Betting Talk

Betting Sports for a Living

2

Comments

  • JayJayOkochaJayJayOkocha Junior Member
    edited June 2018
    You win when you collect money in the sport you bet over a long period of time
    You ll do that only if you BTC provided you are in a high liquidity and high sharp -square ratio sport.Usually any frequency above 60 65% BTC is indicative of skill,obviously depending on how much on avg you beat the closer

    danshan i think you obsess with the details and try to bring complexity where it isnt much really.Just internalize the principles first then concern urself w the details
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    You win when you collect money in the sport you bet over a long period of time
    You ll do that only if you BTC provided you are in a high liquidity and high sharp -square ratio sport.Usually any frequency above 60 65% BTC is indicative of skill,obviously depending on how much on avg you beat the closer

    danshan i think you obsess with the details and try to bring complexity where it isnt much really.Just internalize the principles first then concern urself w the details

    I think what most bettors call principles are actually wives tales, and shoot I dont know them and I surely dont have a single detail really.
  • JayJayOkochaJayJayOkocha Junior Member
    edited June 2018
    if this were wive tales i ll be homelless,and looking for a job in architeture Art Vandelay industries or something

    - - - Updated - - -

    if this were wive tales i ll be homelless,and looking for a job in architeture in Art Vandelay industries or something
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    so lets say you can find 2 or 3 baseball games a day to bet so 6 months, 180 days, 2.5 games a day bet that is 450 games bet a season, lets assume nothing changes in 2 or 3 seasons, it would take you 2 or 3 full seasons to get enough games to actually say you are a PROBABLY a winner!. That is a long time and a hell of an investment if you are not a winner, in losses to find out you are not.
    Issue 1 Market changes
    Issue 2 Rule changes
    Issue 3 Something changes
    so many guys come in have 2 or 3 good seasons and then fall off a cliff and you never hear from them again or they change their username and only a few people know who they are from the way they write!

    I also still have 1 question that I cant answer
    win or loss can be lucky right?
    can a + or - CLV be lucky too?
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    an NFL season you are talking decades
  • JayJayOkochaJayJayOkocha Junior Member
    edited June 2018
    danshan just beat the closing number more often than not.Its unlikely if you BTCL more often than not in MLB season 300 400 games that you re lucky,cause of the vig.i would say 100-200 closing number sample is enough to get an idea.
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    I have 163 games bet so far
    and
    62.66% go my way against the line
    45.06% go my way enough to cover the margin
    my way avg 2.10
    against me -1.77%
  • JayJayOkochaJayJayOkocha Junior Member
    edited June 2018
    thats great numbers. i deduce that you ve won money
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    and the against my way are with margin deducted

    - - - Updated - - -

    I am down 5.5 units
    77-86 winning at 47.25 and paying for 49.34

    last 20 or so its gotten ugly
    <style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
    <colgroup><col style="width: 114px"></colgroup><tbody>
    L


    L


    W


    L


    L


    L


    L


    L


    L


    W


    W


    L


    L


    L


    L


    L


    L


    W


    L


    L


    W


    W


    L


    L


    W


    L


    W


    W


    L


    L


    L

    </tbody>

    - - - Updated - - -

    but I was killing it up until this patch
  • JayJayOkochaJayJayOkocha Junior Member
    edited June 2018
    Thats normal variance.utterly regular believe me .Thats why many top bettors bet/model more sports than 1.I ve made 20 k bets as an example

