Paper trading and betting $2 is basically the same thing. You also didn't tell him to bet as little as possible since you literally told him to bet more on certain plays.

There are millions of losing sports bettors out there. They haven't learned to win at sports betting from placing $2 bets or $100 bets or $20k bets. I'd venture you haven't figured it out either since you're a pretty clear poseur.

Mister Rodriguez is right. There's enough info on this forum to turn a small bankroll into 6 figures. But yeah, make sure to bet $1 on some plays and $2 on others while ignoring all that info instead. Genius stuff there.

1. Having skin in the game is never a bad thing. What concentrates the mind more, a bunch of fake losses on a spreadsheet or a bunch of small slaps?

2. I didn't tell him anything, I responded to his question and told him the most he should bet is 1% of his roll.

3. How do you know how people learn to win? I learned how to win placing on avg. $5 bets. That's how I know for an unmitigated fact that you're full of ****. I followed my own advice but I guess I'm that Shakesperian Monkey writing Hamlet, the only difference is when you ask me to do it again, it gets done.

Strike a pose there's nothing to it ... Vogue.

Betting on Outcomes like the OP is doing, please direct me to those threads.

Thank you in advance.... Muppet.

Here's a hint: using weird non-standard vocabulary for sports betting to obfuscate how bad your ideas are doesn't fool anyone here, at least no one who has a clue about sports betting.

The info is here and it's quite easy to find. It's not anyone's job to hold hands and spoon feed how to win at sports betting.

SECOND REQUEST:

Please direct me to the thread(s) where one can turn $200 into at least $100,000 in a short period of time.

Thank you.

Yet you want the OP to figure it out overnight... too funny.

S**t, I'll try harder next time.

If we're calling a few years a short period of time, 'make an account on all your soft local outs/sites that aren't know to be sharp, attack off market stales lines/niche markets/props to grow initial BR using pinnacle/exchanges as an indicator of true prices (or sharp local books like for example topsport is the sharpest 'local' book in Australia whereas most of the others are super square)

Let's say Pinnacle has a game at -123/+110 and betfair/matchbook agrees that the true price is about the same (let's say it has back/lay at -117/+116 with some decent depth to the market)

If you're getting -110 or +123 on the respective sides or even a point or two worse, you're prob gonna do okay in the long term. Yes, it is that simple. Yes those spots are widely available if you have a ton of accounts with a ton of books and a small enough bankroll to put full units on large edges on niche sport. Yes, it does get harder as your bankroll scales, but certainly not until you're into betting into the four figure range and by that point you've probably figured out an area where you can succeed while scaling your bet sizes.

I was betting $20-100 on random stuff recreationally when I started here as a poker player and eventually over several years turned it into a large br firing 10k+ etc, MrRod turned next to nothing into a six figure br since I first met him as a random poster here, i'm sure the guys who have been doing it longer like thremp (as much as we don't get along) probably have seven figure bankrolls, he's right and he knows what he's talking about here, we mostly all followed roughly the same formula at least initially before settling into whatever it is we specialise in as we learned more and our bankrolls got to the point where we can do it full time.

In my case I still attack some major markets on soft local outs that offer square lines, while also handicapping a few semi-mainstream but not completely mainstream sports. Other people do different things, there are a ton of ways to win, but it's basically unanimous that attacking niche markets and square/off market lines is where you should start if you have 200 dollars and want to build from there.

If your starting bankroll is 200 dollars you can probably find 5% edges fairly easily betting niche stuff like asian baseball or third division soccer or french rugby union or rugby 7s or esports or whatever just stake aggressively at at half kelly or whatever and a year or two in you should probably have a five figure bankroll and a few years in you should have a six figure bankroll if you figure out how to do it right

Obviously the optimal bet size for a losing punter is zero I literally said in the first reply in this thread that if you're making -EV bets your bankroll will eventually be at zero anyway so learning to make profitable bets is the right place to start (for example, if you're getting arb price against Pinnacle or backing at the betfair lay price it's going to profitable over a decent sample and it shouldn't be too hard to find spots to do that on a 200 dollar bankroll as you can max bet all sorts of niche markets for a long time)

Or if you have no interest in betting at a serious level for profit and just want to have fun, bet on whatever you want to bet on for however much you can afford to lose and that's fine too. If he can afford to lose 25 cents a game and finds a bet where a book will take bets that small cool he can only lose a cent and change in EV or whatever per bet, or if he wants to make -5% ROI bets at 10 bucks a game he's losing 50 cents a game equity i'm sure he'll be fine and yes if his bets aren't profitable he'll go busto after a few hundred bets on average but that's cheap entertainment and that's fine

Swoop,

Thanks for the response. If the definition of a short period of time is a few years, then I agree. That's not at all how I took it.

