My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

I doubt very highly somome one would be 58% over 1500 games. Not to mention that anyone would start out with a bank of $1000.

IF kelly WAS that easy there would be a lot of millionaires walking around that started with a $1000 bankroll and hit 58% over 1500 bets, which is about 6 months worth of plays for me.
But congratulation I am sure you have started on your second million by now, just as all the other Kelly people have.
 
General that is just it...Kelly IS moneymanagement, that is my point.


Kelly is a BIG mistake, make up anything you want about it.

I will start posting my straight wagers,and let all the Kelly pundits start posting their wagers. We will all start with an imaginary 50K bank roll.
They with their breakdowns and me with my laundry list. They with their 5% here, and 10% there, and me with my straight 1%.

Would be interesting, but no one ever follows through with it...I wonder why?
 
You just don't get it do you? Kelly would call for a wager amount of 4% if you could select games at a 54% rate. The 1% tells me you are just trying to hold onto your $50k for as long as possible without losing it. You really aren't trying to make money. If you are going to hit much less than 54% you must be planning on losing?? Is that the case? Successful people have a plan and implement it. My plan is better than your plan, you just haven't figured it out yet.

Once again over A Million Reasons!!!!
 
I don't think there is anyone that can pick games at 54% over their lifetime either. But that is niether here nor there.


I have a 1% rate because at any given time I might have 30 or more games going , not to mention the scalps and arbitrages I might have made(which are far more than 1% each way). If you are implementing Kelly that type of betting is IMPOSSIBLE. So while you could have 100% of your bankroll commited in 15-25 plays, I can have 30 wagers going along with 5-6 scalps and still not even be 50% committed.(which some would say is way too much) but not when half of it is risk free.

So while guys who are betting with Kelly have to figure out which games they are going to play and which they are going to leave off, I bet all the games I like and then some.
Like I said, there must be a lot of millionaires walking around that started with a $1000 post up. I guess that is why there are new sportsbetting portals opening up everyday, and all the so called geniuses that swear by Kelly are selling their picks on their websites.:+textinbu

I started out with a mid level 5 figure bankroll about 12 years ago, I have rolled that over more than a few times, and I have NEVER gone bust. I have made money every single years since 1992, not in every sport but overall. Gambling was my ONLY source of income for about 8 years.

I live in a pretty nice neighborhood in a damn nice house. I pretty much do what I want when I want. I am not even 40 yet, so I have to think my way is a pretty good way.

But I am not going to start chirping about what I have or don't have. I just know that I win consistantly. That is something 99% of the guys that place a bet cannot say. So if my way isn't the best, I really don't care, it works for me.

As long as all you millionaires let me get my share I will be fine.

I am done with this, because anyone that claims to be able to roll $1000 bux into a million (in 1500 plays) is clearly dillusional.
 
I can hardly wait to see your tax returns showing you made your living off gambling for 8 years. Congratulations. But this isn't about how big my house is or how big your house is. We don't need to go there because it is irrelevant to the discussion. This is about what is a sound money management system. Straight wagering is just not as sound. Just think how much more you could have made if you used a good money management system rather than one from the stoneages. If this is mathematically too difficult for you just admit it. But don't discount it because you don't understand.

This isn't that hard.

If you thought you were going to hit 53% and for simplicity they are all wagering 11/10 wagers, Kelly would call for a 1.3% of the bankroll play. This is very close to what you are currently doing.

Now if you made 100 plays and went 40-60, kelly would have done better because you were losing and therefore decreased your bet amounts and lost less!!!

Now if you made 100 plays and went 60-40, kelly would have done better because you were winning and your bank roll increased and therefore your bets increased thus you win more.

You can wager anyway you want but for pete sakes don't come in here claiming yours is better when mathematically it isn't. I have devised offshoots of the kelly system to try to enhance performance. The basic principal is to try to maximize profits and avoid losing the bankroll.
 
Final comment (I lied before)


My current banroll is at its ceiling, which means I have built it over those 10 years or so to where it is now. It is all I need. You don't think that when I started out I wasn't increasing my bet size as my bankroll increased? Of course I was. 1% of 50K is less than 1% of 75K isn't it?

Maybe that is where the problems of understanding this are hard. I am not continuously going broke, I have a steady amount available to bet. Sure it dips below that "ceiling" number when I bet, or when I lose a few opinionated plays. But it I always calculate my bets on that ceiling amount.

I do not have 2500 in my bank one day, lose a few bets and then have 1500, and then have to recalculate or reload. I have an amount that is basically perpetual to deal with. Most guy's bankrolls are what they have to their name. I actually have money in post up accounts and on hand that is specifically for gambling.

