Varying Size of Bets

Varying Size of Bets In my research, I've come across many arguments for and against varying the size of your bets. In my mind, it doesn't make sense. If you have the best of it(a 54-55% or more chance of winning your bet), then you make the bet. Why bother deciding if it's a 1-star or 5-star bet? In the long run, it seems it would equal out. I'd say people varying their bets are just not betting enough on their 1-star bets. Instead of varying their bets from 1 to 5 units, they should be betting 2.5 units on each bet. Any thoughts on the issue are welcomed. Not looking to argue really, just looking to inform myself.

In general I'd agree with you. However when you find extreme outlier lines I always advise to bet more and manage your position. If the market is 217.5 on an NBA total and you find a 219.5 (this happened in the past week in Game 6 of the Hou/LAC series) then make a big bet on the outlier. You can bet some OV at the best number you can find and leave enough exposure on the UN to reflect a normal bet. In this case Golden Nugget had 219.5 due to a huge OV bet they took earlier. Cantor closed 216.5 so taking a chunk back there left an UN position plus the middle shot. The game went OV so I lost the equivalent of 1 unit. If you know you can scalp a number or put together a plus EV middle then over betting the outlier is certainly a good move. There are other reasons to vary your bet size. Correlation with other bets, an existing method of under betting your bankroll etc.