POWERHOUSE
Banned
- Beiträge
- 765
- Punkte
- 0
hab auf KO A.A.
also wird wenigsten einer von uns gewinnen.
X
Der "gute Wettquoten" Thread
- Ersteller platine
- Erstellt am
His Royness1
Administrator
Ich spiele nie Big... 10% von seiner Bankroll spielt eigentlich niemand vernünftiges. 1% sind doch 10/10 dachte ich...
Kohle weg,war sowieso der Gewinn vom "Ich-dreh-mich-weg-und-fang-an-zu-heulen" Kampf.
POWERHOUSE
Banned
- Beiträge
- 765
- Punkte
- 0
ich rede hier von BIG.von ausnahmen.
auserdem spiele ich boxwette sowieso bigger als nba,mlb und den rest.
FALSCH!
btw: ich hab erfahren dass man auf die wrestlemania heute wetten konnte. ich verpass aber einiges. :mensch:
desperados
Nachwuchsspieler
- Beiträge
- 501
- Punkte
- 0
Vernünftiges Moneymanagement impliziert, nie mehr als 3% des Bankrolls zu setzen (teilweise wird auch 1% empfohlen, wie His Royness schon sagte). D.h. 10/10 = max. 3% des Bankrolls.
10% sind imo definitiv zu hoch.
Muß jedoch jeder Spieler selbst entscheiden, wieviel Risiko er aufzunehmen bereit ist. Je höher (prozentual zum Gesamtkapital) die Einsätze, desto höher das Risiko eines Totalverlustes.
10% sind imo definitiv zu hoch.
Muß jedoch jeder Spieler selbst entscheiden, wieviel Risiko er aufzunehmen bereit ist. Je höher (prozentual zum Gesamtkapital) die Einsätze, desto höher das Risiko eines Totalverlustes.
POWERHOUSE
Banned
- Beiträge
- 765
- Punkte
- 0
10% sind auch nur eine ausnahme und wenn dann nur bei einer boxwette.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=By90rxZKCwU
kurz mal nachgeguckt: @www.wettbasis.com
Zuletzt bearbeitet:
Einsatz hängt vom valuegehalt ab.
Einen super Thread dazu gibts von PunyPunter bei Wettpoint zu dem Thema.
3.2 M. M.: Staking – Kelly und Co. im Vergleich
http://www.forum.wettpoint.com/thread.php?id=14619
Einen super Thread dazu gibts von PunyPunter bei Wettpoint zu dem Thema.
3.2 M. M.: Staking – Kelly und Co. im Vergleich
http://www.forum.wettpoint.com/thread.php?id=14619
POWERHOUSE
Banned
- Beiträge
- 765
- Punkte
- 0
SPORTS BETTING MONEY MANAGEMENT
by R. J. Miller
///
Correct money management is easy to explain. It is almost impossible to adhere to.
There have been about as many 'systems' for varying the bet size as there are systems to beat the craps table. None of them work and all of them do harm by giving false expectations. Double-up systems, star betting, the Kelly Criterion, etc. all have the same thing in common. They adversely affect the cash flow and they raise the breakeven percentage that must be accomplished.
Any time you vary your bet size by the slightest amount, you increase the breakeven percentage of 52.38. If you refigure your percentage after each bet, your breakeven jumps to over 55%. If you have 1 star and 5 star bets or bet twice as much on some plays, you should understand that only the large bets are meaningful to whether you will be a winner. You might as well not bet the smaller ones. In the end, they won't matter.
Some touts say you should increase your bet when you are on a winning streak and decrease it when you are on a losing streak. The key word is 'are'. If you won yesterday, you 'were' on a winning streak. But that was yesterday. If you know you will win today, why not bet it all? If you know you will lose today, you might consider not betting at all.
The problem with bet size is not the streaks, but the breakeven. If you have a 56% advantage on each bet, over 200 games you will win less than 50% about 17% of the time.You will win more than 60% about 17% of the time. Winning 100 and losing 100 with a 5% unit, you will lose 50% of your bankroll to the vigorish. (100 wins times $50 less 100 losses times $55 equals minus $500 on a $1,000 bankroll).You will lower your bet and never get even. I recommend playing no more than 2% of your bankroll. Anything over 2% is unacceptably risky, even for recreational bettors.
