This staking method seems popular among bettors who are basically pricing their own betting prices which aren't set when compared to table games and poker hands where you can get the exact probability once the cards are face up or roulette etc.

So basically say with a 10k bank you are betting to win say 4% of bank that would mean you have

$400 on a Even money to win $400
$100 on a $5 chance = $400 profit
$1000 on a $1.40 chance again $400 profit

So basically every bet is to win 4% profit of your 10k bank.

It just seems average to me that you're dictated by the prices your are offered by bookmakers compared to kelly where you're betting more the greater the overs are.

The thing is a lot of the sharps are using this method so meh, and their saying its the best way to bet since pricing sports games isn't set like table games, instead the prices are subjective and why they prefer this method.


Some are now also tinkering proportionate staking by betting to their own rated prices they priced each team etc.

For example say with a $5 decimal chance, instead of having $100 on it to win the required 4% $400

If they asses the bet themselves $3 (which is 2-1) they would have $200 on it even at the $5 which = 8% profit $800

because $200 at their rated 2-1 wins 4% of bank $400, but instead of $100 they previously bet using the original proportionate staking method, now because the bookmakers are offering them $5 they would instead bet $200 going of their 2-1 price they allocated to the team, so this is sort of making that extra $$$$ and having more on the team because the bookmaker got the price wrong similar to kelly but different maths.

So basically what do you think about proportionate staking and the adjusted proportionate staking especially for sports betting that these players are using because the prices aren't set like roulette and table games poker etc?

Well, kelly is optimal for growth. Your proposed system is not kelly, thus it is inferior to kelly.

The only reason to not use kelly is if you have no way to estimate your edge, or you want less variance (in which case something like 1/2 kelly is recommended)

Yeah this is what I was basically asking since bettors cant estimate their edge. Since full kelly seems the best staking method I was wondering why they would use proportionate staking instead of kelly even 1/2 or 1/4 kelly. Unless they think proportionate staking is somehow better then betting 1/2 or 1/4 kelly. And proportionate staking seems to be gaining popularity amongst bettors atm.