When I bet futures or props or series, I will introduce more money in, so maybe I am raising my ceiling somewhat. But in those plays I am tying my money up for an extended period of time, so to me they are not really part of the grand scheme. If they lose then I definately take them off the top, if they win it is all profit and I collect.

Now saying that 1.3% is what Kelly calls for ifyou think you can hit 53%. Well I think I can hit 51-52% on my opinionated plays. So I have to think my 1% isn't too far off Kelly. But I simply do not fluctuate my opinions. In other words I don't look at a game like Monday Night that I loved, and think Denver is a lock and bet 16% or whatever a 65% OPINION calls for. I bet my same amount. Sure I COULD have won a lot more (16times more), but the next time one of my "locks" lost I would be even pretty much, depending on vig/odds.

It all evens out. It regresses towards a mean. 99% of the people out there pick at 50%. There are a select few that can do better than that, so eventually you get to the same spot, you just might have a few more ups and downs along the way.
 
Once again it has nothing to do with how much someone has or doesn't have to wager with or how big their house is. It is about how they should manage their money on the bets they do place.

I guess by varying your bet amounts as your bankroll increased you were ineffect running a bankroll money management system similar to what kelly would do. So you really didn't do a straight bet method. I didn't say anything about betting 1% of a bankroll on one play and 16% of a bankroll on another play. There are other versions of a kelly type money management system which you could do that. I was talking stictly betting the same % of bankroll on every play.

I guess the fact that you did vary your amounts says that you followed a money management system more towards what I would recommend i.e. kelly and I win the arguement!!!!
 
If only one thing can be learned from this thread (I believe many lessons are here) it is, do not wager on any one event over a set % of B.R. I stick to 1-3% -- I cannot imagine betting 6% of my total BR on any one bet.
 
Well I knew it wouldn't be your final comment.

You never answer the questions put to you, do you? You always change to some other subject. Who said anything about adjusting a wager based on the probability of winning? The fact that you are adjusting your wager based on your bankroll is exactly what kelly would recommend!!!!

Looking into to the future you would have to think you could win a greater % than 52.38% of your wagers or it really doesn't matter at all how you bet you will lose in the long run. It is just a matter of how fast. If you kept records of your plays for a period of time it would probably be the best indicator of what your performance would be in the future. This would help you get a better indicator of the optimal amount to wager.
 
Sam: I would say erroring on the side of conservate in what % of bankroll to play is a wise move. A betting partner of mine keeps extremely accurate records in regards to our win% and what we % of our bankroll we should be playing. Our % will be higher because we are confident that we can hit above 55% (which correlates to a 6% of bankroll play). I would say for most players a 1-4% of their bankroll is a better amount to play. If you want any other info in regards to what to do when you have for instance you have 3 games that you are playing that are going on at the same time, what you should do to optimize your plays let me know. Not that I am recommending it, but if at noon on sunday you normally play 6 games how could you handle this from a kelly standpoint. There are alot of other things you could do to improve your performance that are off shots of a Kelly method.

As Always good Luck

Northern Star
 

The General

Another Day, Another Dollar
Sam Odom said:
If only one thing can be learned from this thread (I believe many lessons are here) it is, do not wager on any one event over a set % of B.R. I stick to 1-3% -- I cannot imagine betting 6% of my total BR on any one bet.
Sam, we both know that money management is the key. It is the deciding factor in any straight bettors long term success or failure.
 
General:

I think there are three keys

1. Picking Winners (if you pick all winners you don't need 2 or 3, but that isn't going to happen unless you have the book they have in Back To The Future movie)
2. Money Management (I of course think Kelly is they way to go. Kelly by the way was an engineer at Bell Labs, which at that time got the best of the best in the engineering world to work for them).
3. Discipline (trying to limit the number of plays so you only make solid choices, its easy to play more games when you are wining and give back some of those profits or to chase when you are losing, both bad decisions)

As Always Good Luck

Northern Star
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

thanx for the bump Shrink..spent the last hour and a half digesting it...great read and one of the best educated debates i've seen on EOG..especially given the fact that although posters disagreed on the subject, it was for the most part handled with class..
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

thanx for the bump Shrink..spent the last hour and a half digesting it...great read and one of the best educated debates i've seen on EOG..especially given the fact that although posters disagreed on the subject, it was for the most part handled with class..
Archangel,

You are welcome...

It certainly is worth the time to dig deep into that thread. Some of the sharpest minds are debating the art of bookmaking...

It's exactly what you stated, too...

"great read and one of the best educated debates i've seen on EOG..."

THE SHRINK
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by The General
Hey guys, since we are here. Could a major book prosper by writing even money wagers on the major sports which were standard vig of 110 sides and totals in years past, IF they have the proper & large enough volume?
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Absolutely not.

