But which staking plan is the best?

The answer is: A simple and straightforward staking plan. Nothing complicated; just plump for flat staking with or without a ratcheting mechanism.

All other staking plans contain one or another problem and I can guarantee that there is definitely not a single staking method in existence, which makes a failing betting system work.

Therefore, firstly work out a sound betting system and then secondly, adhere to a modest and plain staking plan. Keep the money management as simple as possible because it is already difficult enough to keep up with everything that goes into monitoring a betting system. You will perhaps also have to think about juggling your bank between various bookmakers and exchanges if needs be.

In today’s article I’m going to show you a fuss-free staking plan using the example of our 2017-18 Winter League portfolio .

As mentioned, it’s a combination of a flat staking plan and a ratcheting mechanism.

A Definite Edge and a Sound Staking Plan Work Wonders!

With the help of our HDAFU Tables and, in particular, their Inflection Point graphs, it is now easy to develop a portfolio of bets with a definite mathematical edge.

And in conjunction with our chosen staking plan, the portfolio of 2017-18 Winter Leagues performed as follows:

Image 1: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Profit Curve with Ratcheting

We started with a betting bank of 4,000 units and finished after 47 weeks and 518 bets with a total 38,925 units.

Of course, it wasn’t a smooth ride the whole time. Especially at the start of the season, the first 15 weeks (up to 27/10/2017) were very tough. 153 bets were placed but the result was pretty much a zero sum game. It did eventually rise to 5,562, but for all the time invested and work performed it was quite a frustrating experience.

From this point until the end of December, results were better and the ratcheting system helped the bank up to 13,792 units. But then another rough period started.

Nevertheless, it was worth it! A very long slog (47 weeks!) for a profit of 34,925 units. A great result vindicating the soundness of both the portfolio of bets and its staking plan.

Just as a side note, if you want to learn more about how the portfolio was originally compiled and how it performed in detail then you will find our report here: System Football Betting: 2017-18 Winter League Report – 35k in 138 Days

But let’s get back to the topic of the article: proper staking…

Image 1 showed you the performance of the portfolio using ratcheting, but if we would have applied a flat staking plan only (without ratcheting), then the Profit/Loss curve would have looked like this:

Image 2: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Profit Curve Flat Stakes

You can see straight away that the simple flat stakes (without ratcheting) also produces profits, but the curve is much flatter – here, the betting bank only increases from 4,000 units to 13,909 units. Flat staking lacks the exponential element of a ratcheting system to grow a bank, but on the other hand, it is much easier on the nerves as I will show you later in this article.

But first here are a few definitions…

What is Flat Staking?

Flat staking simply means that you wager on every bet exactly the same amount of money, without any deviations. But this may include some consideration towards the risk of each bet. You may therefore wish to stagger your stakes according to the implied probability (odds) of winning each bet:

• VERY SIMPLE: decide to stake a flat 100 units on every bet in the portfolio.
• SIMPLE: decide to stake a flat 100 units on bets with odds below 1.50, 50 units on bets with odds between 1.50 and 2.50, and so on.

But whichever of the two options you choose, you are in effect still ‘flat staking’.

What is Ratcheting?

Ratcheting is a progressive money management approach where the size of the stakes move by degrees, upward or downward, depending upon results.

(A) If your portfolio wins, increase the stakes!

With ratcheting the stakes are variable and depend on the size of the bank. However, the percentage of the ratchet (in our case 2.5%) always remains constant.

If at the end of a round of matches (or week) your bank has grown, all bets placed the following week should be adjusted to the higher bank.

For example, if the bank increases from 4,000 to 4,500, the stake increases from a flat 100 units to 112.50 per bet in the following round (i.e. stake remains at the base level set of 2.5% of bank).

The percentage of the bank used per bet stays ‘flat’.

(B) If your portfolio loses, reduce the stakes!

Nevertheless, you also need to guard against bankruptcy. If your portfolio experiences a losing round, reduce the stakes for each bet but not before the bank drops to 75% (or below) of its highest point.

You may think that this method is simply a stop-loss strategy, but it isn’t quite the same. I will explain further down in the article why we used 75% as the margin for our downwards ratcheting and not any other number.

Should you lose at the end of a round (week), continue to play each bet with the same, unchanged stake until the bank’s previous high has shrunk by 25%.

This means that in the event of a short-term loss, the stake continues to refer to the bank at the highest level it has reached so far and does not adjust to the lower bank until the bank has dropped to 75% of its peak size.

Only then is the stake recalculated (reduced) and the ratchet process begins again.

To be clear on this point, in the event of a run of losses, the stake size per bet always remains in relation to the highest bank to date and should not decrease until the threshold of 75% of highest bank ever is reached. (If you have for example, a very bad start to a campaign, the 75% trigger point may well apply to your starting bank).

Only then will the stakes be adjusted (reduced) to this lower bank size. This will then be your new starting bank. All further bets from then on refer to this bank and the ratcheting process begins again.

Example 1:

The bank drops from 4,000 to 3,800: The stakes remain unchanged, flat 100.00 (= 2.5% of the starting bank of 4,000) for the next period (round/ week).

After the next round the bank closes with 3,520. Still, the stakes remain unchanged, flat 100.00, using the previous bank of 4,000 for its calculations.

Only if the bank closes with under 3,000 (75% of 4,000) will the stake sizes be recalculated.


Example 2:

Using the starting bank from our previous example, the bank has dropped to 2,800. This has now become the new starting bank and the stake is recalculated:

2,800 x 2.5% = 70.00

With the reduction of over 75% of the bank from its former highest level of 4,000 (100 unit stakes) to 2,800, the stake size is recalibrated and remains flat at 70 units.

Afterwards, if the bank starts to rise, you will need to begin increasing the stakes again.

Say, after the next round you bank has gone up to 3,150.

3,150 x 2.5% = 78.75

The adjusted ‘new’ stake is now 78.75 and remains in place until either the bank drops to 75% of 3,150 (2,362) or the bank grows above 3,150, when stake amounts will be 2.5% of the new, larger bank size.

Flat Staking vs. Ratcheting

We have seen that ratcheting is purely a method of ‘flexible flat staking’ to encourage exponential bank growth.

The idea is to start off with stakes of 100 units and, if everything goes according to plan, by the end of the season the stake sizes should hopefully be in the multiples of 100 units.

Looking at the other side of the coin, the losses during this time will be in the same proportions, and not everyone is comfortable when losing a few thousand units in an afternoon, even if its ‘just winnings’ from previous rounds.

Bear this in mind before you decide to try ratcheting. Are you a disciplined person? Are you able to function when you have a few thousand riding on a few matches?

If your answer to these questions is ‘no’, then please do yourself a favour and stick to flat staking only! Do not try ratcheting, at least not to the end, and stop increasing your stakes when you reach the limits of your comfort zone (or have achieved target).

Bank Development during Rough Periods

Even the soundest portfolio of bets will experience bad periods where one bet after another (or even one round after another) is losing. It happened to us from the 09/12/2017 (2017 week 50) – 11/03/2018 (2018 week 11). Three months of more losing rounds than winning ones! Tough indeed!

Here are two images that show the profits/losses together with the bank development during this rough period using flat stakes versus ratcheting:

Image 3: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Using Flat Stakes only

Image 4: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Ratcheting the Stakes

Both staking plans produced profits but, to put the choppy ride into even better perspective, you will need to note that the results summarised in Image 4 were by this time already based on a ratcheted bet size of 344.80 units (as at 09/12/2017), and this has grown to 707.82 units by 11/03/2018.

The period spanned more than 15 weeks with nine losing rounds (60%). From the 23/12/2017 – 12/01/2018 there were many losses, not huge, but enough to be nerve-racking!

The biggest losing round of bets with flat staking was: – 578
The biggest losing round of bets with ratcheting was: – 4,091

Tough! This again highlights the difference in volatility between flat staking and ratcheting. Steel hearts only required here!

However:

The biggest profit round with flat staking was: 1,785
The biggest profit round with ratcheting was: 6,155

Great! But please don’t get carried away too much!

