• Forums
  • Best Betting Sites
  • Sportsbook Promos
  • Best Sports Betting Apps
  • NFL Betting Forum
  • NBA Betting Forum
  • MLB Betting Forum
  • NHL Betting Forum
  • NCAAF Betting Forum
  • NCAAB Betting Forum
  • Soccer Betting Forum
  • Tennis Betting Forum
  • General Discussion
  • Help Forum
  • Guidelines
  • FAQ
  • Forum Updates
    Covers Logo
    Covers App
    Faster picks. Smarter bets.
    All in the NEW Covers App
    Download on the App Store Download on the Google Play Store
    • Sports
      • NFL
        • Back
        • NFL
        • NFL Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NFL Picks
        • Weather
        • Injuries
      • NCAAF
        • Back
        • NCAAF
        • NCAAF Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NCAAF Picks
        • Weather
        • Injuries
      • NBA
        • Back
        • NBA
        • NBA Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NBA Picks
        • Injuries
      • NCAAB
        • Back
        • NCAAB
        • NCAAB Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • NCAAB Picks
        • Injuries
      • MLB
        • Back
        • MLB
        • MLB Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • MLB Picks
        • Weather
        • Injuries
      • NHL
        • Back
        • NHL
        • NHL Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NHL Picks
        • Injuries
      • Soccer
      • UFC
      • WNBA
        • Back
        • WNBA
        • WNBA Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • WNBA Picks
        • Injuries
      • CFL
        • Back
        • CFL
        • CFL Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • CFL Picks
      • Golf
        • Back
        • Golf
        • Golf Home
        • Golf Odds
        • Masters Odds
        • PGA Championship Odds
        • US Open Odds
        • British Open Odds
        • Ryder Cup Odds
        • Golf Picks
    • Odds
      • All Odds
      • NFL
      • NCAAF
      • NBA
      • NCAAB
      • MLB
      • NHL
      • Golf
      • Soccer Odds
        • Back
        • Soccer Odds
        • MLS Odds
        • Champions League Odds
        • Premier League Odds
      • UFC
      • WNBA
      • CFL
      • Election Odds
      • Futures
        • Back
        • Futures
        • NFL
        • NBA
        • MLB
        • NHL
        • NCAAB
        • NCAAF
      • Sports Odds History
    • Picks
      • All Picks
      • NFL
      • NBA
      • NHL
      • MLB
      • NCAAF
      • NCAAB
      • Golf
      • WNBA
      • CFL
      • User Picks
      • Team User Picks
      • Consensus Picks
        • Back
        • Consensus Picks
        • All Consensus Picks
        • NFL
        • NBA
        • NHL
        • MLB
        • NCAAF
        • NCAAB
        • CFL
        • WNBA
        • Consensus FAQ
        • Public Money
    • Prop Projections
      • NFL
      • NBA
      • MLB
      • NHL
    • Betting
      • US Betting Sites
      • Canada Betting Sites
      • Sportsbook Reviews
      • States
        • Back
        • States
        • US Legal Tracker
        • Revenue Tracker
        • Arizona
        • Arkansas
        • California
        • Colorado
        • Connecticut
        • DC
        • Florida
        • Georgia
        • Illinois
        • Indiana
        • Iowa
        • Kansas
        • Kentucky
        • Louisiana
        • Maine
        • Maryland
        • Massachusetts
        • Michigan
        • Mississippi
        • Missouri
        • Nevada
        • New Hampshire
        • New Jersey
        • New York
        • North Carolina
        • Ohio
        • Oregon
        • Pennsylvania
        • Tennessee
        • Texas
        • Vermont
        • Virginia
        • West Virginia
        • Wyoming
      • Provinces
        • Back
        • Provinces
        • Alberta
        • British Columbia
        • Manitoba
        • New Brunswick
        • Newfoundland and Labrador
        • Northwest Territories
        • Nova Scotia
        • Nunavut
        • Ontario
        • Prince Edward Island
        • Quebec (English)
        • Quebec (francais)
        • Saskatchewan
        • Yukon
      • By Sport
        • Back
        • By Sport
        • Baseball
        • Basketball
        • Boxing
        • College Football
        • F1
        • Football
        • Super Bowl
        • Golf
        • Hockey
        • Horse Racing
        • March Madness
        • Soccer
        • UFC
        • World Cup
      • Betting Apps
        • Back
        • Betting Apps
        • Best Sports Betting Apps USA
        • Ontario Sports Betting Apps
      • Rest of World
        • Back
        • Rest of World
        • UK Betting Offers
          • Back
          • UK Betting Offers
          • UK Betting Sites
          • bet365 Bonus Code UK
          • 888Sport Promo Code UK
          • William Hill Sign up Offer
          • Betway Sign up Offer
          • BetVictor Bonus Code UK
      • Betting Guides
