ileks
Part of the furniture
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Messages
- 2,293
It's complicated.
Certain strategies we (my syndicate partner and I) run are very low risk, very high volume. Others are pure position taking where we do some research and then decide the market has it wrong and then punt on our opinion. The former is a low margin cash cow, but the latter is where the real money is. If you can tolerate the losing streaks, then the overall margin can be very high. Our low risk stuff is of the order of 1% margin, the high risk would be minimum 10%.
Stop if we lose £x? Well, we manage our bankroll such that we adjust staking according to how much we currently have in total. Eg: lets say I have a bank of £100 and I want to bet on brazil and I think I have an edge of 15%, I can use a formula called the kelly staking criteria to work out how much of that £100 to bet on that one bet. It optimises bank growth over time and factors in both winning and losing variance. The real problem is that the 15% figure is an estimate, and may be wildly wrong. Ultimately, yes, there is a point at which I'd stop, but it's not defined in stone. shrug.
Oh, and for that brazil bet, you'd not bet more than 5% of your bankroll, tops.
You have such a cool job.
If you don't mind me asking, what information are you using to form your probabilities in a world cup? I mean, surely there isn't much to go on given the top teams rarely ever meet eachother, or if they do it's usually in friendlies which don't reflect a WC game at all. Do you use some kind of ranking system or do you model goals as a poisson process and use some clever technique to infer the parameters (attacking/defending "strength" etc.) from previous games?