The reality is that each person may be trying to accomplish something different. If your goal is to afford entertainment and not go broke, that is entirely different than my goal of making a living. If you bet $100 a game on Monday night football to enjoy the game, it will cost you $5 a week if you can go 50-50. There is nothing wrong with that. It's cheaper than a movie. But that is entertainment expense, not an excellent investment vehicle.
To do sports betting in a serious way, you must treat it as you would any other business. In sports betting, your inventory is your cash. If you run out of cash, you are out of business. The old saying is that you should not use your rent money to bet with. That is true. But if you're betting for a living it is equally true that you must not use your gambling bankroll to pay the rent.
The amazing thing about sports betting is the return on investment (ROI) that is possible. And there is no magic. The return on investment is a function of the winning percentage and the amount that is invested. The amount invested is a function of how many games (investments) are bet and how much is bet on each game. It is the same as any business. How many widgets did you sell and how much did you gross per widget.
In my case, I average between 1,000 and 1,200 plays per year. Let's call it 1,000. My pain tolerance is a 1% unit. I will bet 1.1% of my bankroll on every bet. That means I will bet 1% of my money 1,000 times...1000% of my bankroll....That's 1000% of my bankroll. And again, I will bet 1000% of my bankroll. The same money 10 times in a year. That is why such a return is possible.
Now if I can win 56% of my plays, I will get a return on investment of nearly 100%. I will win 560 bets and lose 440 bets. I will pay a broker fee to the sportsbook of 44 bets. Therefore, I will win 76 units. (76 times 1% equals 76%). I will win $7.60 for every $100 that I bet. I will explain later how I end up with 100%.
A word here on that $7.60. I've seen many people come to town and try to make a living playing sports. Some of them think they can bet $100 a game and do it. Well, think about it. If they play 20 games a week, they will bet $2,000 and, if they are good, make $7.60 times 20=$152. At $200 a game, they can expect $308. That's pretty hard to live on. I think the minimum that must be bet is $500. That's only $760 a week and leaves no room for a bad streak. To bet $500 at 1%, you need $50,000. Like any business, you should continue to invest some of the profits to grow the business.
As soon as you can draw from the business, you should put yourself on a salary. That way you can know what to expect for an income and won't be bothered by the short term vagaries of Lady Luck.
You just need to know the number of bets, the amount per bet, and the win percentage, and you will know what to pay the IRS next year.
After 19 years, I know the number of plays I have each year. I know what my bet size is. And with 1,000 plays, the standard deviation for my win percentage is 2. So I know I will win between 55% and 57%. Sounds rather dull when I put it that way. And I guess it actually is. Bernard Baruch, the great financier, said he always looked for boring businesses. They were well run, without surprises and he knew what to expect.
I know what to expect. One great lesson my brother, JR, pointed out to me was that with a 56% expectation, your bankroll would reach a new high only 5% of the time. Nineteen out of 20 days you will be below your bankroll high. The novice thinks you should have more money each day. I also know that with a 56% win rate and 100 bets a month, I will lose money every 9th month. Good money management is aided by knowing what to expect.
As a final note on bet size, I should add that I use a plateau system.
I bet 1% of my bank and continue to flat bet until my bank grows by at least 25%. Then I recalculate the 1%. Thus if I started with $10,000, I would bet $100 a game until my bank grows to at least $12,500. At that point, I would refigure my unit to $125. It would stay there until I reached at least $15,625. That way my actual risk reward ratio doesn't get too high. The other thing that I do that is unique and rather arguable is that I never lower my bet. Remember, if you vary the bet, your breakeven goes up. At a 1% unit and 19 year's experience, I'm comfortable that I can ride through a losing streak. If you lose 10 games at $200 a bet and lower the bet to $180, you must win 12.2 bets to get back to even. That is how I get my 100% annual ROI. My actual bet goes up during the year as my bankroll reaches higher plateaus.
by R. J. Miller
///
Correct money management is easy to explain. It is almost impossible to adhere to.
