Hi, I would like to talk about serious betting and the way that the true gambler approaches to it.
The way he chooses invest amounts
(whether he chooses Kelly's criterion or something else..),
or the most profitable system to extract maximum money
(doubles or trebles or..).
------------------------
I'm not opening this theme for "martingale supporters" and homemade systems, I want to talk about betting from the real, scientific, point of view.
(And if you want to include tips and tipsters into this talk, then be prepared to give their full statistics, including some standard deviation calculus on them, so we can conclude which one is true and which one was just lucky..)
The way he chooses invest amounts
(whether he chooses Kelly's criterion or something else..),
or the most profitable system to extract maximum money
(doubles or trebles or..).
------------------------
I'm not opening this theme for "martingale supporters" and homemade systems, I want to talk about betting from the real, scientific, point of view.
(And if you want to include tips and tipsters into this talk, then be prepared to give their full statistics, including some standard deviation calculus on them, so we can conclude which one is true and which one was just lucky..)
For those among us, to whom the first choice in life was not mathematical education, I would like to say: do not have fear of subject, I want us all to participate in this "thoughts sharing" forum, with purpose of lifting up our awareness on what kind of approach to betting is right and what is not.
So all "scientific stuff" (as far as I am concerned) will be said in the way that 6th grader could understand
.
So all "scientific stuff" (as far as I am concerned) will be said in the way that 6th grader could understand
.the Kelly criterion
Ok, first for all of you who are not realy sure what Kelly´s criterion is or maybe haven´t heard of it at all, here´s the explanation:
Imagine that you are playing a game of coin tossing and every time you guess the outcome - you get $1.10 profit, but if you miss - you lose $1.00. (Of course no one will give you that deal but we are using it to show the point) So, if you play that game for 200 tossing and guess 100 times and miss 100 times, you will have 100 x 1.10x = +$110.00 and 100 x (-1.00) = -$100.00, that means you´ll have +$10.00 on your balance. Nothing new here yet.
The question is can we extract more from that? Well, we can try investing $5.00 instead $1.00 - then we would earn $5.50 when we guess and lose $5.00 when we miss. Using the same logic we could try investing all $200.00 of our Bank, but who can guarantee that you won´t miss the first one and go broke.
The question that we must ask ourselves is: can we calculate the best amount so we can extract maximum money, that is through this situation, offered to us?
To make long story short, american mathematician John Larry Kelly, Jr. (1923–1965) calculated this and solution was so elegant and usefull that we can now apply it to many things where gain is bigger than the given chances would otherwise allow.
The equation says that optimum invest amount (U) equals odds (k) multiplied by chances (s) minus one, all divided by odds minus one.
:think: U = (k*s-1) / (k-1)
So in our example where chances (s) were 50% (coin toss) and odds (k) were 2.10 (that is decimal format for +110) the optimum invest amount would be
U = (2.10 * 0.50 - 1) / (2.10 - 1)
U = 0.045, meaning that 4.5% of your Bank, at the time of placing bet, is the optimum invest amount for achiving maximum profit.
Ok, first for all of you who are not realy sure what Kelly´s criterion is or maybe haven´t heard of it at all, here´s the explanation:
Imagine that you are playing a game of coin tossing and every time you guess the outcome - you get $1.10 profit, but if you miss - you lose $1.00. (Of course no one will give you that deal but we are using it to show the point) So, if you play that game for 200 tossing and guess 100 times and miss 100 times, you will have 100 x 1.10x = +$110.00 and 100 x (-1.00) = -$100.00, that means you´ll have +$10.00 on your balance. Nothing new here yet.
The question is can we extract more from that? Well, we can try investing $5.00 instead $1.00 - then we would earn $5.50 when we guess and lose $5.00 when we miss. Using the same logic we could try investing all $200.00 of our Bank, but who can guarantee that you won´t miss the first one and go broke.
The question that we must ask ourselves is: can we calculate the best amount so we can extract maximum money, that is through this situation, offered to us?