        • Back
        • Betting Guides
        • All Guides
        • Glossary
        • Betting Calculators
          • Back
          • Betting Calculators
          • Odds Converter
          • Parlay Calculator
        • Futures Betting Guide
        • Moneyline Betting Guide
        • Over/Under Betting Guide
        • Parlay Betting Guide
        • Point Spread Betting Guide
        • Prop Betting Guide
        • Sports Betting Guides
          • Back
          • Sports Betting Guides
          • How To Bet On Sports Guide
          • NFL Betting Guide
          • NHL Betting Guide
          • NBA Betting Guide
          • MLB Betting Guide
          • NCAAB Betting Guide
          • NCAAF Betting Guide
          • Golf Betting Guide
          • Tennis Betting Guide
        • Teaser Betting Guide
      • Betting News
        • Back
        • Betting News
        • All News
        • Industry News
        • Podcasts
        • Covers Videos
        • Covers Writers
        • Offers & Boosts
    • Promos
      • Sportsbook Promos
      • Canada Sportsbook Promos
      • Bonuses By Sportsbook
        • Back
        • Bonuses By Sportsbook
        • bet365 Bonus Code
        • BET99 Promo Code
        • BetMGM Bonus Code
        • BetRivers Bonus Code
        • Caesars Sportsbook Promo
        • DraftKings Promo Code
        • Fanatics Sportsbook Promo
        • FanDuel Promo Code
        • Hard Rock Bet Promo Code
        • Sports Interaction Promo
        • Stake Promo Code
        • theScore Bet Promo Code
        • TonyBet Promo Code
      • Bonuses By Region
        • Back
        • Bonuses By Region
        • Arkansas Promos
        • Arizona Promos
        • Colorado Promos
        • Connecticut Promos
        • DC Promos
        • Illinois Promos
        • Indiana Promos
        • Iowa Promos
        • Kansas Promos
        • Kentucky Promos
        • Louisiana Promos
        • Maine Promos
        • Maryland Promos
        • Massachusetts Promos
        • Michigan Promos
        • Missouri Promos
        • New Jersey Promos
        • New York Promos
        • North Carolina Promos
        • Ohio Promos
        • Pennsylvania Promos
        • Tennessee Promos
        • Vermont Promos
        • Virginia Promos
        • West Virginia Promos
        • Wyoming Promos
    • Forum & Contests
      • All Forums
      • NFL Betting Forum
      • MLB Betting Forum
      • NCAAB Betting Forum
      • NCAAF Betting Forum
      • NBA Betting Forum
      • NHL Betting Forum
      • Soccer Betting Forum
      • Contests
        • Back
        • Contests
        • Contests Home
        • Streak Survivor
        • King of Covers
        • My Contests
    • Casino
      • Sweepstakes Casino
        • Back
        • Sweepstakes Casino
        • Sweepstakes Casino
        • Sweepstakes No-Deposit Bonuses
        • Sweepstakes Promos
          • Back
          • Sweepstakes Promos
          • Card Crush
          • Casino.click
          • Chanced Casino
          • Crown Coins Casino
          • FreeSpin Casino
          • LoneStar
          • McLuck
          • Mega Bonanza Casino
          • PlayFame
          • Pulsz
          • Stake.us
      • US Casinos
        • Back
        • US Casinos
        • US Online Casinos
        • US Online Casino Bonuses
        • Casino Promos
          • Back
          • Casino Promos
          • bet365 Casino Promo Code
          • BetRivers Casino Promo
          • Borgata Casino Bonus Code
          • Caesars Casino Bonus Code
          • DraftKings Casino Promo
          • Fanatics Casino Promo
          • FanDuel Casino Promo Code
          • Golden Nugget Casino Promo
          • Hard Rock Bet Casino Promo
          • Hollywood Casino Promo Code
      • Canada Casinos
        • Back
        • Canada Casinos
        • Canada Online Casinos
        • Provinces
          • Back
          • Provinces
          • Alberta Online Casino
          • BC Online Casino
          • Ontario Online Casinos
        • Casino Promos
          • Back
          • Casino Promos
          • BC.GAME Bonus Code
          • Cloudbet Promo Code
          • RainBet Promo Code
          • Roobet Promo Code
          • Shuffle Promo Code
          • Thrill Promo Code
    • Prediction Markets
      • Prediction Markets
      • Prediction Market Apps
      • Prediction Market Promos
      • Kalshi Promo Code
      • Kalshi Referral Code
      • Polymarket Promo Code
      • Polymarket Referral Code
      • DraftKings Predictions Promo Code
      • Novig Promo Code
      • ProphetX Promo Code
      • Underdog Promo Code
      • Betr Promo Code
      • OG Promo Code
      • Fanatics Markets Promo Code
      • Plus500 Promo Code
      • Gemini Predictions Promo Code
    • NFL Week 4
      NFL Week 4
      • NFL Odds
      • NFL Picks
      • NFL Prediction Markets
      • NFL Betting Sites
    Covers Account
    Log in Create account
    Join free Log in
    All Forums | MLB Betting Forum