There have been about as many 'systems' for varying the bet size as there are systems to beat the craps table. None of them work and all of them do harm by giving false expectations. Double-up systems, star betting, the Kelly Criterion, etc. all have the same thing in common. They adversely affect the cash flow and they raise the breakeven percentage that must be accomplished.
Any time you vary your bet size by the slightest amount, you increase the breakeven percentage of 52.38. If you refigure your percentage after each bet, your breakeven jumps to over 55%. If you have 1 star and 5 star bets or bet twice as much on some plays, you should understand that only the large bets are meaningful to whether you will be a winner. You might as well not bet the smaller ones. In the end, they won't matter.
Some touts say you should increase your bet when you are on a winning streak and decrease it when you are on a losing streak. The key word is 'are'. If you won yesterday, you 'were' on a winning streak. But that was yesterday. If you know you will win today, why not bet it all? If you know you will lose today, you might consider not betting at all.
The problem with bet size is not the streaks, but the breakeven. If you have a 56% advantage on each bet, over 200 games you will win less than 50% about 17% of the time.You will win more than 60% about 17% of the time. Winning 100 and losing 100 with a 5% unit, you will lose 50% of your bankroll to the vigorish. (100 wins times $50 less 100 losses times $55 equals minus $500 on a $1,000 bankroll).You will lower your bet and never get even. I recommend playing no more than 2% of your bankroll. Anything over 2% is unacceptably risky, even for recreational bettors.
The reality is that each person may be trying to accomplish something different. If your goal is to afford entertainment and not go broke, that is entirely different than my goal of making a living. If you bet $100 a game on Monday night football to enjoy the game, it will cost you $5 a week if you can go 50-50. There is nothing wrong with that. It's cheaper than a movie. But that is entertainment expense, not an excellent investment vehicle.
To do sports betting in a serious way, you must treat it as you would any other business. In sports betting, your inventory is your cash. If you run out of cash, you are out of business. The old saying is that you should not use your rent money to bet with. That is true. But if you're betting for a living it is equally true that you must not use your gambling bankroll to pay the rent.
The amazing thing about sports betting is the return on investment (ROI) that is possible. And there is no magic. The return on investment is a function of the winning percentage and the amount that is invested. The amount invested is a function of how many games (investments) are bet and how much is bet on each game. It is the same as any business. How many widgets did you sell and how much did you gross per widget.
In my case, I average between 1,000 and 1,200 plays per year. Let's call it 1,000. My pain tolerance is a 1% unit. I will bet 1.1% of my bankroll on every bet. That means I will bet 1% of my money 1,000 times...1000% of my bankroll....That's 1000% of my bankroll. And again, I will bet 1000% of my bankroll. The same money 10 times in a year. That is why such a return is possible.
Now if I can win 56% of my plays, I will get a return on investment of nearly 100%. I will win 560 bets and lose 440 bets. I will pay a broker fee to the sportsbook of 44 bets. Therefore, I will win 76 units. (76 times 1% equals 76%). I will win $7.60 for every $100 that I bet. I will explain later how I end up with 100%.
A word here on that $7.60. I've seen many people come to town and try to make a living playing sports. Some of them think they can bet $100 a game and do it. Well, think about it. If they play 20 games a week, they will bet $2,000 and, if they are good, make $7.60 times 20=$152. At $200 a game, they can expect $308. That's pretty hard to live on. I think the minimum that must be bet is $500. That's only $760 a week and leaves no room for a bad streak. To bet $500 at 1%, you need $50,000. Like any business, you should continue to invest some of the profits to grow the business.
As soon as you can draw from the business, you should put yourself on a salary. That way you can know what to expect for an income and won't be bothered by the short term vagaries of Lady Luck.
You just need to know the number of bets, the amount per bet, and the win percentage, and you will know what to pay the IRS next year.
After 19 years, I know the number of plays I have each year. I know what my bet size is. And with 1,000 plays, the standard deviation for my win percentage is 2. So I know I will win between 55% and 57%. Sounds rather dull when I put it that way. And I guess it actually is. Bernard Baruch, the great financier, said he always looked for boring businesses. They were well run, without surprises and he knew what to expect.
