How much of your bankroll should you risk per bet? (Unit sizing debate)

[CoachTony_Bets]

I've been seeing a lot of newer bettors posting screenshots of huge bets relative to what seems like their total bankroll and it got me thinking we should probably have a discussion about proper unit sizing.

For me personally I stick to 2% of my bankroll per bet as a standard unit. So if I have $5,000 in my betting account, one unit is $100. On games where I really like the matchup and feel very confident I might go 1.5 units or 2 units max, but that's rare. Maybe once or twice a month I'll do that.

The reason I like 2% is it gives me enough cushion to survive a bad streak without going broke. Even if I lose 10 bets in a row (which has happened), I'm only down 20% of my bankroll. That's recoverable. I've seen too many guys at the school where I coach bet way too big on "locks" and then they're completely wiped out after one bad weekend.

What's everyone else using for their unit size? And do you adjust based on confidence level or keep it consistent?

 

[ParlayPrincess_88]

Honestly I don't really think about it in percentages like that. I just kind of bet whatever feels right for the game? Like if it's a random Tuesday NBA game I might throw $20 on it, but if it's a Sunday NFL game with my Chiefs playing I might bet $50 or even $100 if I'm feeling good about it.

I guess my "bankroll" is just whatever's in my DraftKings account at the time. Right now I have like $380 in there so I'm doing okay. Earlier this season I was down to like $80 but then I hit a couple parlays and got back up.

Is it really that important to be so strict about the percentages? I mean I get not betting your entire account on one game obviously but beyond that it seems like overthinking it. Some weeks I bet more some weeks I bet less depending on how confident I am and how much money I have available.

 

[SharpEddie47]

This is probably the single most important topic for long-term success and most bettors completely ignore it. Princess your approach is exactly how people go broke, I'm sorry to say.

I use a flat 1% of my total bankroll per unit and I never deviate from that. Ever. I don't care how confident I feel about a game. Confidence is a feeling and feelings are what separate your money from your wallet. I've been doing this for over 20 years and I can tell you with absolute certainty that the bets I felt most confident about have lost just as often as any other bets.

The math is simple. With 1% units you can lose 50 bets in a row before you're completely broke. With 5% units you can only lose 20 in a row. With 10% units you can only lose 10. Now obviously nobody is going to lose 50 in a row, but bad streaks of 10-15 losses happen more often than people think. Variance is real and it's brutal if you're not prepared for it.

Tony's 2% approach is reasonable if you have a proven track record and know your edge. But for anyone who hasn't tracked at least 500 bets with verified positive ROI, they should be at 1% maximum. Most people overestimate their skill level dramatically.

The other thing people don't understand is bankroll management isn't just about surviving losing streaks. It's about being able to bet into your edge consistently. If you blow your bankroll on a bad week because you were betting 10% units, you can't capitalize when good opportunities come up the following week. You're out of the game entirely.

Trust the process, not your gut.

 

[FadeThePublic]

I'm at 2.5% per unit which I know is higher than Eddie recommends but I'm comfortable with it given my edge. When I have a spot where public money is heavily on one side and I'm seeing reverse line movement, I want to be able to capitalize on that opportunity.

The way I see it, if you have an actual edge you should be aggressive enough to make real money from it. Betting 1% units when you're hitting 57% is leaving money on the table. Obviously you need to balance that with survival but if your edge is real then 2-3% units is optimal from a growth standpoint.

That said, Eddie's right about one thing. Most people betting 5% or 10% units don't actually have an edge, they just think they do. I tracked for two full years at 1% before I bumped up to 2.5%. You need proof before you get aggressive.

Princess I think you need to actually set a defined bankroll and stick to percentage-based betting. What you're doing right now is basically gambling not investing. If you want to treat this like entertainment that's fine but don't expect to be profitable long-term with that approach.

 

[CoachTony_Bets]

@SharpEddie47 I hear what you're saying about 1% being safer and you're probably right that it's the smartest approach for most people. My reasoning for 2% is that I'm not trying to become a professional bettor or anything, this is supplemental income for me. I have a job that pays my bills. So I'm willing to accept slightly more risk for slightly more reward.

