I wrote about this in Larry Grossman's Book
Basically, go 1200-800, bet your "best bet" every night for 5 years, and you turn $1000 into billions and billions betting 10% of bankroll per play.
Of course, the naysayers say "hey, no way I could get down a million on a game. Curiously, this is never where the system trainwrecks, it is hitting the 60% where it crashes and burns.
The next time someone tells you he hits 60% vs. widely available numbers with lots of plays, ask him
1. Is he a multimillionaire or
2. Does he just really, really suck at betting
Ps. While 60% makes you billions, curiously, 55% betting at that rate will cause you to go broke!! Very counter intuitive.
Also losses and win order DO NOT MATTER!
uppy:
Basically, go 1200-800, bet your "best bet" every night for 5 years, and you turn $1000 into billions and billions betting 10% of bankroll per play.
Of course, the naysayers say "hey, no way I could get down a million on a game. Curiously, this is never where the system trainwrecks, it is hitting the 60% where it crashes and burns.
The next time someone tells you he hits 60% vs. widely available numbers with lots of plays, ask him
1. Is he a multimillionaire or
2. Does he just really, really suck at betting
Ps. While 60% makes you billions, curiously, 55% betting at that rate will cause you to go broke!! Very counter intuitive.
Also losses and win order DO NOT MATTER!
uppy:Fezzik said:Basically, go 1200-800, bet your "best bet" every night for 5 years, and you turn $1000 into billions and billions betting 10% of bankroll per play.
Of course, the naysayers say "hey, no way I could get down a million on a game. Curiously, this is never where the system trainwrecks, it is hitting the 60% where it crashes and burns.
The next time someone tells you he hits 60% vs. widely available numbers with lots of plays, ask him
1. Is he a multimillionaire or
2. Does he just really, really suck at betting
Ps. While 60% makes you billions, curiously, 55% betting at that rate will cause you to go broke!! Very counter intuitive.
Also losses and win order DO NOT MATTER!
I wrote an analysis of it 20 years ago, did you steal my work?
Northern Star
Just for completeness. Playing 10% of your bankroll and hitting 55% won't make you broke, in fact you would make a nice profit. 100 plays would show a 5% profit!!! Hitting 55% and playing 11% of your bankroll, you would just about be treading water. Anything above 11% would send your bankroll to zero, its just a matter of time. Less than 10% of your bankroll would result in a profit, with the optimum % for 55% correct being just about 6% of your bankroll. 1500 plays at 6% and a record of 825-675 would result in a bankroll 7.77 times larger than the initial bankroll.
I guess I don't quite understand how increasing the amount of your bankroll used on each play would decrease your profit?
10% of your bankroll at 55%
$1000 bankroll
100 plays
55 w = +5500
50 L = -4815
+$685 considering -107 juice
11% of your bankroll hitting 55%
55 w = 6050
45 l = 5300
+750 with 11% of your bankroll
How is that treading water?
55
10% of your bankroll at 55%
$1000 bankroll
100 plays
55 w = +5500
50 L = -4815
+$685 considering -107 juice
11% of your bankroll hitting 55%
55 w = 6050
45 l = 5300
+750 with 11% of your bankroll
How is that treading water?
55
Also losses and win order DO NOT MATTER!uppy: FEZZICK
Your joking right? Of course loss and win order counts. If you go 1200-800 lets say you start off 0-100. Your shit out of luck. Even if you hit 800 out of your next 1100.
10% OF BANKROLL IS WAY TOO HIGH.
Insteed of 10% of a thousand dollar bankroll, you would be much better off with 5% of a 2000 dollar bankroll and settle for a million insteed of a billion. LOL<!-- / message -->
uppy: FEZZICKYour joking right? Of course loss and win order counts. If you go 1200-800 lets say you start off 0-100. Your shit out of luck. Even if you hit 800 out of your next 1100.
10% OF BANKROLL IS WAY TOO HIGH.
Insteed of 10% of a thousand dollar bankroll, you would be much better off with 5% of a 2000 dollar bankroll and settle for a million insteed of a billion. LOL<!-- / message -->
IF you do not go bankrupt with a string of losses, then loss and win order do not matter......as long as you have some bankroll left (even a couple of bucks left.) By the way, if you use a percentage of your bankroll for every play, you will always have some fraction of your bankroll left so loss and win order do not matter. tulsa
However, that is on paper and in reality you would be very depressed if you lost 9 in a row at 10% per play and you probably wouldn't be able to hit 58% winners or whatever in that state of mind...so I fully agree that 10% of bankroll per play is VERY MUCH too high.