    Just dont dwell on it,trust always the closing number provided you are not betting Uganda Ping Pong and you re not the originator e.g Haralabos when he wagered on NBA totals
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    Win45-games100 +CLV
    win30-games59 -CLV
  • R40R40 Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    danshan wrote: »
    I have been reading this post and it is interesting, OP thanks for posting! I think the thing that drives me crazy is when are you good? you say CLV and I just see so many people have good CLV and get destroyed and cry variance! I hear people say just win and then I run a test with 100000 coin flips and 4 out of 10 times I would be a long term winner doing coin flips (deviations)! It is so confusing to me. I wish someone could clarify it, I read the black cat in a coal cellar and that told me that no one wins. if you are the .0000001% that can win, A its not enough for the risk involved, B its not consistent, C the books will block you. when I started thinking about it seriously I said I think its possible if you can just win a few units per sport and do tons of sports, you bet 5 grand a game and win 5 or so units per sport and you should do good overall, some sports win 6 units others lose 3 and you net + but I am not so sure about that now. I personally went back and looked at tons of my bets and tried to simulate a zillion more and I cant see where CLV makes a winner. I see the CLV connection to winning but dont see the certainty of clv being a winner. There are way easier ways to make money and lots more sure ways to do it as I see it at this point. Only thing for me is I like it, so I stay and keep trying to get better every moment!

    You need significant CLV. You believe the the accuracy of the betting market so not sure why you keep coming back to this CLV thing. If you have 1-point CLV, you are most assuredly going to win. The lesser your CLV, the lesser the chances.
  • R40R40 Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    danshan wrote: »
    and the against my way are with margin deducted

    - - - Updated - - -

    I am down 5.5 units
    77-86 winning at 47.25 and paying for 49.34

    last 20 or so its gotten ugly
    <style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
    <colgroup><col style="width: 114px"></colgroup><tbody>
    L


    L


    W


    L


    L


    L


    L


    L


    L


    W


    W


    L


    L


    L


    L


    L


    L


    W


    L


    L


    W


    W


    L


    L


    W


    L


    W


    W


    L


    L


    L

    </tbody>

    - - - Updated - - -

    but I was killing it up until this patch

    That means the model is probably good but the luck has been bad. When the CLV is not there, you start over. In this case, you continue moving forward until you lose faith or the money runs out.
  • h82loseh82lose Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    also CLV will vary market to market on when the line matures. for example if your betting openers overnight with circled limits then obviously your CLV will be higher if your savy enough at picking off soft lines. When you bet into a more mature market when limits are raised or closer to game time. alot of the time the CLV will be less since line has been hit with higher limits available. just food for thought. I put much more value in someone who can hit 1% average CLV in a mature market than someone getting 1% on overnighters with reduced limits. not saying that your better or worse its just that most the money comes in when limits are opened up.
  • jets96jets96 Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    I put much more value in someone who can hit 1% average CLV in a mature market than someone getting 1% on overnighters with reduced limits

    exactly
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    h82lose wrote: »
    also CLV will vary market to market on when the line matures. for example if your betting openers overnight with circled limits then obviously your CLV will be higher if your savy enough at picking off soft lines. When you bet into a more mature market when limits are raised or closer to game time. alot of the time the CLV will be less since line has been hit with higher limits available. just food for thought. I put much more value in someone who can hit 1% average CLV in a mature market than someone getting 1% on overnighters with reduced limits. not saying that your better or worse its just that most the money comes in when limits are opened up.

    I have been the last week making my picks after first pitch of the last game and the pinnacle limits are 4500ish when I am betting. I have not made any like BOL opener baseball picks. My issue is I lack faith in CLV as you can see I win actually better on neg CLV games at best it does not make a difference.
    Win45-out of 100 games +CLV
    win30 out of 59 games -CLV
    I went back and looked at hoops which I think I have a way way way better grasp on than baseball and I was actually slightly better at +CLV
    in the NBA
    115-102
    +CLV 79-73
    -CLV 36-29