Moral #1: If you are a person that finds it challenging to keep emotions under control, stick to flat stakes! The best laid plans fall to pieces if you can’t cope during the really rough times.

It is always better to be a modest winner than a brave loser.

Emotional Rollercoaster when Winning or Losing

In the previous section you saw the monetary effects of winning and losing when using flat stakes only or when ratcheting. However, the differences become even more obvious if you look at the profits/losses in relation to the bank:

Image 5: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Profit/Losses in relation to the bank: Flat Stakes

When staking flat our example portfolio only produced a maximum loss of – 8.1 % of the bank. The winnings too were pretty ‘modest’: a maximum of 20.7%.

Ratcheting involves a far greater rollercoaster. The maximum loss was as high as – 15.2 % of the bank. The maximum winnings were: 52.6%.

Image 6: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Profit/Losses in relation to the bank: Ratcheting

Moral #2: As I have already said, simple flat stakes (without ratcheting) are much easier on the nerves than ratcheting. The exponential growth a ratcheting system produces goes hand-in hand with exponential losses.

Stop-Loss Margin when Ratcheting

In the article Bank Management & Stake Size I explained the ‘scientific’ calculation of the percentage of starting bank that should be used for betting.

It was based on the average of the three largest losing rounds (weeks):
12%, 15.2% and 14.6% >>> average: 13.9% (rounded: 14%).

We can use this figure of 14% to calculate the stop-loss margin. You see, everything is somehow connected. The stake size, the stop-loss margin, and much more.

To be able to sit through a run of at least two losing rounds in a row where the bank is depleted by 14% each time you need to calculate as follows:

86% x 86% = 73.96%

Let’s round this up to 75% to be more risk averse (safety conscious).

Hence, if your portfolio loses, reduce the stakes but not before the bank drops to 75%. It is very unlikely to happen but it may, you never know. By the way, our bank didn’t drop a single time below the 75% threshold during the Winter League 2017-18 Campaign.

Please bear in mind that all the calculations and explanations are based on a portfolio of just over 500 bets with an expected hit rate of around 50%. Should your portfolio be different (no two are alike), then you will need to carry out all the calculations using your own figures.

If you cannot calculate this for yourself in such great detail then either stick to the 75% threshold, or perhaps lower it to 65% (if you have a lower risk aversion) as advised in previous articles.

Moral #3: Better to be safe than sorry. If you are new to ratcheting it’s probably better if you play with smaller stakes than the calculations actually permit (e.g. 1.5% of your betting bank instead of 2.5%) then you won’t reach the stop-loss margin too quickly.

I hope you’ve enjoyed this article and learned something about sound staking and ratcheting. However, if you are still unsure on any point, please feel free to ask any questions via the comment section below.

The main goal is to let your winnings grow your bankroll. Obviously, the first chunk of it is going to come from your own pocket, but once you get good at the art of betting, you�ll essentially be playing with other people�s (or the house�s) money.

With the help of these tips, we�ll show you how to build your bankroll the right way…

DO: Stick to your guns!

Are you particularly good at a certain game? Although it may be tempting to branch out and start learning other games, you should stick to your guns. That way, you�ll be using your existing knowledge to its maximum potential.

Poker Bankroll management, for instance, requires you to master a certain buy-in level before moving on to a higher one. It�s a self-imposed limitation that keeps you from biting off more than you can chew.

In essence, it keeps you honest in terms of where you stand, skill-wise. It also incentivizes you to master a certain variant of the game (such as Hold�em or Omaha) and not to be inconsistent.

DON�T: Bet too much

Betting is all about getting a solid grasp of risk versus reward and learning to recognize when to push forward and when to hold back. The idea is to never blow your entire bankroll on a single bet regardless. At the most, it should be a tiny, pre-defined percentage of it. Although different people have different ideas about the exact number, most would agree that it shouldn�t exceed 5%.

A single bet should only ever be a small percentage of your entire bankroll. (Picture Source: Pixabay.com)

DO: Take advantage of promotions

Typically, any sportsbook or casino will entice you to make a bet through them by rewarding you with lucrative bonuses. It pays off to study the conditions of the deal and let the bonuses work for you as you�re growing your bankroll.

DON�T: Foster unrealistic expectations

Forget about making thousands from a $5 or �5 bet. Unlike what�s portrayed in the movies and popular culture, it doesn�t work like that in real life. In fact, one of the unexpected downsides of a pro gambler’s life is the routine of daily grinding. In many ways, it�s much like a day job. You get up, do the work, rinse and repeat. Remember that success equals consistency over time rather than getting lucky with a single bet.

DO: Take a break often

Whether winning or losing, you�re more than likely to experience wild emotional swings and go on tilt. Even the most hardcore seasoned pros are not immune to this, so be wary of it. The solution is defined by responsible gambling guidelines by taking a break often, especially when things aren�t going your way. By doing this, you�ll stop yourself from making emotional decisions that often result in suboptimal betting patterns.

DON�T: Withdraw your winnings too soon

When building your bankroll, you want to see it grow as quickly as possible. As tempting as it may be to withdraw your winnings, how are you going to reach your goals if you unavoidably ameliorate your bankroll as a result? Think of it like building a business, a process that�s referred to as bootstrapping. When working with limited finances, it�s in the entrepreneur�s best interest to funnel all the profits back into growing the company rather than pocketing them.

Conclusion

Whether you�re into sports betting or casino games, stick to the above-mentioned guidelines and you�ll be setting yourself up for success. Keep in mind that succeeding in this field is a marathon, not a sprint � you�re in it for the long haul.

Towards the end of this summary article, we also discuss the statistical evidence of the lockdown effects as matches continue to be played without fans.

The Systems Employed

For the purposes of this test nine systems were selected across four leagues in close geographical proximity to one another.

Please note that it is normally our mandate when selecting systems for real-play portfolios only to pick the best single system in a league (e.g. whole-of-season or first half-season or second half-season), or best two systems (first half-season and second half-season).

However, for the purposes of this live simulation, we trialled a number of different first half-season systems from the four leagues. This was done because the choice of leagues in which to generate bets for this experiment was extremely limited at the time the simulation began.

Immediately below you will find screenshots taken from the actual 2020 Summer League HDAFU Tables showing each system in detail. The systems were determined after scrutinising the profit/loss curves shown in the dedicated ‘Inflection Points by HO/AO quotient’ tab in these tables. (Home Odds divided by Away Odds).

(Clicking on all of the images below enlarges them in a new tab):

HDAFU Table Finland Veikkausliiga: 2x Draw Systems

Note that although the draw odds of these two systems overlap, it is important to understand that they apply to two separate tranches of games (i.e. the HO/AO quotients do not overlap). System (a) represents smaller quotients indicative of games involving short-priced home favourites. System (b) applies to quotients above 1 indicating games where the away team is the shorter-priced favourite. All nine of the systems in this simulation are non-overlapping to provide stand-alone comparisons.

HDAFU Table Screenshots – Iceland Úrvalsdeild: 1x Draw & 1x Favourite System

HDAFU Table Screenshots – Norway Eliteserien: 1x Draw, 1x Favourite System & 1x Home Win System

HDAFU Table Screenshots – Sweden Allsvenskan: 1x Draw & 1x Favourite System

Results of the 2020 ‘Live’ HDAFU Tables Trial

Profit Loss Curve

The graph below shows the final profit/loss curve after 44 rounds of betting (i.e. separate days) comprising a total of 129 bets:

HDAFU Tables – Summer Leagues 2020 Live Simulation: Bank Development

If you were following our live picks on a daily basis you will remember that on August the 3rd, after 26 betting rounds (91 bets), we decided to cut two systems from the draft and monitor instead the results from the favourite win systems in Iceland and Sweden – both were underperforming badly and stood little or no chance of recovering into profit taking into consideration the likely number of remaining expected bets.

The 129 picks therefore included bets in both of these systems up to and including the 2nd of August but no further.

System-by-System Analysis

HDAFU Tables – Live Simulation: 1X2 Portfolio Analysis

What do the results of this live picks simulation tell us?