However, that is on paper and in reality you would be very depressed if you lost 9 in a row at 10% per play and you probably wouldn't be able to hit 58% winners or whatever in that state of mind...so I fully agree that 10% of bankroll per play is VERY MUCH too high.
Lets play hypothetical for just a second. Lets say you got your Bankroll up to one million and you still bet 10% per play. All it would take is one 10 game losing streak to bring your bankroll all the way down to less than $150K. Then lets say you hit your next 14 plays strait after that for a 60% clip during a 24 game stretch. You barely have your bankroll up to 400K.
So you have a 24 game run where you go 14-10 but lose almost $500,000 grand. If you would have flat bet you would have made a profit.
Win and loss order really matters when you bet that way.
So you have a 24 game run where you go 14-10 but lose almost $500,000 grand. If you would have flat bet you would have made a profit.
Win and loss order really matters when you bet that way.
I believe one should use a flat betting system...to start the shinanigans off. Then when you have accumulated enough in the bank change your flat bet up to meet the (long met new) bankroll. Then when (assuming you continue to win more than lose) your bankroll reaches a new plateu change the flat bet to meet the even newer (but still long met) bankroll.
Example:
Say I have 5,000 then I play $300 per game (6%), but fixed. Say I do hit the winners like you propose you can do at a 58% rate.
First month: 24-18 (42 games) +$1,490
Second month: 24-18 (42 games) +$1,490
Third month: 24-18 (42 games) +$1,490
Now re-examine: Bankroll at a comfortable $9,470 or so.
After this...and this is the art...pay yourself some of the gains occassionally. It is up to the player but I would given the above scenario pay myself $500 and continue
Change your flat bet to $500 of the newly depleted $9,000 (about 5.5%). Do it again..... repeat as necessary.
The above is ideal, of course, but in general and plus or minus some I think this is wholly possible. I can testify that this works. tulsa
Example:
Say I have 5,000 then I play $300 per game (6%), but fixed. Say I do hit the winners like you propose you can do at a 58% rate.
First month: 24-18 (42 games) +$1,490
Second month: 24-18 (42 games) +$1,490
Third month: 24-18 (42 games) +$1,490
Now re-examine: Bankroll at a comfortable $9,470 or so.
After this...and this is the art...pay yourself some of the gains occassionally. It is up to the player but I would given the above scenario pay myself $500 and continue
Change your flat bet to $500 of the newly depleted $9,000 (about 5.5%). Do it again..... repeat as necessary.
The above is ideal, of course, but in general and plus or minus some I think this is wholly possible. I can testify that this works. tulsa
Chop-
When utilizing Kelly, which is basicaly what is being discussed here, the order of your wins and losses make absolutely no difference. You could go 1200 wins then 800 losses, 800 losses then 1200 wins or any other combination as long as you ended up with a record of 1200-800 and your bankroll would be the same.
The formula to figure out what your bankroll will be is:
starting BR * (1 + Rate)^T
Rate = The expected Rate of Return for each play
T = Total Number of Trials
This means that if you start with $1000 and hit 55-45 betting 10% of BR each bet lating -110 you will end with a bankroll of $1045.40 independent of how those wins and losses come.
Interestingly the optimal bet size for BR growth hitting 60% laying -110 is 16%, so whoever wrote the article the author of this thread quoted was suffering from a bit of risk myopia.
When utilizing Kelly, which is basicaly what is being discussed here, the order of your wins and losses make absolutely no difference. You could go 1200 wins then 800 losses, 800 losses then 1200 wins or any other combination as long as you ended up with a record of 1200-800 and your bankroll would be the same.
The formula to figure out what your bankroll will be is:
starting BR * (1 + Rate)^T
Rate = The expected Rate of Return for each play
T = Total Number of Trials
This means that if you start with $1000 and hit 55-45 betting 10% of BR each bet lating -110 you will end with a bankroll of $1045.40 independent of how those wins and losses come.
Interestingly the optimal bet size for BR growth hitting 60% laying -110 is 16%, so whoever wrote the article the author of this thread quoted was suffering from a bit of risk myopia.