    Flat betting in Baseball....

    «First Previous 789 ... 121314 Next Last»
    betthehouse
    HeadOverHeart
    lanastasis
    nccashman
    G8RB8
    ...
    Participants:
    Search
    Views: 42489
    Posts: 347
    «First Previous 789 ... 121314 Next Last»
     
    betthehouse
    betthehouse
    Covers Rehab
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Apr, 2002
    Posts: 2292
    Posted: Apr. 14, 2008 - 11:48 PM ET #151

    No, maybe you dont know how to read.  I said he was a dumb fucker.  Lets go back to elementry school here.  Fucker is not plural if i put a (s) at the end of Fucker then i would be talking about more then one fucker.  In this case, i was only talking about one fucker, not multiple fuckers  <- see the s?  that means more then one! Dumb Fuck!  No S on that either!!
    Reply
    No, maybe you dont know how to read.  I said he was a dumb fucker.  Lets go back to elementry school here.  Fucker is not plural if i put a (s) at the end of Fucker then i would be talking about more then one fucker.  In this case, i was only talking about one fucker, not multiple fuckers  <- see the s?  that means more then one! Dumb Fuck!  No S on that either!!
     
    HeadOverHeart
    HeadOverHeart
    Hall of Fame
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Nov, 2007
    Posts: 22502
    Posted: Apr. 14, 2008 - 11:50 PM ET #152

    Both are corrupt and douchebags so stop your bickering.  Let's get back to baseball.
    Reply
    Both are corrupt and douchebags so stop your bickering.  Let's get back to baseball.
     
    betthehouse
    betthehouse
    Covers Rehab
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Apr, 2002
    Posts: 2292
    Posted: Apr. 14, 2008 - 11:50 PM ET #153

    sorry, i dont look at my key pad when i type.  Didnt notice the spacebar didn't work.  Maybe i should cry to the government and quit my job so i can get a free one.
    Reply
    sorry, i dont look at my key pad when i type.  Didnt notice the spacebar didn't work.  Maybe i should cry to the government and quit my job so i can get a free one.
     
    HeadOverHeart
    HeadOverHeart
    Hall of Fame
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Nov, 2007
    Posts: 22502
    Posted: Apr. 14, 2008 - 11:53 PM ET #154

    Mods...can you get this guy outta here please?  And kindly remind him that the Bush Administration cut off 3 of my offshore accounts because they know how I should spend my money better than I do (gambling bill).

    Thank you.
    Reply
    Mods...can you get this guy outta here please?  And kindly remind him that the Bush Administration cut off 3 of my offshore accounts because they know how I should spend my money better than I do (gambling bill).

    Thank you.
     
    lanastasis
    lanastasis
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: May, 2006
    Posts: 6770
    Posted: Apr. 14, 2008 - 11:56 PM ET #155

    Quote Originally Posted by betthehouse:

    No, maybe you dont know how to read.  I said he was a dumb fucker.  Lets go back to elementry school here.  Fucker is not plural if i put a (s) at the end of Fucker then i would be talking about more then one fucker.  In this case, i was only talking about one fucker, not multiple fuckers  <- see the s?  that means more then one! Dumb Fuck!  No S on that either!!


    I have a Bachelor's in Journalism and have won numerous national sports writing awards so unless you are a fellow English/journalism major, being lectured by you on this topic is like having Larry the Cable Guy explain economics to Allen Greenspan.
    Reply
    Quote Originally Posted by betthehouse:

    No, maybe you dont know how to read.  I said he was a dumb fucker.  Lets go back to elementry school here.  Fucker is not plural if i put a (s) at the end of Fucker then i would be talking about more then one fucker.  In this case, i was only talking about one fucker, not multiple fuckers  <- see the s?  that means more then one! Dumb Fuck!  No S on that either!!


    I have a Bachelor's in Journalism and have won numerous national sports writing awards so unless you are a fellow English/journalism major, being lectured by you on this topic is like having Larry the Cable Guy explain economics to Allen Greenspan.
     
    HeadOverHeart
    HeadOverHeart
    Hall of Fame
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Nov, 2007
    Posts: 22502
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 12:02 AM ET #156

    Don't feed him lanastatis...I'm done here for now.  Off to go study Ozzie Rules....
    Reply
    Don't feed him lanastatis...I'm done here for now.  Off to go study Ozzie Rules....
     
    nccashman
    nccashman
    Banned
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Jan, 2008
    Posts: 2378
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 12:06 AM ET #157

    Hey now, I will say that Bush is not all that bad. I love the tax cuts. I am getting some serious money from the IRS this year. Thank you Mr President
    Reply
    Hey now, I will say that Bush is not all that bad. I love the tax cuts. I am getting some serious money from the IRS this year. Thank you Mr President
     
    G8RB8
    G8RB8
    Legend
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2005
    Posts: 30086
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 12:15 AM ET #158

    Jesus, can you people not talk politics?  We have a whole forum for that.
    Bagel Sandwiches Suck
    Reply
    Jesus, can you people not talk politics?  We have a whole forum for that.
     
    GWarner27
    GWarner27
    Hall of Fame
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Aug, 2007
    Posts: 20963
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 12:21 AM ET #159

    i think that no matter if you excel on either betting dogs or faves, it'll work in your favor especially on the sports with spreads, which I do MUCH more than baseball (mainly because of 6-run 8th innings ) ....
    Reply
    i think that no matter if you excel on either betting dogs or faves, it'll work in your favor especially on the sports with spreads, which I do MUCH more than baseball (mainly because of 6-run 8th innings ) ....
     
    kevk87
    kevk87
    Rookie
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2007
    Posts: 742
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 12:26 AM ET #160

    hey vanzack, do you middle any bets? or do you consider middling a waste of EV?
    Reply
    hey vanzack, do you middle any bets? or do you consider middling a waste of EV?
     
    nccashman
    nccashman
    Banned
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Jan, 2008
    Posts: 2378
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 12:29 AM ET #161

    he middles everything...that's his strategy...he makes the sure money...not a bad idea but i wouldn't recommend it unless you have a 5 or 6 digit bankroll
    Reply
    he middles everything...that's his strategy...he makes the sure money...not a bad idea but i wouldn't recommend it unless you have a 5 or 6 digit bankroll
     
    lanastasis
    lanastasis
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: May, 2006
    Posts: 6770
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 12:30 AM ET #162

    Quote Originally Posted by kevk87:

    hey vanzack, do you middle any bets? or do you consider middling a waste of EV?


    Have you read the entire thread? We already covered this in great detail.
    Reply
    Quote Originally Posted by kevk87:

    hey vanzack, do you middle any bets? or do you consider middling a waste of EV?


    Have you read the entire thread? We already covered this in great detail.
     
    kevk87
    kevk87
    Rookie
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2007
    Posts: 742
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 12:32 AM ET #163

    my bad, just got back from a group meeting. Pretty exhausted, must of missed it
    Reply
    my bad, just got back from a group meeting. Pretty exhausted, must of missed it
     
    kevk87
    kevk87
    Rookie
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2007
    Posts: 742
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 12:39 AM ET #164

    well actually, I was talking about middling over/unders or spreads
    Example: Pretend  the over/under is 8 and I bet the over, but through out the day it goes up to 10 (probably will never happen in baseball) and I bet the under. So I have a possibility to win both bets if the game hits 9 runs. Or if it hits 8 I would push and win the under. Or if it hits 11 I win one bet but lose the other losing the only the juice.
    Reply
    well actually, I was talking about middling over/unders or spreads
    Example: Pretend  the over/under is 8 and I bet the over, but through out the day it goes up to 10 (probably will never happen in baseball) and I bet the under. So I have a possibility to win both bets if the game hits 9 runs. Or if it hits 8 I would push and win the under. Or if it hits 11 I win one bet but lose the other losing the only the juice.
     
    lanastasis
    lanastasis
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: May, 2006
    Posts: 6770
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 12:47 AM ET #165

    All right, I have a very serious post returning this back to the original discussion. VANZACK, I want you especially to read this.

    I just set up the Vanzack/lawstyle formula for flatbetting and applied it to my betting results. The results, if it does not disprove the premise that this flatbetting is better than the alternative of always risking the same amount, certainly makes it worse of an option for me.

    Here's what I found out.

    So far this season:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +14.9 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +14.02 UNITS

    OK, not a big difference, but a difference nonetheless.

    Then I went to the last month and a half of last season, when I began implementing my current method of betting:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +23.59 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +20.89 UNITS

    So, as you can see, as the statistical model is enlarged, the difference is magnified. As far as I am personally concerned, flat betting results in LESS PROFIT.

    Now I am not saying this is an absolute condemnation of the flat betting theory. The next logical question would be: Do I bet more dogs or favs? I would guess it's about the same, but I don't know what the exact average is. Just about the only formula I don't have is one that can average the moneylines in a column to give an average moneyline. This is tricky because of the middle ground of numbers between -100 and +100 which prevents you from flat out taking an average. I am too lazy to come up with a corrective formula, but if someone already has one, I would be more than happy to run it on my numbers and let you know if I bet dogs and favs equally or what.

    But for now, I will not bet flat betting as defined in this column and I have proven it is definitely not for all.
    Reply
    All right, I have a very serious post returning this back to the original discussion. VANZACK, I want you especially to read this.

    I just set up the Vanzack/lawstyle formula for flatbetting and applied it to my betting results. The results, if it does not disprove the premise that this flatbetting is better than the alternative of always risking the same amount, certainly makes it worse of an option for me.

    Here's what I found out.

    So far this season:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +14.9 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +14.02 UNITS

    OK, not a big difference, but a difference nonetheless.

    Then I went to the last month and a half of last season, when I began implementing my current method of betting:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +23.59 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +20.89 UNITS

    So, as you can see, as the statistical model is enlarged, the difference is magnified. As far as I am personally concerned, flat betting results in LESS PROFIT.

    Now I am not saying this is an absolute condemnation of the flat betting theory. The next logical question would be: Do I bet more dogs or favs? I would guess it's about the same, but I don't know what the exact average is. Just about the only formula I don't have is one that can average the moneylines in a column to give an average moneyline. This is tricky because of the middle ground of numbers between -100 and +100 which prevents you from flat out taking an average. I am too lazy to come up with a corrective formula, but if someone already has one, I would be more than happy to run it on my numbers and let you know if I bet dogs and favs equally or what.

    But for now, I will not bet flat betting as defined in this column and I have proven it is definitely not for all.
     
    GmoNavarro
    GmoNavarro
    Rookie
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Feb, 2007
    Posts: 849
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 1:22 AM ET #166

    Quote Originally Posted by lanastasis:

    All right, I have a very serious post returning this back to the original discussion. VANZACK, I want you especially to read this.

    I just set up the Vanzack/lawstyle formula for flatbetting and applied it to my betting results. The results, if it does not disprove the premise that this flatbetting is better than the alternative of always risking the same amount, certainly makes it worse of an option for me.

    Here's what I found out.

    So far this season:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +14.9 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +14.02 UNITS

    OK, not a big difference, but a difference nonetheless.

    Then I went to the last month and a half of last season, when I began implementing my current method of betting:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +23.59 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +20.89 UNITS

    So, as you can see, as the statistical model is enlarged, the difference is magnified. As far as I am personally concerned, flat betting results in LESS PROFIT.

    Now I am not saying this is an absolute condemnation of the flat betting theory. The next logical question would be: Do I bet more dogs or favs? I would guess it's about the same, but I don't know what the exact average is. Just about the only formula I don't have is one that can average the moneylines in a column to give an average moneyline. This is tricky because of the middle ground of numbers between -100 and +100 which prevents you from flat out taking an average. I am too lazy to come up with a corrective formula, but if someone already has one, I would be more than happy to run it on my numbers and let you know if I bet dogs and favs equally or what.

    But for now, I will not bet flat betting as defined in this column and I have proven it is definitely not for all.


    You just said you won more units in your system, all right now you have to look at how many units did you risk with your system and how many units would you have risked using flat betting system, then you take the ROI from that and the higher is your correct answer...at least thats how I see it as an investment...is it the same to win 100 units putting in risk 1000 units than winning 80 units putting in risk 750 units?
    Reply
    Quote Originally Posted by lanastasis:

    All right, I have a very serious post returning this back to the original discussion. VANZACK, I want you especially to read this.

    I just set up the Vanzack/lawstyle formula for flatbetting and applied it to my betting results. The results, if it does not disprove the premise that this flatbetting is better than the alternative of always risking the same amount, certainly makes it worse of an option for me.

    Here's what I found out.

    So far this season:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +14.9 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +14.02 UNITS

    OK, not a big difference, but a difference nonetheless.

    Then I went to the last month and a half of last season, when I began implementing my current method of betting:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +23.59 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +20.89 UNITS

    So, as you can see, as the statistical model is enlarged, the difference is magnified. As far as I am personally concerned, flat betting results in LESS PROFIT.

    Now I am not saying this is an absolute condemnation of the flat betting theory. The next logical question would be: Do I bet more dogs or favs? I would guess it's about the same, but I don't know what the exact average is. Just about the only formula I don't have is one that can average the moneylines in a column to give an average moneyline. This is tricky because of the middle ground of numbers between -100 and +100 which prevents you from flat out taking an average. I am too lazy to come up with a corrective formula, but if someone already has one, I would be more than happy to run it on my numbers and let you know if I bet dogs and favs equally or what.

