Thanks Dragoner for a detailed reply.

Quote from: Dragoner on August 14, 2013, 01:44:54 PM
So that is a good move to check out sports betting instead of roulette.

That's an interesting observation. I am not planning to move away from roulette. Roulette is my passion. Roulette is not about making money for me, it is more about going on an adventure. It is more about the satisfaction I get from exploring the wheel and satisfaction I get from playing the game. Though am on a mission and challenge to prove something to my Dad, I will continue to play roulette whether I taste success or failure in that attempt. It is like paying a few quid to go on a fun ride. What you gain is the thrill of the ride and not monetary.

Quote from: Dragoner on August 14, 2013, 01:44:54 PM
The bankroll size doesn't matter much. It is the ratio of the BR and bet size that matters. The 5% per bet seems to be fine. I would even suggest a larger bet size if the odds of your bets are around 2 (even money bets) and you are flat betting.

Premier league is something that we chat about in our home at times and I can get advice from my friends. That is the way I want to go for sports betting. Thanks for all your advice on the bet size. I think I will go with 5% of the BR and not more than 20% on a day. And preferably will start flat betting and see how it goes. May be I might increase the bet size a little when someone is on a streak.

Quote from: Dragoner on August 14, 2013, 01:44:54 PM
The only progression that I advise is that when your bankroll increases you can increase your bet size as well.

Would you advice decreasing the bet size to that 5% of BR when my BR decreases after a streak of losses?

Quote from: Dragoner on August 14, 2013, 01:44:54 PM
A smaller bet size is always safer, but the risk is never going to be 0.

Thanks. I think I have learnt from Sam that whether it is 5$ or 50$ the risk of losing on a specific bet is always the same, it doesn't vary with your bet size.

Quote from: Dragoner on August 14, 2013, 01:44:54 PM
Live/offline: I prefer offline. It is less stressful. You have more time to think. But that is just preference.

Thanks for this valuable suggestion. I think I will stick to offline based on what you have advised. I think I realize that live will obviously lead me to less time to think and I will be prone to make mistakes. How funny it is that people advice playing live in roulette and the other way around in sports betting

Quote from: Dragoner on August 14, 2013, 01:44:54 PM
If you don't know the game, you don't know the EV, you can't really make a good bet. Either you need to know the game, or you need a good source for this kind of information about the games.

Sure Dragoner, I think I get what you are saying. But again the EV is subjective isn't it. It is really hard to say the probability of Manchester united beating Swansea is 60% or 80%. What we can say is a range. Or is there any way we can make it more objective. Anything that has some subjectivity in it is susceptible to be inaccurate.

Quote from: Superman on August 11, 2013, 04:43:05 PM
instead of working my way up to the 1% it must be my first win, now that win could take a few bets if the 1st one is lost

@ Superman, One basic question. At what point do you give up, as I find sometimes (very rarely) the first win is the one that takes long to come in. Also, do you have any recommendations on the money management to be used for ECs. Some people say soft progressions, but I don't understand what soft progressions mean. Is it a shortened version of martingale where you do 1,2,4 and stop or does it mean something else. Any pointers would be much appreciated.

Quote from: Bally6354 on August 14, 2013, 10:15:05 AM
Players like Superman have spent a lot of time studying the game and doing the groundwork.
You don't win longterm using voodoo or guesswork.

I am not debating either of these points. I greatly admire anyone who spends time in studying and understanding the game and believe there is a lot to learn from them. The thing am getting at is someone need not give things on a plate, but atleast let us know the strategy and thought process behind what they do (just like Superman explained his money management) it will benefit eager people like who is trying to learn and understand the game. If it cannot be explained, then it cannot be.

Quote from: Bally6354 on August 14, 2013, 10:15:05 AM
I liken it more as a kind of situational awareness. A players results over time would likely show losses if they were just using pure instinct.

My whole point was around botting stuff. What I was getting to was if it is situation awareness and making decisions based on what you see and what you have experienced, it can be taught to a machine and such artificial intelligence can be coded. It is not that its an easy job, but being in the robotics industry, I know exactly how its done. But if its purely based on human instincts, then it cannot be.

Let me take the crude example into account. The key word is "Factor into account". The moment that comes in, it becomes more of a decision making rather than a voodoo capability. Hope you are seeing where am getting to.

I did my training at Ensemble studios before graduating and starting work as a R&D consultant with Fanuc and Universal robotics. During the training, I experienced how we build AI capabilities into the RTS game Age of empires. It is simply an  astonishing subject to look at when it comes to situational awareness and taking 1000s of factors into consideration before taking the next decision which lasts only for milliseconds. And it also has inbuilt learning capabilities based on what it experiences and based on 100s of decisions happened in the past.