In truth, not much, but it does prove that a profit can be made in a live environment from selecting systems based upon past-performance using the HDAFU Tables. As stated above we would never have chosen to play for real multiple first half-season systems in the same league – Always stick to the single best historical performer and construct portfolios based around these top performers in each of the leagues of your choice.

Although hindsight is a flexible tool, choosing just one system from each of the four leagues would have been relatively easy as the best four stood out markedly from the rest:

• FINLAND: Draw system at and between HO/AO quotients of 0.405 & 0.543. The corresponding draw odds between 3.39 and 3.60 were a less risky bet than the wider odds range of the other draw system. In other words, the system we would have played contained games that were more homogeneous (consistent) with each other.
• ICELAND: Draw system at and between HO/AO quotients of 0.152 & 0.33. The corresponding draw odds here were between 4.11 and 5.26. Again, it was considered to be a more consistent set of bets than the other system, which relied on choosing home or away favourites – literally two systems in one.
• NORWAY: Favourite system at and between HO/AO quotients of 0.445 & 0.67, corresponding to odds between 1.90 and 2.22. We would have picked this over the home win system option purely because the favourites were all going to be the home team anyway (HO/AO quotient below 1): the home win system option was more risky and wholly represented by underdogs at home. The historical profits shown in the analysis for the favourite were also more recent than those posted by the third option, the draw system.
• SWEDEN: Draw system at and between HO/AO quotients of 0.383 & 0.904 (corresponding draw odds 3.45 to 3.76). This was a far better set of historical data than betting on the favourite showed. Profits for the draw system were present in each of the previous five seasons and three times larger than those for the favourite system.

These four systems on their own (three winners and one loser) would have netted an overall profit of 556.66 units.

Coronavirus Effects on Home Performance

The four leagues chosen were all Nordic countries to provide some form of meaningful comparison.

Finland and Norway produced 1X2 results much in line with previous seasons but, in both leagues, the draw percentage was a little down and the away win was slightly up. But nothing statistically significant enough to say that playing with no crowds has affected the trends:

Finland & Norway: First Half-Season 1X2 Results Comparison

However, in Iceland and Sweden, the picture was different:

Iceland & Sweden: First Half-Season 1X2 Results Comparison

In both leagues, it is quite clear to see that home wins have dropped significantly, with draws and away wins increasing in frequency as a result.

Although it is too early to draw conclusions after just half a season, this is a situation that suggests monitoring and will perhaps be the subject of a follow-up article if trends continue in this manner.

Get the Analysis Spreadsheet!

If you would like the accompanying Excel spreadsheet (541Kb) for this article please click on the button below. It is priced at £9.99 and includes a host of useful formulas including the Excel logarithm formula to calculate the expected Longest Losing Streak once the expected hit-rate is known. Other analyses included:

• Full, country-by-country breakdown of each system and its performance
• First half-season Home, Draw and Away result comparison with previous five seasons
• Charts, graphs and tables representing the final results
• Template for identifying the bets, which can be tailored to your own requirements
• The usual array of Excel formulas for your own system selection purposes including monitoring
• …and much, much more!

HDAFU Table Discount Offer

In addition, you will receive a lifetime discount code with your product delivery note providing £35.00 off of any purchase of three or four HDAFU Tables (i.e. bridging the gap to the previous minimum five-table discount code). If you want a gentle introduction to the world of HDAFU Tables, or wish to target your leagues in smaller bundles, then this offer is for you!

Click here to get your Analysis Spreadsheet:

>>> 2020 HDAFU coronavirus test excel spreadsheet <<<


(Then click on the green Checkout button, fill in your name/email address details, submit your order and pay securely with PayPal or a credit card. A download link will then be sent to your email address. Check your junk mail if it doesn’t arrive in your inbox immediately).



Important Guidance on Picking Systems from a League

Despite choosing multiple systems from the four leagues for the purposes of the live test, our guidance for compiling a 1X2 portfolio from the HDAFU Tables remains unchanged: when selecting (i) a first half-season system and/or a second half-season system or (ii) a whole-of-season system, choose only one option from each league.

Choosing both a first half and second half-season system in the same league is completely viable (i.e. two systems in a single league), but don’t mix and match by implementing a whole-of-season system plus a first and/or second half system or multiples of any of these types in the same league:

HDAFU Tables: Viable Combinations of Chosen Systems in Any One League – One Tick = One System




]]> https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/systems/1x2-betting/results-of-our-2020-summer-league-hdafu-tables-real-time-test/feed/ 2 https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/systems/1x2-betting/2020-summer-league-hdafu-tables-coronavirus-trial-live-picks/ https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/systems/1x2-betting/2020-summer-league-hdafu-tables-coronavirus-trial-live-picks/#comments Wed, 05 Aug 2020 04:02:31 +0000 https://www.soccerwidow.com/?p=6718 more »]]> This article will be updated at least once a day until the first halves of the league seasons highlighted finish. Clear your browser cache and then press the F5 key to refresh.



Live Simulation: Nine HDAFU Systems in Four Leagues

Many of you are asking what effects coronavirus is having on football betting. Whilst we envisage that the disruptions caused will not have any noticeable change on long-term statistical trends, it is impossible to say with any certainty what will happen in these unprecedented times.

Therefore, we have decided to carry out a very public experiment using 1X2 systems taken from our most recent set of HDAFU Tables – those for the 2020 Summer Leagues, limited to four leagues that will hopefully play out the entirety of their seasons, albeit a little late in starting (or restarting).

We will publish the picks a day or so in advance and keep you abreast of progress. We have decided to suspend our own betting for the time being, so this exercise will be purely a simulation with a ratcheted staking plan in operation and is for first-half-of-season systems only.

The four leagues are:

• Finland Veikkausliiga (2x draw systems)
• Iceland Úrvalsdeild (AKA Pepsideild) (1x draw system; 1x favourite win system)
• Norway Eliteserien (1x draw system; 1x home win system; 1x favourite win system)
• Sweden Allsvenskan (1x draw system; 1x favourite system)

Portfolio Expectations

• Portfolio Probability = Hit Rate 47.07%
• Mathematical Advantage (Expected Yield) = 27.61%

This collection of nine systems, therefore, represents a MEDIUM-RISK portfolio



Two Different Approaches:

1X2 HDAFU Profit/Loss Curve Betting & Over/Under ‘X’ Goals Cluster Table Betting

In tandem with this HDAFU test, we are doing the same with our Cluster Tables in four Winter Leagues that are due to finish at the beginning of August. Picks will be published daily and will appear on our German-language sister site, Fussballwitwe.de. Don’t understand German? then try Google auto-translation into English here.

In short, both are value betting systems, but with different methods.

1X2 bets are system bets: you choose a system and place the bet whenever the selected criterion fits – in this case, the quotient arrived at by dividing the current home odds by the corresponding away odds.

Over/Under bets are based on calculating the betting odds for each game (according to the historical statistics over the five preceding seasons) and placing the bet where there is value. Here, we will consciously choose the bets according to probabilities as well as their profitability/yield potential. (Over/Under course readers will know what I am talking about here!)

The 1X2 bets are much easier to play; you make the selection criteria once (i.e. formulate the system at the beginning), using the historical information and profit curves contained in our HDAFU Tables. These also provide a risk assessment and simulation of how future betting expectations might go. Once the parameters of each system are known, it only takes a short time to find the appropriate bets for each game round. However, good value usually lies only in low probability bets (longer odds such as the draw, or underdog win), and, therefore, it is a better idea to mix these selections with higher probability bets (favourite wins), to avoid long losing streaks.

With Over/Under betting you can decide which probabilities you want to play depending on your personal risk attitude. Higher probabilities = lower risk of losing the bet = easier for the nerves. The challenge here, however, is that in order to gain this extra level of precision you have to calculate each individual game individually.



Slideshow of Value Betting Picks

The picks for the respective day will appear here around noon/13.00 GMT +1, including the results from the previous day.

Please click on the arrows at either end to scroll through and view the entire history of the picks.

Hover over the table with your cursor for pop-up day-to-day notes.