    But for now, I will not bet flat betting as defined in this column and I have proven it is definitely not for all.


    You just said you won more units in your system, all right now you have to look at how many units did you risk with your system and how many units would you have risked using flat betting system, then you take the ROI from that and the higher is your correct answer...at least thats how I see it as an investment...is it the same to win 100 units putting in risk 1000 units than winning 80 units putting in risk 750 units?
     
    andarmac99
    andarmac99
    MVP
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Apr, 2007
    Posts: 16954
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 1:31 AM ET #167

    solid read
    Reply
    solid read
     
    lanastasis
    lanastasis
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: May, 2006
    Posts: 6770
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 1:39 AM ET #168

    GMONavarro -- Correct me if I'm missing something, but the ROI is clearly higher (for me) using the 1 unit risk on every play rather than flat betting. Each methord has as many numbered of games wagered but one gives a higher profit than the other so I am getting more on my investment using 1 unit risk on every play. If I am missing something, please let me know. But for me, the bottom line is clear: flat betting nets fewer units over the long haul. Granted, I will feel better about this statement as my statistical model increases and the numbers still stay the same. However, I think it is telling that the difference in success between 1 unit risk vs. flat betting appears to be proportional to the amount of games bet, which seems to give more credibility to my theory that for me, flat betting is a worse option.
    Reply
    GMONavarro -- Correct me if I'm missing something, but the ROI is clearly higher (for me) using the 1 unit risk on every play rather than flat betting. Each methord has as many numbered of games wagered but one gives a higher profit than the other so I am getting more on my investment using 1 unit risk on every play. If I am missing something, please let me know. But for me, the bottom line is clear: flat betting nets fewer units over the long haul. Granted, I will feel better about this statement as my statistical model increases and the numbers still stay the same. However, I think it is telling that the difference in success between 1 unit risk vs. flat betting appears to be proportional to the amount of games bet, which seems to give more credibility to my theory that for me, flat betting is a worse option.
     
    lawstyle
    lawstyle
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Dec, 2007
    Posts: 291
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 1:41 AM ET #169

    Quote Originally Posted by lanastasis:

    All right, I have a very serious post returning this back to the original discussion. VANZACK, I want you especially to read this.

    I just set up the Vanzack/lawstyle formula for flatbetting and applied it to my betting results. The results, if it does not disprove the premise that this flatbetting is better than the alternative of always risking the same amount, certainly makes it worse of an option for me.

    Here's what I found out.

    So far this season:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +14.9 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +14.02 UNITS

    OK, not a big difference, but a difference nonetheless.

    Then I went to the last month and a half of last season, when I began implementing my current method of betting:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +23.59 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +20.89 UNITS

    So, as you can see, as the statistical model is enlarged, the difference is magnified. As far as I am personally concerned, flat betting results in LESS PROFIT.

    Now I am not saying this is an absolute condemnation of the flat betting theory. The next logical question would be: Do I bet more dogs or favs? I would guess it's about the same, but I don't know what the exact average is. Just about the only formula I don't have is one that can average the moneylines in a column to give an average moneyline. This is tricky because of the middle ground of numbers between -100 and +100 which prevents you from flat out taking an average. I am too lazy to come up with a corrective formula, but if someone already has one, I would be more than happy to run it on my numbers and let you know if I bet dogs and favs equally or what.

    But for now, I will not bet flat betting as defined in this column and I have proven it is definitely not for all.

     

    The reason that happened is because you are better at winning bets on underdogs than favorites, at least so far.  Since the method you initially used values bets on dogs more, you profited by betting your way.  Like I said above, flat betting doesn't guarantee profit, but if you don't know whether you're better at betting dogs or favorites, it's the safe way to go.  If you suck at picking favorites and are great at picking dogs, then do what you're doing.  If you are about equal, flat bet, and you won't have to worry about it.

    Reply
    Quote Originally Posted by lanastasis:

    All right, I have a very serious post returning this back to the original discussion. VANZACK, I want you especially to read this.

    I just set up the Vanzack/lawstyle formula for flatbetting and applied it to my betting results. The results, if it does not disprove the premise that this flatbetting is better than the alternative of always risking the same amount, certainly makes it worse of an option for me.

    Here's what I found out.

    So far this season:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +14.9 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +14.02 UNITS

    OK, not a big difference, but a difference nonetheless.

    Then I went to the last month and a half of last season, when I began implementing my current method of betting:

    Risking 1 unit per every bet = +23.59 UNITS
    Flat-betting = +20.89 UNITS

    So, as you can see, as the statistical model is enlarged, the difference is magnified. As far as I am personally concerned, flat betting results in LESS PROFIT.

