If you are a small time player and do this for fun and don't care if you win or lose then go have fun. I am a nickel and dime player and have won big the last few years limiting my action. I've been playing for 30 years and it took a long time for me to figure it out. With the tournament coming up people will go crazy the first weekend and completely destroy their bankroll because of the amount of games being played. Last year I didn't even play until it got down to 32 teams.
I believe that is true because mathematically the juice will take too much out of you in the long run.
However if you are struggling to seperate your winners from your losers it sometimes helps to open up your whole portfolio and spread your eggs out into a bunch of different baskets. I am currently doing this to try to figure out where the flaws are in my capping that have cost me to this point.
I went 25-19-1 yesterday (18-11 sides) and currently am 3-1-1 today. I started out 7-1 on sides yesterday. If I was being selective I would've been all over Mizzou today (and all over Princeton last night). Both games failed to cover.
I would rather be 8-0 than 28-20-1 but until I get better at weeding out good from bad I have to run with what is profitable. Hopefully I can solidify my capping and go back to a few games a week.
Good luck to everyone!
sb
However if you are struggling to seperate your winners from your losers it sometimes helps to open up your whole portfolio and spread your eggs out into a bunch of different baskets. I am currently doing this to try to figure out where the flaws are in my capping that have cost me to this point.
I went 25-19-1 yesterday (18-11 sides) and currently am 3-1-1 today. I started out 7-1 on sides yesterday. If I was being selective I would've been all over Mizzou today (and all over Princeton last night). Both games failed to cover.
I would rather be 8-0 than 28-20-1 but until I get better at weeding out good from bad I have to run with what is profitable. Hopefully I can solidify my capping and go back to a few games a week.
Good luck to everyone!
sb
disagree
if you have an advantage there is no such thing as vig
in other words you are laying -110 or less on games in which the vigorish should be -120 or more (for example) on that line. the more +EV you take the more you make.
you are right in that few seem to be able to wager on a high volume of games and maintain an advantage. and if you dont have an advantage it becomes more and more apparent the higher the volume. but if you do it is magnified by volume, and volume also minimizes risk, if proper money management techniques are in place.
if you have an advantage there is no such thing as vig
in other words you are laying -110 or less on games in which the vigorish should be -120 or more (for example) on that line. the more +EV you take the more you make.
you are right in that few seem to be able to wager on a high volume of games and maintain an advantage. and if you dont have an advantage it becomes more and more apparent the higher the volume. but if you do it is magnified by volume, and volume also minimizes risk, if proper money management techniques are in place.
sh....t, I'd love to be able to pick one game a night and win almost every night. who wouldn't.
Does anybody understand law of averages.
let say you bet 100 games a year. hit 58%
5800-4200=1600-juice=1180.
let say you bet 1000 games. at 55% correct.
55000-45000=10,000-juice=5500.
who made more money. Isn't that what this is all about. and i didn't even have to win a higher %.
to each his own.
Does anybody understand law of averages.
let say you bet 100 games a year. hit 58%
5800-4200=1600-juice=1180.
let say you bet 1000 games. at 55% correct.
55000-45000=10,000-juice=5500.
who made more money. Isn't that what this is all about. and i didn't even have to win a higher %.
to each his own.
guys, for the most part Harrington is correct.......but
ATX...makes a valid point, especially if you are formulating your own betting line vs the posted number......
its common for "sharps" to bet 20-30 basketball games on a sat.
but for the 90% of people betting i would say follow Harringtons advice.....gl
ATX...makes a valid point, especially if you are formulating your own betting line vs the posted number......
its common for "sharps" to bet 20-30 basketball games on a sat.
but for the 90% of people betting i would say follow Harringtons advice.....gl
Agree with both of you:
ATX if you take advantage of reduced juice you can weight the game in your favor...my assumptions are made at the standard 110 to win 100.
true that is a good point but IMO the number of cappers that can hit 58 out of their first 100 plays will outweigh the number of cappers that can hit 550 plays out of 1000. I would love to have that kind of run over 1000 plays.
Good points everyone...I think this point has been run through many times on this forum but it's always good to revisit it.
sb
ATX if you take advantage of reduced juice you can weight the game in your favor...my assumptions are made at the standard 110 to win 100.
true that is a good point but IMO the number of cappers that can hit 58 out of their first 100 plays will outweigh the number of cappers that can hit 550 plays out of 1000. I would love to have that kind of run over 1000 plays.
Good points everyone...I think this point has been run through many times on this forum but it's always good to revisit it.
sb
Good arguments on both sides. I think though to help us all out. Those mathmatically inclined like truely is should show us some numbers to break each case down with examples. I think it would be much easier to show your case with examples. So please if anyone can put out some examples, it would be much appreciated. Aloha CC.
