[Scientist]

hello. I would appreciate any help you guys could give.

I bet moneyline wagers on MMA only. The average line over the last 500 bets for me -220. I win on average about 80% of my bets.

I have been flat betting (risking) 5% of my bankroll, regardless of the line, unless it is an underdog, in which case I bet (risk) 2%.

I am good at picking winners, but I am mathmatically challenged.

What kind of bankroll should I be using? I am risk averse, but do not want to be too conservative.

Should I be betting to win a certain percentage?

[Peep]

Winning 80% of your bets, you could certainly be betting more of your bankroll and not risk going broke. Since you have a record of your last 500 bets, why don't you go over your W/L with different scenerios, see how you would have done with

A) Straight 10 % on everything.
B) Straight 20% on favs, 5% on dogs.

If u see the flucuations would have been livable, go with an increase in the future and hope you luck holds.

[Scientist]

20% ? No, I would never risk 20% on one fight. 10% I have done it, when I was building, but I would not be comfortable with that at this point.

I have lost 4 in a couple of times, and I have no inclination to drop 40% of my bankroll. I like to keep volatility to a minimum which is why I started betting the way I do. But I feel like I am leaving some money on the table by not betting more on large favorites.

An interesting stat though, is that my losses come from -300 or more favorites to the same frequency as -150 favorites. So I am just having a hard time coming up with a system that tells me how much to bet and when.

[Neil Nollidge]

Originally Posted by Scientist

hello. I would appreciate any help you guys could give.

I bet moneyline wagers on MMA only. The average line over the last 500 bets for me -220. I win on average about 80% of my bets.

I have been flat betting (risking) 5% of my bankroll, regardless of the line, unless it is an underdog, in which case I bet (risk) 2%.

I am good at picking winners, but I am mathmatically challenged.

What kind of bankroll should I be using? I am risk averse, but do not want to be too conservative.

Should I be betting to win a certain percentage?

Focus on your average WINNING line and scan staking posts already made

[Scientist]

Thanks... I looked at the bankroll posts before I posted this, actually spent 1/2 a day looking at them... I only found one that was related to money line bets, and it was over my head.

I should look at the average winning line, ok. So assume that is a little higher than my overall average of -220... let's say it was -240. What would that mean?

[Peep]

Yes, that is the problem with full Kelly, no one can stand the flucuations and swings. They are not livable for most bettors, myself (and sounds like yourself) included, even if they do maximize profit.

[Scientist]

Yeah, I even looked at half kelly and quarter kelly, but I am unsure how to apply it to moneyline bets...

[u21c3f6]

Here is how I would do it. I would not look at average line. For example a wager at -300 and one at -140 may give your average of -220 but unless the -140 wagers have a much higher ROI, to use a single % would have you underbetting on the -300 wager and overbetting on the -140 wager. I would break my stats down to only include lines within a certain range and then figure out the ROI for that range. Then I would calculate the half-Kelly for each of those ranges and I would wager that amount based on the line. I would also keep track going forward to make sure that my initial calculations of the ROI's are correct and adjust as necessary.

If you find out that your ROI is pretty much the same across the various ranges, then it would just be a matter of betting the correct amount to win a certain amount based on the line. For example, if your ROI is 10%, at half-Kelly you would wager enough to win 5% of your bankroll. If your bankroll is $1,000, you would wager 50 to win 50 at +100 but you would wager 100 to win 50 at -200 and so on.

Joe.

[Scientist]

That is a great idea, thank you. I will give that a try for a while!

[cantin]

play only dog ML's

[Scientist]

Originally Posted by cantin

play only dog ML's

I don't even know what that means.

[Arilou]

"play only dog MLs" means only take +odds, which is obviously a rather silly suggestion in your case and almost as silly in general. You miss a lot of good value with rules like that.

Mathematically you should be risking large amounts when you are a heavy favorite. This makes sense: You recognize that you can bet more on -150 than +150, and yet you won't bet more on -250 than -150. You're clearly not emotionally ok with risking on a Kelly basis, which would suggest obscene levels of risk on large favorites when you have much the best of it, so instead I'd suggest that creating a fixed $$ swing (e.g. amount risked + amount you're trying to win) could allow to do better without putting you on stress/tilt/etc.

[SamsonSharp]

My 2 cents.

I bet a lot of MMA also and I wouldnt base your % based on the line. Base it on how confident you are in the matchup. Also if you are betting on 4 or more fights a night I would never bet more than 10% (unless its GSP vs Hardy.. jk). I would say rank the fights out of 5 how confident you are. 1 is a toss up 5 you know its gonna happen.

1 = 1%
2 = 2%
3 = 4% (where alot of bets would end up
4 = 6-7%
5 = 10%

[Scientist]

Great suggestions, thanks guys.

Samson, that is more or less what I used to do, but then just started betting 5u on everything.

Arilou, that is pretty much what the 5% rule I use now is... that is the amount I can lose without going on tilt and chasing it.


Appreciate the input guys