    - - - Updated - - -

    and the WNBA I cant believe everyone does not play the openers I mean even at kickoff its 1k at most places believe me I have looked! With a few places at 2500 or so but not many its very limited
  • h82loseh82lose Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    Most of the money/market correction comes in with the off screens put the lines up
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    h82lose wrote: »
    Most of the money/market correction comes in with the off screens put the lines up

    sorry I am naive to the terminology, what the heck does this mean?
  • R40R40 Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    danshan wrote: »
    I have been the last week making my picks after first pitch of the last game and the pinnacle limits are 4500ish when I am betting. I have not made any like BOL opener baseball picks. My issue is I lack faith in CLV as you can see I win actually better on neg CLV games at best it does not make a difference.
    Win45-out of 100 games +CLV
    win30 out of 59 games -CLV
    I went back and looked at hoops which I think I have a way way way better grasp on than baseball and I was actually slightly better at +CLV
    in the NBA
    115-102
    +CLV 79-73
    -CLV 36-29

    - - - Updated - - -

    and the WNBA I cant believe everyone does not play the openers I mean even at kickoff its 1k at most places believe me I have looked! With a few places at 2500 or so but not many its very limited

    CLV gives you an indication in the short term of your future success. Winning with 63 games at negative CLV is an indication that you are probably not much better than a coinflip unless you have significant CLV. If you are averaging CLV of half-point on basketball, you can probably expect to break even. If more, you are probably going to be a solid winner. If you can get 1-point, back up the truck.
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    I have one simple question but also a very complicated question
    is Detroit -137 a good bet or not cause sometimes I get +CLV or-CLV or a Win or a Loss. The only way to know is with 1000 or more bets and for me that seems difficult because shit changes fast !
  • R40R40 Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    danshan wrote: »
    I have one simple question but also a very complicated question
    is Detroit -137 a good bet or not cause sometimes I get +CLV or-CLV or a Win or a Loss. The only way to know is with 1000 or more bets and for me that seems difficult because shit changes fast !

    CLV is largely meaningless in one game. Someone here argued with me that you should not bet a game when the line is moving against you. If you are an average bettor and the line is moving opposite of what you expect, you should probably pass on the game because someone knows more than you. But if you consider yourself a winning gambler, you bet the game because by definition a winning gambler beats the market.

    Having positive CLV on a game simply means you were in line with the market and gives you some mental relief because you were on the "right side." You may have in fact been entirely on the wrong side but you at least know that if the trend continues you should come out ahead. When it doesn't, you put a hole through the wall.
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited June 2018
    say I had unlimited funds, how much on a typical Wednesday night middle market MLB game would I have to bet to move the line 20 cents?
  • donny2donny2 Senior Member
    edited August 2018
    durito wrote: »
    None of that has anything to do with proper kelly (fractional staking). In fact fractional kelly is optimal for dealing with all that. The OP (who posts these same questions every year on12 forums) is doing something absurd like assuming a constant unit size for a whole year.

    How are you feeling if you start with 50k, betting 1k a game and you lose 15 units, do you still want to bet 1k a game? If you aren't lowering your unit size as your roll decreases you will quickly end up with 0.



    Hi there. Could you explain the correct process then? You say its absurd to do something as a constant unit size for a whole year. Okay so lets use 20k for example to make it simple. So you are betting 1 or 2 percent per game right? So lets say you are betting 400 a game and thus 2 percent. At what point do you increase your betsize from your original 20k bankroll? And if you are betting 400 a game, what would be the next bet size? 500? Thus once you increase your bankroll from 20k to 25k, then you bet 500 per game? And if at any point it hits 20k or below, you go back to 400? Do you believe betting 1 or 2 percent is the proper amount? I know people say you should not be betting more than 3 percent of your bankroll per play and some even say 1 percent for pros. But are pros betting 1 percent of their bankroll per game only?


    Well my thoughts were if someone had a huge bankroll... let say 200k. And say they bet 1 percent or 2k a game. If they make say 20 units for the year, thats pretty good and that would be 40k profit. But yes i used the example of a constant unit. But that is always wrong? So what if someone's unit size is always that much per season regardless of what happened previously. In other words, thats not the proper way to bet? And if they were betting 2 percent or 4k per game, well 20 units would be 80k a year which is a lot.

