8 +120 for the same team. You definately have that money invested, becaue you won't be seeing it for at least 6 months, risk free or not. That is why most gusy won't take scalps they see on futures, simply because they don't think having their money tied up for that long is worth the pennies on the dollar they will be collecting in Jan/Feb

    It is all semantics really. Like the question Who "pays" vig winners or loser?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #35  
    RX Wizard cincy_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    8,834
    Quote Originally Posted by wantitall4moi
    Actually it is 5/225*100/2 = 1.11% And only if you get a perfect balance which most guys don't really do, especially on a 5 center.

    But there is zero risk involved, but even so you have to "invest" the money to get the profits. As with anything. As long as the money is tied up and unuseable, it is considered invested. If it is a long term arbitrage, then you can maybe take a loan out on it and use the play as collateral. But generally speaking unless it is an interest free loan then it isn't worth it. So if you have an NFL future of Over 8 -110, and Under 8 +120 for the same team. You definately have that money invested, becaue you won't be seeing it for at least 6 months, risk free or not. That is why most gusy won't take scalps they see on futures, simply because they don't think having their money tied up for that long is worth the pennies on the dollar they will be collecting in Jan/Feb

    It is all semantics really. Like the question Who "pays" vig winners or loser?
    The thing about ROI is that it takes a variety of different things and ties them up to get you ONE VARIABLE. If you use it to calculate how much you have won/lost, you can do the same by tracking your bankroll.

    I like your futures example, but another reason someone would use ROI is to factor in things that do not show up on the winning %.

    If I spend 10 MINUTES/day capping games and win $500 on $10,000 worth of bets, is my ROI the same as that for someone who spends 10 HOURS/day capping games and wins the same amount?

    Of course not - and that is because you have to take into account that you have invested TIME as well - and you have to put a monetary value on that. Also, if you bought a new laptop or signed up for DSL so that you could be more efficient, then that is also an investment on your part.

    If someone REALLY wants to use ROI they right way, then they have to assign a $ value to time spent on capping, $ spent on subscribing to any website (Don Best, StatsFox etc.), $ spent on newsletters and publications and so on.

    The ROI is useful in converting everything into "apples", so that you're not comparing apples to oranges. When you deal with time, bonus money, cash back on losses, scalping, middling etc you can come up with ONE number if you use ROI. That is why you would use it. If you're simply going to use ROI to track your wins/losses, why even bother? Just check your bankroll and categorize your plays to check for winning/losing patterns.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #36  
    RX Wizard royalfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    6,910
    Quote Originally Posted by ice man
    just baffles me that some guys argument is that this a waste of time. Gambling involves a ton of math related situations and I guess people are to scared or lazy to figure this out, makes no sense. Anyone betting moneyline sports should know is ROI, how do you keep score?
    To each their own but it sounds like you are insulting my intelligence. I make tons and tons of plays. If you hit a higher rate or return on investments I could give a rats ass. If I win at a lower rate but win more money that is ALL that matters. The only thing that matters at the end of the day is how much money adds or subtracts from your bankroll. Absolutely nothing else matters. You are the one baffling me if you think otherwise.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #37  
    RX Wizard cincy_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    8,834
    Quote Originally Posted by royalfan
    To each their own but it sounds like you are insulting my intelligence. I make tons and tons of plays. If you hit a higher rate or return on investments I could give a rats ass. If I win at a lower rate but win more money that is ALL that matters. The only thing that matters at the end of the day is how much money adds or subtracts from your bankroll. Absolutely nothing else matters. You are the one baffling me if you think otherwise.
    I agree

    I had said as much earlier, maybe not as bluntly:

    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?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #38  
    Rx Wizard Iceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    LasVegas...okay?
    Posts
    11,732
    Quote Originally Posted by royalfan
    To each their own but it sounds like you are insulting my intelligence. I make tons and tons of plays. If you hit a higher rate or return on investments I could give a rats ass. If I win at a lower rate but win more money that is ALL that matters. The only thing that matters at the end of the day is how much money adds or subtracts from your bankroll. Absolutely nothing else matters. You are the one baffling me if you think otherwise.
    I am not insulting your intelligence. What I am saying is that record keeping should be one of the most important things in someones everyday gambling life and must be taken seriously, all aspects of it not just ROI. The reason I asked about ROI is I may start betting on more events and in turn the more money wagered the more money won. I was wondering what"pro" shoots for, that is it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #39  
    RX Wizard royalfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    6,910
    Gotcha, good luck with it. More than one way to skin a cat.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #40  
    RX Senior Pancho Sanza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,250
    Its how many dollars you turn over X your earn rate thats important, not just the rate.

    When you throw in middling, it usually brings the ROI down but adds to the bottom line.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #41  
    Rx Wizard Iceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    LasVegas...okay?
    Posts
    11,732
    doesn't always bring down the rate if the rate is in the negative.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #42  
    RX Wizard cincy_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    8,834
    Quote Originally Posted by ice man
    doesn't always bring down the rate if the rate is in the negative.
    It does if you don't hit the middles and you keep paying the vig.

    That is besides the point though - the bottom line is that term "ROI" makes gambling sound like a business, and probably makes people feel less guilty about it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #43  
    RX Senior
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,385
    seems to me makeing less bets and winning a higher percentage is a lot saker than makingtons of bets. forget the vig for a moment. lets take a typical sunday nfl 16 games for the weekend. now you all have differant methods pts,fumbles,runs passes what ever. then i assume each catgory gets a rating
    now if there are 16 games normal distribution might be 2 terrific games 4 average+ 4 average games 4 below average and 2 dog games to bet on. so arent you better off betting either 2 or 6 games as opposed to betting10 games. dontthe additional games create breakeven at best situations. one o theguys i know who is a dime better has strong medium and average plays. at theend of the year the average plays are around 52% breakeven. when i ask about why bet those the answer i get is i did the work and they might click. this all relates to theearlier discussion of 500 bets with a .14 roi or 1500 bets with a .05 roi. its sort of like options if your a writer. better percentage short term more dollars long term also more time for things to go wrong long term. so i still think picking best games and betting more might just make more sense?n o. Good luck all the real bottom line is how much is left on dec 31. heart222
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #44  
    RX Wizard cincy_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    8,834
    Quote Originally Posted by heart222
    seems to me makeing less bets and winning a higher percentage is a lot saker than makingtons of bets. forget the vig for a moment. lets take a typical sunday nfl 16 games for the weekend. now you all have differant methods pts,fumbles,runs passes what ever. then i assume each catgory gets a rating
    now if there are 16 games normal distribution might be 2 terrific games 4 average+ 4 average games 4 below average and 2 dog games to bet on. so arent you better off betting either 2 or 6 games as opposed to betting10 games. dontthe additional games create breakeven at best situations. one o theguys i know who is a dime better has strong medium and average plays. at theend of the year the average plays are around 52% breakeven. when i ask about why bet those the answer i get is i did the work and they might click. this all relates to theearlier discussion of 500 bets with a .14 roi or 1500 bets with a .05 roi. its sort of like options if your a writer. better percentage short term more dollars long term also more time for things to go wrong long term. so i still think picking best games and betting more might just make more sense?n o. Good luck all the real bottom line is how much is left on dec 31. heart222
    It is different for each person - that is why you need to track your plays.

    For example, I LOSE all of my best plays and WIN a lot of my good plays. There were times I would have a winning record and actually lose money. So, these days, I do not make large plays - and you could translate that into saying, "I don't differentiate between plays"

    For someone else, it could be different. That is why every person has to see what works best for him.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #45  
    RX Senior RobFunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    47,442
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #46  
    RX Senior
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    oz
    Posts
    2,578
    This one is obviously from a while ago ;)

    My opinion is any positive ROI is a good ROI. Higher isn't necessarily better - I'd prefer 3% ROI for 10 bets than 6% ROI for just 2.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #47  
    RX Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    413
    10%
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •