Recommendation on topic of next article

[King Yao]

[ QUOTE ]
i would like to hear king yao's take on bet sizing

(ie how often he flat bets, how often he does multi-unit plays, how he weights things.... weighting when the numbers are clear is one thing, but how did he weigh the miami-pittsburgh under last night, for example?)

[/ QUOTE ]

To answer this quickly: while I respect those that use Kelly, I don't use it. I go by my gut feel of how much risk I can stand for the perceived edge. Sometimes that perceived edge is due to confidence levels - meaning if I think I have 3% edge, but I'm not really sure, I may bet less with the 3% edge than when I think I have 1% edge, but I'm 100% positive I have 1% edge. For example, I'd happily bet a lot on a coin flip if I'm getting +105 and I know the coin flipper isn't cheating. But if I think fair value is -120, and I can get -105, I may bet less than in the coin-flip situation if I am not that confident that my -105 number is correct.

I'm glad I don't have to quantiy risk for myself because I know what risk I'm comfortable with. At the same time, it means I have less expertise in writing about risk and bet-sizing because it would be wrong to suggest to others to "bet if you have edge until you can't stomache it anymore".

As for the PIT/MIA under, I made three plays connected to the under: 1H Parlay MIA +9.5 / Under 20 (early in the day), PIT team total under 27 +105, and 2H Parlay MIA +7 / Under 14.5. I didn't take the PIT/over parlay, so I was really short PIT and taking the under at the same time. Worked out nicely last night, but it still probably had a 46% or more chance of losing.

edited to add: each one I bet the max I could, which is well within my risk limits. it was more the books limits rather than my risk limits that deteremined the bet size. Again, that shows I'm not the best person to write about bet sizing since I don't think about it that much.

[Thremp]

King Yao,

Assuming that you had a much smaller BR and wager limits weren't an issue? Would you still be better by "gut feel"?

[King Yao]

Most likely not because I'd have to be more concerned with a risk of ruin or a bad losing streak crippling the bankroll. I would need much more time to analyze and think about the issue before being comfortable writing about that topic. Other things I can write within in the 24 hour or so that I have til the deadline for the article.

FWIW, my first thought would be to stick to 1% or 1.5% plays unless there was a middle or arb involved.

[Thremp]

[ QUOTE ]
Most likely not because I'd have to be more concerned with a risk of ruin or a bad losing streak crippling the bankroll. I would need much more time to analyze and think about the issue before being comfortable writing about that topic. Other things I can write within in the 24 hour or so that I have til the deadline for the article.

FWIW, my first thought would be to stick to 1% or 1.5% plays unless there was a middle or arb involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was just curious.

[cato-tonia]

[ QUOTE ]
To answer this quickly: while I respect those that use Kelly, I don't use it. I go by my gut feel of how much risk I can stand for the perceived edge. Sometimes that perceived edge is due to confidence levels - meaning if I think I have 3% edge, but I'm not really sure, I may bet less with the 3% edge than when I think I have 1% edge, but I'm 100% positive I have 1% edge. For example, I'd happily bet a lot on a coin flip if I'm getting +105 and I know the coin flipper isn't cheating. But if I think fair value is -120, and I can get -105, I may bet less than in the coin-flip situation if I am not that confident that my -105 number is correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

you have got to be kidding.

tell me you're kidding.

-c

on second thought, i can completely understand why anyone who makes 3500 bets a year would rather not maximize his profit.