More on all of this later.

But for now, let me leave you with this thought.

The definition of "gambling" is to wager at unfavorable odds. A properly run book is wagering at favorable odds, not gambling.
How did I miss this thread 2 years ago? Thanks for bumping it.

JC said that a bookmaker absolutely couldn't survive writing even money wagers at -110 vig, and he promised more on all that later but I didn't see anything later.

He also found a definition of "gambling" that I couldn't find; everywhere I looked gambling was defined as wagering and vice versa, although I certainly agree that properly run books gamble/wager at favorable odds.
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

thanx for the bump Shrink..spent the last hour and a half digesting it...great read and one of the best educated debates i've seen on EOG..especially given the fact that although posters disagreed on the subject, it was for the most part handled with class..
IT WAS AN EXCELLENT THREAD. IT WAS BY FAR THE MOST EDUCATED THREAD AT EOG. I WISH BAKER,WANTI, JUDGE, AND DRUNK WOULD START BACK POSTING OVER HERE. IT WAS ONLY ONE POSTER THAT TRIED TO RUIN THE WHOLE THREAD. I WILL GIVE YOU ONE GUESS ITS A NO BRAINER.
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

Absolutely not.

More on all of this later.

But for now, let me leave you with this thought.

The definition of "gambling" is to wager at unfavorable odds. A properly run book is wagering at favorable odds, not gambling.
Yoo hoo...

JC?

You've had 2 years now and you expect me to answer your posts in days??.:rolleyes:

Thanks,

THE SHRINK
 

sofos

EOG Addicted
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.


WantItAll wrote
You enter a contest to win a car. they have 3 placards yo have to chose from. On one of those 3 placards is written the word CAR. So you pick, they flip one over, that in not a winner. Theythen give you thhe option of changing your original pick or keeping it. What option gives you the best odds of winning, keeping your original pick or changing
it?

Baker answered
For the love of everything holy please don't tell me you are somehow going to use this riddle in relation to sports betting. I really can't beleive you are trying to relate a riddle that you probably saw on the TV show NUMB3RS to books moving numbers. To answer your question you should always change your selection, doing so will provide for an expectation that you will end up picking the CAR placard 66.6% of the time. Do you even know why changing your selection would be the correct "play"?

Regardless of the arguments on the main subject the claim above that one should change his placard selection is wrong.
Assuming they know which placard contains the word CAR once you have picked one placard there is ALWAYS at least one placard without the word CAR on it. So, showing you a placard without the word CAR offers no new information whatsoever. The odds remain the same (you still have 1/3 chance with your original pick and 1/3 chance by switching your pick). I agree of course that this "example" is in no way related to booking.
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

I'll never forget this pearl shared by someone I respect a lot:

We really aren't interested in what the small bettors think or what the uninformed public is doing: we're really concerned about what the Professional bettors do.

If the Professional bettors are always betting on the San Francisco 49ers even though they aren't covering the spread, there's something they see about the 49ers that we don't see.

Now they might be wrong at that time, but our experience is that over a long period of time Professional gamblers have a reason for, why they bet their money...

THE SHRINK
 

munson15

I want winners...
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

Just read the whole thing, and I still don't know if the Kelly method (which I have used from time to time) is great or horrible. I've seen so many guys bash and praise it that I'm not sure. I've never stuck with it over a long enough haul to be sure.

Also, what's a "Polish middle?":+clueless
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

Just read the whole thing, and I still don't know if the Kelly method (which I have used from time to time) is great or horrible. I've seen so many guys bash and praise it that I'm not sure. I've never stuck with it over a long enough haul to be sure.

Also, what's a "Polish middle?":+clueless
A POLISH MIDDLE IS WHEN YOU MIDDLE YOURSELF ON THE SAME GAME. I THINK YOU CAN FIGURE THE REST OUT. BETTING THE GAME, AND THAN IN THE 2ND HALF BETTING THE OPPOSITE OF THE ORIGINAL SIDE OR TOTAL.THATS A POLISH MIDDLE.
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

I would submit the individual who controls and develops the clientele determines the value of a store. Obviously capital and managerial skills are a must. If I wished to sell my store the quality of my clientele would determine the sells price.
 

munson15

I want winners...
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

Thanks, Rainbow. I like to play for middles and sides, and wanted to know if I was being "Polish.":LMAO

So the Polish middle would be attmepting to catch a middle after the game has already begun, but the same way you middle a game with 2 lines that are different beforehand?
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

The only way a bookie can win these days is by being a bookie.

Agonizing over 4.5 percent makes for great readiing and almost transforms bookmaking into a legitimate business.