    So its like 20k bankroll, bet 400 per game, once it hits 25k, go 500 per game. But should you be increasing your bet sizes by 100 dollar bets? Like then 600 etc? And go up 100 by 100? The other thing i thought was this. The bigger your bankroll, the higher your bet size should be. But when you start losing and your bankroll goes down, you have to decrease your bet size like in the example you gave where you say if you start with 50k and bet 1k a game and lose 15 units, do you want to continue to bet 1k a game still? The thing is aren't you then almost always going to be having to need much more wins than losses when this happens? Example you down 15 units or 15k from betting 1000 a game. Now you bet 750 a game? At what point in your 50k bankroll would you decrease your 1k bet size? Im guessing around 40k? And the thing is for you to get back to your original 50k, you would need to win more than 10 games in order to break back even. So its like you want to increase your bankroll, sure you bet x amount... but once you start losing and need to decrease your bet size, you going to have to win more than the games you lost in order to get back to 50k because your bet size is now smaller. Thus imagine you decrease your bet size to 500. If you win back 10 units, you are still down 5k when you should be down juice only. So curious what is the right play here and strategy here. Because in poker, you want to make money and increase your bankroll to play higher stakes. So in sportsbetting, the same applies right? You want to bet say 200 or 400 a game, but eventually be able to bet 1k, 2k and then 3k plus a game right? Because my thoughts were its really hard to bet sports for a living unless you are betting like at least 2k a game. Do you think 2k is probably the correct number as the minimum amount? Because making 20 units a year in sportsbetting is very hard at least thats what i think.
  • artimusartimus Junior Member
    edited August 2018
    donny2 wrote: »
    Hi there. Could you explain the correct process then? You say its absurd to do something as a constant unit size for a whole year. Okay so lets use 20k for example to make it simple. So you are betting 1 or 2 percent per game right? So lets say you are betting 400 a game and thus 2 percent. At what point do you increase your betsize from your original 20k bankroll?
    ...this isn't a hard concept. 200k roll betting 4000 a game, and you lose 20k in a day and have 180k. Tomorrow you bet 3600 a game. Win 5000 and have 185k, now you bet 3700 a game. Need 5k to pay rent and loan some to a friend, now you have 180k, 3600 again. If you can't easily replace your bankroll you change your size every day/week/whatever.

    You're focusing on the small details instead of the big picture. Plenty of people win 50, 100, 200 units a year. You don't hear about them because they are crushing and need to stay a secret to continue to get action. Like the guys making 50, 100, 200 units in blackjack, they're not on the streets talking it up. The guys making millions a year in private poker games, they're not advertising it either. People who have serious edge are smart. They scale up, take on investors, bet bigger. They don't tout their picks on internet forums, which is why you don't hear about them. Work hard, get outs to bet on, and work your way up the ladder.
  • donny2donny2 Senior Member
    edited August 2018
    Wait so the correct thing to do is change bet size every single day? Isn't that a bit extreme? Like if you have 20k and bet 400 a game, why not wait till its 25k before you bet 500 a game. The other thing is based on what you say, aren't you going to bet like 370 or 420 etc and strange amounts doing it this way? Well in my example, im talking about this is your bankroll and you are not going to replace it etc.

    When you say people win 50, 100 and 200 units a year, what are you basing this on? You obviously don't mean flat betting right? Like imagine 20k bankroll, someone bet 400 per game and flat bets and make 50 units or 20k for the year or 100 units or 40k for the year right? That would be insane if someone could do this. So if this person bet 400 per game and bankroll increases to 25k and 30k and they increase bet size like how you mentioned, then say they are up 20k and doubled their bankroll. But they did not get from 20k to 40k flatbetting 400 a game, but increased bet size to 500, and 600 and then to 800 etc. So you would still say that person is up 100 units if going from 20k to 40k betting this way?