Bruv, I blog about this type of stuff. I'm intimately familiar w/ the process.

having a blog makes you an expert now? lol you need to relax m8

what you don't seem to understand even after numerous people have pointed it out is that placing bets does not improve your skills in anyway..

this is not poker where the more hands you play the better you become

You do not need to place any bets to test your theory. You only place a bet once you know you have an edge. It isn't not that hard ey

Also it is very easy to go from 200 to 200k if you have an edge. You can just run a simple sim to find this out where you can get there with a few thousand bets if you have 5% edge betting kelly.

The only good thing about sportsbetting is the exponential growth. The only reason people don't get rich is because there are limits on the bets you can place

in the two posts i ve stated time frames i clearly said in a couple a years on average,but some did it in a season

the landscape is tougher now then it was literally 3-4 years ago,with books asking proof of income for 3k deposits when it was 10k back then minimum,selfies of you and your father eating pasta together with you holding your ID and so on

This is what the OP asked:

Here’s your response:

The OP doesn’t have the BR to spread across multiple outs.

The OP doesn’t have the BR to run volume

The OP doesn’t have the BR for half-kelly as that would place his bet size way above acceptable levels

The OP doesn’t have the BR (funds) to for a Don Best Subscription

The OP is focusing on minutia? No he’s not, he asking good questions.

In short, there’s nothing wrong with your post besides everything. It’s not tethered to reality and it does nothing to answer the OP’s question or deal w/ where he is presently. His question was not a generalized one about how to make $ sports betting; that’s a different conversation.

In your defense, I did see you say zero to hero in a few years at the end of your original post but when you said in a "short time," in a later post I didn't connect the dots so that may be my bad but I was dealing w/ several Muppets at once.

Ok

You have me confused and I don't mean you're confusing me.

P.S. It's not very easy to go from $200 to $200,000 even w/ an edge because if you don't bet to it appropriately, you could get carried out long before you even reach $10,000.

Do you understand my point? Your post had zero to do w/ his question. It was some cookie-cutter, generic response. That's fine in the appropriate context but maybe he wants to do exactly what he asked.

hedgie,

Little intellectually dishonest to magically add money into something and call it "0EV". If they're bonus whoring, w/e. But it isn't like that doesn't magically invalidate kelly.

GB,

What is the basis for your magical bullshit? Mine is based off actual math. Yours is based on.... nonsense? Some mistaken belief you must lose, but magically need to change staking sizes which you'll never use in the future?

Your advice ****ing sucks man and no one should take you for anything more than a complete buffoon on the subject.

I don't even know what you are talking about. I didn't say you have to lose, I said it's OK and it is.

Once again, my advice is perfectly fine and will keep the OP out of trouble while he improves. Contrary to popular belief you can actually get better at betting by betting... What a concept of actually using the Market as an immediate feeback loop, it's brilliant in it's simplicity.

No. It is incredibly stupid and will never be anything less than absurd.

Weird that you waited 6 years to post this kinda nonsense.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

Nonsense is telling some guy w/ a $200 Roll to implement Half-Kelly. The fact that I am the only guy saying **** about it says more about you Muppets than me. Forget that fact that Mr. Muppet's post had nothing at all to do w/ the original question.

I'm not even sure what the basis of your argument is other than making **** up to feel like you know something.

What argument? I answered the OP's 2 questions, apparently not to your satisfaction.

I then then proceeded to call out Mr. Muppet's crazy a** reccomenation for him implement Half-Kelly w/ a $200 BR and we now find ourselves here. I'm just as amazed as you are. This thread has turned into a Mad Hatters Tea Party.

Yes. Your answer was like someone "answering" 2+2 with potato. It is nonsense.