Flat betting in Baseball....

A lot said on this early in the thread if you have some time to read it.....

What you are basically saying is that you do better on big dogs and big favs (weighted) than you do on small dogs and small favs.  If you could somehow know that that is the case - then you are doing the right thing.  But if you have an even distribution - or the opposite is true - you are not doing yourself any favors.

Hutch - if you want to PM me I will answer this.....

The truth is that no matter how I answer this question it will cause 100 posts of nonsense in return.  Ive learned to stay away from these types of answers.

But as a concept - the amount shouldnt matter.  Some might say that locking up $.50 of profit on a $5 wager isnt good - but to me its the same 10% as making 5k on 50K.  Its all relative - and your ROI shouldnt change because your amounts change.....

You're right....people will go bananas...and it's not a big deal.  I think I can figure it out knowing what I know about your unit size.  

Van,  are you calculating back in the % of the team winning the game? You say that if you were to bet to win the same amount for each game then one would have more weight than the other especially the further away from zero you get....but once you calculate the % of those teams winning back in they should be directly proportional to one another.

 Yes, on a given night I want a dog that is +180 to win over a dog that is +120 but when you calucalte back in the % of those dogs winning (which was determined by you capping the game and finding value) there isn't more weight on one over the other because the greater dog is going to have a lower % of winning.

If I am understanding you correctly.....

The weight of winning or losing is allocated in the payoff.  So if the actual odds of you winning are the odds that you are betting, than longterm you are going to break exactly even.

But if you do not break exactly as the odds suggest, then you are risking more on the higher odds bets than you are on the lower odds bets, and the amount you are winning or losing overall has more weight on the bets that are farther away from -100 ( your bigger dogs or favs as opposed to your smaller dogs or favs).

This is fine if your bigger dogs and bigger favs win more as a group than your smaller dogs and smaller favs - but it is not putting equal weight on all games - which is my definitino of flat betting.

Did I understand you correctly?

Yes, I think you're understanding me correctly. However, lets say you have a game at +110 and another one at +200 and weight those games exactly the same. The first game has close to a 50% chance of winning compared to the second game which has about a 33% chance of winning.  Wouldn't you actually be putting a lot more weight on the games that are closer to 100 becasue the games that are +200 or so have less of a chance of winning yet you're weighting them the same as a game that has 50% chance of winning?

Does that make any sense?  Thx for your time....Good luck this year

I only read post #1 (sorry)

But I thought flat betting meant that you would win or lose the same amount regardless of whether you bet the dog or the fav

who r these people making money?

surely they dont waste time here posting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

5 year old thread.  Nostalgic to read again.