But I absolutely agree with your point about not varying unit size based on confidence. I used to do that when I first started and it was a disaster. The games I felt most confident about were often the worst beats. Now I just stick to my 2% and occasionally 1.5x or 2x that on very specific situational spots that I've tracked and know work for me historically.

@FadeThePublic How did you decide 2.5% was the right number for you? Was it based on calculating optimal growth rate or just what felt comfortable?

 

[ParlayPrincess_88]

Okay you guys are making me feel like I'm doing this all wrong lol. I guess I never really thought of it as having a "bankroll" that I manage. It's just money in my betting app that goes up and down.

So if I wanted to do this the right way, would I take whatever's in my account now ($380) and say that's my bankroll, then only bet like 1% or 2% of that per game? That would be like $3.80 or $7.60 per bet which seems really small. At that rate it would take forever to actually make any real money wouldn't it?

I get that the point is to not go broke but also like, I'm not betting thousands of dollars here. If I lose the $380 in my account it's not the end of the world, I can just deposit more next paycheck. Maybe the strict bankroll thing is more for people betting serious amounts?

 

[SharpEddie47]

Princess this is exactly the mindset that keeps people losing. You're thinking about it completely backwards.

The question isn't "how big do my bets need to be to make real money." The question is "do I have an actual edge that will make me money over time." If the answer is yes, then proper bankroll management ensures you'll be around long enough to realize that edge. If the answer is no, then bet size is irrelevant because you're just going to lose either way.

If you only have $380 and you're betting $50 per game, that's 13% of your bankroll per bet. You can lose 7 games in a row and you're completely broke. And I guarantee you that over a long enough timeline you will hit a 7 game losing streak, probably multiple times. It's not bad luck, it's just variance.

Here's what you should do. Decide how much total money you're willing to allocate to sports betting. Not what's in your account right now, but the actual total amount you're comfortable losing if it came to that. Let's say that number is $2,000. That's your bankroll. 1% of that is $20 per bet. That's your unit size.

Yes it feels small. Yes it means you're not going to turn $2,000 into $10,000 overnight. But here's the thing, you weren't going to do that anyway. What this approach does is give you the ability to survive long enough to actually develop an edge and profit from it consistently.

The "I'll just deposit more money next paycheck" mentality is exactly how people end up thousands in the hole over time without realizing it. You're not tracking your total deposits vs withdrawals, you're just feeding money into a system where you have no edge.

 

[FadeThePublic]

@CoachTony_Bets I didn't really calculate optimal growth rate mathematically if I'm being honest. I tracked my results for two years at 1% units and saw that my worst drawdown was about 15% of my bankroll. So I figured if I'm never losing more than 15% even during bad stretches, I could safely bump up to 2.5% without serious risk of ruin. It's been working so far but Eddie would probably tell me I'm being reckless.

The thing is though, I'm not trying to slowly grind out 3% ROI over decades. I want to make actual money while I'm young enough to enjoy it. And if you have a real edge, being too conservative is actually -EV in terms of total lifetime earnings.

@ParlayPrincess_88 Look I get it, small bets aren't exciting. But think about it this way. Would you rather bet $50 per game, go broke three times this year, and end up down $1,500 overall? Or bet $20 per game, stay solvent all year, and end up plus $800 if you can develop even a small edge? The second option is way better even though the bets feel small.

Also if you're hitting parlays occasionally that's great but those big wins are masking the slow bleed of bad process. You're probably down money over time but the parlay hits make you think you're doing fine.

 

[CoachTony_Bets]

I think there's a middle ground here that we're missing. Princess clearly isn't approaching this as a professional investment, she's treating it as entertainment. And that's fine, not everyone needs to be a sharp bettor. But even for entertainment betting you should have some guardrails.

Princess here's what I'd suggest. Take whatever amount you're comfortable losing in a month, let's say $400. That's your monthly bankroll. Divide that by 20 (assuming you want to make about 20 bets per month). That gives you $20 per bet. It's higher than the 1% Eddie recommends but it's way better than betting randomly between $20 and $100 based on how you feel.