    Well i want to know what is the right way to bet. And also does it depend on your goals? Like if you are someone that wants to make 10 units for the season and flat bet say 200 or 400 a game, well thats what you do. But if you want to increase your bankroll so you could turn that 10k or 20k into something big, you have to increase your bet size no matter what right? Thus if you only bet 200 or 400 a game, well you really can't make more than say 25 units a year max don't you agree on this if you flat betting? The thing is, the goal is to eventually bet 1k and up etc by doing this right if someone wants to make a lot of money doing it?
  • cshcsh Senior Member
    edited August 2018
    Is this danshan's new account?
  • RonbetsRonbets Senior Member
    edited August 2018
    csh wrote: »
    Is this danshan's new account?

    Not quite. This guy posts the same queries in multiple forums yearly. He got bent outta shape when the late Danshan was boasting and throwing big #'s around. "How is it possible?" type posts.

    What I truly believe is that the late Danshan is sitting on a big pile$$.
  • donny2donny2 Senior Member
    edited September 2018
    Well could someone confirm if what the other guy mentioned is the correct thing to do? Thus you are suppose to change bet size everyday thus 2 percent of your bankroll per bet? That to me seems a bit extreme. I mean, i could imagine if you go from 10k to 15k, then you go from 200 to 300? Then sort of do this with like 400, 500 etc?

    Because if you are flat betting an amount whether its 200 or 500, then its basically going to be impossible to run up a huge bankroll right?
  • R40R40 Senior Member
    edited September 2018
    donny2 wrote: »
    Well could someone confirm if what the other guy mentioned is the correct thing to do? Thus you are suppose to change bet size everyday thus 2 percent of your bankroll per bet? That to me seems a bit extreme. I mean, i could imagine if you go from 10k to 15k, then you go from 200 to 300? Then sort of do this with like 400, 500 etc?

    Because if you are flat betting an amount whether its 200 or 500, then its basically going to be impossible to run up a huge bankroll right?

    The correct answer is you flat bet a specific dollar amount at 1% per bet. When you have bet hundreds of games and been a success, you decide you have an edge. If you have an edge, you start betting 2% or more. At no time do you bet 2% without an edge.

    Yes, you will vary your bets by your bankroll if you want to manage it properly. You should also eat more fruits and vegetables.
  • donny2donny2 Senior Member
    edited September 2018
    Hi there. Yes i know they said 1 percent is what most pros bet. I get what you mean with having bet lot of games, then decide if you have edge and then start betting 2 percent or more.


    But let say you believe you found an edge. So let say bankroll is 10k to make it simple. You would bet 200 a game. Now let say after a day of betting, bankroll is now 10150 or 9850. Are you really going to make the next bets 2 percent of 10150 or 9850? Because wouldn't it be better idea... once the 10000 hits 15000... which would require 25 units at 200 per bet... then you bet 300 a game? Or is that incorrect.


    Now if you just want to make some money where you flat bet same amount every year, then flat betting whatever amount is fine right? Like how some ppl always bet 50 or 100 or 200 or even 500 a game. But if you want to be serious where you want to get a bigger bankroll where you could potentially make a lot, you have to increase bet size right? But is increasing bet size the way i described it still okay? Thus if you get bankroll from 10k to 15k while betting 200 a game, then you start betting 300 a game? Then if you get it to 20k , you bet 400 a game? And whenever you hit below 15k, you go back to 300 a game? And say if you dropped from 10k to 7500, go to 150 a game etc? So i like to know what is the right way to do it in terms of betting where eventually one could bet 500 a game or even more like 1k or 2k. Because unlike poker where the higher stakes you play, the tougher the competition, whether you bet 100 a game or 500 or 5000 a game, its not like its harder to win a 500 dollar bet vs a 100 dollar bet, its money. I think someone mentioned that sportsbetting is scaleable... is that the word because of that?
Sign In or Register to comment.