-
AFLW 2024 - Round 8 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
My official betting thread
- Thread starter brett128
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
your record for AFL says otherwise
Princess Wafflewaffle
Debutant
- Jun 30, 2012
- 83
- 17
- AFL Club
- Carlton
If you cant beat the 2-3 game at crown for at least $40hr you are not trying. You can mainly play the situations rather than the cards. ie most players are either weak tight ie just calling stations. If you cop a hard table just request a table change. It is one of the few things I rarely see people do. Table selection like bet selection in sporting bets is an underated skill.
"Also, your preoccupation with multis shows a lack of understanding in maximizing expected bankroll growth. If you assume the win % you have is real, you'd be better off betting them separately to maximise +EG." Of course I could back each leg separate. I could have bet 4 units on each leg of a 2 leg multi @1.50 each to return a profit of 4 units for 8 units of risk. If I lose both I lose 8 units. split and I finish equal win both and I win 4 units. Or I bet 4 units total to win 5. The amount you win is obviously important but you modelling
does not allow you to lose both. Your first big paragraph was about the kelly criterion and house you need to maximise bankroll growth. In order to do this you need to bet an ever increasingly large amount as your bankroll grows. But the first bad run you have it kills you.
I do not have a problem with the picks you make. Each to their own and we all go on good runs and bad runs. But always chasing the largest growth possible will kill you in the end.
If you have a $10k bankroll and and make picks at 57% accuracy( a pretty good strike rate) and can get $1.93 lines your suggested bet is 10.76% of your bankroll.
It is impossible that if you are betting over 10% of your on picks that you will not eventually go close to bust. You may not actually have nothing left but your roll will be so small that betting will not be worthwhile other than as a form of entertainment.
You may come back now and say well I don't bet over 10% of my roll or I only bet 1/2 kelly but then you just contradict yourself because early you talk about always chasing the highest growth.
Any way best of luck to you
As a last point if you expect to win 57% of games you are at the moment running 3.67 games below expectation over 31 games. Only a tiny sample size but by betting such a large percentage of your roll each time you would have to be down at least 25-30% of your roll. If you were simply betting with a 100 unit bankroll and betting 1 unit each game you would be down <4% of your roll. Obviously if you run hot your way will increase your roll quicker but one bad run and you will be busto soon enough.
"Also, your preoccupation with multis shows a lack of understanding in maximizing expected bankroll growth. If you assume the win % you have is real, you'd be better off betting them separately to maximise +EG." Of course I could back each leg separate. I could have bet 4 units on each leg of a 2 leg multi @1.50 each to return a profit of 4 units for 8 units of risk. If I lose both I lose 8 units. split and I finish equal win both and I win 4 units. Or I bet 4 units total to win 5. The amount you win is obviously important but you modelling
does not allow you to lose both. Your first big paragraph was about the kelly criterion and house you need to maximise bankroll growth. In order to do this you need to bet an ever increasingly large amount as your bankroll grows. But the first bad run you have it kills you.
I do not have a problem with the picks you make. Each to their own and we all go on good runs and bad runs. But always chasing the largest growth possible will kill you in the end.
If you have a $10k bankroll and and make picks at 57% accuracy( a pretty good strike rate) and can get $1.93 lines your suggested bet is 10.76% of your bankroll.
It is impossible that if you are betting over 10% of your on picks that you will not eventually go close to bust. You may not actually have nothing left but your roll will be so small that betting will not be worthwhile other than as a form of entertainment.
You may come back now and say well I don't bet over 10% of my roll or I only bet 1/2 kelly but then you just contradict yourself because early you talk about always chasing the highest growth.
Any way best of luck to you
As a last point if you expect to win 57% of games you are at the moment running 3.67 games below expectation over 31 games. Only a tiny sample size but by betting such a large percentage of your roll each time you would have to be down at least 25-30% of your roll. If you were simply betting with a 100 unit bankroll and betting 1 unit each game you would be down <4% of your roll. Obviously if you run hot your way will increase your roll quicker but one bad run and you will be busto soon enough.