If you run through that $400 in a month, you stop until next month. No more deposits mid-month. That way you're still having fun and making bets that feel meaningful to you, but you're not in a situation where you're hemorrhaging money without realizing it.

The strict 1% approach Eddie uses is optimal for professional bettors who are treating this like a business. But for recreational bettors I think a monthly budget approach works better psychologically. You still have structure and protection but it doesn't feel as restrictive.

 

[ParlayPrincess_88]

@CoachTony_Bets okay that actually makes sense and feels way more doable than the 1% thing. I could definitely do like $400 a month and $20 per bet. That's basically what I'm doing now anyway but without the "stop if you run out" part, which is probably where I get in trouble.

@SharpEddie47 I know you're trying to help and I appreciate it even if it comes across harsh sometimes. You're right that I don't really track my total deposits and withdrawals. I probably should do that. I think I've deposited maybe $1,200 total since I started betting last year and my account is at $380 right now so I guess I'm down $820? That sounds bad when I say it out loud.

Maybe I do need to be more careful about this. I just don't want it to stop being fun you know? Like if I'm stressing about spreadsheets and ROI calculations it's not entertainment anymore it's work.

 

[SharpEddie47]

Princess I appreciate you being honest about the $820 loss. Most people wouldn't admit that. The good news is you're recognizing it now before it becomes $5,000 or $10,000.

Tony's suggestion is reasonable for your situation. The monthly budget approach gives you structure without requiring you to treat this like a second job. You can still have fun and make bets that feel exciting, but you have a hard stop that prevents real damage.

One thing I'd add though. Even with the monthly budget approach, you should at minimum track your overall deposits vs withdrawals in a simple note on your phone. Just write down every time you deposit money and every time you withdraw. At the end of the year you'll know if you're up or down overall. That's not asking much and it gives you actual data instead of just feelings.

The reality is most people are going to lose at sports betting. The house edge is real and most bettors don't put in the work to develop an actual edge. But losing $400 a year on entertainment is very different from losing $5,000 a year without realizing it. One is a budgeted expense, the other is a problem.

If you decide you want to actually try to be profitable long-term, then you need to get serious about tracking, unit sizing, bankroll management, all of it. But if you just want entertainment with controlled risk, Tony's approach works fine.

 

[FadeThePublic]

This has actually been a pretty good discussion. I think we've covered the spectrum from professional approach (Eddie's 1%) to serious recreational (Tony's 2%) to casual entertainment (Princess's monthly budget idea).

The common thread though is that everyone needs some kind of structure. Whether it's strict percentage-based units or a monthly entertainment budget, you have to have guardrails. The people who get in real trouble are the ones who just bet whatever whenever with no plan at all.

I will say though, if you're betting 1% units and you don't have at least $5,000 bankroll, you're basically betting $50 per game or less. At that level it's hard to make meaningful money even if you have an edge. So there's a practical minimum bankroll needed if you actually want this to be profitable rather than just entertainment.

For anyone reading this who's trying to figure out what's right for them, my advice is start at 1% until you have at least 500 tracked bets. If your ROI over those 500 bets is positive, you can consider bumping to 2%. If it's negative, you need to fix your process before worrying about unit size. No amount of bankroll management will save you if you don't have an edge.

 

[CoachTony_Bets]

Yeah I think we've pretty much covered all the bases here. The key takeaway is that unit sizing matters a lot more than most people think. It's not the sexy part of betting, it's not fun to talk about, but it's the difference between lasting long-term and going broke.

One more thing I'll add for anyone newer to this. Your unit size should stay the same even when you're on a heater. I see a lot of guys start winning a few in a row and suddenly they're betting double or triple their normal amount because they feel like they're "hot." That's when disaster strikes. Winning streaks end just as unexpectedly as they begin, and if you've increased your bet sizes you're going to give back all those winnings plus more.

Discipline is boring but it's what separates the people who are still betting five years from now from the people who flame out in six months.