I know what to expect. One great lesson my brother, JR, pointed out to me was that with a 56% expectation, your bankroll would reach a new high only 5% of the time. Nineteen out of 20 days you will be below your bankroll high. The novice thinks you should have more money each day. I also know that with a 56% win rate and 100 bets a month, I will lose money every 9th month. Good money management is aided by knowing what to expect.
As a final note on bet size, I should add that I use a plateau system.
I bet 1% of my bank and continue to flat bet until my bank grows by at least 25%. Then I recalculate the 1%. Thus if I started with $10,000, I would bet $100 a game until my bank grows to at least $12,500. At that point, I would refigure my unit to $125. It would stay there until I reached at least $15,625. That way my actual risk reward ratio doesn't get too high. The other thing that I do that is unique and rather arguable is that I never lower my bet. Remember, if you vary the bet, your breakeven goes up. At a 1% unit and 19 year's experience, I'm comfortable that I can ride through a losing streak. If you lose 10 games at $200 a bet and lower the bet to $180, you must win 12.2 bets to get back to even. That is how I get my 100% annual ROI. My actual bet goes up during the year as my bankroll reaches higher plateaus.
His Royness1
Administrator
Tja da findet man wohl auch unter den Expertenmeinungen bei 4 verschiedenen Leute 5 Meinungen... Das muss jeder für sich selbst wissen.
Meine erste Wette waren 100% von Bankroll bzw. die 100 Euro die ich eingezahlt habe, wobei man sagen muss, im Verlustfall hätte ich wohl nochml nachgezahlt... Also ist die Frage wie definiert mein seinen Bankroll...
Ich hab immer meinen Gesamtgewinn benutzt obwohl davon ja auch nicht mehr alles da ist, weil ich soviel verprasse... Und am Anfang habe ich sicher öfter über 1% gespielt. Heute ist 1% eher die Ausnahme und für mich schon big, also würde ich die 650 mal auch als big bezeichnen.
Meine Größte Wette waren damals zwischen 5-10% und die habe ich verloren, das waren 3000 Euro, da habe ich ein paar Wochen geweint, denn nur zu wetten umso eine Idiotie wieder reinzuholen ist schon mühselig.
Meine erste Wette waren 100% von Bankroll bzw. die 100 Euro die ich eingezahlt habe, wobei man sagen muss, im Verlustfall hätte ich wohl nochml nachgezahlt... Also ist die Frage wie definiert mein seinen Bankroll...
Ich hab immer meinen Gesamtgewinn benutzt obwohl davon ja auch nicht mehr alles da ist, weil ich soviel verprasse...
Und am Anfang habe ich sicher öfter über 1% gespielt. Heute ist 1% eher die Ausnahme und für mich schon big, also würde ich die 650 mal auch als big bezeichnen.Meine Größte Wette waren damals zwischen 5-10% und die habe ich verloren, das waren 3000 Euro, da habe ich ein paar Wochen geweint, denn nur zu wetten umso eine Idiotie wieder reinzuholen ist schon mühselig.
POWERHOUSE
Banned
- Beiträge
- 765
- Punkte
- 0
Tja da findet man wohl auch unter den Expertenmeinungen bei 4 verschiedenen Leute 5 Meinungen... Das muss jeder für sich selbst wissen.
Meine erste Wette waren 100% von Bankroll bzw. die 100 Euro die ich eingezahlt habe, wobei man sagen muss, im Verlustfall hätte ich wohl nochml nachgezahlt... Also ist die Frage wie definiert mein seinen Bankroll...
Ich hab immer meinen Gesamtgewinn benutzt obwohl davon ja auch nicht mehr alles da ist, weil ich soviel verprasse...
Meine Größte Wette waren damals zwischen 5-10% und die habe ich verloren, das waren 3000 Euro, da habe ich ein paar Wochen geweint, denn nur zu wetten umso eine Idiotie wieder reinzuholen ist schon mühselig.
Ich dachte, du setzt höhere Summen.
Was mir beim erfolgreichem Wetten auffällt:
-Man ist nicht mehr so vorsichtig, wie früher,
obwohl die Einsätze 10x größer sind.
-Setzt Wette aus langeweile!
-Man vergisst den eigentlichen Wert des Geldes.