Princess Wafflewaffle
Debutant
- Jun 30, 2012
- 83
- 17
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Rooster Cogburn
Premiership Player
- Dec 16, 2010
- 3,193
- 837
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Arsenal
You do realise they have 2 outs in Jones and Jamar? I'd argue that Jones has been of their best this year, he's a huge out.
Princess Wafflewaffle
Debutant
- Jun 30, 2012
- 83
- 17
- AFL Club
- Carlton
No worries. I pulled out of my multi once the 2 outs were named for everybodys notice
- Thread starter
- #111
St Kilda -17.5 @ 57%
St Kilda vs North Melbourne OVER 202.5 @ 57%
Both through Sportsbet. Note the $1.88 price. I haven't made push charts for AFL totals yet, but I think the 2-3 cents is worth the sacrifice for 2 points. All other books are at 204.5
St Kilda vs North Melbourne OVER 202.5 @ 57%
Both through Sportsbet. Note the $1.88 price. I haven't made push charts for AFL totals yet, but I think the 2-3 cents is worth the sacrifice for 2 points. All other books are at 204.5
- Jul 23, 2010
- 5,793
- 4,223
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Less than 1% of the Crown 2/3 pool would beat the game for $40p/h post time/rake over anything remotely close to a decent sample.
Princess Wafflewaffle
Debutant
- Jun 30, 2012
- 83
- 17
- AFL Club
- Carlton
I am not from melbourne so I only play sporatically at crown but in the last 2 years I have played 72 sessions at 2/3 (stats are better in the last year now that it is a 100bb max rather than a $200 max buyin). average session is 6.8 hours for a total profit of $21500. This is after I lost $1300 in total over Friday & Saturday this week. I am obviously playing weekends mostly so it is peak times but it is not that unusual. There are certainly 3-4 players there who have played well against me over time. One is Rick who is a bald guy, says he is retired, probably 35-40 years old but definitely aggressive and is a good talker at the table. He has put me in some uncomfortable spots the few times we have played.
It has been deleted but there was definetly a post which said I was likely to go 0-3 which I agreed wasn't out of the realms of possibility as I wasn't in love with any of the games.
I ended going 2-1 with the 2 playing out as I said and my thoughts on it being better to back North outright proving correct. As for the Melbourne game the 2 late withdrawls made a massive difference, especially since I said Jamar should allow them to win enough contested ball to keep it close and he was one of the late withdrawls as well as Jones who has been one of their best 2-3 this year.
Anyway I didn't have a bet since I pulled out of the multi but it has been fun discussing with all of you. If you would like me to give you my thoughts next week let me know.
It has been deleted but there was definetly a post which said I was likely to go 0-3 which I agreed wasn't out of the realms of possibility as I wasn't in love with any of the games.
I ended going 2-1 with the 2 playing out as I said and my thoughts on it being better to back North outright proving correct. As for the Melbourne game the 2 late withdrawls made a massive difference, especially since I said Jamar should allow them to win enough contested ball to keep it close and he was one of the late withdrawls as well as Jones who has been one of their best 2-3 this year.
Anyway I didn't have a bet since I pulled out of the multi but it has been fun discussing with all of you. If you would like me to give you my thoughts next week let me know.
- Thread starter
- #114
I'm going to update performance metrics tomorrow. A bit busy at the moment. Needless to say I'm disappointed with totals especially the last few weeks.
Variance can be a bitch. As for bankroll variability, 50% bankroll decreases don't really bother me. It's happened to me a number of times. I've dropped about 30% of roll since releasing my plays.
I release all plays after I get down on them myself. That's the extent of what I'm willing to discuss. Given I bet kelly, even though I know I have softer lines mid week, I forego mid week value to bet as close to sequential kelly as possible.
Variance can be a bitch. As for bankroll variability, 50% bankroll decreases don't really bother me. It's happened to me a number of times. I've dropped about 30% of roll since releasing my plays.
