Once and
for all, - when laying 11 to win 10, what percentage of bets do professional
gamblers win?
///
There's always an awkward pause when a
non-gambler or a beginner asks me, "What percentage of bets do professional
bettors win?"
It's
a less-than-simple question to answer because it can't be answered simply. That, of
course, sounds like a cop-out, but the answer to that question really does demand an
explanation.
Many people believe professional-level sports bettors win at least 60% of their
bets. It's understandable that people think that, but it's just not true. The fact is, the
difference between the percentage of bets won by successful sports bettors and the
percentage of bets won by chronic losers is relatively very small.
We'll ignore money line bets here for the sake of clarity, and address only
those bets wherein the player must risk as much as 11 to win 10; - pointspreads and over/under bets.
Against this type of bet, anyone at all can expect to win 50 percent. After all, the only
thing required is to flip a coin and pick a side. The bookmakers' profit comes from the
difference between what a bettor must risk and what a bettor expects to win. Every time a
player wins, the bookmaker withholds slightly more than 9 percent of the winnings
($1
for every $11 risked). Consequently, a bettor winning only half his bets will
ultimately go broke.
Professional sports bettors, by comparison, rarely sustain a long term winning percentage
higher than 57 or 58 percent, and it's often as low as 54 or 55 percent. People find that
hard to believe, and they understandably get even more skeptical when told that, for a
genuine professional-level sports bettor, a long term winning expectation of 60% or more
is actually too high.
That last paragraph sounds crazy at first, but as crazy as it may seem there is a
simple explanation: If a bettor has five bets on a given day, risking $110 to win $100 on
each bet, and wins three of them, that's a great winning ratio of 60% and a net profit for
the day of 80 dollars. (The bettor wins $300 and loses 220 dollars.) If another bettor has
fourteen bets on that same day, risking $110 to win $100 on each one, and wins eight of
them, that's a much poorer winning percentage of only 57%, - but almost twice as
much profit for the day of 140 dollars. (The bettor wins $800 and loses
660 dollars.)
The second bettor was not necessarily less skilled at picking winners than
the first bettor; the second bettor may simply have chosen to apply all his advantages -
including those which had less than a 60% chance of winning in the first place. If the
ultimate goal is to make money, it is obvious which of those two bettors was more
successful. The real goal is, of course, to make money. The measure of success of a
sports handicapper is not his percentage of winning bets, but the relative amount of
profit he made over any given period of time.
Although
there are, indeed, propositions that offer more than a 60% expectation of winning, such
propositions are relatively few and far between, and are only a very small part of the
overall picture. With the break-even point at about 53%, genuine professional bettors know
there is no tenable excuse to pass up propositions offering expectations of higher than,
say, 55 percent. A small advantage applied over and over is awesomely effective.
Mathematicians will confirm that a profit is more assured from a group of 200 bets with a
55% expectation-per-bet than from a group of 50 bets with a 60% expectation-per-bet. In
other words, the more bets placed, the more predictable the outcome.
(See our
article, Binomial Distribution.)
| "The measure of success of a sports handicapper is not his percentage of winning bets, but the relative amount of profit he made over any given period of time." |
That, too, is one of the facts of life of which
successful bettors must be familiar. It's a basic principle of math: The more bets you are
able to place, the more likely it is that your winning percentage will be close to your
expectations. A pro bettor must be more concerned with profit than with establishing a
great winning percentage, and those two conditions are not always compatible. A real pro
applies all his advantages as often as possible, not only the best of his advantages when
they occasionally arise.
To illustrate the point, consider casino craps. The house has less than a 51% winning expectation against a passline bet at craps, yet casinos advertise their craps games on signs 100 feet tall. Casino executives know that if they can get enough players to make enough bets they will end the day with approximately the percentage of profit expected. They also know that the fewer bets placed, the less predictable the percentage of winning bets. Can you imagine a casino wanting to limit the number of times you throw the dice?
The accompanying illustration (below) shows the results of different
winning percentages over different numbers of bets when risking 11 to win
ten. Standard vigorish charges of 4.55
percent are figured into the numbers. (The bookies' net commission is 4.55 percent of
all monies risked when bettos risk 11 to win ten. See our article,
A Crash Course in Vigorish.)
Notice in the illustration that winning 55% of 250 bets is more profitable than
winning 65% of only 50 bets, - and remember that a profit is more assured - that is, more
dependable
- because of the higher number of trials.
|
percent of winning
bets |
Total number of bets
|
||||
|
50
|
100
|
150
|
200
|
250
|
|
|
65.0%:
|
13.3
|
26.5
|
39.7
|
53.0
|
66.2
|
|
62.5%:
|
10.6
|
21.2
|
31.9
|
42.5
|
53.1
|
|
60.0%:
|
8
|
16
|
24
|
32
|
40
|
|
57.5%:
|
5.4
|
10.7
|
16.1
|
21.5
|
26.9
|
|
55.0%:
|
2.7
|
5.5
|
8.2
|
11
|
13.7
|
|
52.5%:
|
0.1
|
0.2
|
0.4
|
0.5
|
0.6
|
|
Net number of units profit
|
|||||
|
Graph shows effect of different win percentages over different
numbers of bets. When risking 11 to win 10 it is best to use no more than 2% of your
bankroll per bet - (Most pros use about 1 percent) - and 'pull the trigger' whenever you
feel you have at least a 55% expectation of winning. Pro bettors tend to have
a lot of bets compared to non-professionals. Note that winning 55% of
150 bets is
actually as profitable as winning 60% of 50 bets, but more importantly, a bettor
is more assured of achieving his expected win percentage over a larger total number
of bets, and with more bets and smaller bet sizes, the 'ride' is much smoother, less
risky, and more predictable.
(Graph assumes all bets are same size.) |
|||||
Generally speaking, non-professional
gamblers go wrong by
risking too much of their bankroll on individual bets. They don't
spread their risk
thin enough over
a big enough number of bets. Professionals use smaller bet sizes in
proportion to their bankroll over
larger numbers of bets. As a matter of fact, one good way to spot a
non-pro is that he oten has fewer than a half-dozen bets per week, and
he risks more than two
percent of his bankroll on each bet. (Those sports touts peddling progressive betting
schemes such as the "Kelly criterion" or "one-star, two-star, three
star" systems aren't professional gamblers at all; they're salesmen selling
dreams over their 900-numbers. Big swings in the size of your bets will send you back to your job at the car
wash quicker than bad handicapping.) If you're a part-timer with a wad of 'mad' money to risk, it may be okay to
risk 4 or 5 percent of your bankroll on a single bet, but don't expect to play that way
for long. Sooner or later, such poor management will annihilate you. To quote from my book,
How Professional Gamblers Beat The Pro Football Pointspread,
the population of bad handicappers in Tap City is dwarfed by the
population of bad money managers.
Of those genuine professional-level sports bettors I've known, most would
never risk more than two percent of their working bankroll on any single
bet, and all of them usually risk much less than that. The general consensus
seems to be about one percent. -
J. R. Miller
No comments:
Post a Comment