anyone with some statistics knowledge?

Hey guys,

can someone tell me which way is more profitable long term assuming you can pick somewhere between 55%-58% winners.

Let's say you want to flat bet 1% on each bet and for this purpose starting bankroll is 100 units

should you simply throughout the season just bet 1 unit per game

or is it more profitable to calculate 1% of the bankroll after each day's action therefore increasing (decreasing) your bet on a daily basis

let's assume a 1000 game sample

thanks in advance fellas

Horse Racing

can someone tell me which way is more profitable long term assuming you can pick somewhere between 55%-58% winners. I've read 52% is above average in NHL/NFL/NBA/MLB?

Let's say you want to flat bet 1% on each bet and for this purpose starting bankroll is 100 units Flat Bet @ Meadowlands

should you simply throughout the season just bet 1 unit per game
Exactly Win/Place/Show


$10 Across The Board each race $300 a night instead of $300 to win on Team A or B

If you pick 55% winners, you should be risking 5.5% of your bankroll per play on a -110 line.

58% winners 11.8% of your bankroll on a -110 line.

Google Kelly Criterion.

thanks hoosiers, i will check that out

but i think i didnt ask my question correctly, lets say for example that my bankroll is 10000 and i want to bet 1% or 100 on each bet, and i do that throughout the season without adjusting anything

or start with the same bankroll of 10000 and start with $100 bets, but after a lets say 10-0 day and the bankroll jumping to 11000, on the next day i bet 1% again but this time my bet would be $110

which one of these systems would be better long term, if you could put up 55% winners

Ideally, you would want to rebalance after every bet so that you are truly risking a set % of your bankroll on every play.

Realistically, this won't work because many games will be going concurrently. For instance, if you have 2 bets going, you're going to have to make them the same size. If bet 1 wins, then bet 2 is now too small relative to your bankroll; if bet 1 wins, then bet 2 is now too large relative to your bankroll. But that's just something you'll have to deal with.

The point is that if you want to replicate the results of a % bankroll bet as smoothly as you can, you should be rebalancing every chance you get: i.e. after every game. Failing that, at the end of every day would be allright as well. This is preferable to rebalancing every time your bankroll gets to some certain milestone (doubles, goes up 10%, goes up 50%, etc.).

Assuming that you are picking at a profitable winning %, you will want to rebalance as often as you can.

Ganchrow has a calculator that determines your optimum bet size (at another site).

I would explain it, but if you just search for a calculator and/or read the shit that is all over the internet, you can find the answer.

smallballtothebank said:

Hey guys,

can someone tell me which way is more profitable long term assuming you can pick somewhere between 55%-58% winners.

Let's say you want to flat bet 1% on each bet and for this purpose starting bankroll is 100 units

should you simply throughout the season just bet 1 unit per game

or is it more profitable to calculate 1% of the bankroll after each day's action therefore increasing (decreasing) your bet on a daily basis

let's assume a 1000 game sample

thanks in advance fellas

Click to expand...

First of all, picking 55-58% winners is nearly impossible long-term. To answer your question, recalculate the bankroll after every game or day. Hoosiers has it right with the Kelly Criterion, but I'm still not convinced of its applicability to sports. It's definitely useful in blackjack but if unless you have a statistical model that is successful to 3 sigmas, I'd stick to flat betting 1% of the BR.