|
MONEY MANAGEMENT
Part 1
First, let me say that even if
you have a better than average winning percentage you will fail to make profits if you do not use or
incorporate a faulty money management system.
Professional gamblers, stocks and
bonds traders, arbitragers, or any similar professionals understand the
necessity of valid money management systems. There are several reasons for
the need of such a system. The obvious one is to decrease risk while
maximizing profits. Another reason was told to me by Paul Paulson of
www.moneykeg.com and author of Money and the Middle Man. He explains,
“The reason for money management, in my
opinion, is so that a bettor can comfortably utilize his edge. Notice that
I did NOT say “maximize” his edge. The reason is because if you size your
bets solely with the purpose of maximization, you trigger, albeit
inadvertently, the biggest obstacle facing bettors – psychology. What I am
trying to say is that the more you ‘optimize’ your bet size system (what I
consider a money management system as opposed to a picking system where you
aim to pick the “winner” game, race, etc.), the larger your potential draw
downs.”
By way of example, let’s say you have a
bankroll of $10,000. If you ‘optimize’ your bet in a simulation using
techniques like, optimum f or the Kelly criterion, then your total bankroll
will fluctuate more violently than if you size your bets with a simple 1%
total bankroll bet. The ‘optimized’ simulation may draw down your account
over 30% in some instances while the latter will likely yield much less than
that.
The point is this: How will you ‘feel’ about
your system after a draw down of 30%? Is it likely that you will continue
using the system? Or will your “better judgment” win out as you add this
picking system to the picking systems’ scrap heap? I would venture to guess
that most bettors would stop betting the system if a large draw down
occurred. The problem is that statistically, a system with a positive
expectancy will still have large streaks of winners and losers. If you
should be so unfortunate as to start utilizing your strategy just before one
of those inevitable losing streaks, then you will experience significant
destruction of your funds.
The lesson here is to minimize your draw
downs to a level where you feel comfortable. That is, use a bet size where
if you experience a string of losers, (which you will) then you will still
move forward and still gain that statistical advantage called ‘positive
expectancy’. If you make your bet size such that each bet has no
significant emotional effect, then you are practicing the proper money
management. If a bettor can achieve this, then he will know what it is like
to have 13 losers in a row in a good system. More importantly, he will be
psychologically stable enough to weather the storm and achieve the profits
he deserves for having the ability to foresee such occurrences and plan for
them accordingly.”
In simple terms, it is important
to use a money management system that allows your bet size to be within your
comfort level. Using a money management system will help your psychology
withstand losing streaks. A bettor should make their bet size in relation
to their bankroll small enough that there is no emotional effect on the
outcome. This will enable you to stay with a system long enough to see if
works.
There are several valid money
management systems and some schemes that are not so prudent. Many of these
will be discussed in later articles. For now, we will discuss a “percentage
of bankroll”. In this system, the player will risk a percentage of his
current bankroll. For this discussion, we will use a 2% bankroll ratio for
the bet. We like this amount because as explained above must people do not
have the discipline or stomach to see large losses. As you can see in the
illustration below, we start with a $10,000 bankroll so our first bet will
be $200. As our bankroll increases and or decreases so will our bet size.
We also make the assumption that we will have a 60% winning probability.
Bull Market Sports Handicappers has an average three year winning
probability of 64.65% so we will be conservative and use 60% in our
illustration. This means that for every 100 bets there will be 60 winners
and 40 losers. As you can see in the illustration, one can expect to net
$3,493. This makes your total bankroll $13,493 at the end of 100 bets.
We will now compare this to a
same size bet system. We will start with the assumption that we will win 60
games with a bet size of $200. This will produce $12,000 in gross
winnings. Now take the 40 losers at 220 (don’t forget the vigorish) which
yields 8,800 in gross losses. The net profit will be $3,200. This is are
not bad but not as good as the percentage of bankroll illustration.
Some people who subscribe to the
same size bet system will say it is not a fair comparison. They will say
that many of the wagers in the bankroll system are greater than $200. The
argument is that if you wager more than $200 you will surely show larger
profits.
Let’s look at this argument
further. First we take the average of all bets in the illustration. Doing
this will produce and average bet size of $205. If you use this bet and
multiply this by the 60 winners, we get gross winning in the amount of
$12,298. We then do the same for the 40 losers (again do not forget the
vigorish) and we get gross losses of $9,019 for a net profit of $3,280.
