Questions about Downswings and Tailing Picks

[Jerry Seinfeld]

Hey guys I am new to this forum but have been lurking for a while. Anyways I have some questions for you all if you can help me.

I started sports betting about 8 weeks ago (although have only been taking it seriously for a little over a month).

I have a full time job that pays well and I would like to supplement that income with sports betting (I have no intentions on quitting my other job). I am pretty much an amateur with a lot to learn.

Anyway I have 50k that I 100% afford to lose but would like to not have to reload if possible. I did some google searches for risk of ruin and downswings and found basically nothing but poker results and figured I would ask you guys.

Basically I have gone (121-117) so far and am overall a loser by about 6u. I was up about 11u but am now down 6u overall betting 1u for each game (I am not betting $1000 yet just testing the waters and get a better feel before I put my investment in).

I have for the most part been tailing posters on multiple sites (this being one of them). With most posters with a 57%-62% win rate. I have checked back to make sure these posters have been honest and have been keeping proper track and all them have. Yet through this many bets I am still losing.

I want to make an average of 10 bets a day with a winrate of 55.5%, for an expected ROI of 6%. I am willing to do so with a variety of sports and will not make a bet if I do not think it is plus EV. So are these people whose picks I am tailing just running that much above EV (which I assumed they were even though every sample used is well over 150).

I am more than willing to put my own work into and to learn to make my own picks. I really do not like tailing other peoples picks I am just trying to use it as a tool to learn and to get a good overall estimate for value for a good sports bettor. But to this point it has been negative. Is it normal for a 55.5% bettor to be down over a 200+ bet sample? Is 6% ROI a realistic expectation? Or am I just in some dream world? Also what is a normal downswing for someone with that estimated winrate? Again I have looked it up and got a bunch of poker stuff.

Thanks and I look forward to contributed to this forum instead of begging for advice.

[VegasDave]

Welcome to the board JS.

I'd definitely recommend spending some time soaking in threads in the think tank forum... Lots of sharp math guys there that discuss some important aspects of gambling in depth.

I'd also recommend watching Justin7's video on Kelly betting, and reading up on it as well.

Lastly, tailing guys isn't a great strategy long term, as we all go through hot and cold streaks. Some guys are certainly better than others, but it is worth taking the time to learn how to cap for yourself, and then using your favorite posters for opinions/angles instead of blindly following them.

Best of luck and once again, welcome aboard.

[pat venditto]

238 game sample size its definately possible for a +ev gambler to be down. Just remember to try to question whether you are making mistakes with some picks or not. If the pick fits your criteria and it loses, thats going to happen atleast 45% of the time

[reno cool]

Don't count on a 6% return. That's a very high# for even money bets in sports betting. If you intend on simply following pickers who showed a positive rec in the past you are likely to lose.
What is it that you're doing that leads you to believe you're making value bets?

[Willie Bee]

Don't tail anyone unless you're just eventually looking for someone to blame besides yourself. Learn from everyone, but don't tail a soul. Don't believe any 'miracle system' and never chase losing bets. Stay out of the on-line casinos. When you get ready to deposit that money, my advice is to stay away from the free plays and bonuses that will only tie your money up with rollover requirements.

Welcome to SBR

[Ganchrow]

Is it normal for a 55.5% bettor to be down over a 200+ bet sample?

A 55.5% bettor has a roughly 16.11% probability of finding himself in the red after 238 picks at -110.

A 55.5% pick probability corresponds to an edge of about 5.95%. A bettor with such an edge playing at lines of -300 would have a 4.66% probability of finishing in the red.

OTOH, at +300, a bettor with a 5.95% edge would have a 30.44% of finishing his 238 bets sans profit.

Translation: longer odds implies higher volatility. Hence a player's record becomes increasingly less significant the more its comprised of bets on larger underdogs.

[Jerry Seinfeld]

Thank guys not looking to point fingers at anyone else at all. Maybe I just thought incorrectly that following who seem to be proven winners over a reasonable sample would lead to profit (yet honestly I still don't see how it doesn't but I asked you guys for advice and you all know way more than me).

Thanks for the analysis Ganchrow.

[Data]

Maybe I just thought incorrectly that following who seem to be proven winners over a reasonable sample would lead to profit

From a statistical standpoint no record will ever be statistically significant to justify following due to a large number of players.

(yet honestly I still don't see how it doesn't but I asked you guys for advice and you all know way more than me).

That is fairly simple. Imagine a large number of coin flippers. Their results are normally distributed. No result can be unexpected. Combine this picture with the fact that in real life processes that should be normally distributed usually have fatter tails and it becomes obvious how wrong it is to rely on "black boxes" no matter how good their previous results are.

[The General]

Welcome to SBR, Jerry

[smitch124]

If I remember right Jerry Seinfeld always comes out even, so something is amiss here...

[daggerkobe]

"Tail no one...... fade Brandon Lang."