Day 057
Picks & Results: August 26th, 2020




Day 055
Picks & Results: August 24th, 2020




Day 054
Picks & Results: August 23rd, 2020




Day 053
Picks & Results: August 22nd, 2020




Day 052
Picks & Results: August 21st, 2020




Day 049
Picks & Results: August 18th, 2020




Day 048
Picks & Results: August 17th, 2020




Day 047
Picks & Results: August 16th, 2020




Day 046
Picks & Results: August 15th, 2020




Day 045
Picks & Results: August 14th, 2020




Day 044
Picks & Results: August 13th, 2020




Day 043
Picks & Results: August 12th, 2020




Day 041
Picks & Results: August 10th, 2020




Day 040
Picks & Results: August 9th, 2020




Day 039
Picks & Results: August 8th, 2020




Day 037
Picks & Results: August 6th, 2020




Day 036
Picks & Results: August 5th, 2020




Day 034
Picks & Results: August 3rd, 2020




Day 033
Picks & Results: August 2nd, 2020 - W36 L55 = 39.56% hit rate




Day 032
Picks & Results: August 1st, 2020 - W33 L53 = 38.37% hit rate




Day 030
Picks & Results: July 30th, 2020 - W32 L50 = 39.02% hit rate




Day 029
Picks & Results: July 29th, 2020 - W31 L50 = 38.27% hit rate




Day 027
Picks & Results: July 27th, 2020 - W30 L46 = 39.47% hit rate




Day 026
Picks & Results: July 26th, 2020 - W27 L45 = 37.50% hit rate




Day 025
Picks & Results: July 25th, 2020 - W22 L43 = 33.85% hit rate




Day 023
Picks & Results: July 23rd, 2020 - W21 L43 = 32.81% hit rate




Day 022
Picks & Results: July 22nd, 2020 - W19 L41 = 31.67% hit rate




Day 021
Picks & Results: July 21st, 2020 - W17 L38 = 30.91% hit rate




Day 019
Picks & Results: July 18th, 2020 - W16 L38 = 29.63% hit rate




Day 018
Picks & Results: July 18th, 2020 - W12 L35 = 25.53% hit rate




Day 017
Picks & Results: July 17th, 2020 - W12 L34 = 26.09% hit rate




Day 016
Picks & Results: July 16th, 2020 - W11 L31 = 26.19% hit rate




Day 015
Picks & Results: July 15th, 2020 - W10 L30 = 25.00% hit rate




Day 013
Picks & Results: July 13th, 2020 - W9 L29 = 23.68% hit rate




Day 012
Picks & Results: July 12th, 2020 - W8 L26 = 23.53% hit rate




Day 011
Picks & Results: July 11th, 2020 - W8 L22 = 26.67% hit rate




Day 008
Picks & Results: July 8th, 2020 - W8 L20 = 28.57% hit rate




Day 007
Picks & Results: July 7th, 2020 - W7 L18 = 28.00% hit rate




Day 006
Picks & Results: July 6th, 2020 - W7 L17 = 29.17% hit rate




Day 005
Picks & Results: July 5th, 2020 - W6 L16 = 27.27% hit rate




Day 004
Picks & Results: July 4th, 2020 - W6 L10 = 37.50% hit rate




Day 003
Picks & Results: July 3rd, 2020 - W4 L9 = 30.77% hit rate




Day 002
Picks & Results: July 2nd, 2020 - W4 L8 = Hit Rate 33.33%




Day 001
Picks & Results: July 1st, 2020 = 36.36% hit rate




Note: Following the interim report detailed in our report after 91 picks, two systems have been dropped (Sweden favourite win; Iceland favourite win) and are shown from Round 27 (August 3rd) for monitoring purposes only.

Want this slideshow larger? Either hold down the ctrl key on your keyboard and press the + (plus) key until you reach a comfortable size. (Afterwards, hold ctrl and press the − (minus) key to reduce your view). Alternatively, with a scroll wheel mouse, hold down the ctrl key on your keyboard and push the scroll wheel forwards. Hold ctrl and reverse the direction of the scroll wheel to reduce the view. The URL bar at the top of your screen will guide you in returning to 100% normal size.



Staking Plan

The starting bank is 3,000 units and the basis for calculating the stakes is as follows:

• Odds below 1.10: 5% of highest bank achieved*
• Odds between 1.10 – 1.16: 4% of highest bank achieved*
• Odds between 1.16 – 1.39: 3.8% of highest bank achieved*
• Odds between 1.40 – 2.25: 2.5% of highest bank achieved*
• Odds between 2.26 – 7.50: 1.5% of highest bank achieved*
• Odds over 7.50: 0.5% of highest bank achieved*

This is the same staking plan used by the counterpart Cluster Tables experiment, but you should note that the chosen HDAFU systems are likely to utilise only the three lines highlighted as all odds satisfying our criteria will be 1.30 or over and will never exceed 7.50.

Not only will the stakes be scaled according to risk, but a ratchet system* will also be employed. Stakes will begin based on the starting bank of 3,000 units and will continue to be so until there is an increase in the bank after a day’s games. Thereafter, it will be calculated based on the highest end-of-day bank total achieved (even if the actual bank drops below 3,000 units in future). Only if the starting bank reduces by 40% will the stakes be scaled back. (i.e. A stop-loss mechanism is activated if the bank falls below 1,800 units).

N.B. All stake calculations will be rounded-up to the nearest whole unit (e.g. 77.19 becomes 78).



Duration of Experiment

As mentioned, we will be running the HDAFU 1X2 systems calibrated for the first half of the season only in each of the selected four leagues, starting on the 1st of July, 2020.

Picks will appear in our slideshow until the midway point of each league is reached.

At this stage, with the coronavirus interruptions, no certain dates have yet been confirmed as to when each league will reach its natural break (if indeed there is one), but we will advise in advance of each system drawing to its conclusion.



Final Whistle

We have no idea how things like the lack of a crowd, the apparent nullification of home advantage, players being able to hear instructions shouted between themselves and from the sidelines, referees no longer being mobbed over their decisions by over-enthusiastic and supporter-conscious players, lack of fitness, or psychological factors, will affect the game we all know and love.

It is safe to say that we are as much in the dark as you are concerning the future of football and sports betting.

The unknowns are too many to take great risks and, as stated previously, we are not chancing our money on these picks – the systems we are using together form a ‘live’ experiment based on our previously successful HDAFU Tables and Cluster Tables.

If you wish to play these picks yourself, then please do so with money you can afford to lose and try to stick to our stake recommendations.

Let’s hope for something to cheer us all up during these very strange times!

]]> https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/systems/1x2-betting/2020-summer-league-hdafu-tables-coronavirus-trial-live-picks/feed/ 3 https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/value-betting-academy/learning-centre/betting-terminology/science-calculating-winning-losing-streaks/ https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/value-betting-academy/learning-centre/betting-terminology/science-calculating-winning-losing-streaks/#comments Wed, 20 Feb 2019 20:46:20 +0000 https://www.soccerwidow.com/?p=5514 more »]]> This article is a short journey to the theme ‘risk management’ as we are often asked…

How high should be a starting bank?
Is 5,000 units enough?

Well, there is no standard answer to this question. It all depends on the individual strategy.

Image: Sergey Novikov (Shutterstock)

However, what is possible, is to calculate bank fluctuations (i.e. winning and losing sequences).

With the help of knowing the best and worst case scenarios you can determine the ideal starting bank for any betting system of your choice.

At the end of the article you will find a few useful exercises to practise, with the solutions available as a free download to all of you who would like them.



Length of Winning and Losing Streaks

It stands to reason that the smaller the probability of an event occurring (i.e. higher odds), the longer the likely losing streak will be (in between winning bets).

However, the big question is how often and for how long will the losing (and winning) streaks transpire?

It is possible to mathematically calculate many things with statistics, including streaks of luck and bad luck. However, it is important to note that no matter how accurate the results may appear, they are ‘models’ (a formal representation of a theory).

In this article, we are talking about probabilities; what can we ‘predict’ about how things may develop in the future. Please bear in mind that any such hypothesis is always a “could happen” not a “will happen”.