This is better but still falls short of the $3,485 net winnings we
experience using the percentage of bankroll system. Another problem with
this argument is that it is impossible to determine an average of previous
bets because the bet have not yet been made. Since we do not have a crystal
ball its impossible to do this.
In order to make money in sports
betting, you must look at it as an investment. This separates the
successful gambler from the “hard luck” loser. Gambling must be thought of
as investment such as the stock market. Sports betting is a grind, do not
expect to make a killing overnight. People who bet large amounts either to
recoup losses or to make large sums in a short period of time may have a
gambling problem. If this is you and you think you may have a problem,
please go to the official gamblers anonymous site and see if you are in need
of help.
|
Initial Equity |
10,000 |
|
total
bets |
20,497 |
|
|
|
|
Winning Probability |
60% |
|
Ave.
bet |
205 |
|
|
|
|
Total
Trials |
100 |
|
60
win |
12,298 |
|
|
|
|
Amount of Profits |
+
12,452 |
|
40
lose |
9,019 |
|
|
|
|
Amount of Losses |
-
8,959 |
|
net |
3,280 |
|
|
|
|
Max.
Runs positive |
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
Max.
Runs negative |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Results |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity |
13,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Profit/Loss |
+ 3,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nr.
of Profits |
60.00 |
65% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nr.
of Losses |
40.00 |
35% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Return |
+ 68.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Max.
Drawdown |
-
19.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MAR-Ratio |
3.52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Profit/Loss |
+ 35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Median Profit/Loss |
+ 181 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trial-Nr. |
Profit/Loss |
Equity |
Max.
Drawdown |
Return |
Position Size in $ |
Position Size in % of Current Equity |
|
- |
|
10000 |
|
|
To Win |
Risking |
|
|
1.00 |
-
220.0 |
9780 |
-
2.2% |
- 2.2% |
200 |
220 |
2% |
|
2.00 |
+ 196.0 |
9976 |
-
0.2% |
- 0.2% |
196 |
215 |
2% |
|
3.00 |
+ 200.0 |
10176 |
0% |
+ 1.8% |
200 |
219 |
2% |
|
4.00 |
-
224.0 |
9952 |
-
2.2% |
- 0.5% |
204 |
224 |
2% |
|
5.00 |
-
219.0 |
9733 |
-
4.4% |
- 2.7% |
199 |
219 |
2% |
|
6.00 |
+ 195.0 |
9928 |
-
2.4% |
- 0.7% |
195 |
214 |
2% |
|
7.00 |
-
218.0 |
9710 |
-
4.6% |
- 2.9% |
199 |
218 |
2% |
|
8.00 |
-
214.0 |
9496 |
-
6.7% |
- 5.0% |
194 |
214 |
2% |
|
9.00 |
-
209.0 |
9287 |
-
8.7% |
- 7.1% |
190 |
209 |
2% |
|
10.00 |
-
204.0 |
9083 |
-
10.7% |
- 9.2% |
186 |
204 |
2% |
|
11.00 |
+ 182.0 |
9265 |
-
9.0% |
- 7.4% |
182 |
200 |
2% |
|
12.00 |
-
204.0 |
9061 |
-
11.0% |
- 9.4% |
185 |
204 |
2% |
|
13.00 |
+ 181.0 |
9242 |
-
9.2% |
- 7.6% |
181 |
199 |
2% |
|
14.00 |
-
203.0 |
9039 |
-
11.2% |
- 9.6% |
185 |
203 |
2% |
|
15.00 |
-
199.0 |
8840 |
-
13.1% |
- 11.6% |
181 |
199 |
2% |
|
16.00 |
-
194.0 |
8646 |
-
15.0% |
- 13.5% |
177 |
194 |
2% |
|
17.00 |
-
190.0 |
8456 |
-
16.9% |
- 15.4% |
173 |
190 |
2% |
|
18.00 |
-
186.0 |
8270 |
-
18.7% |
- 17.3% |
169 |
186 |
2% |
|
19.00 |
+ 165.0 |
8435 |
-
17.1% |
- 15.7% |
165 |
182 |
| |