CHOPTALK said:
CHOPTALK...you know I respect you, but I have to disagree with you. The math shows, win loss order does not matter if you keep your bankroll percentage the same per play. HOWEVER, your mental state takes a beating in a severe manner and you would be hard pressed to keep finding 58% or 60% winners. BUT, if you were guaranteed that you would win say 58% of all wagers, it doesn't matter if all your losses came first and all your wins were ordered for the last or if vice versa or all betwixt and between. tulsa
BAKER IS RIGHT, however, CHOPTALK and we (I think most of us) would agree that hitting your winners after losing 10 in a row would be most grieviously difficult. Don't bet what the kelly criterion suggests. That is a formula based on the removal of psychology from the mix and assumes that you will hit your goal win%. YOU WILL NOT HIT YOUR GOAL WIN% IF YOU LOSE TEN IN A ROW...FROM THERE ON OUT YOU ARE FEELING THE WEIGHT OF THE LOSSES AND IT WILL AFFECT YOUR JUDGEMENT.
Five or so percent would be the amount I would do...(6 percent is my max and believe me 1% here or there MATTERS) tulsa
Five or so percent would be the amount I would do...(6 percent is my max and believe me 1% here or there MATTERS) tulsa
Maybe you guys are right about the win and loss order. All I can say is 10% of your bankroll on one play is huge. I would lower that to 5% if at all possiable.
I know im speaking like a hypocrite because since I had to withdrawl all my money from my sportsbooks in September for personal reasons I have had to start from stratch and have hit that 10% mark several times in the last few months. I hate the stress of that. It kills me. I would hate to go on a long losing streak betting that way. I hope I can get back to 5% or less by June or July. Fingers crossed.
I will look into this.
I dont think anyone can hit 60% daily. It can be done being very selective but not everyday.
I feel and Know I can hit 65% in Sunbelt basketball but thats only 15 or 20 plays in a 3 month period. If I had to make a bet everyday in basketball I would get killed!!!!!!!!! maybe even less than 50%..
I guess it all comes down to being patient.
I know im speaking like a hypocrite because since I had to withdrawl all my money from my sportsbooks in September for personal reasons I have had to start from stratch and have hit that 10% mark several times in the last few months. I hate the stress of that. It kills me. I would hate to go on a long losing streak betting that way. I hope I can get back to 5% or less by June or July. Fingers crossed.
I will look into this.
I dont think anyone can hit 60% daily. It can be done being very selective but not everyday.
I feel and Know I can hit 65% in Sunbelt basketball but thats only 15 or 20 plays in a 3 month period. If I had to make a bet everyday in basketball I would get killed!!!!!!!!! maybe even less than 50%..
I guess it all comes down to being patient.
Ok guys, I just got the calculator out. I stand corrected. Win and loss orders does not matter. Please forgive my ignorance.
There is only one reason I would not try this. 60%. Maybe it would work if you are not required to make a bet every single day. But that would slow down the building process.
Good thread guys.
There is only one reason I would not try this. 60%. Maybe it would work if you are not required to make a bet every single day. But that would slow down the building process.
Good thread guys.
Has anyone factored into the equation that when you are betting the Kelly system you are also betting a REVERSE D'Alembert system? Down on a loss and up on a win so that for any equal number of wins and losses you are down for every pair of wins and losses. You will be betting more on your losses and less on your wins. When you add juice to that you will have to EXCEED the 52.37% win rate for 11/10 betting just to break even. Seems to me that the Kelly system is only successful if you can win upwards of 55% of your bets. If you hit less than that you will lose your tail. Let me explain what I am talking about by using units instead of percentages. If you go up on every win and down on every loss (which is what happens when betting a fixed percentage of bankroll) the bets would be on winning five in a row 5,6,7,8,9 (35 units) then losing 5 in a row 10, 9,8,7,6 (40 units). Equal number of wins and losses but you are out 5 units. Doesnt matter the order of wins and losses, you will get the same results. Add in juice and it will be a real disaster so if anyone is planning on doing this, make sure you can hit a high percentage.
CHOPTALK said:
Very true, a good reason to put a maximum bet cap in place. $5000, $10,000, $30,000 ... whatever will give you the income you are seeking. Once you hit your max bet, you go no higher, only lower with % of bankroll if you have a long losing streak. You can reap the benefits of flat betting once you hit your max bet, but still protect yourself during a bad run with your % of bankroll rule.