Of course, the larger the sample size (i.e. number of bets), the more likely the prediction is to be correct. But apart from the bookmakers themselves, who else has a betting portfolio comprising thousands of bets every weekend?



Winning and Losing Streaks Formula

The longest expected losing streak (or winning streak) can be calculated using the following formula:



n = number of trials (i.e. total number of bets)
ln = natural logarithm¹
P = probability²
| .. | = absolute value or ‘modulus’

¹Suffice to say, explaining what natural logarithm is would be worthy of a series of articles. For the time being, use Excel to calculate this for you.

²For winning streak calculations use the positive value (i.e. the probability of winning). For losing streak calculations use the negative probability value. For example, if the probability to win the bet is 33% then the probability that the bet loses (negative probability) is 67%.



In practice, the formula is best applied to situations where you constantly bet repeatedly on the same probability, for example, on ‘red’ at the roulette wheel: its probability remains exactly the same with every new spin of the wheel.

For football betting the concept is much more difficult to apply as each bet is likely to have a different probability (e.g. one Over 2.5 Goals bet with a 55.3% chance, and the next with a 62.1% chance, etc.).

However, you can group bets in probability clusters – for example, bets with a 55%-60% expected hit rate, bets with a 60%-65% expected hit rate, and so on.



Longest Winning and Losing Streaks, depending on the number of bets (Examples for 50, 500 and 1,000 bets shown)

The tables above show the calculations of the expected maximum number of winning and losing streaks, depending on the expected hit rate (probability of the bet to win).

To read the tables, let’s explain the 70% line (odds in the region 1.4 and 1.45); in other words, bets with a 7 in 10 chance of winning.

The table on the left calculates the expectations of 50 tries (50 bets in a row, one after the next). You can see that the player will experience at least one streak of three lost bets in a row somewhere in the sequence.

On the other hand, he can expect at least one series of 11 winning bets in a row during the same sequence of 50 bets.

In contrast look at the 30% line (odds in the region of 3.2 to 3.4). In a series of 50 bets the bettor must expect at least one sequence of 11 consecutive losing bets, but will probably see only one set of three consecutive winning bets.



To develop a sense of probabilities and sequences, you can experiment with a dice. It has six faces; in other words, a probability of 16.67% (1 in 6 chance) of successfully landing on a chosen number.

Choose a number and count the number of throws until you succeed to roll it. Count also the number of consecutive successful rolls.

Exercise:

Choose two numbers that you do not want to roll (e.g. 5 and 6).

This means you have a 66.67% chance that one of the remaining four numbers is rolled.

In football betting terms, this equates to wagering on something like the full-time ‘Under 3.5 Goals’ market at odds of 1.50. (This experiment is just a little faster than waiting for 50 games to finish!)

Take a pen and paper and record 100 throws of the dice. If one of your four chosen numbers arrives mark a 1 on your paper; if the 5 or 6 are thrown, mark a 0. Count the number of winning and losing streaks you experience.

What is the maximum number of winning and losing streaks you experience in a sample size of 100 throws (bets)?




Having learned how to calculate the expected length of winning and losing streaks, the next question to ask is:

How many bets is it likely to take before I encounter ‘X’ losses in a row?



Timing of Winning and Losing Streaks

This formula is actually very simple:



= 1 divided by P, to the power of a

P = probability (expected hit rate or loss rate)
a = number of won or lost bets in a row



In the tables below you can see how many attempts (bets) it needs to experience a specific, expected length of luck or bad luck. Again, the assumption is that the bettor bets all the time on the same probability:



Expected time of occurrence of winning and losing streaks, depending on the hit rate

Reading the table:

Looking firstly in the right-hand column at the Losing Sequences, if the expected hit rate is 45% (what you should ‘expect’ at odds of around 2.2), then it is likely that you will experience a sequence of three losing bets in a row by the time your sixth bet is settled.

After 20 such bets it is likely that you will have seen a losing streak as long as five bets in a row.

Looking at the Winning Sequences column: you will win three times in a row at some stage during a series of 11 bets.

However, winning five in a row may only be seen once in every 54 bets.



As we mentioned before, in football betting it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to find bets, all with the same probability of success.

However, you should at least try to understand the theory behind winning and losing streaks, as it will be easier on your nerves when you do encounter the inevitable run of bad fortune.

In particular, a thorough understanding of losing streaks is of enormous importance when setting both the size of your starting bank and stakes per bet.



Example:

A bettor prefers bets within the odds range of 2.0 to 2.5 with a hit rate between 40% and 50%. He plans to place 50 bets (e.g. two bets per round on 25 rounds of matches).

After looking at the tables, he knows that the maximum losing sequence expected is likely to be as long as six to eight lost bets in a row. Therefore, he knows that there may be at least one sequence of three or four consecutive rounds (weekends) when all bets lose.

After every 5^th to 8^th bet, he is also aware that he is likely to experience a loss of three consecutive lost bets (e.g. one weekend loses both bets, the following weekend only one loses).

He also knows that every 13 to 32 bets there will even be a streak of five losing bets in a row.

The bettor is fully aware that he has to take this into consideration and plan the starting bank accordingly to be able to ‘sit through’ these losing streaks.

Of course, he also knows that winning sequences will arrive too. In his case, with some ‘luck’, he may experience a winning sequence of five bets in a row after 32 bets. Every eight to 16 bets he will have a ‘lucky’ streak of three wins in a row.

This is certainly quite a fluctuation. When these ‘bad luck’ and ‘good luck’ streaks actually happen, nobody knows. However, what we do know is: They will happen!



Starting Bank – Rule of Thumb

A starting bank should be approximately five times the maximum expected losing streak. The reason for this is that a losing streak can happen right at the beginning, immediately followed by another bad run of luck. We are talking statistics here!

So if a bettor wants to stake 10 units per bet, the starting bank must be nine times (expected losing streak) the stake of 10 units multiplied by five = 450 units. Then he can risk 2.2% of his bank each time he bets (10 divided by 450). If losing, the stakes will remain constant at 2.2% and, if winning, raised gradually.

Questions to ask before setting the starting bank:

1. What hit rate is expected (probability to win the bets)?
2. How many bets are planned for the season?
3. How long will the longest losing streak be?
4. What is the desired stake per bet?

Calculation of the starting bank:

Length of maximum losing streak X planned stake per bet X five



Exercises: Losing & Winning Streaks

1. A bettor pursues a strategy with a win probability of 60% per bet (e.g. Under 3.5 Goals). He places one bet after the other; in other words, he waits for the outcome of each bet before placing the next. In total he places 50 bets.

   What is the longest ‘losing streak’ (bad luck) that he can expect? How long is the longest ‘winning streak’ (luck) that can be expected?

2. Same example as in (1): A strategy with a probability of 60% per bet; placing one bet after the other.

   This time our punter is hoping for a ‘winning streak’ (luck) of 5 consecutive wins. How often does that happen?

3. A gambler pursues a strategy with a probability of 20% per bet (e.g. ‘betting on the underdog’). Again, he places one bet after the other.

   With a total of 500 bets, how long is the longest ‘losing streak’ that he must expect? After how many bets can he expect the longest ‘winning streak’?

4. Same example as in (3): Strategy with a probability of 20% per bet; placing one bet after another

   The bettor was hoping for a ‘winning streak’ (good luck) of five consecutive wins. How often does that happen? After which bet number should he expect ‘bad luck’ of five consecutive losses?

5. Following the above two strategies (one with a 60% chance to win, the other with 20%) our bettor stakes 10 units per bet.

   How high should the starting bank be for the 60% strategy, and how much for the 20% strategy?

   Note: The initial bank should be approximately five times the maximum losing streak based on a total of 500 bets placed.




Answers to the Exercises

>>> download answers <<<





Just click on the button above and click on “Proceed to checkout” button in the new tab, then enter your name and e-mail address. Our automatic service will then deliver the file to you via e-mail, free of charge. The size of the PDF file is 320KB.



Optimising Your Bankroll

The factor 5 used in this article to determine the betting bank is a risk variable for risk-averse bettors. It is also the factor advisable for strategies with a 45% to 55% win probability (odds between 1.8 and 2.2).