To make long story short, american mathematician John Larry Kelly, Jr. (1923–1965) calculated this and solution was so elegant and usefull that we can now apply it to many things where gain is bigger than the given chances would otherwise allow.
The equation says that optimum invest amount (U) equals odds (k) multiplied by chances (s) minus one, all divided by odds minus one.
:think: U = (k*s-1) / (k-1)
So in our example where chances (s) were 50% (coin toss) and odds (k) were 2.10 (that is decimal format for +110) the optimum invest amount would be
U = (2.10 * 0.50 - 1) / (2.10 - 1)
U = 0.045, meaning that 4.5% of your Bank, at the time of placing bet, is the optimum invest amount for achiving maximum profit.
Of course, all that was correct in given example, for different parameters it will give different outputs.
One more thing, sometimes it is hard to say what are the correct chances for someone to win the game or something alike. So, chances are the parameter - to which we must approach with caution and always take the smaller value instead of the bigger one, if we are not sure.
Also it would be a great mistake to invest more than Kelly recommends, but investing less - would just made us less money..
One more thing, sometimes it is hard to say what are the correct chances for someone to win the game or something alike. So, chances are the parameter - to which we must approach with caution and always take the smaller value instead of the bigger one, if we are not sure.
Also it would be a great mistake to invest more than Kelly recommends, but investing less - would just made us less money..
Second thing is choosing an appropriate system.
Imagine this: you play two tips a day, you guess 100% every time - what system would you play? Accumulator two out of two seams as the only logical system, it would be a big mistake to play two singles instead. Why? Well, if you have $200.00 and you put $100.00 on first and $100.00 on second (let them be +100 or decimal 2.00) you would have $400.00 but instead of that let say you played system 2/2 (doubles accumulator) - and invested $200.00 your winnings would then have been $800.00
What if you guess the outcome in 99% of time? 98%? 97%? When does it become more profitable to play singles?
Many people take for granted that playing singles is "the only way" to bet. As we have showed in example - it is not always the most profitable. Calculating the most profitable system is hard job, but it can be simply calculated by advanced betting calculators available on internet.
Let me show you what I mean..
let say you found 8 games (odds +100) and you have 60% of guessing that kind of odds in past plays.. Can you tell which system will bring back the highest gain in long term?
Well, the answer is not easy to calculate, that is why we use calculators, answer is 2/8 and with an invest of 76.8% of our Bank we would achive maximum value of 1.173 times our bank per system. Try to input your data and see your own potencial.
Maximization is great way to step over the line wich separates profit and lost.
Imagine this: you play two tips a day, you guess 100% every time - what system would you play? Accumulator two out of two seams as the only logical system, it would be a big mistake to play two singles instead. Why? Well, if you have $200.00 and you put $100.00 on first and $100.00 on second (let them be +100 or decimal 2.00) you would have $400.00 but instead of that let say you played system 2/2 (doubles accumulator) - and invested $200.00 your winnings would then have been $800.00
What if you guess the outcome in 99% of time? 98%? 97%? When does it become more profitable to play singles?
Many people take for granted that playing singles is "the only way" to bet. As we have showed in example - it is not always the most profitable. Calculating the most profitable system is hard job, but it can be simply calculated by advanced betting calculators available on internet.
Let me show you what I mean..
let say you found 8 games (odds +100) and you have 60% of guessing that kind of odds in past plays.. Can you tell which system will bring back the highest gain in long term?
Well, the answer is not easy to calculate, that is why we use calculators, answer is 2/8 and with an invest of 76.8% of our Bank we would achive maximum value of 1.173 times our bank per system. Try to input your data and see your own potencial.
Maximization is great way to step over the line wich separates profit and lost.
Because it is forbidden to input direct links, I can't tell you which calc to use, but you can type advanced betcalc in your search engine and try.. hopefully this is not stepping over the line, because I am not trying to advertise, I am really trying to help people to extract their deserved maximum.
