Volume betting considerations

@ScroopyNoopers

 Yes.  I obviously do not have a problem with 'volume betting'.  

Nowadays there are so many ways to bet.  Like in NHL, you have ML, PL, Total, TT, each period, etc.

But before you make each wager you need to know your EV and your breakeven point on each play.

I think there are so many ways to bet that you can find some 'inefficiencies' in some of them for each game.

Then you have to know the breakeven for your bet to see if you have an edge and then if you have an edge, how much of an edge it is.  Then you have to scale accordingly.  

For example, on here I simply post all of my plays as 1 unit plays just to make it simple.

But if you have a play where you see more of an edge you should be betting it more.

So, I think in most games you can find something worth a play where you have an advantage.  But you have to scale up when you find something more advantageous.  Otherwise, those plays where you do not have that much of an edge will eat away at potential profit.

I am not saying you do not know how to do this.  All I am saying is that it helps folks that are doing volume betting if they are able to do this.  That way you are not betting just to have action on all the games but actually think you have an edge in a game.

The example I like to use is something like this:

If a total in MLB is 7.5 and the OVER is -122 and the UNDER is +100, should you play the UNDER since it should be a 50/50 scenario and you are not laying the juice. 

The answer is no because of your breakeven price.

(Risk) divided by (Risk + Reward) = breakeven price

122/220 = .5545  So, 55.45% is the breakeven probability..

100/200 = .5  So, 50% is the breakeven probability.  

Now you take those breakeven probabilities for both sides and sum them.  That way you can figure out what the whole of the market is.

.5545 + .5 = 1.0545 

So, the hold on this market is 5.45%.  

So, there is a 5.45% tax placed on the sum of those bets.

You are not guaranteed that the 'tax' is placed across both sides evenly.  You can never know this for certain.

Maybe the OVER has 3% juiced because the public likes to bet OVERs a bit more.

All you can know for sure is the total tax.  

So you have to know if you are making a good bet and to do that you have to have a sense of what the true placement is for each side.

Because you KNOW the true breakeven point is some number less than 50% on the bet you want to place.

So, if the OVER has 3% it means that 2.4% of the juice is placed on the UNDER. 

That means the true probability is 47.6%.  

So, you would be laying 50/50 prices on only 47.6% chance to win your bet on the UNDER.

This is what is known as 'Top-down betting'.  This assumes that there is a market.  That the power of that market is the liquidity of that market where people are actually betting the liquidity of the market and that gives you an accurate price.  

So, if you use this same example, and at Pinnacle, for example, or another bookmaker that is not a retail book and the same UNDER is priced at -110 then you are at your true odds of 52.4%.  Then the retail book will provide you a 2% edge in your favor.

Because NOW you know the breakeven probability and NOW you know what the price should be.

If all of that is accurate then you are fine.  But you cannot just go to the market and take the UNDER because you can get better odds on it, that is not necessarily correct without knowing the other information.

Retail books will always do this more than Circa or Pinnacle will do it.

If in NFL a game is -7 -110 everywhere and Draftkings, or another retail book, lists it at -6.5 -140, you may think this is a great number.  Now you are paying far too much for a 'better' number.

Like the guy said:  All this does is make you feel better about losing your money.  It feels more comfortable but is a far worse mathematical play.

Then when you do your 'modeling', 'stats', or even 'intuition' and set your theoretical price you know where you stand.

Then after this wager is placed you need to always see if you are beating the CLV (Closing Line Value) on these plays.

So, when you set your price you need to know two things: the breakeven point and the true price.

Then you can figure out if you have any edge at all based on what you thought about the game.

Then you can scale the bet according to how much of a 'perceived' edge you have over the breakeven point.

Then you should have a set amount of your bankroll (total and percentage-wise) to allocate accordingly per unit size at scale.  That way if you hit a bad run you are not losing any more than you would if it were only, say, one or two games.  Then this amount will go up as you build your bankroll and will go down if you hit a bad run.  This way betting a lot of games will not cost you more than betting just one or two games due to this spread and allotment as a bankroll management technique.

Then always track your CLV to make sure all of your things are working the way you think they should.

Sorry that was so longwinded.  But I wanted to address this because a lot of folks think you cannot be successful if you 'volume bet'.

