Thanks Schoolman and esoito. I read through the staking plan.
First look, it is very rigid. Second look, I feel something is basically wrong. There seem to be no correlation between the odds and the liability. It all feels a bit erratic. What are your views on this laying MM?
For example anything below 3.5, your liability is X. Then at 3.6, your liability should further increase as you are betting against the odds, instead it decreases. Would like to understand expert views on why.
Also, while i was doing a bit more research, i am seeing two distinct methods. Either fixing the liability or fixing the return during the staking. What would you recommend and why?
First look, it is very rigid. Second look, I feel something is basically wrong. There seem to be no correlation between the odds and the liability. It all feels a bit erratic. What are your views on this laying MM?
For example anything below 3.5, your liability is X. Then at 3.6, your liability should further increase as you are betting against the odds, instead it decreases. Would like to understand expert views on why.
Also, while i was doing a bit more research, i am seeing two distinct methods. Either fixing the liability or fixing the return during the staking. What would you recommend and why?