Fezzik's 2011/2012 football record

[QUOTE=IceTea;48230]awesome job as usual bob. i'm not sure but i kno that u know... how many times have we had a '+' NFL week since september? i think 1 maybe? can you tell us?[/QUOTE] There were two positive NFL weeks since September (another 2 in Sept), a small gain week ending Oct 10 and a larger gain week ending Oct 24.

If you're down 65 units, this should mean that 65% of your bankroll is gone, correct? If this is the case, does one manage future bets based on the current existing bankroll or the original bankroll. I've always thought that each week based on wins and losses, the new bankroll is established, and 1 unit is 1% of that number. However, that logic makes coming back from this type of season almost impossible? Anyone have any thoughts here?

[QUOTE=Chicago909;48254]If you're down 65 units, this should mean that 65% of your bankroll is gone, correct? If this is the case, does one manage future bets based on the current existing bankroll or the original bankroll. I've always thought that each week based on wins and losses, the new bankroll is established, and 1 unit is 1% of that number. However, that logic makes coming back from this type of season almost impossible? Anyone have any thoughts here?[/QUOTE] I was curious about the same although I thought I remember hearing that you should NEVER bet more than 2% of your bankroll so if the max play is a 4 unit then each unit to me was .5%. I therefore am only down 33% but the same prinicpal on future bets would apply. I would assume that you cant answer the question in a blanket fashion as each individual has many different factors involved in the decision.

Every Tuesday I look at my bankroll and make 0.5% my unit bet, rounded up to the nearest $10. It can make for some funny numbers, but it's the best way to lower risk of ruin. If your goal is to get even by the end of the season when you're down, you're either betting too much (this explains a lot of the line movement most Monday nights), or your bankroll is attached to your living expenses.

Yeah, you should theoretically readjust your bet size based on bankroll every game (or every second) but realistically, once a day or week works fine.

Disagree This means you are always buying high and selling low. I adjust my bankroll after each season. This year is a great example for me. I am hitting close to 65% but history tells me there is no way I will end the season that high - just doesn't happen (yes, it can happen for one season but not expected). And, the above logic means I am going to increase my plays for each game, but I know I am not going to maintain this type of win percentage. And, like someone said, you will never make it back to even by doing this. In theory, if I know I am a 55% winner and I am at 65%, I can typically expect to lose some games. Just the opposite is true as well. If I am at 45%, I know I probably have some winners coming. To get to 65% or 45% you are probably having some good luck or back luck. This way you are buying low and selling high. I keep my bets level for the whole season and then adjust.

The only quibble I have with that is that the dice have no memory, so to speak. You still have a 55% chance of winning your next bet. If you really thought you had a 45% chance, you'd just quit or bet the other side. A bet with a 55% chance of winning has a 55% chance of winning, and I'd like to use the optimal bet size for that based on my bankroll.

Correct, but if you truly have a 55% chance and you are currently at 65%, you have probably been getting lucky. Luck plays a role in all of this as well. Yes, maybe you got lucky and will still win at 55% to end around 59%.

Sixth while I love your plays, I disagree with your logic here. If you are a 54% capper and are at 65% for the year your most likely to end at 60%, not revert to 54% by year end. I would not be downsizing because I had a good run. Personally I resize my bets each time my bankroll moves enough to move 1% by $250.

Sean I think you have to do the math. I love looking at baseball teams to do this kind of math because you get a decent sample size (162 games) and you get the randomness you would get in a typical betting year as well. I looked at the TB Rays. They won 56% of their games for the year but had plenty of ups and downs. They only play one game a day, obviously, so you don't have to deal with multiple bets each day but it's all the same. If you started with a $100,000 bankroll and wagered 2% on each wager, recalculating after each day, you ended up at $124,932. If you just wagered 2% on each play, you ended up at $125,800. I also took the Cleveland Indians who won 49.4% of their games figuring if you have a losing season betting it's probably around the 49% number. When looking at their games, readjusting the wagers left you with $78,668 and betting the same amount left you with $79,600. Both situations left you with about a 1% higher return by leaving the bets the same amount. Let me know if you think there is an error in my math but pretty sure this is correct.