[kdog]

Well, as you've seen, the original groupings are set around the key numbers. 1-2.5, 3-6.5, 7-9.5, etc. So other than the 4 it's really not too bad. And truthfully I can't think of a better way to break it down and still have enough data points for relevance.

I've compared my breakevens to two weeks of ML's now and find most all to be quite close. Since I agree with your statement "in a general way, when attempting to quantify data of this kind, it is always better to err on the side of the less precise and more robust than your instincts might think." (Proceed with caution in other words.)I'm looking for a minimum difference between ML and my breakeven of greater than 5 before I place a bet. That seems like a good place to start.