Here is another article: How to Calculate Losing Streaks & Optimal Bankroll in which we provide a more detailed account of setting the ideal starting bank.

Risk management in sports betting is the foundation stone upon which all of your betting transactions should be built.

Risk management encompasses risk assessment, risk control and capital requirements, all of which cannot be addressed until you understand how winning and losing streaks are likely to impact upon your starting bank.

]]> https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/value-betting-academy/learning-centre/betting-terminology/science-calculating-winning-losing-streaks/feed/ 33 https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/betting-advice/money-management/2017-18-winter-league-report-bank-management-stake-size/ https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/betting-advice/money-management/2017-18-winter-league-report-bank-management-stake-size/#comments Mon, 06 Aug 2018 14:01:27 +0000 https://www.soccerwidow.com/?p=6358 more »]]> In the article Finding a System Using the HO/AO Quotient I showed you how to identify profitable clusters where the market constantly over- or underprices the bets on offer and, based on this knowledge, the article Judging the Risk of a Football Betting Portfolio addresses how to piece together a portfolio and judge its risk prior to execution.

Managing and following through with the plan is illustrated in the 2017-18 Winter League Report – 35k in 138 Days, where the full performance of our selections is analysed and dissected.

But remember, the best compiled portfolio won’t work without proper bank management and staking.



Juggling a Portfolio of Bets between Bookmakers

Please have a look at the distribution of bets during the 2017-18 Winter League Campaign:

Image 1: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Bets per Week of the Year (per round)

Week 38 was the busiest with 24 bets in total, whilst week 50 saw 23 bets. Within a relatively small portfolio of just over 500 bets, the average number of bets per round was 11, but the observed spread was anything between 0 and 24 (2 rounds without bets).

Even with a small portfolio, bank management poses challenges, especially when juggling numerous bookmaker/exchange accounts. Monitoring the balance of each account can become difficult, which may lead to liquidity issues (perhaps not enough in the account) and the constant hassle of moving money between your accounts (or playing with smaller stakes than intended).

Trying to get the highest odds possible in the market all the time becomes unrealistic as the total betting bank would need to be spread over many, many bookmakers.

As harsh as it may sound, you will have to accept that aiming to achieve the highest odds available in the entire market at any moment in time is virtually impossible, and the choice of bookmakers/exchanges has to be limited from the start. I recommend limiting your bookmaker/exchange accounts to a maximum of five or six, and simply choosing best price between them at the time you wish to place a bet.

Here is the list of bookmakers/exchanges we recommend to use in addition to Betfair: –

BetDaq
Matchbook
Smarkets
Pinnacle
William Hill
888Sport



It makes little difference to the results when limiting your accounts to just a handful and you will see evidence of this in our 2017-18 Winter League Report – 35k in 138 Days.

The screenshot below shows the bet placement distribution by bookmaker/exchange.

Image 2: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Distribution by Bookmakers/ Exchanges

Lesson 1: Limit your choice of bookmakers/exchanges!




Determining the Stake Size

To determine the stake size there are a few things to consider. Firstly of course, the size of your starting bank. This is an easy one to call – You know what funds you have.

But once you’ve settled on the starting bank, things quickly become a little more complicated…



(1) Distribution of Funds between Bookmakers

You can go to great length and once you have compiled your portfolio carry out following exercise:

• Go to the ‘data’ tab in the HDAFU Tables, copy and paste all applicable matches and amalgamate them in one spreadsheet.
• Go to any odds comparison site of your choice and check the bookmakers that would have been available for you in those matches; log them into your spreadsheet together with the name of the bookmaker/exchange (a hugely time-intensive exercise!)
• Sort the data into chronological order and group it by weeks/rounds.
• Count the number of bets with each bookmaker/exchange in each round.

Once complete, you will be able to use the data to come up with a similar graph to this one:

Image 3: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Distribution by Bookmaker/Exchange in more detail

In our example, you can clearly see that Pinnacle had the majority of bets (up to 15 in one round), Betfair and Matchbook were the next most used (up to seven bets per round), followed by 888sport (up to five bets per round), and lastly, William Hill (up to four bets).

Going forwards, the scientific split of our bank for the forthcoming new season based on experience from last season is therefore:

40% Pinnacle: 1,600 units
20% Betfair: 800 units
20% Matchbook: 800 units
10% 888sport: 400 units
10% William Hill: 400 units

But, if you have no past experience it may be harder to estimate which of your chosen bookmakers/exchanges are most likely to have the highest odds when you are ready to place the bets, and how future bets may be distributed between your accounts.

If you have no past figures to guide you, then it is probably best to distribute your betting bank equally between your chosen bookmakers/exchanges. In this case (five accounts), an even split of the starting bank of 4,000 units means 800 units in each account.

Lesson 2: If you cannot calculate the most probable distribution of your bets between the bookmakers of your choice, then simply distribute funds in equal amounts between your accounts!



(2) Distribution of Profits and Losses

The major question is how each betting round is going to perform. Is the portfolio going to make a profit or a loss? Which account will accrue the biggest proportion of profits? Which will be the most high-maintenance, requiring the most re-deposits?

Have a look at our profit/loss distribution over time:

Image 4: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Profit/Loss Distribution per Week (per Round)

In total, there were 47 rounds (weeks) of betting. 17 of these (36.2%) finished with losses. (Effectively one losing round in every three).

There were four months (15 rounds) between week 50 (9/12/2017) and week 11 (11/3/2018) where the portfolio experienced a seemingly never-ending rollercoaster ride.

During this time, eight rounds (over 50%!) produced losses as seen in the image above. Those three months were especially difficult on the nerves.

However, this still doesn’t tell us the best stake size. There is also no sense looking at which bookmakers incurred losses, as the past distribution will very likely not repeat itself during the forthcoming new season.

The best guide is to have a look at the profits/losses in relation to the bank size:

Image 5: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Profit/Loss in relation to the bank

As you can see, there were three occasions where the bank dropped by more than 12% of its total. In the worst single round (week) the size of the bank contracted by over 15%. Furthermore, we know from Image 1 (distribution of bets per week) that if we are going to employ a similar portfolio of bets in future, that there will be up to 25 bets in a week (round).

We have no idea which of the 25 bets will win and which won’t, and the intention of the staking plan not to be bankrupt after any one week of ‘bad luck’. Also, we don’t want to be in a position after experiencing a ‘bad week’ where we are forced to reduce the size of our stakes. Better to arrange the plan so that we can ride through any longer periods of ‘bad luck’.

We have distributed our funds between accounts but we don’t know which of the chosen bookies/exchanges are going to receive the bets.



(3) Calculating the Stake Size

The ‘scientific’ calculation is as follow:

The average of 12%, 15.2% and 14.6% = 13.9% (rounded: 14%).

Although very unlikely, there may be a run of losses (say three rounds in a row) where the bank is depleted by 14% each time, and should this happen, we still need to continue placing bets without having to reduce the stakes.

As mentioned, we are expecting a maximum of 25 bets in a single round.

25 divided by 86% divided by 86% divided by 86% = 39.3 (risk averse rounded: 40)

1 divided by 40 = 0.025 (= 2.5%)

So, if we risk 2.5% of our betting bank per bet, we will still be able to survive three hefty losing runs without having to reduce the stakes.



The ‘short cut’ calculation is as follow:

If you have no past figures or estimates, take a short-cut and use the following calculation:

• Estimate as best you possibly can the expected maximum number of bets in one betting round
• Double this number
• Divide 1 by this number

Example:

• Expected number of bets: 25
• 25 x 2 = 50
• 1 divided by 50 = 2%

Lesson 3: Limit your stake to 2.5% if you have a portfolio of around 500 bets coming up for one season. If you have a larger portfolio, use your past experience or figures to calculate your maximum stake size as shown above!





Can a Portfolio make Profits during a Rough Patch?

