You're not as smart as you think you are... - Pace and Cap

alydar_ David · 09-01-2006, 12:51 PM

...or, at least I'm not.

It's interesting (and should be helpful) to note motifs in one's betting.

For example, I always tend to outsmart myself.

Here are my personal results for prime plays on dirt races for non-maidens this year; these are single win bets on "can't lose" horses going off at 4-1 or more. Obviously, these bets don't come up every day.

I won 21% of my win bets.

Note, if I'd made a flat bet on each on them I'd have gotten back $1.55 for every dollar I invested.

So, what really happened? By varying my bet size I got back $1.33 for every $1.00 invested.

My duh.

The thing is...this happens every year. I keep records. I know. So, why do I persist in outsmarting myself?

Good question.

Houndog · 09-01-2006, 12:57 PM

Your smarter then most people as you actually keep a record of your bets. A return of 1.33 for each dollar is still very good in my opinion.

shoeless · 09-01-2006, 05:47 PM

I second that.Jeff

alydar_ David · 09-04-2006, 10:31 PM

Thanks for the kind words, guys.

This whole point of the post though was the irony of money management.

Theoretically, you're better off increasing your bet per Wager Value, which is Edge * Odds. In other words, you bet more when things are looking good for the greedy.

"Can you believe they're letting this horse go at 7-1? It's time to send it in!"

However, in reality that's never been as lucrative as flat/percentage betting for me. Don't know why. Kelly betting (and fractional Kelly betting) is supposed to work, and in theory, it should. Can't really explain it, but flat betting (and increasing the amount of the wager as a percentage of your bankroll as your bankroll grows) has always generated a greater R.O.I. for me.

Once again it would appear betting and money management have garnished about as much interest as record keeping.

Never mind. We will now resume normal programming. "Who do you like in the fourth?"

admin · 09-05-2006, 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alydar_David

Thanks for the kind words, guys.

This whole point of the post though was the irony of money management.

Theoretically, you're better off increasing your bet per Wager Value, which is Edge * Odds. In other words, you bet more when things are looking good for the greedy.

"Can you believe they're letting this horse go at 7-1? It's time to send it in!"

However, in reality that's never been as lucrative as flat/percentage betting for me. Don't know why. Kelly betting (and fractional Kelly betting) is supposed to work, and in theory, it should. Can't really explain it, but flat betting (and increasing the amount of the wager as a percentage of your bankroll as your bankroll grows) has always generated a greater R.O.I. for me.

Once again it would appear betting and money management have garnished about as much interest as record keeping.

Never mind. We will now resume normal programming. "Who do you like in the fourth?"

No David. lets not give up yet
For me a flat bet at the beginning of each 20 race cycle based on
a percentage of my total win bank roll always works best
For me betting more and sending it in never works well "Live"
It works great on paper but ... and any kind of betting
a percentage of total bank after each win fails too
because I have a low win percentage.

09-01-2006, 12:51 PM	#1
alydar_ David Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,654	You're not as smart as you think you are... ...or, at least I'm not. It's interesting (and should be helpful) to note motifs in one's betting. For example, I always tend to outsmart myself. Here are my personal results for prime plays on dirt races for non-maidens this year; these are single win bets on "can't lose" horses going off at 4-1 or more. Obviously, these bets don't come up every day. I won 21% of my win bets. Note, if I'd made a flat bet on each on them I'd have gotten back $1.55 for every dollar I invested. So, what really happened? By varying my bet size I got back $1.33 for every $1.00 invested. My duh. The thing is...this happens every year. I keep records. I know. So, why do I persist in outsmarting myself? Good question. Attached Images

09-01-2006, 12:57 PM	#2
Houndog Grade 1 Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,258	Your smarter then most people as you actually keep a record of your bets. A return of 1.33 for each dollar is still very good in my opinion.

09-01-2006, 05:47 PM	#3
shoeless Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 4,610	I second that.Jeff

09-04-2006, 10:31 PM	#4
alydar_ David Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,654	Thanks for the kind words, guys. This whole point of the post though was the irony of money management. Theoretically, you're better off increasing your bet per Wager Value, which is Edge * Odds. In other words, you bet more when things are looking good for the greedy. "Can you believe they're letting this horse go at 7-1? It's time to send it in!" However, in reality that's never been as lucrative as flat/percentage betting for me. Don't know why. Kelly betting (and fractional Kelly betting) is supposed to work, and in theory, it should. Can't really explain it, but flat betting (and increasing the amount of the wager as a percentage of your bankroll as your bankroll grows) has always generated a greater R.O.I. for me. Once again it would appear betting and money management have garnished about as much interest as record keeping. Never mind. We will now resume normal programming. "Who do you like in the fourth?"