It is more like building a Deep blue. But remember, Deep blue was indeed beaten by Kasparov.

Seems interesting. Just ordered a copy.

Quote from: Chrisbis on August 14, 2013, 06:47:11 AM
Superman says he plays by hunches, feelings, even by the very vibrations in the crystals that surround the Superman castle, that keep the evils at bay!

Hence why he says, for now, it can not be botted....... so, from what I gather, there is no set rule of thumb, or method that could be exactly articled.

Working in Robotics industry, I know how hard it is to convert instincts and feelings into machines. I believe instincts are the only betselection that makes sense and may be for superman it works like a Voodoo.

Quote from: TwoCatSam on August 14, 2013, 02:04:45 AM
Look under his cape!!

Hmm!! I would, but am a bit scared of the consequences.
[attachimg=1]

Thanks Weddings.

Quote from: Sputnik on August 12, 2013, 02:14:35 PM

Sport-betting is a good way to walk ... see two attach files ... should let you get started ...
I know people that make serious money using the 2-6 method ... you can even build your own version of it ...

Thanks Sputnik. 2-6 looks more of a martingale right? Does sports betting follow the same set of progressions as in roulette? Is there any that specifically works in sports betting only?

Quote from: Superman on August 11, 2013, 04:43:05 PM
no red ones luckily, its the session duration I am pointing out, an average of about 2 minutes, the good ones only have 2 bets,

Great one Superman. Just giving it a deep thought, even though you mentioned otherwise, it is more of a hit and run concept right, especially as your bet size is also going to be more or less equal to your target?

Also, you mentioned your play is documented in this forum. can't find many in here or rf.cc. Is there a different place I should be looking?

There are too many dormant sections already. Why not use the general section to post and if it becomes too many, then slots can automatically find a slot.

gCall to experts out there!


Recently I read lots of suggestions towards investing in sports betting rather than roulette. But figured out that there are not many discussions.


Few basic questions.  What is the BR and unit size one should consider? What is safe and steady.  Live game betting or offline?  Does having a knowledge of game absolutely important? Is there any known progressions or is it flat betting always? What should be a decent target one should keep in mind?


Any inputs are welcome.

Quote from: spike on August 10, 2013, 07:28:03 AM
With a good edge, variance almost disappears. Meaning luck no longer enters into the equation, luck and variance being the same thing.

Is it possible at all t get a good edge? Holding the name Spike, may be you might know more abt getting a sharp edge

Thanks Bayes!

I think now am straying into another territory. Is the variance governed by roulette or is it governed by your bet selection methods. In other words, does your bet selection impact the variance at all. If no, (presumably am assuming that's the right answer), then what is the point in discussing a bet selection. Again I am assuming that's left to your intuition isn't it?

Also, another important thought process that crosses my mind is even though your variance is inversely proportional to the pay-offs, are you able to get down the variance and pay-off ratio by choosing multiple betting positions and placing the same units at multiple positions. Let me make my question clearer by quoting an example. Take the Easy peasy system. You start with betting 2 units on EC and 1 unit on a line. Is it considered to be yielding a higher payoff to variance ratio compared to placing 3 units on EC? I am assuming the answer is yes. If yes, then is that the way to go? If the answer is no, is it because the expectancy of pay-off against the variance of the individual elements (EC and line) within this will point to the same pay-off/variance ratio?

Sorry am asking too many questions, but I really like to get to the bottom of this to understand the game much better like you all do. And I don't have words to thank for the numerous answers you all have helped providing.

-Yanks.

Very informative.

Very interesting. Very conflicting views but enriching to understand and follow this. If that's the case, do you think you will be able to give me an example of a low variance bet so that I can relate the concept to a practical realistic example. It might well be a case that this is only a concept and no body knows what a low variance bet is, but it will be really helpful, if you can share more insights on this.

Quote from: Number Six on August 09, 2013, 02:43:04 PM
This is related to an interesting concept known as the personal permeance.

Hmm!! This is another thing that I was pondering upon. How having a target set or having a stop loss and breaking things into session is going to control your Bankroll apart from it impacting or creating a false perception in your mind about winning and losing. In reality it is a continuous flow of numbers, how much ever small sessions you break it into, isn't it. The only thing that will prevent it from becoming a continuous set of repeatable events is if we didn't have table limits. Am I reading it right?