Betting Talk

in General with two options of stake amount

danshandanshan Senior Member
edited January 2018 in Sports Betting
Just say I have two NBA games and what I do now is bet $1 on every spot I see space. I was thinking does anyone think it might be wiser to place $1 on each half point I think there is space for example

Nets I got +1 and the book has +3 so 4 spots including half point moves
Now I would bet $1 dollar on Nets but I was thinking bet $4 since there is 4 spots of space

another example
Spurs -7 I got and book has -6
I currently bet $1 and in what i am saying bet $2 units since 2 spots of space.

I guess the question is when they are way off are they going to get more clv or am I just completely off. I guess the only way to know would be to break my clvs down by space

god I know I ramble cluelessly but I hope that makes enough sense to get a response from someone

thanks in advance again

Comments

  • paddyboy111paddyboy111 Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    I love your complete disrespect for your own worth as a human. That will serve you well in handicapping.

    I think the answer here is that increasing your bet linearly with the 'edge' that you calculate is VERY aggressive. Most bettors would only rarely double or triple their bet.
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    I think I would not double stake size I would more like reduce my $1 to where the day never exceeded about 3-5% of bankroll in general again of course. I think the only true answer is to see if that space really does mean more CLV and if so then of course you would increase your bet on those accordingly. MAX CLV is where the max stake amounts should be in general, dont you agree?
  • JayJayOkochaJayJayOkocha Junior Member
    edited January 2018
    [

    I think the answer here is that increasing your bet linearly with the 'edge' that you calculate is VERY aggressive. Most bettors would only rarely double or triple their bet.[/QUOTE]

    What you call very agressive is the optimal.off course in sportsbetting its not possible to pinpoint precisely the mean edge for a give game.However you should mold your staking size according perceived edge.Assuming your estimations are accurate you will outperform anyother staking methodology this way(Kelly) and reach any arbitrary large goal faster.
    Just bet half or one third of your perceived edge.if you are not good at estimating fair probabilities dont bet
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    JayJayOkocha wrote: »
    [

    I think the answer here is that increasing your bet linearly with the 'edge' that you calculate is VERY aggressive. Most bettors would only rarely double or triple their bet.

    What you call very agressive is the optimal.off course in sportsbetting its not possible to pinpoint precisely the mean edge for a give game.However you should mold your staking size according perceived edge.Assuming your estimations are accurate you will outperform anyother staking methodology this way(Kelly) and reach any arbitrary large goal faster.
    Just bet half or one third of your perceived edge.if you are not good at estimating fair probabilities dont bet[/QUOTE]

    All I read was dont bet and I 100% totally agree JK, I did not understand the part about "However you should mold your staking size according perceived edge", can you clarify that please?
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    I just read it again and it sounds like you are saying the method I am mentioning in a smarter form is the optimal method is that what you said?
  • jets96jets96 Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    i think if you bet anything 3 pts off your line your looking for trouble...
    do you have any long term results against the close, with your lines
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    jets96 wrote: »
    i think if you bet anything 3 pts off your line your looking for trouble...
    do you have any long term results against the close, with your lines


    no it is a very new my model was created Novemberish and tested and actually started mid dec.

    what do you mean bet anything 3 points off your line and are you only talking NBA?

    like lakers I got +3 and they are +7 that would be a hint that I am lost on that game at least?

    and thanks for the reply?
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    danshan wrote: »
    Just say I have two NBA games and what I do now is bet $1 on every spot I see space. I was thinking does anyone think it might be wiser to place $1 on each half point I think there is space for example

    Nets I got +1 and the book has +3 so 4 spots including half point moves
    Now I would bet $1 dollar on Nets but I was thinking bet $4 since there is 4 spots of space

    another example
    Spurs -7 I got and book has -6
    I currently bet $1 and in what i am saying bet $2 units since 2 spots of space.

    I guess the question is when they are way off are they going to get more clv or am I just completely off. I guess the only way to know would be to break my clvs down by space

    god I know I ramble cluelessly but I hope that makes enough sense to get a response from someone

    thanks in advance again

    I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Could you explain in more depth?
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    yeah who in the world would ever know what the hell I am talking about, I do agree I just ramble on!.

    Basically if I got -4 and the current line is -1 is it better to go harder after that in comparison to betting the same wager on every "edge" without regard to the implied edge differences or size of the edge
  • jets96jets96 Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    how do you know you have and edge at all , if you started in dec you would have some data of over a month of games , its really nothing but its a start
  • jets96jets96 Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    oh and am saying if your 3 pts or more off the line am not sure its a good thing , personally when am 3.5 pts off am hitting 50% ...when off 3.01 to 3.5 pts am a little better , when am between 1.01 and 3.00 pts off am pretty darn good.
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    thanks for the input, that really helps the numbers, I will start to track what the CLV result is when I am 0-1 1-2 2-3 off the close. I 100% agree that my findings are nowhere near done. I will need a ton more games to say I am doing anything that could even be considered a "working" model. I am rather impressed at this point with what I am seeing so far. What would you say is a reasonable number of games to start to believe I am on the right track? Thanks again for your input!
  • JayJayOkochaJayJayOkocha Junior Member
    edited January 2018
    danshan dont overcomplicate if your estimations are good bet according your edge fractionally and with a max cap obviously.if you are still experimenting stick to a small percentage
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    JayJayOkocha wrote: »
    danshan dont overcomplicate if your estimations are good bet according your edge fractionally and with a max cap obviously.if you are still experimenting stick to a small percentage

    Thanks I have been straight betting for 45 days or so and doing well but that is nothing as we all know in this game, you need way more data than that
  • JayJayOkochaJayJayOkocha Junior Member
    edited January 2018
    Square-1/2 per cent Sharp-Fractional Kelly/Fortune Formula/Thorp Formula
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2018
    JayJayOkocha wrote: »
    Square-1/2 per cent Sharp-Fractional Kelly/Fortune Formula/Thorp Formula

    I think the sharp method is hard to identify is it just coincidence variance luck that 1-2 points is +3.5CLV and 3-5 points is +1.01%CLV or lord knows. I am very confused on a solid bank roll, if you look at my lines I have posted up you can see I am on the right track for the model but the stake method and how to play with those numbers is above my pay grade.
Sign In or Register to comment.