We all agree that 98% of all gamblers lose. (Obviously, anonymous Internet geniuses make up the other two percent).

So if you have 98% of your clentele losing to you, that might pay for Buffy and Jody's college tuition..
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

Thanks, Rainbow. I like to play for middles and sides, and wanted to know if I was being "Polish.":LMAO

So the Polish middle would be attmepting to catch a middle after the game has already begun, but the same way you middle a game with 2 lines that are different beforehand?

NOPE. A polish middle is: laying 7.5 and taking back +6.5. Get it now? Its usually only professionals that experience it, when the move goes against them, they are smart enough to bail even at a worse price, because the former bet is now irrelevant.
 

munson15

I want winners...
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

NOPE. A polish middle is: laying 7.5 and taking back +6.5. Get it now? Its usually only professionals that experience it, when the move goes against them, they are smart enough to bail even at a worse price, because the former bet is now irrelevant.
OK, now I get it, thanks for the explanation-I figured it had to be bad to be referred to as "Polish":+textinb3 I just hadn't ever seen it explained, I appreciate you taking the time to clue me in. :cheers I'm guessing that you'd really have to feel like you were on the wrong side to take that chance.
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

OK, now I get it, thanks for the explanation-I figured it had to be bad to be referred to as "Polish":+textinb3 I just hadn't ever seen it explained, I appreciate you taking the time to clue me in. :cheers I'm guessing that you'd really have to feel like you were on the wrong side to take that chance.

No Problem. Maybe the simpler way to explain it is risking $200 to lose $10....lmao.:doh1
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

Thanks, Rainbow. I like to play for middles and sides, and wanted to know if I was being "Polish.":LMAO

So the Polish middle would be attmepting to catch a middle after the game has already begun, but the same way you middle a game with 2 lines that are different beforehand?
IT CAN HAPPEN TO YOU AFTER A GAME STARTS ALSO, THE BOTTOMLINE ITS JUST LIKE IRONLOCK STATED. ON A TOTAL OR THE SIDE. I KNOW OF SEVERAL TIMES WHERE PLAYERS MIDDLED THEMSELVES BY WATCHING THE 1ST HALF AND THEIR GETTING BLOWN OUT, SO THEY DECIDE AT HALFTIME TO JUMP SIDES, I BELIEVE YOU KNOW THE REST, THEIR ORIGINAL TEAM THEY BET ON BEFORE THE GAME,WINS THE 2ND HALF BUT DOESN'T COVER THE SPREAD FOR THE GAME. THATS A POLISH MIDDLE.
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

IT CAN HAPPEN TO YOU AFTER A GAME STARTS ALSO, THE BOTTOMLINE ITS JUST LIKE IRONLOCK STATED. ON A TOTAL OR THE SIDE. I KNOW OF SEVERAL TIMES WHERE PLAYERS MIDDLED THEMSELVES BY WATCHING THE 1ST HALF AND THEIR GETTING BLOWN OUT, SO THEY DECIDE AT HALFTIME TO JUMP SIDES, I BELIEVE YOU KNOW THE REST, THEIR ORIGINAL TEAM THEY BET ON BEFORE THE GAME,WINS THE 2ND HALF BUT DOESN'T COVER THE SPREAD FOR THE GAME. THATS A POLISH MIDDLE.
This was my favorite thread at EOG, It was the MOST EDUCATED THREAD I?ve ever read at EOG..............
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

Yes. The losers outweigh the winners by far. Even though many people on these type of forums hardly ever lose a wager.


Hey guys, since we are here. Could a major book prosper by writing even money wagers on the major sports which were standard vig of 110 sides and totals in years past, IF they have the proper & large enough volume?
 

The General

Another Day, Another Dollar
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

SHRINK and I spoke with a bookmaker once and he had an idea of going with 101 juice and I think it would have happened if not for unfortunate Govt intervention.
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

rainbow,

I agree with everything you shared. For me personally, this was the most informative and educational thread I have ever read during the three years that EOG has been around...

Some of our sharpest posters participated in it...

The General,

I recall this bookmaker telling both of us on the phone that IF they chose to, they could book bets at -$101 or -$102 juice and still make a profit...

The name of this book is PINNACLE...

And they were reacting to CRIS/BOOKMAKER'S sudden decision to stop doing transfers with them years ago...

Oh the times, they are changing...

THE SHRINK
 
Re: My Knowledge Of A Bookie To Be Successful.

After 30 years of experience, I've learned the true most important thing in being successful in book making is your clientele. IF you allow sharp players, limit them to something reasonable and give them the lines early. Adjust the lines for the squares and only let them bet late. No more than 3 hours before game time.
 
Top