25th March 2007, 11:09 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 4,442
|
|
Kelly, half kelly, quarter kelly etc are aggressive because they rely on "knowing" your edge. Therefore when you know your edge (for example a two entity contest) kelly is very efficient in maximising returns and taking advantage of overlays.
The problem is that it is far too radical for horseracing in general. Very few are able to "know" the exact edge, as the sands shift radically from contest to contest. If the punter has thousands of selections and breaks even, then by modifying his returns by getting better prices, he figures that kelly will prove a bonanza.
The consideration is not necessarily given to drawdown, and the result is often a bust.
Kelly is supposed to take this into account via edge, but in the real world the edge is a moving average and the swings can bust a punter very easily.
In my opinion, kelly is high risk, but the returns are greater (if accurate).
It depends on the accuracy of the person placing the bets and the personal inclination to gamble for reward.
Kelly is way too radical for me - slow and steady wins the race.
Punting is not an 800m sprint, it is a 3200m distance race, where careful planning, knowledge, patience and superior skills reap rewards.
|