[eyeball]

This is a modified Martingale chase sytem isnt it?
So I guess with time you will loose since its a martingale?

[LT Profits]

Well, it may take you longer to go broke than a full-fledged Martingdale, but yes it is a long term loser. Just think about it, if every bet you make has the same edge, then you most likely have a +EV on your first bet. However, if that bet loses, you are overbetting by doubling up on the second bet, practically nullifying the +EV. (This is where Ganch's Kelly Calculator becomes helpful). Then if that bet loses again, you end up betting four times your original bet on a game that has the same edge (theoretically) as the first bet. That's just poor money management.

[Ganchrow]

Yeah, LT is pretty much spot on.

I'll just point out that it isn't a question of nullifying expected value (which for +EV bets will always be greater in nominal dollar terms the larger the wager), but rather one of nullifying expected bankroll growth.

Personally I know nothing of John Morrison (or his eponymous "system") other than he calims a 97% win rate.

That alone should be enough to give you pause.

[Munson15]

A 97% win rate on a Martingale system can be very bad to your bankroll.

[cschaps]

The win rate on the morrison system is impressive but it seems the losses would be huge because of the compounding effect.

How would you calculate "edge" on each game of a series picked to win by the morrison system?

Does the system give win probabilities on each game of that series? If so couldn't you minimize the compounding effect of the morrison system by maximizing expected growth?


For example lets say the next pick in the morrison system is the Yankees over the Pirates. The bet, per the morrison system, would be that the Yankees will win at least one game of the 3 game series. If there was a win probability to use on each game of that series, you could calculate edge on game 1 of the series and if negative not bet it and wait on the 2nd game of the series. If the second game has a positive edge then you would calculate the percentage of your bankroll to bet on that 2nd game. If that second game loses, you would go through the same analysis on game 3. Again this eliminates the compounding effect of losing all 3 games in a series based on carrying over losses to each subsequent game of the series.

Also it would seem logical that you would pick the runline under this system when the team picked to win is getting 1.5. If so how is edge calculated on the runline. I guess you would need a win probability on that bet as well before edge can be calculated.

So it all boils down to does morrison provide win probabilities on each individual game in order to be able to maximize expected growth and minimize the compounding effect on the losses?

[rcn848]

If you can accurately predict win probabilities you should just bet kelly and watch the cash pile in.