You can do it if you have a tracking spreadsheet built already. and 10% Kelly would be within my lower range, yes. But I like to stick to 1/6 - 1/8 Kelly when taking a large number of shots on one event.
I utilize 1/4 and just stick with it no matter what. My weekly variance can be rather high, but so is my personal risk tolerance. Also, I break out my total bankroll into different bankrolls for different sports, so if I bleed over on Wed-Thurs it’s really not a big deal. Also, I don’t calculate bonuses or bookmaker grading errors into my bankroll calculation, so that all adds up to a little extra wiggle room. And I’m running usually around 60-80 bets per week.
That kind of contradicts. The edge is one of the inputs to Kelly, so the less confidence you have in knowing your edge the less useful the Kelly output is.
Kelly also doesn’t factor a persons mental position or ability to get a bet on. The concepts of kelly are useful to understand, but imo its only of real use if you have unlimited ability to get bets on and your bank role is within your risk tolerance.
Eg The last bet i took was £120. Kelly tells me £18,776 is my optimal stake. Thats nonsense, I couldnt get anywhere near that amount on… even if i could i couldnt handle losing that amount - and because i can’t stake that much on other bets it would take ages to recover that loss
Different I guess if you have clean accounts and a bank role which is relatively small to other income
Yes, the less confidence you have in your edge the less useful Kelly is. Hence utilizing the fraction. That’s what I said.
1 Like
If the Kelly recommended bet is a giant percentage of your bankroll, then you can be sure that you are mis-measuring your actual edge. The problem is not with Kelly, its with the inputs.
Inputs were fine, I slightly erred on the side of caution with my edge but it became a good example as the edge was huge and odds short.
I guess the definition of bank could be tweaked, how much is really bank or how much are you willing to lose entirely on a certain method… but even the latter throws out a sum i couldnt actually get on the bet and wouldnt tolerate using.
The context is around sharps. If a sharps genuinely sharp theyll most likely have big banks and difficulties getting on. They’ll have learnt back roll management to get there, but that doesnt mean they have to follow a kelly % to stay there. (i listened to a podcast last week from a pro gambler saying similar thing)
Basically you should be using the principles of Kelly without making every calculation.
The very best bets you can possibly make are the big chalk bets that have a short turnaround time. I reserved my big wagers for the human interest stories who overcame all odds to qualify and unloaded on them to miss the cut. If I’m getting -380 on a prop that is north of 90% I’m going to pull the trigger for sure.
If you do the Kelly math you’ll find that these props have the highest Kelly % wager size and the shortest doubling time.
Make no mistake, I bet all the longshots too but it’s the big favorites that have me salivating.
Other than that it’s about the speed. Let’s say you have a $1000 bankroll, and they flash Sam Forgan to miss the cut in the Open at -380. You have to have a quick trigger finger and be wiling to make the huge bet laying those odds (as in, $100 or more) before the odds move or are taken down. If you can get to the point where you can make those wagers quickly without second guessing yourself, you’re well on your way to becoming a big winner.
In general the sharps have a fixed wager size and they rush to beat the line move. If they think they have a big edge then they’ll bet bigger.
There is also the concept of “betting on the come”. If you smell a big line movement coming, you make a huge wager on one side and gradually scalp as the line moves back. This one is a bit more risky and requires knowledge of how the betting markets and books work. The big risk is that the odds will not move as expected or will be taken down and you’re stuck with your original wager.
I got $1,000 down (max) on Sam Forgan to miss the cut at -425.
Won most of the cutline bets this week thanks to DG.
Poom Saksansin got me…
but with a name like that can you even be mad?
Well you made the right decision, it happens
Surely you’re still in the green though
Any idea why the line was so low on Forgan? I guess the books weren’t afraid of the max wagers from the sharps (since it was only $1000 and there aren’t that many of them)
Im not sure why the prices were what they were but I found a book with a lot of the worst golfers at -300 to -450 to miss the cut.
Max bet those and did well. Only losses were Poom and Yuxin Lin.
I feel like DG has a solid model with sound logic for pricing players like that while books are just making a guess or using a very simplistic model.