Meaningless statistics and tightening your game

I try to look at my betting habits and patterns with as much objectivity as possible, and in doing so I have come to believe that I am indeed a (potential) advantage player, but there are several bad habits/leaks in my game that are preventing real success.

One all-too-common leak is lack of discipline. Betting too much, rushing into decisions too quickly, betting on fighters because I am a fan, etc. This aspect is easiest to tighten up by formulating (and following) self-imposed guidelines. Over the long run as you become more disciplined you will be able to stray from your rules when you know it is the right play. But when starting, or if discipline is a problem for you, stick to a more regimented system.


I am going to impose some bet-size limitations for myself in the near future, once I determine what they should be. One of the biggest mess-ups I have in my picks is the 4 unit play on Hazelett. I don't necessarily think Dustin was a bad play there, but 4 units was way too much and it cost me. A limitation of 2 units for anything under 200 would have ameliorated that a great deal.

My bet limits are likely going to be something like this:

+infinity to +100: 1 units max
+100 to -150: 1 units max
-150 to -200: 2 units max
-200 to -300: 3 units max
-300 to -425: 4-5 units max
-425 to -???: NO BET

This isn't exactly the system I will be using per se, as I am still working out what the actual cut-off points and bet sizes will be. I may go back and see what my results would have been up to this point if I had been following this sort of system. That will take a little work though.

An even easier way to adjust your bet sixes based on odds is to always bet to win a fixed amount, like 1 unit or 1% of bankroll. That way the bet size is controlled automatically by the lines. This is probably the system I am going to implement until I get better at determining appropriate bet sizes for individual fights.

Here are some interesting statistics of my results so far (this sample size is too small to be of any real use, but it is interesting nonetheless):

RESULTS FOR EACH ODDS RANGE:

-300 to -400: 3-0
-250 to -300: 2-2
-200 to -250: 2-0
-150 to -200: 3-1
even to -150: 1-2
+150 to even: 0-3
+??? to +150: 3-0

To me this is a very interesting data set. It really shows that I have a few 'sweet spots'. I have yet to pick a small underdog correctly, and my record for ALL close lines is abysmal. +150 to -150 is my worst range, and accounts for the majority of my losses. Because of this I will think long and hard before betting on close lines in the future, and will keep the bet sizes small when I do.

When all is said and done, I am -.95 units with underdog bets. -4.95 if you count even odds as an underdog. That is very telling. I am not that great at the underdog bets. I need to be careful here.

In the future my underdog bets will likely be much smaller (perhaps even fractional units) and anchored with bets on favorites. From here on out the name of the game is winning at all costs.
After looking at these results I am regretting the 3 units on Mir at -145. I should have made that 1 unit.

On average I am doing much better with larger favorites and will stick more to them in the future. I actually do much better with my picks for significant underdogs than I do for the closer lines.



-The Wise Guy