picksix,
The problem is that two tails and you're bust! The risk of ruin at 50% of bankroll is enormous and why I keep saying money management can't be swept under the carpet. If betting on a 50-50 prop at +110 you still will have swings and binomial distribution patterns/streaks that will kill you if undisciplined. With a no risk bet or converting the same "small" risk to greater odds ( reward ) you don't risk ruin or throw $ management out the door.
You also have to compare apples and apples. My scenario only risks 20,000 in 100 tries ( 200 a pop ) to get to that 13,500 profit. TA's or yours(5000 at risk each attempt) risks 500,000 to get the 26,000. The risk to reward is MUCH BETTER in my scenario. And I've effectively put my whole bankroll into risk twice and have virtually ZERO CHANCE of busting ( unless heads hits the first 50 times straight and I obviously would not have 5000 to put on each if I ran into that kind of streak but it would be over in 2 tries for the other ) whereas any small run of tails will likely bust the other case. The first two or 3/4 for instance.
Please look at it more closely guys, it really is cool and works! Philo described just putting two units on one side and one on the other in basic training, and even that will help over a straight 1 unit on the soft side! It might seem counter-intuitive to bet anything on the -105 line but you are also betting more on the +110 too. If they were +100 and +105 instead it would be the same principle. Being less than even money doesn't matter if their is a scalp inherent/available. My last big ones of these was Monty -150 vs +170 ( I forget the opponent ) and the -150 side was at OLY so it wasn't exactly a shaky out. Really, mull it over and you'll see!
GL  |