    Now I am not saying this is an absolute condemnation of the flat betting theory. The next logical question would be: Do I bet more dogs or favs? I would guess it's about the same, but I don't know what the exact average is. Just about the only formula I don't have is one that can average the moneylines in a column to give an average moneyline. This is tricky because of the middle ground of numbers between -100 and +100 which prevents you from flat out taking an average. I am too lazy to come up with a corrective formula, but if someone already has one, I would be more than happy to run it on my numbers and let you know if I bet dogs and favs equally or what.

    But for now, I will not bet flat betting as defined in this column and I have proven it is definitely not for all.

     

    The reason that happened is because you are better at winning bets on underdogs than favorites, at least so far.  Since the method you initially used values bets on dogs more, you profited by betting your way.  Like I said above, flat betting doesn't guarantee profit, but if you don't know whether you're better at betting dogs or favorites, it's the safe way to go.  If you suck at picking favorites and are great at picking dogs, then do what you're doing.  If you are about equal, flat bet, and you won't have to worry about it.

     
    lawstyle
    lawstyle
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Dec, 2007
    Posts: 291
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 1:44 AM ET #170

    Let me add -- if you were to go on a hot-streak picking favorites starting now, and you re-ran your numbers in a few weeks, you would find that you would have profited MORE by flat betting than with your current method.
     
    But hey, way to be savvy with those dogs.
    Reply
    Let me add -- if you were to go on a hot-streak picking favorites starting now, and you re-ran your numbers in a few weeks, you would find that you would have profited MORE by flat betting than with your current method.
     
    But hey, way to be savvy with those dogs.
     
    chillery
    chillery
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Jun, 2007
    Posts: 8290
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 1:49 AM ET #171

    All good responces to this thread topic.  Vanzack
    Reply
    All good responces to this thread topic.  Vanzack
     
    lanastasis
    lanastasis
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: May, 2006
    Posts: 6770
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 1:49 AM ET #172

    Lawstyle, if I am better at dogs, it is by a small margin. I have run testing to see how I profited at all kinds of different odds and I ran profits at every level, whether it was -180 or better or +180 or better and everything in between.
    Anyway, the difference is minimal. Just ask these Covers folk. In the one week that I have posted here this year, I was already getting edgy complaints asking about why I was playing so many favs. The result? I am up 13+ units on money lines using a system that apparently is more profitable for me than flat betting.
    Reply
    Lawstyle, if I am better at dogs, it is by a small margin. I have run testing to see how I profited at all kinds of different odds and I ran profits at every level, whether it was -180 or better or +180 or better and everything in between.
    Anyway, the difference is minimal. Just ask these Covers folk. In the one week that I have posted here this year, I was already getting edgy complaints asking about why I was playing so many favs. The result? I am up 13+ units on money lines using a system that apparently is more profitable for me than flat betting.
     
    GWarner27
    GWarner27
    Hall of Fame
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Aug, 2007
    Posts: 20963
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 1:50 AM ET #173

    yeah it figures that the dogs are the key to it all, but until i realize what i excel at, I think i'll stick to flat-betting.

    again thanks for all of your time
    Reply
    yeah it figures that the dogs are the key to it all, but until i realize what i excel at, I think i'll stick to flat-betting.

    again thanks for all of your time
     
    cd329
    cd329
    Hall of Fame
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Mar, 2004
    Posts: 23763
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 2:04 AM ET #174

    Alright can somebody help me to undertsand this a little better. I have read this whole tread like 5 times and still cant understand the formulas for figuring out what to bet on each game.  Its been a long time since i was in school using math formulas, so i actually need worked out example.
     
    my unit size is 100 bucks
    if i want to bet a -130 favorite and a +160 dog, how much do i bet on these teams?   Please dont just post the formula, so me the math with these actual numbers, so i can see exactly how it was done.
    thank you
    cd
    Reply
    Alright can somebody help me to undertsand this a little better. I have read this whole tread like 5 times and still cant understand the formulas for figuring out what to bet on each game.  Its been a long time since i was in school using math formulas, so i actually need worked out example.
     
    my unit size is 100 bucks
    if i want to bet a -130 favorite and a +160 dog, how much do i bet on these teams?   Please dont just post the formula, so me the math with these actual numbers, so i can see exactly how it was done.
    thank you
    cd
     
     
    lawstyle
    lawstyle
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Dec, 2007
    Posts: 291
    Posted: Apr. 15, 2008 - 2:08 AM ET #175

    Quote Originally Posted by lanastasis:

    Lawstyle, if I am better at dogs, it is by a small margin. I have run testing to see how I profited at all kinds of different odds and I ran profits at every level, whether it was -180 or better or +180 or better and everything in between.
    Anyway, the difference is minimal. Just ask these Covers folk. In the one week that I have posted here this year, I was already getting edgy complaints asking about why I was playing so many favs. The result? I am up 13+ units on money lines using a system that apparently is more profitable for me than flat betting.