Yes, it can! Our portfolio produced a profit during and despite three very tough months:

Image 6: 2017-18 Winter League Campaign – Analysis of Most Challenging Period

Prior to week 50 the bank size stood at 13,792 units, but after enduring a really volatile period (where more than one round lost in every two) the bank had risen to 23,960 units.

This was only possible by using a strict staking plan in combination with stake ratcheting.

Please remember:

• Limit yourself to just a handful of bookmakers/exchanges: five or six is plenty
• Split your bank (more or less) equally between the chosen accounts
• Limit your individual bet stakes to 2.5% of your entire betting bank (or less if you are expecting more than 25 bets at any betting round)
• Apply and stick strictly to the set rules, and NEVER experiment and/or change your staking midway through a campaign! Once decided. Stick to it!




–

Get the Full Report on our 2017-18 Winter League Campaign

You may find it helpful to follow the explanations in this article with the help of our Excel monitoring workbook. Not only does it contain the match data and calculates the bet distribution, but includes many more Excel formulas and ideas to help you grasp how to record and control your own betting ventures.

We are sure that you will feel the nominal £5.00 GBP charge is a real bargain.

The size of this .XLSX Excel file is 568KB:

>>> 2017-18 winter league campaign <<<


 

–

I hope you enjoyed this article and learned something about the unavoidable randomness of the distribution of bets within a portfolio and how to keep your bank under control despite the inevitable peaks and troughs. However, if you are still unsure on any point, please feel free to ask any questions via the comment section below.

]]> https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/betting-advice/money-management/2017-18-winter-league-report-bank-management-stake-size/feed/ 2 https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/betting-advice/money-management/how-to-calculate-losing-streaks-optimal-bankroll-sport-betting/ https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/betting-advice/money-management/how-to-calculate-losing-streaks-optimal-bankroll-sport-betting/#comments Mon, 21 Dec 2015 14:49:07 +0000 https://www.soccerwidow.com/?p=5401 more »]]> In this article we will teach you to determine how large your starting bank needs to be to avoid bankruptcy by calculating the longest losing streaks that can be expected from your chosen betting strategy.



What is Bankroll Management?

Bankroll management is one of the most important pillars for success in sports betting.

Image: Alex Roz

A portfolio of sports bets placed over time can be compared to investing in the money markets on a portfolio of stocks and shares.

Indeed, the term ‘bankroll management’ comes from the financial sector and describes the use of the seed capital (i.e. in betting terminology, the initial stake).

Bankroll is the ‘starting bank’, and the intention is to manage it and increase it at the same time.

Bankroll management therefore deals with how to properly manage your starting bank.



The Continual Importance of Statistics, and Lots of Them!

The good news: It is actually possible to calculate the required starting bank mathematically.

The bad news: The calculations are naturally dependent upon statistics, and the ‘significance’ of the results relies on the amount of data used.

For example, any strategy based on one German Bundesliga team’s home games during a season produces a sample of precisely 17 sets of data, which is a very small number, statistically speaking.

The Law of Large Numbers is omnipresent so far as statistical accuracy is concerned: The larger the data sample, the more accurate the final results are likely to be, although a line has to be drawn between sample size and an acceptable level of error.

One way of coping with small data sets is to incorporate a risk discount into the equation. More about this later…



What does ‘Optimal’ Really Mean?

On face value, you might assume that calculating the necessary starting bank for a betting strategy can be derived solely from the stake multiplied by the number of bets (n).

With the 17 matches from our example above, and a constant stake of 100 units per bet, the bank would then be: 100 x 17 = 1700 units. But is this maximal amount really needed?

Although this may be true where returns from winning bets cannot be immediately re-invested, such a bank can never be optimal because an inordinate amount of capital would be tied-up.

What you should look for is the most cost-effective bankroll where all the money you have at your disposal is working for you as efficiently as possible.

Optimal bankroll is characterized by two things:

• Cash holdings (i.e. money in reserve) is kept as low as possible
• Gambler’s ruin is avoided




Calculating the Optimal Bankroll

There are five vital criteria you will need to establish:

1. What is the size of your stake per bet?
2. How many bets does your strategy expect to be placed?
3. What is the expected hit rate of your strategy?
4. What is its expected longest losing streak?
5. Determine the risk variables and incorporate a ‘risk coefficient’.




Example Calculation

Okay, we will stick with the German Bundesliga for demonstration purposes and use a system gleaned from its latest full-time 1×2 HDAFU Simulation Table.

If you have already bought this table, you can see the full and detailed analysis of backing the underdog whenever Hamburg plays at home: This strategy has realised a yield in excess of 58% over the course of five complete seasons from 2010-11 to 2014-15.

In addition, there has been profit produced in every one of those same five seasons.

It’s an ideal candidate for incorporating into a large portfolio of other systems. (When we say ‘large’ we mean a portfolio that will generate at least 500 bets in a season.)



Remember the five criteria:

(1) Size of Stake per Bet:

This is determined by your own liquidity, and to keep this calculation simple, a Constant Stake (CS) of 100 units per bet will be used.

(2) Number of Bets:

For this mini portfolio of Hamburg home games, the Number of Bets (n) is 17 for the new season.

(3) Hit Rate:

The HDAFU Simulation Table reveals that from 85 Hamburg home games over five seasons, 32 underdogs triumphed: a Hit Rate of 38%.

The random selection of only 85 matches is a relatively small sample and the possibility of ‘random sample error’ is therefore relatively large.

To compensate, it is worth applying what is known as a ‘risk discount’ to reduce the actual hit rate experienced and to build-in an extra level of security if statistical expectations for the new season are not realised.

Taking a risk discount figure of 5%, the expected hit rate becomes: 38% – 5% = 33%.

[Have a look at this article for more information about hit rates].

(4) Longest Losing Streak Expected (LLSe):

The longest expected losing streak (or winning streak) can be calculated using the following formula:



n = number of trials (i.e. total number of bets)
ln = natural logarithm*
P = (negative) probability^†
| .. | = absolute value or ‘modulus’ (see Wikipedia if you would like to know more about these mathematical symbols)

*Suffice to say, explaining what natural logarithm is would be worthy of a series of articles. For the time being, use Excel to calculate this for you: to make life easy, the formulas to use are included in the free spreadsheet download below.

^†For this calculation, the negative probability or hit rate is used. In this case, having adjusted our hit rate down to 33% using a risk discount, the probability that the bet loses (negative probability) is 67%.

LLSe = |(ln (17) / ln (0.67))| = |2.833213344 / -0.400477567| = 7.07
rounded down to 7.00

From a pool of 17 bets, you can therefore statistically expect that a maximum of seven in a row may be lost without winning one in between.

(5) Risk Coefficient (RC):

The determination of risk variables depends primarily on your risk aversion. Risk-averse bettors choose a high coefficient figure (e.g. 5), whilst gamblers who are happier taking risks choose lower coefficients (e.g. 2).

But why are we including a risk coefficient at all?

We can assume that the longest expected losing streak (in our example, seven lost bets in a row), may already start with the first bet.

Although one bet may win after that, with the gains reimbursing the loss and allowing for reinvestment, there can still be a second stroke of bad luck directly after the first bet that you have won.

Neither winning bets nor losing bets ever line up in a uniform manner; they will always appear in a random pattern, so always better to be safe than sorry.



Optimal Bankroll Formula

The formula is:


Optimal Bankroll = CS x LLSe x RC

Our Bundesliga example is an underdog backing system, which by its very nature, is risky. However, as there are only a maximum of 17 bets in this mini system, we will choose a risk coefficient of 1.5: we are happy to take the risks!

It is not very likely that there will be two losing streaks of seven games in a row when betting 17 consecutive times. However, we are aware that it may be quite challenging for the nerves to sit through losing streaks watching the bank balance reduce before your eyes!

The optimal bankroll required to run this system for a season is as follows:


100 units x 7 LLSe x 1.5 RC = 1,050 units

If you remember the sub-optimal bank strategy at the beginning of the article where we touched on a bankroll of 1,700 units (100 units per bet x 17), you can see we have now released 650 units for investing in another strategy elsewhere.



Calculate Your Own Longest Expected Losing Streaks & Optimal Bankroll!