I release all plays after I get down on them myself. That's the extent of what I'm willing to discuss. Given I bet kelly, even though I know I have softer lines mid week, I forego mid week value to bet as close to sequential kelly as possible.
damn
Princess Wafflewaffle
Debutant
- Jun 30, 2012
- 83
- 17
- AFL Club
- Carlton
But this means you have to significantly got better than 52.5% to break even because your bets are now smaller you ave to win more often to make up for an earlier loss. Conversely if you win early and your roll increases a smaller amount of losses is needed to reduce your bankroll quicker as your bets are bigger.
- Thread starter
- #120
You're asking about linkages of cause and effect that span into the many hundreds of bets (with many bets bet simultaneously).
For ANY given win % above break even, the best investment methodology is Kelly. One can prove it to themselves. I created a simulator and simulated many 1000's of bankoll runs using different betting methodologies (flat units, bastardized hierarchical betting methods, betting to win x % of roll, etc, etc) under varying win % distributions.
Kelly had by far the highest average expected bankroll growth. Yes I understand it's volatile; the standard deviation of average expected bankroll growth from these thousands of simulations was wider than other staking methods. However I'm happy with accommodating that volatility, because I understand that my end state is optimal bankroll growth.
It takes a certain type of person to bet like this, most people should not bet Kelly as they probably cannot emotionally deal with the volatility. My bankroll is a set of numbers to me, i'm not fazed with 50% bankroll reductions, or the 100% bankroll gains that commonly come my way. I know my method optimises bankroll growth, that's all that matters to me.
- Thread starter
- #121
Melbourne vs Brisbane OVER 184.5 @ 55% (Luxbet) LOSS
Melbourne +35.5 @ 55% LOSS
St Kilda -17.5 @ 57% LOSS
St Kilda vs North Melbourne OVER 202.5 @ 57% WIN
Canberra +4.5 @ 55% (Sportsbet) WIN
Canberra vs St George Illawarra UNDER 38 @ 57% (Luxbet) LOSS
Expected ATS Wins: 21.5
Actual ATS Wins: 16
16-22 ATS
Once I reach 100 plays, I'll add a z score to assess the likelihood I can actually hit my expected win %.
If I've missed anything, please keep me accountable.
Melbourne +35.5 @ 55% LOSS
St Kilda -17.5 @ 57% LOSS
St Kilda vs North Melbourne OVER 202.5 @ 57% WIN
Canberra +4.5 @ 55% (Sportsbet) WIN
Canberra vs St George Illawarra UNDER 38 @ 57% (Luxbet) LOSS
Expected ATS Wins: 21.5
Actual ATS Wins: 16
16-22 ATS
Once I reach 100 plays, I'll add a z score to assess the likelihood I can actually hit my expected win %.
If I've missed anything, please keep me accountable.
asanque
Premium Platinum
I still foresee a few issues with your system.
1. Taking odds late means that the sharps have already gotten all the value
2. You still seem to be betting on most/all games, where I would have thought you should only concentrate on those with the highest certainty
3. Even if you win, using kelly, you are going to hit the bookie limits pretty quickly.
1. Taking odds late means that the sharps have already gotten all the value
2. You still seem to be betting on most/all games, where I would have thought you should only concentrate on those with the highest certainty
3. Even if you win, using kelly, you are going to hit the bookie limits pretty quickly.
- Thread starter
- #123
Very wrong.
Closing lines are still very much inefficient. This is the AFL, NRL and S15 here. We aren't dealing with anywhere near NFL efficiency here. I've said this before, but many line moves in Australian sports are the weight of square money getting down just before the game.
Totals on AFL and NRL are that soft, that you can find 55% plays on over two thirds of games. This is a unique situation in the sports betting world. I'd never dream of this many plays in any other sports (efficient non-Australian sports) i've capped. Again, this is a result of how bad the market is.
I've said this many times, PLEASE give me this problem. I'd rather have to deal with getting enough action, than dealing with little or no edge.
the reason you aren't limited is because of your pathetic record
- Status
