General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
What odds should you bet on? High odds or low odds? Of course there needs to be value, but what is to prefer if you have a choice (when there’s a huge favourite you can always choose asian handicap and get higher odds).
I bet 1,5 % of my bankroll when The odds is around 2,00. But what if the odds is 10 or 1,10? It doesen’t make sense to me betting the same amount anyway. Let’s say I bet whenever I expect the odds to be 20 % higher than it should be. If I mean the odds should be 2,00, and I get 2,20 I bet. My theoretical expected ROI (return of investment) is 110 (0,50 x 2,20). If I bet 1000 I can expect to win 100.
If the odds is 1,60 and I mean it should be 1,50, and I still bet 1000, my chance of winning the bet is around 67 % (1/1,5). I then get a ROI of around 107 (67 x 1,60) and I win 70.
If the odds is 1,06 and it should be 1,05, my chance of winning the bet is around 95 %. My ROI is around 1,01 (95 x 1,06). I win 10. In other words 10 times less compared to betting on odds around 2,00. Does that mean that I should bet 15 % of my bankroll on such bets, to compensate? I think that is far to risky, even though I have a 95 % chance of winning the bet. Or maybe it’s not too risky?
And what if the odds I 5,00? Let’s say I still bet if the odds is 20 % above what it should be, in this case 5,80. My chance of winning the bet is only 20 %. My ROI goes up to 116 (0,20 x 5,8). That means I would have to bet around 1 % of my bankroll to win the same amount, around 100.
But if it’s reasonable to risk 1,5 % when you have a 50 % chance of winning the bet, is it not far too risky risking 1 % when you only have a 20 % chance of winning the bet?
I’m sure I’ve misunderstood something here. It doesn’t make sense to me. Both if the odds is very low OR very high you have to risk (in my opinion) too much to win the same amount compared to when the odds is around 2,00.
I bet 1,5 % of my bankroll when The odds is around 2,00. But what if the odds is 10 or 1,10? It doesen’t make sense to me betting the same amount anyway. Let’s say I bet whenever I expect the odds to be 20 % higher than it should be. If I mean the odds should be 2,00, and I get 2,20 I bet. My theoretical expected ROI (return of investment) is 110 (0,50 x 2,20). If I bet 1000 I can expect to win 100.
If the odds is 1,60 and I mean it should be 1,50, and I still bet 1000, my chance of winning the bet is around 67 % (1/1,5). I then get a ROI of around 107 (67 x 1,60) and I win 70.
If the odds is 1,06 and it should be 1,05, my chance of winning the bet is around 95 %. My ROI is around 1,01 (95 x 1,06). I win 10. In other words 10 times less compared to betting on odds around 2,00. Does that mean that I should bet 15 % of my bankroll on such bets, to compensate? I think that is far to risky, even though I have a 95 % chance of winning the bet. Or maybe it’s not too risky?
And what if the odds I 5,00? Let’s say I still bet if the odds is 20 % above what it should be, in this case 5,80. My chance of winning the bet is only 20 %. My ROI goes up to 116 (0,20 x 5,8). That means I would have to bet around 1 % of my bankroll to win the same amount, around 100.
But if it’s reasonable to risk 1,5 % when you have a 50 % chance of winning the bet, is it not far too risky risking 1 % when you only have a 20 % chance of winning the bet?
I’m sure I’ve misunderstood something here. It doesn’t make sense to me. Both if the odds is very low OR very high you have to risk (in my opinion) too much to win the same amount compared to when the odds is around 2,00.
Show More
To my mind this is similar to the laying to a fixed stake or fixed liability argument, to which there is no definitive answer imo.
It just depends on your own risk assessment and how cautious you want to be.
It just depends on your own risk assessment and how cautious you want to be.
Divide 100 by the price and the answer is your stake. Price 2.0 = Stake 50pts, 3.0 = 33, 4.0 = 25, 10.0 = 10 and so on.That's what I do.
That may be an idea. But it also means that if I bet on odds feks 1,10 I will not even bet twice as much as compared to betting on odds 2,00. If I bet 1000 on odds 2,00 I will bet around 1800 on odds 1,10. I think that sounds too litle.
But you're right, you've got to consider the size of your bank. It's almost paradoxical because you're supposed to bet more where there's more value, but if we're talking about a 10,000.00 shot that you think should be 5,000.00, you want a lot on coz it offers big value, but on the other hand, your bank can only take so many losses and you've got to factor in that your bet only has a 1 in 5,000 chance of winning, so you've got to work out a way of reconciling the conflicting factors.
I would think it would be difficult to calculate
accurately different degrees of ''value''. I bet
only when I feel I have at least 20% margin over
my calculated price, if it was, say 30% I would
happy with the extra profit, without putting
more on. Each to there own GL,
accurately different degrees of ''value''. I bet
only when I feel I have at least 20% margin over
my calculated price, if it was, say 30% I would
happy with the extra profit, without putting
more on. Each to there own GL,
Sounds like a good plan Kenilworth. In fact, I'm going to implement that. I'm not going to bet until I see what I think is exceptional value.
There seems to be some misunderstanding here. I don't bet more or less depending on value. I bet more or less depending on the risk I take.
If I bet on odds 1.10 the risk I take is very little compared to a bet on odds 2,00. Even if there's a bit more value on the 2,00 bet.
That is why I think it's reasonable to risk more. An vice versa when the odds is for example 5,00.
If I bet on odds 1.10 the risk I take is very little compared to a bet on odds 2,00. Even if there's a bit more value on the 2,00 bet.
That is why I think it's reasonable to risk more. An vice versa when the odds is for example 5,00.
what I do, is what what bookmakers do ideally, but in reverse, that
is lay horses to take out the same amount, that is 100. for example
they lay perhaps 3 horses in a race, at say, 6/4, 3/1, and 4/1,
taking 40, 25, and 20 respectively total 85. Get them all beat win
85, if one wins lose 15. I say ideally, it is not always possible
to lay horses exactly the same return, but it is on here, backing
or laying. Sometimes from my example bookmakers wouldn't want all
3 to be losers, so they perhaps take 60 for the favourite meaning
that horse losing 45, the other two winning 5, and anything else
winning 105. It's up to the individuals taste.
is lay horses to take out the same amount, that is 100. for example
they lay perhaps 3 horses in a race, at say, 6/4, 3/1, and 4/1,
taking 40, 25, and 20 respectively total 85. Get them all beat win
85, if one wins lose 15. I say ideally, it is not always possible
to lay horses exactly the same return, but it is on here, backing
or laying. Sometimes from my example bookmakers wouldn't want all
3 to be losers, so they perhaps take 60 for the favourite meaning
that horse losing 45, the other two winning 5, and anything else
winning 105. It's up to the individuals taste.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539