With this free Excel table download, you can easily and quickly discover what the longest losing streaks are for your own strategies. Just enter your stake, number of bets, and risk coefficient figures and let it calculate everything for you!

>>> Excel Workbook – Losing Streaks <<<

 
 Click on the above button – in the new tab click on the ‘Continue Checkout’ button. Enter your name and email address to allow our automatic shopping cart to deliver the file by email to you, free of charge. The .xls file size is 93 KB. When you receive your confirmation email, just click on ‘View Purchase Online’ (in the email text) to download the file.

]]> https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/betting-advice/money-management/how-to-calculate-losing-streaks-optimal-bankroll-sport-betting/feed/ 23 https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/value-betting-academy/odds-calculation-en/gamblers-ruin-explained-fair-coins/ https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/value-betting-academy/odds-calculation-en/gamblers-ruin-explained-fair-coins/#respond Wed, 24 Sep 2014 08:26:01 +0000 http://www.fussballwitwe.com/?p=2656 more »]]>

One of the phenomenons of probability is Gambler’s Ruin. The most common meaning is that a gambler with finite wealth, playing a fair game (that is, each bet has expected zero value to both sides) will eventually go broke against an opponent with infinite wealth.

In other words, the maxim of gambler’s ruin is that if you play long enough you will eventually go bankrupt and have to quit the game prematurely.

Collage of Shutterstock images; Foreground: wacpan, Background: Lisa S.

The World of Sports Betting

The truth is that in the world of sports betting, the common gambler has far less money than a bookmaker or casino, and there will inevitably be a time when he will simply be unable to continue playing and, of course, the house will not be giving credit.

“Long enough” may be a very long time though. It mainly depends on how much money the gambler starts with, how much he bets, and the odds of the game. Even with better than even odds, the gambler will eventually go bankrupt. But, this may take a very long time indeed.

Please note that we are talking here about a “fair” game; e.g. each bet with zero value. The practice of bookmakers and betting sites to offer odds with an overround in their favour makes this outcome just much quicker.



Fair Coin Flipping

To make the dilemma of gambler’s ruin a little easier to understand imagine coin flipping with a friend. You each have a finite number of pennies (n₁ for yourself and n₂ for your friend).

Now, flip one of the pennies (either player). Each player has a 50% probability of winning (head or tail). If it’s a head you win a penny and if it’s a tail you surrender a penny to your friend. Repeat the process until one of you has all the pennies.

If this process is repeated indefinitely, the probability that one of you will eventually lose all his pennies is 100%. In fact, the chances P₁ and P₂ that players one and two, respectively, will be rendered penniless are:



Now let’s populate these equations with real numbers:



The above example is based on both players starting with the same amount of pennies (100 each). In other words, you and your friend have both an exact probability of 50% to end up with all of the pennies after many, many coin flips. This means that after an unknown number of coin flips either you or your friend will finish banking all the pennies. At the start, your chances are equal, and it is impossible to say who may win.

However, if one of you has many more pennies than the other, say you start with 100, and your friend with 10,000, then your chance of finishing with all of the pennies (yours as well as your friend’s) is as low as 1%, whilst your friend’s chances are 99% to win this unequal match.






Bankruptcy Probability Table – Gambler’s Ruin

To visualize the gambler’s ruin problem further, here is an overview of the probabilities of finishing with N amount of pennies.

Player 1 starts with 5 pennies. Player 2 has an infinite amount of pennies.

The top row shows the number of flips. The left hand column shows player 1’s current amount of money. The numbers in the table are probabilities (click on the image to enlarge; opens in a new tab):



Overview of the probabilities to finish with an N amount of pennies after X flips

Reading the table (examples):

After the first flip player 1 has a 50/50 chance of ending up either with 4 pennies (i.e. he lost the first coin flip), or with 6 pennies (i.e. he won the first coin flip).

In 10.4% of the trials player 1 will be broke (penniless) after the tenth flip of the coin. This means that every 10th experiment of this nature player 1 will have been forced to give up after the 10th flip of the coin due to a run of “bad luck” whilst player 2 is not affected by “bad luck” purely because he has plenty of coins to sit through and survive any such spell.

82.04% of the players will still be in the game after coin flip 15. However, 17.96% of the gamblers will already have retired due to exhausted funds.

You can download the above table including all of its formulas, should you wish to experiment with different probabilities:

EXCEL SPREADSHEET PROBABILITY TABLE – STARTING WITH 5 PENNIES

In return for this freebie we would appreciate if you could share this article or give us a ‘thumbs-up’ with a ‘love’ or ‘like’ via Twitter or Facebook or any other social network site

Of course, you will now probably surmise that player 1 started with only 5 pennies, and by staking 1 penny each bet he was risking 20% of his starting bank on each coin flip, which is way too much. Player 1 should ideally have started with a much larger pile of pennies, and risked a far smaller percentage of his bank with each coin flip.

Anyway, eventually the same thing will always happen, albeit just much more slowly. Player 1 will still go broke sooner or later, if player 2 has an infinite amount of pennies. It’s just for the sake of the above table and illustration that we choose to show the calculations with a starting bank of 5 pennies only.

Go to the next page, to see some more examples and illustrations…



]]> https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/value-betting-academy/odds-calculation-en/gamblers-ruin-explained-fair-coins/feed/ 0 https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/systems/football-roulette-correct-score-conclusion/ https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/systems/football-roulette-correct-score-conclusion/#comments Tue, 11 Jun 2013 20:27:15 +0000 https://www.soccerwidow.com/?p=2985 In this final article on the Football Betting Correct Score Roulette System we will take the initial paper test one stage further and add what would have happened in the 2012-13 season if we had continued the system with the seven teams failing to register a 2-0 home win during 2011-12.

We will also investigate the proposed stop-loss point at the end of the calendar year, and try to project what practical uses the theory behind this system may have in a different arena.



2012-13 Paper Test

As we have seen, this is a progressive system with each stake individually calculated to claw-back all previous losses and to collect a net £100 win when the desired correct score line arrives.

In this way, the staking plan becomes exponential as we saw in the first of our three articles.

Taking the same staking system into its second season and, still assuming that each bet can be placed at odds of 11.0, the table for match rounds 24-46 is as follows:



Correct Score Roulette Staking Plan Table

NB. The new season begins on the above staking plan table for non premier league teams, but for the top-flight teams, match 20 on the original staking plan table represents the first game of the 2012-13 season (as Premier League teams play only 19 home games in a season).


You can see on the table above how quickly the stakes grow from game to game for teams continually failing to register the elusive 2-0 home win score line.

At some stage it will become difficult to get stakes of this size placed with any one market and therefore the system may have to rely on split stakes placed with more than one bookmaker or betting exchange to achieve full coverage of each match.

Looking ahead, staking may become more and more tricky in order to force this football betting system to its final conclusion; pursuing this course is dependent on having a very large betting bank and having the desired result arrive before bankruptcy.

]]> https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/systems/football-roulette-correct-score-conclusion/feed/ 4 https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/systems/football-roulette-paper-test/ https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/systems/football-roulette-paper-test/#comments Fri, 07 Jun 2013 19:00:58 +0000 https://www.soccerwidow.com/?p=118 What’s The Score?

After describing the Football Roulette – Correct Score Betting system, it is time to reveal the results of our first paper test.

30 teams were picked according to a popular selection process:

• 8 from the English Premier League (top 8 from the previous season)
• 7 from the English Championship (the 3 relegated sides from the Premier League plus the top 4 sides that didn’t get promoted into the Premier League)
• 7 from English League One (the 3 relegated sides from the Championship plus the top 4 sides that didn’t get promoted into the Championship)
• 8 from English League Two (the 4 relegated sides from League One plus the top 4 sides that didn’t get promoted into League One)

Our chosen score, was a 2-0 home win.

The system sounded good enough to put to the test and the following tables show the results from the 2011/2012 English League season (click on each table to open in a new tab and then place mouse pointer over the table and use magnifier to enlarge):



English Premier League Results 2011-12



English Championship Results 2011-12

]]> https://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/systems/football-roulette-paper-test/feed/ 2