Jeder der durschnittlich verdient, würde sich an den Kopf fassen, wenn man ihm sagen würde :Hab gestern 1K auf die Lakers gesetzt.
Wetten ist wie Bergsteigen.
Eben... jedem das Seine. Mache sind mit Flatbetting erfolgreich andere wiederm mit Kelly oder was auch immer. Wobei rein mathematisch Kelly allen überlegen ist.
Der Text von R. J. Miller liest sich für mich wie Werbung um ein Buch zu verkaufen.
Ich zitiere mal PunyPunter:
Meiner Ansicht nach wird bis auf Punkt 2 alles mit Kelly erfüllt aber auch Overbetting lässt sich mit einer Modifikation vermeiden. Beim Flatbetting wird keines der Punkte erfüllt.
His Royness1
Administrator
Ich dachte, du setzt höhere Summen.
Was mir beim erfolgreichem Wetten auffällt:
-Man ist nicht mehr so vorsichtig, wie früher,
obwohl die Einsätze 10x größer sind.
-Setzt Wette aus langeweile!
-Man vergisst den eigentlichen Wert des Geldes.
Jeder der durschnittlich verdient, würde sich an den Kopf fassen, wenn man ihm sagen würde :Hab gestern 1K auf die Lakers gesetzt.
Wetten ist wie Bergsteigen.
Weiß ja nicht was für dich höhere Summen sind, aber meistens hält einen da auch die Limitierung von ab. Mehr hatte Ladbrokes z.B. auf den Helenius-Fight garnicht angenommen...
desperados
Nachwuchsspieler
- Beiträge
- 501
- Punkte
- 0
Die 4 Staking-Kriterien von PonyPunter fassen die Anforderung an ein "gesundes" Staking-System imo sehr gut zusammen.
@Powerhouse:
Nix gegen dich, aber wettbasis ist eine der schlechtesten existierenden Wettinformationsseiten. Allein die dort präsentierten "Strategien" sind lustig und schwachsinnig zugleich
@Powerhouse:
Nix gegen dich, aber wettbasis ist eine der schlechtesten existierenden Wettinformationsseiten. Allein die dort präsentierten "Strategien" sind lustig und schwachsinnig zugleich
POWERHOUSE
Banned
- Beiträge
- 765
- Punkte
- 0
@Powerhouse:
Nix gegen dich, aber wettbasis ist eine der schlechtesten existierenden Wettinformationsseiten. Allein die dort präsentierten "Strategien" sind lustig und schwachsinnig zugleich
hab nur danach gegoogelt
und dann die seite bekommen.habe eben mal dort ein bisschen nachgeschaut.
die wett-tipps1 sind garnichtmal so schlecht.
@HR: eine zeit lang habe ich nur 1000€ wetten platziert.
luxus kommt und geht
colderthanice
Bankspieler
@HR: eine zeit lang habe ich nur 1000€ wetten platziert.
luxus kommt und geht
Wetten lohnt sich auch erst ab 4 stelligen Beträgen finde ich
His Royness1
Administrator
POWERHOUSE
Banned
- Beiträge
- 765
- Punkte
- 0
ok 1000 ist vielleicht ein bisschen hoch aber unter 300-500€ lohnt es sich mmn nicht.
da kann man sich den stress für die paar hunderter auch sparen.
His Royness1
Administrator
Du hast doch deine Baseball-Tips hier meistens mit 100-200 reingestellt. Was habt ihr eigentlich für Komplexe hier die Möchtegern-Highroller raushängen zu lassen.
Besonders colder kann doch froh sein, wenn er bisher insgesamt plus-minus 0 gemacht hat in seiner Karriere...
POWERHOUSE
Banned
- Beiträge
- 765
- Punkte
- 0
----
POWERHOUSE
Banned
- Beiträge
- 765
- Punkte
- 0
Forumwette ATL easy durch.
ATL9 ARI4.
Hab danach noch small-medium SFG gespielt.
SFG 10 NYM 1 :laugh2: dass es durchgeht wusste ich aber soo easy :cool4:
3-0 Run PHI,ATL und SFG
unter ~30Std.
~1000€
die 100 bis 200 waren doch schon lange her.
highroller wetten bestimmt nicht mit 1k
Zuletzt bearbeitet: