units question

hackermike · #1 01-24-2006, 10:04 PM

hi i recently signed up for a picks service. i have read that it is best to use the same betting unit for every bet. does that mean that i should risk the same, or win the same? for example, if one pick was -110 and another was +220, should i bet $110 (my normal unit) on each, or should i try to win 100 at both? thanks

legend42 · #2 01-25-2006, 12:35 AM

Generally, you play to win the unit(s) when you are getting short money (i.e. -110) and lay the unit when you're getting an overlay (like +220). So, if your unit was $100, you would risk $110 to win $100 on the first wager and risk $100 to win $220 on the second.

Some bettors use different methods, but that's the commonly accepted practice. It doesn't mean you always have to bet the same amount, though. The "unit" is just a base for bankroll calculations, w/l records, etc.

DeucesUp · #3 01-26-2006, 01:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Generally, you play to win the unit(s) when you are getting short money (i.e. -110) and lay the unit when you're getting an overlay (like +220). So, if your unit was $100, you would risk $110 to win $100 on the first wager and risk $100 to win $220 on the second.

[/ QUOTE ]

While there's probably no concensus, I don't agree with this. I think most bettors consider a unit to be the "win" amount. Thus a 2-unit bet at -110 would be 2.2 units to win 2. A 3 unit bet on a +1000 moneyline would be 0.3 units to win 3 and a 1-unit bet on -500 moneyline favorite would be 5 units to win 1.

It doesn't make much a huge difference if you stick to bets that are near even money, say 1-to-1 or 2-to-1 odds. But betting longshots like +800 moneylines has much higher variance than -110 spreads, so you really need to risk a much smaller fraction of your bankroll on each longshot if you don't want to go broke when you hit a cold spell.

legend42 · #4 01-26-2006, 03:06 AM

[ QUOTE ]
But betting longshots like +800 moneylines has much higher variance than -110 spreads, so you really need to risk a much smaller fraction of your bankroll on each longshot if you don't want to go broke when you hit a cold spell.

[/ QUOTE ]

But if you're risking 5 units on the -500 bets, and only 0.2 units on the +500 bets, you can go broke pretty fast that way, too. Like you say, systems vary.

SumZero · #5 01-26-2006, 04:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But betting longshots like +800 moneylines has much higher variance than -110 spreads, so you really need to risk a much smaller fraction of your bankroll on each longshot if you don't want to go broke when you hit a cold spell.

[/ QUOTE ]

But if you're risking 5 units on the -500 bets, and only 0.2 units on the +500 bets, you can go broke pretty fast that way, too. Like you say, systems vary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, if your unit is 1% of your bankroll and you see something offering a line of -20000 and you think the true line is more like -50000 you have to lay 2x your bankroll to make a 1 unit bet.

DeucesUp · #6 01-26-2006, 04:47 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, if your unit is 1% of your bankroll and you see something offering a line of -20000 and you think the true line is more like -50000 you have to lay 2x your bankroll to make a 1 unit bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah and if you bet 1unit = 1% of your bankroll on +20000 ML and you think the true line +50000, you're almost 100% likely to go broke.

Don't use ridiculous examples, it proves nothing. Obviously, units wagered relative to bankroll need to be adjusted for extreme odds bets, that was my point exactly.

Easy E · #7 01-26-2006, 11:19 AM

I think most bettors consider a unit to be the "win" amount

I don't. I base it on units risked, with the results adjusted to reflect the base unit (so, lose 1.1 units, win 2.2 units, etc).

I think it makes much more sense for bankroll management to bet in units (as in, units at risk) than adjust for outcomes. I don't translate +220 into 0.45 units bet, when I'm laying a unit to win 2.2.

Do other serious bettors look at it that way?

NoChance · #8 01-26-2006, 12:31 PM

I think it is done both ways, but I look to win one unit. Therefore, on a -110 line and one unit = to $100, I must wager $110 to win $100.

Think of it this way. When you win your bet, do you say you are 1-0 and ahead 1 unit or 1-0 and ahead 0.91 units? If you say you are ahead one unit, then you must realize that you actually risked more than that one unit to win it.

Performify · #9 01-26-2006, 02:36 PM

I'm with Easy. My default is to look at a unit as "a unit risked" as well.

So if I list a two unit teaser, that's actually 2.2 units to win 2 units.

But if I'm betting on an underdog thats +220 for example, and recommend a "one unit play on the underdog (+220)", I would be risking one unit to win 2.2 units.

Any time I assume otherwise, I specifically spell it out in my picks: i.e. "bet the underdog (+220) to win one unit"

badpokerplyr · #10 01-26-2006, 03:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I think it makes much more sense for bankroll management to bet in units (as in, units at risk) than adjust for outcomes. I don't translate +220 into 0.45 units bet, when I'm laying a unit to win 2.2.

[/ QUOTE ]

In agreement here. I've never wagered to win one unit, I risk one unit to win XXX.