last edited by Darri
@james-rome no worries mate, wasnt sure how else to word it. Fantastic profit. Im assuming based on this and your sheets your compounding the bank and as such you stakes are staying in line with the new bank. This was the only reason i brought it up tbh. Because your compounding and keeping the bank inline, then any sort of bad variance ie bad weather or fav goes to 10 men etc could hurt the bank by a fair bit. I noticed that you had lost 2/3 of the bank at one stage? Then it recovered. That type of swing is fairly large risk. Remember my own opinion and ill happily keep quiet if its not wanted.
The actual strategy doesnt matter to me. The risk/reward at its base isnt an issue as long as you are reaching the required strike rate to profit. Its just the risk of a losing run. If you say 92% of all games have at least a goal then my question is out of 100 games what if those 8 losses comes at the start? Its 100% the correct theory that with these type odds or in fact any strategy, you need to be beating the min strike rate to win. So yes you have been beating it here by making a large volume of wins and consistently. That part doesnt worry me, its just the potential worst case scenario based on your strike rate.
My staking is varied based on the strategy. But its mainly down to whats the worst run of games or batch of games i can expect. For my SHGs im aiming for a 84% strike rate so in theory i can expect to lose 16 out of 100. My worst case scenario is losing 16 at once. Not gonna happen (crosses fingers), but if it did based on my staking ill survive that. My max loss is 4% of bank. so 4x16 is 64%. Because i have other strategies alongside this i keep it this defensive because each of those strategies also have variance. If all 3 of my main strategies have a bad run my bank risk is still covered. If you are doing the strategies you have on here would yours? I did used to do 10% stakes and it was way too much risk because i was trading other things. Staking that much isnt actually that bad if its your main strategy its just variance from all others. Bad results happen and luck goes against you. Risk management is underplayed at times when we see digital money on screen (former troubled gambler).
Could you for this strategy risk say 0.5pt on the FHG. Then at HT if still 0-0 cover it with a lay to win trade of 1pt. So typically when its 0-0 with a heavy fav at home (worst case scenario) its roughly between 7 and 5 to lay. So overall your max loss could be 6.5 points. So roughly the same base risk/reward as you currently have but also now you can keep it in for the whole game without trading out. My math is a little off on this as i obviously dont have any data to go off in terms of FHG % and SHG% for your filter. Now given your strike rate if you lost those 8 games at the start you still survive the absolute worst case (-52%) compared to your current (-112% bank bust). Unlike others i agree with maximising your banks potential and staking potential from each individual strategy and not just wasting it but there is always a deep thought into what is too much risk. For me thats the worst possible run at the worst odds based on my previous trades. If you can measure it and still profit from that base you will always be doing well.
Basically with a 92% strike rate to profit you need to be aiming for average winning odds on or greater than 1.09. Plain and simple. The FHGs are your money maker obviously as they are never below that in general apart from extremes. The SHGs to back at HT are normally 1.11 or greater regardless. So as you see im not knocking the strategy just the risk of max outlay.
Iv probably rambled away and not made any sense. So ill try summarize. Again just my opinion not gospel. End of day its about overall risk. If you cant withstand a bad run whatever your strategy is, then your staking too much. I see you have a couple of strategies. Lets say both have 2-3 losses each. There is a bad day in germany for example and 0-0s pop up. At this rate right now 3 losses and you are close to wiping all your accrued gains, now because thats a bank your compounding each loss is a loss to the actual bank rather than profits. So would be close to at least 2/3rds of your bank total lost. Might be easy to think right now with a £1,000 bank which you can re invest, what about losing 2/3rd of a £20k bank could you stomach losing £13k from just 3 bad games.