"..math stuff.."
I still agre with you, but maybe you should think about agreeing with me We are leaving a lot of money to bookies, whether we were winners or loosers last time we gambled.. ..whether we lost - or we failed to monetize our knowledge of sports..
Hi, thanks for joining.. I agree with you, you couldn't be more right when you say that "..many thing matter in winning sports bets.." Of course, bookies are offering to us odds based on mathematical calculus and "other" stuff like instinct and the market law of supply and demand.. so it is an opportunity to extract profit if one knows how. Best way to do so is if you can tell "this odds are a gift considering chances.." (value bet) and then math again comes to the scene in shape of Kelly's criterion, mentioned above. But if there were several games playing at the same time and all of them were "value bets" you must use some serious math if you want to extract maximum money out from the situation.. example: 8 games starts simultaneously, they are all "coin toss winner - probability" in your opinion - but bookie gives +150 on each. What do you do? Play singles?.. I don't expect that people will know the correct answer, maybe some will instinctively say "no, singles are too small for this..", but honestly I think that less then one out of million knows the calculus procedure for finding the right result. That is why I recomend use of tools like advancedbetcalc for all those millions who don't know how to calculate that with ease. And now about your observation how "..math stuff is far down the list..": If you would play singles, you would then have, after 30 same situations, 66xBank, but I would have 126xBank if I have played system 2/8 (doubles) - that is somewhat around double more money
I still agre with you, but maybe you should think about agreeing with me We are leaving a lot of money to bookies, whether we were winners or loosers last time we gambled.. ..whether we lost - or we failed to monetize our knowledge of sports..Anyway, math plays the great role even in choosing what to play (at least it should) but let us pretend for now that that is not the case, that we choose our favorite by instinct, guts or some info that we got somewhere and somehow.. Later I will say much more about - mathematical approach on - how to pick what to play.
But for now, lets stick to the part that comes after we have picked our favourites..
So, we have 5 games to wager on. They all play at different time. All even odds (+100) and we think that we have good chance to win some money by using a "chase" principle.
Well, the answer is: no, we don't have good chances. We have average chances, actually, in the long terms, the same chances for losing our money - as to win any. Notice that it is the same situation that we have when we play only one game. So, why waste time x5?
But don't get scared and believe that "the chase is a dangerous road", it is not dangerous - the thing about it is - we know where it leads, it leads to zero. Eventually you lose, bad luck streak catches you and you lose all winnings and end up in zero, as you would if you have played singles, with even odds and maching chances. "Chase" is an illusion and winning long term in that mode can be achieved only if you pick winners above expectations.
But, if you do pick winners more often than the average player, you have real chance to be a successfull bettor.
And then, it is so important to use any tool that will give you the edge over bookies, especialy in therms of an invest size and accumulator systems.
By using math you could calculate gain achieved by using chase and the one achieved when some real science was used. If I go deeper in calculus, then my promise about 6th graders understanding this, will be broken.. so for now this will have to do
And "chase" vs "real math" will have to become "well known fact that math rules any time.."
But for now, lets stick to the part that comes after we have picked our favourites..
So, we have 5 games to wager on. They all play at different time. All even odds (+100) and we think that we have good chance to win some money by using a "chase" principle.
Well, the answer is: no, we don't have good chances. We have average chances, actually, in the long terms, the same chances for losing our money - as to win any. Notice that it is the same situation that we have when we play only one game. So, why waste time x5?
But don't get scared and believe that "the chase is a dangerous road", it is not dangerous - the thing about it is - we know where it leads, it leads to zero. Eventually you lose, bad luck streak catches you and you lose all winnings and end up in zero, as you would if you have played singles, with even odds and maching chances. "Chase" is an illusion and winning long term in that mode can be achieved only if you pick winners above expectations.
But, if you do pick winners more often than the average player, you have real chance to be a successfull bettor.