     

    If you claim that flat betting if less profitable for you even though you are winning mostly favorites, the math does not add up.  Flat betting essentially means betting more than 1 unit on favorites and less than 1 unit on underdogs.  If you are up 13 units on favorites with your current system, imagine if you had been flat betting.  You would have bet more on each one of those favorites and been up by a lot more than 13 units.

    But the key part in my answer is to consider that flat-betting lowers the amount risked in the long run compared to your method, especially if you are betting more dogs than favorites, or if you are betting 1 unit on underdogs and *Whatever* to win 1 unit on favorites.  Therefore, while you may have profited more by not flat betting, you have risked more by not flat betting too.  Just increase your unit size in your flat-betting simulation, and you will find that you have profited as much if not more than your method, while risking the same amount.

    Reply
    Quote Originally Posted by lanastasis:

    Lawstyle, if I am better at dogs, it is by a small margin. I have run testing to see how I profited at all kinds of different odds and I ran profits at every level, whether it was -180 or better or +180 or better and everything in between.
    Anyway, the difference is minimal. Just ask these Covers folk. In the one week that I have posted here this year, I was already getting edgy complaints asking about why I was playing so many favs. The result? I am up 13+ units on money lines using a system that apparently is more profitable for me than flat betting.

     

    If you claim that flat betting if less profitable for you even though you are winning mostly favorites, the math does not add up.  Flat betting essentially means betting more than 1 unit on favorites and less than 1 unit on underdogs.  If you are up 13 units on favorites with your current system, imagine if you had been flat betting.  You would have bet more on each one of those favorites and been up by a lot more than 13 units.

    But the key part in my answer is to consider that flat-betting lowers the amount risked in the long run compared to your method, especially if you are betting more dogs than favorites, or if you are betting 1 unit on underdogs and *Whatever* to win 1 unit on favorites.  Therefore, while you may have profited more by not flat betting, you have risked more by not flat betting too.  Just increase your unit size in your flat-betting simulation, and you will find that you have profited as much if not more than your method, while risking the same amount.

    All Forums | MLB Betting Forum
    «First Previous 789 ... 121314 Next Last»

    Hot Forums IconHot Forum Topics

    • 🤢🥴💩_ Fubah's risky baseball bets _🥶😲🥵 457,393
    • Sunday 10/04/2026 687
    • NFL LOCKED IN! 104,332
    • ***Macwesties * Sun. Oct. 04, 2026 * Week #4 * NFL Football Plays*** 8,520
    • This Seattle Line Is Begging for a Discussion 2,822
    • NCAA FOOTBALL. 151 33,496
    • __________ 📌 🏈 ?? Fubah's NFL 2026: Week 04 🚩🚩🚩🚩 13,228
    • Lions vs Panthers in game live SNF 1,871
    • Sunday nFl Wk 4 8,149
    • NFL THREAD * 151 * 16,847

    Warning - External Link

    Report User

    Thank you for reporting
    This content is abusive or harmful
    This post is spam
    An error has occurred
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

    Delete Post

    Are you sure you would like to remove this post?

    Remove Thread

    Are you sure you would like to remove this thread?

    Scan Results

    Login/Register

    Happy to have you join the conversation. To do so, please login or create an account.
    Accounts are free and easy to create.

    Search


    Loading…

    Loading…

    About Us
    Contact Us
    Careers
    Our Team
    Brand
    Testimonials
    Betting Guides
    Sportsbook Reviews
    Betting News
    Podcasts
    Responsible Gambling
    Betting Sites
    US Betting Sites
    Canada Betting Sites
    Canada Casinos
    Best Betting Apps
    Contests
    Streak Survivor
    King of Covers
    Ultimate Race
    Office Pools
    The Covers community has
    810,221
    lifetime members worldwide
    Join our community today
    Covers 30 Years Logo Established in 1995,
    Covers is the world
    leader in sports
    betting information.
    21+
    Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER
    Help Privacy Terms of Service Cookies Sitemap Forum
    YouTube logo
    Facebook logo
    Twitter logo
    Instagram logo
    LinkedIn logo
    Google News logo
    Covers is verified safe by:
    Evalon Logo Logo GPWA Logo GDPR logo Logo GeoTrust logo Logo PCI DSS logo Logo
    Copyright © 1995 - 2026 Genius Sports. All Rights Reserved.
    If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.