Bankroll requirements

What is the bankroll requirement with a handicapper picking at 55% and bet size of $100 and odds at -110 to win 100?

P.S. I know that there are few cappers at 55% long term

Quote: bigpete88

What is the bankroll requirement with a handicapper picking at 55% and bet size of $100 and odds at -110 to win 100?

P.S. I know that there are few cappers at 55% long term

It really depends on the number of betting units you have. (bankroll / $ bet)

I made a table for this for my BF a few months back.
I am not at home to look for it right now.

I remember betting units are 1% of bankroll, 1.5% and 2%. There may be others. I think I went max 5%.

1% means you have a 11,000 bankroll and you bet 110 each bet, a 100 unit bankroll
or a 1,100 bankroll and you bet 11 each bet, same 100 betting units
2% means you have a 11,000 bankroll and you bet 220 each bet, a 50 unit bankroll
or a 1,100 bankroll and you bet 22 each bet, same 50 betting units bankroll

It assumes the same winning probability for each bet and we know that is not even close to real world.

Making more larger bets than smaller, most cappers do with their *star* bets,
just increases the variance
and that really is not a good thing to do when you have an edge but it also requires a higher winning percentage and that should be the only time to bet more.

Kelly betting as I understand it is very volatile for most bankrolls and is a many, many season thing.

I can post some data to the end of the week and you can go from there.
If you have any special requests that I should simulate, just ask

Sally

If -110 is 1.91 in decimal odds, a kelly bet would be the fraction (0.55 * 1.91 - 1) / (1.91 - 1) = 5.55% of your bankroll.

When your initial betsize is $100, your initial bankroll should be at least $1800.
For more conservative results (huge swings at the kelly bankroll is(!) expected) you should double or tripple that figure.

Remember to scale up (and down) your betsize as your bankroll growths (shrinks).

removed
silly

Sally

Thanks for your calculations. I don't have much practise with american notation of odds.
They surely have their advantages, but are impractical for my style of sport betting.
Decimal odds of X are much more analytical, and easier to do math with: For any betsize B you get returned B*X if you win, and zero if you lose.
There is no analytical distrinction between the favourite (X>2) or the underdog (X<2) odds - which keeps some kind of calculations easy.

Quote: mustangsally

Doubling or tripling a figure still does not tell one what the RoR can be for a starting bankroll.

A kelly bettor has 0 (zero) RoR only if he
a) keeps resizing his bets with his bankroll, i.e. bets a constant fraction of his bankroll
b) is precisely sure about his edge
c) he is not sweating his bankroll, i.e. doesn't care about intermediate swings


The difficult part in sport betting is (b), being sure of your precise edge.

Quote: bigpete88

What is the bankroll requirement with a handicapper picking at 55% and bet size of $100 and odds at -110 to win 100?

P.S. I know that there are few cappers at 55% long term

I am guessing these cappers are going to charge you for their picks. Include that cost in your formula. Also, be careful thinking that the guy who picked 55% last year wasn't just lucky........

Quote: mustangsally

The decimal odds is not really what I understand.
I can read about it but I would rather stay with the US stuff for now.

added: I git it now
Just a different formula like Odds*WProb-LProb / Odds ;)

The easiest way to describe decimal odds:
It's how racetracks describe payouts on $1 bets.
(For example, an even money bet would pay $2, so the decimal odds version of even money is 2.00. Similarly, 1-2 and 2-1 are 1.50 and 3.00, respectively.)

Also, be careful thinking that the guy who picked 55% last year wasn't just lucky........

I often wonder which came first. Stock brokers having a 100 different funds so they can say last year our Irish Potato fund made 147.23% or touts with Monday night specials, lock of year, Away dogs , Redouble trends, LOL

removed
silly

Quote: SOOPOO

Also, be careful thinking that the guy who picked 55% last year wasn't just lucky........

Agree. Winning at a 55% clip is no big deal. I have several players that do it for an entire year.
It's just variance. No different than the guys that lose 55% of their picks.

Flip a coin 150-200 times. I don't think 55% heads/tails would be anything extraordinary.

Funny, when sports bettors win, they think they are good handicappers; when they lose they
think they are unlucky. This keeps them playing. The typical sports bettor is as sharp as a basketball.

I just want my players to make bets. Eventually I will get their money. 11/10 leans on you until you fall.

Note- I did have a guy last season that was winning over 70% of his bets for an extended period.
I paid him thousands; eventually he faded away....taking my money with him.

I just love it when after a winning bet, the chump professes " I knew it was gonna win. I absolutely knew it "

Yeah, that's why you bet a whole $50 or less on it ! LOL

I am old enough to remember when Monday night football first started. What a blessing for bookies.

Every loser trying to get even, every winner sure he could double up.

Quote: mustangsally

simply because the exact fraction can not be made in sports betting and once your bankroll gets to a low level you can not easily make a bet that is lower than the house minimum.
That is what my results showed.
[1] = $1 wager. For some, not available.
I know there are other forums that address this issue.

Most books allow uneven bets. $20 is very common and pays to a penny as I remember.
With online books I am sure you can make $1.16 bet if wanted and still get paid to a penny.
There may be exceptions.

This statement is not to be missed:

Quote: wizard's kelly page

[to get a percentage of bankroll to bet] Most gamblers use advantage/variance as an approximation, which is a very good estimator.