And then, it is so important to use any tool that will give you the edge over bookies, especialy in therms of an invest size and accumulator systems.
By using math you could calculate gain achieved by using chase and the one achieved when some real science was used. If I go deeper in calculus, then my promise about 6th graders understanding this, will be broken.. so for now this will have to do
And "chase" vs "real math" will have to become "well known fact that math rules any time.."
So, how about it?
It seems to me that too many people (among which are many good players) stay way below their potential, just because they choose wrong system for their good picks and also the wrong invest amount..
But can it be so simple?
To take some historical data and say: I've been guessing this +110 odds in 58% throughout last year (or last 600 games..) so now all I have to do with this 6 picks is to - play this system (2/6), with that invest amount (58.5%).. to achieve theoretical maximum.. and extract every and last coin that belongs to me..
(calculated with: AdvancedBetCalc com)
In my opinion, yes. Because just look the alternative.. The alternative is chaos, or misleading by thinking that stuff we (or somebody we heard them from) hoped to be right without really calculating them.
Please stop leaving your money with bookies
Let's make little things, that will make us richer, because we were a little bit smarter this time..
It seems to me that too many people (among which are many good players) stay way below their potential, just because they choose wrong system for their good picks and also the wrong invest amount..
But can it be so simple?
To take some historical data and say: I've been guessing this +110 odds in 58% throughout last year (or last 600 games..) so now all I have to do with this 6 picks is to - play this system (2/6), with that invest amount (58.5%).. to achieve theoretical maximum.. and extract every and last coin that belongs to me..
(calculated with: AdvancedBetCalc com)
In my opinion, yes. Because just look the alternative.. The alternative is chaos, or misleading by thinking that stuff we (or somebody we heard them from) hoped to be right without really calculating them.
Please stop leaving your money with bookies
Let's make little things, that will make us richer, because we were a little bit smarter this time..
im trying to follow you here but im a bit confused about where your going. I understand the bit about wanting to extract all that is mathematically possible. But are you trying to teach us that? I agree with you that using the rigid mathematical approach is probably best. Just as if your counting cards in black jack, theres a balc and white correct and incorrect play. But im not sure if thats the case in sports betting. The cards are the cards, the rules of the table are the rules of the table. There seems to be wayy more variance in sports betting.
You are right Rudy, there are more factors in betting than 52 , so there must be more combinations.. and it all seems to lead in chaos.. but that is an illusion, an elegant simplicity runs through relations of probability and value and it is obvious if one knows where to look.
Example can be seen in tennis betting, where average men don't know how to recognize value in 1st set winner betting; let's say odds are 3.00 for 2:0 and 7.00 for 0:2 (max 3 sets) and 1st set is 1.50 (1:0) vs 3.00 (0:1) (decimal odds).
Is there a value in any bet? Well, if 2:0 & 0:2 are ok, then 1st set 1:0 should be 1.47 or else people that bet on 1st set 1:0 will be in + long term.. (1st set 1:0 must be 2*(2:0)*(0:2)/((2:0)*(0:2)+(0:2)-(2:0)).
Of course, now we can use Kelly criterion and start making money faster than card counters
, so there must be more combinations.. and it all seems to lead in chaos.. but that is an illusion, an elegant simplicity runs through relations of probability and value and it is obvious if one knows where to look.Example can be seen in tennis betting, where average men don't know how to recognize value in 1st set winner betting; let's say odds are 3.00 for 2:0 and 7.00 for 0:2 (max 3 sets) and 1st set is 1.50 (1:0) vs 3.00 (0:1) (decimal odds).
Is there a value in any bet? Well, if 2:0 & 0:2 are ok, then 1st set 1:0 should be 1.47 or else people that bet on 1st set 1:0 will be in + long term.. (1st set 1:0 must be 2*(2:0)*(0:2)/((2:0)*(0:2)+(0:2)-(2:0)).
Of course, now we can use Kelly criterion and start making money faster than card counters
