At some point I'd like to write up a rigorous mathematical proof showing why this works, but I'll need to meet up with my statistics professor for that.
Before using this table, consider that the season is just beginning; this is only week 3, so the simulations aren't as accurate as they will be. I can't tell you not to bet, but just keep that in mind.
Since Baltimore's win % against Cleveland is so ridiculously high (97%), I decided to run BOA using a more conservative 80%. At 97%, BAL showed up in pretty much every bet. If BAL loses, lots of bets would lose. Better safe than sorry. If you can't tell by now, I like to err on the side of conservatism.
Once more, this is what each heading means:
~"BOA ODDS" are BOA's calculated probability that the particular bet will win.
~"VEGAS PAYOUT" is the payout for that bet according to Vegas, in decimal form.
~"% OF BANKROLL" is the amount bankroll that should be devoted to that bet.
~"POSSIBLE PAYOUT" is the amount won if the bet is won. (BANKROLL * % OF BANKROLL * VEGAS PAYOUT)
Here is the team key, each number corresponds to a particular bet. 1-ATL means that when you see the number 1, it means bet on ATL to win. If you see 5,7, it means parlay NE and TEN.
1-ATL, 2-BUF, 3-CHI, 4-MIN, 5-NE, 6-NYG, 7-TEN, 8-WAS, 9-SF, 10-SEA, 11-DEN, 12-PHI, 13-IND, 14-BAL, 15-DAL, 16-SD
| BET | BOA ODDS | VEGAS PAYOUT | % of BANKROLL | PAYOUT |
| 5 | 90.00% | 1.11 | 7.21% | 8.01 |
| 7 | 87.00% | 1.43 | 6.94% | 9.92 |
| 6 | 84.00% | 1.11 | 6.20% | 6.88 |
| 14 | 80.00% | 1.77 | 6.12% | 10.83 |
| 9 | 79.00% | 1.50 | 5.79% | 8.68 |
| 5,7 | 78.30% | 1.59 | 5.76% | 9.14 |
| 2 | 79.00% | 1.19 | 5.46% | 6.50 |
| 5,14 | 72.00% | 1.96 | 5.14% | 10.10 |
| 7,14 | 69.60% | 2.53 | 5.13% | 12.98 |
| 6,7 | 73.08% | 1.59 | 5.00% | 7.93 |
| 5,6 | 75.60% | 1.23 | 4.97% | 6.12 |
| 7,9 | 68.73% | 2.15 | 4.82% | 10.35 |
| 5,9 | 71.10% | 1.67 | 4.79% | 7.97 |
| 13 | 71.00% | 1.43 | 4.52% | 6.46 |
| 5,7,14 | 62.64% | 2.81 | 4.50% | 12.64 |
| 11 | 70.00% | 1.40 | 4.48% | 6.28 |
| 10 | 71.00% | 1.20 | 4.39% | 5.27 |
| 5,6,7 | 65.77% | 1.76 | 4.39% | 7.74 |
| 5,7,9 | 61.86% | 2.38 | 4.38% | 10.44 |
Alright, let's look at this. That table is based on a bankroll of $100. One of the other reasons BOA works is because it spreads risk over numerous bets in a way such that if one bet fails, other bets can still keep you afloat. If you don't feel like making 19 bets, my advice would be to scale the bets that you do make. If you only want to make the top 5 bets, for example, add the top 5 "% BANKROLLs" together. To find the new percentage to bet, divide that bet's "% BANKROLL" by the sum of the 5 "% BANKROLLs". So... 7.21+6.94+6.2+6.12+5.79 = 32.25. Bet 1 will be 7.21/32.25 = 22.36%. Bet 2 will be 6.94/32.35 = 21.51%, and so on. All 5 percentages should add up to 100%.
As you decrease the number of bets, you increase the amount of risk. For example, if you bet all 19 bets and and all teams win except 5-NE, which has a 90% confidence, you will lose 7.91% of your bankroll. If you decide to only bet the top 5 bets, you'll lose 22.36%. It's about all about your tolerance for risk, which is yours to figure out.
I hope this makes everyone happy. If not, send me some
You make an interesting point, which is that as one starts to overweight better risk-return bets using various exotics, one by definition starts to concentrate risk.
ReplyDeleteIn the top ten bets, for example, there are three teams which could each knock out 30% of the wagers if they lose. The question is whether this is better risk-return than doing straight bets based on some other criteria - such as the top ten based on the spread between projected win% and the win% implied by the Vegas line. Perhaps lower return, but any given game can sink no more than 10% of the bets.
If thoroughbred-style pari-mutuel betting were available for NFL games, then there could be a clear advantage to betting via parlays - since the commission is only taken out of the total amount wagered, rather than out of each component bet. With Vegas or a bookie, one doesn't get this inherent advantage to exotics.
I greatly prefer the format you provided for week 2. I can make decisions based on it-with this format, it's just not enough data to do anything with. Will have to abandon your (otherwise) excellent site for someone else!
ReplyDeleteSorry, missed the previous Week 3 predictions post in my reader.
ReplyDeleteI 'cherry pick' your posts using some of my own interpretation and am 8-6 ATS thus far. I used Brian Burke's data last year and did extremely well for the season.
Keep up the good work.
Sorry, sorry, sorry, I'll put it up.
ReplyDelete