You can be no more, or less, successful if you are simply blindly betting just to have action whether it is on one game or all of the games.

I figured I would just put this in a separate thread instead of clogging your thread with all of that.

Raiders you indeed are smarter than me by a long shot, I understand what you’re saying to a degree but can’t calculate all of that for every game especially considering I already have a system that supposedly gives me an implied value vs the current line. I don’t like checking the closing line as it usually makes me sad, I usually take the dog and the line tends to reveal that people are betting the favorite but I like to get all my picks in at once so I don’t forget later or if I don’t have enough time to look later, which I always do I have too much time currently as I have no other hobbies and watch too much mlb and nhl.

as for blindly betting i do indeed do that sort of usually for pk games that i see no edge in, i try to look for a small edge but time will tell if my -110 c bets do ok or if i would be better just taking the home or away team every time when i cant decide. As for other no value picks that have a heavier fav i have witnessed in my picks that the dog covers or even wins enough to automatically take the dog +1 or 1.5 for those and so far this season it has worked out but time will tell. I’m keeping track of every game in nhl precisely to determine how my picks are doing. I just need to update that lol been busy enough that I haven’t done that. And in the end instead of an intelligent ev and closing line value that you use I have a system that takes juice quite often for example cgy 1.5 yesterday I saw a 0% chance that cgy would lose in regulation by 1 so the value of .5 cgy at -103 was far better than 1.5 at -145 but I said this is what I do I take 1.5 if the line is under -150 and sometimes -155 and somehow 1.5 has been a monster for me this year it so yeah took cgy 1.5 and they did what they weren’t supposed to do and covered in reg. Results of the system will determine how to modify the system rather than fancy statistical terms which are more solid. I tried poker and found that it also is too technical so I gave up on any hope of actually making money on that and just play with play money for fun lol

thanks for the long winded response and good luck this season I think you’re the best capper on here not to say there aren’t other really good ones, this may be the golden era of covers right now cause many people are doing well…so far 

@ScroopyNoopers

 Not about being smart as much as just trying to figure out at what point you need to breakeven and how likely you are to do better than that consistently based on what you think the line should be.

It is fine to have a line where you see value.  But you need to make sure the line you are comparing it to is a 'true' line.  You need to do this by seeing what a 'market making' book, like Circa or Pinnacle, has posted versus a 'retail book', like DraftKings or MGM.  These types of books are run very differently.  That way you can see if your perceived line has a true edge against the true market line and not against a false number.

There are ways to verify your perception that the home team is really covering like you think or that the dog is really covering the +1.5 like you think it is.

Taking juice is fine -- if it gives you an edge and truly will beat the breakeven over time.

I still think it is a good idea to keep track of if you are beating CLV or not.  

This is the main reason folks will get limited at books or not -- whether they are consistently beating CLV or not.  You can be a winning bettor and not be limited simply because you are not beating CLV.  On the other hand, you can be a losing bettor and be limited because you are beating CLV.  Books realize from their CLV reports they run that you are a 'sharp' bettor and will win money in the long run.

This is the best way to decide if you are taking advantage of an inefficient market or not.

There are many better cappers on here.  Many use models, stats and other things.  Some use trends and momentum.  Some just use instinct or 'feel'.

But are they really getting an edge is the thing to look at.  Nearly everyone knows the stats, trends, and momentum.  But are you getting an edge if this is already factored into the 'true' line.

Yes, I think the earlier you bet the better mostly.  But you are correct that sometimes if you wait, the line will move in your favor.  You can see this with dogs, for example.  

Everyone does it differently to an extent.  There are many people on here that do a great job for sure.

Really enjoyed this 22 

From someone who is not always mathematically inclined I enjoy this kind of analysis. 

@MatthewJL46

Excellent write up Raiders.  When I finally retire, this is exactly what I want to do (create the models to define how much "value" there is at he current line).  Right now I am casually betting, but looking at lines and the teams and several factors to make a gut feel that the line is off from what I though it would be.  

Have not had the success that you and others have had, but I also bet within my means, and my F/T job pays the bills not my wagering, so a small profit or loss on a season means one or two more of less fancy Restaurant dinners.

Any sites you use for the numbers to drive your stats models?