Evan Altemus:Well I'm going to basically respectfully disagree with almost everything you said.
Well, then we agree that we have and will have disagreements from now on. No problem. 
No one can please Greeks or Trojans at the same time. 
Evan Altemus: First, I like to keep things simple with a 1-5 unit wagering system. This is a system that the average bettor can follow. If I am having a good season then my smaller plays are winning at a good rate, giving me a reason to keep making them. Also, what you don't realize or have chosen to ignore, is that if I am winning games at a higher rate, then I increase the unit size. During the NBA Playoffs, most of my plays were either 3 or 4 units because I was doing so well. So far during this MLB season my average play is either 1 or 2 units because I don't feel as comfortable.
I didn't choose to ignore the hot streakes. Nor the cold streakes. What I know is that LUCK will in the long term even out those hot and cold streakes and what is left is an EDGE. A handicapper have it or he doesn't have it. And therefore, it doesn't matter how many units we play.
Let me demonstrate that to you.
One handicapper can really beat the odds or he cannot do it. A good handicapper will pay attention to his work from time to time and will improve his methods, starting by cutting off all his plays that cleary show that he doesn't have an EDGE. Not by increasing or lowering his unit size, his stakes.
EDGE does not have nothing to do with unit size or Risk or Confidence. The odds always have Risk involved. But we have to know how to find Value on them. And if we are able to find True Value on the odds, we will have an EDGE.
For example, having an EDGE on pointspread sports, is to hit 57% during a certain period of time. This means that we are fiding Value on the lines. When we do it, we are having an EDGE. However if we do not have that kind of EDGE in three consecutive seasons, with at least an average 4% ROI (hitting 54,48%), then something is wrong with our handicapping.
On ML sports, is by choosing ML odds presented by the books which are at least 5% or 10% higher than our on, so if we hit exactly the winning percentage implied by our own odds, we will end up with a ROI of 5% or 10%.
We will have always Risk on our plays, but if we at least win 53% of our plays and those very same plays have +100 minimum odds, then we will have an EDGE. What we have to do first, is to avoid all the plays that will end up costing us money and hard earned profits. It is like avoiding playing in the american roulette, since the odds are against us. We only pull the trigger when the odds are stacked on our favor.
And we will know that by examining properly our own records. It doesn't make any sense to risk one or two units on plays were we are not showing any edge. For example, on Rugby League or Cricket where we always end up losing money, if we are making a lot of profits on our national or regional football association league.
Now, the true Risk Management is done with our bankroll. And our Management System is set to accommodate our winning percentage (which is calculated based on our W/L record) and our Volume. A lower winning percentage coupled with a high Volume of plays, will mandate that we have a lot of units available on our BR in order to endure the rough patches. On another hand, if our winning percentage is very high and the Volume is very low, then we can have less units available on our BR, but each unit size will be much bigger.
This way, we will never go bankrupt and we will always have the proper unit size for our odds value edge found in each play. Of course there are plays that present so much Value that we will double our stakes, but those situations are very rare, one or two per board, per year.
Unless you're really an exceptional handicapper and you will even want to play a +21 points dog as a -25 points favorite. I'm clearly exagerating, since you can't put a lot of money on those kind of plays. It will be easier to get down, let's say, $200K USD on a ML dog in Las Vegas and in the offshores using beards and runners, than on a "costumized" pointspread.
Evan Altemus: I also feel that most of your comments don't have much substance to them. You go on and on about topics that either don't make sense or are wrong. In regards to your ROI comment, I don't care about that because it's not a good way to analyze a handicapper. ROI should be used on a stock, bond, company, etc in my opinion. If a handicapper is using a sound unit wagering system then you need to look at that. True edge??? Come on now... If you are taking all of a handicappers plays and making them all the same unit size, then you are limiting the true skill of a capper. One of the biggest ways to make money in business, poker, sports betting, stock investing, is to capitalize on the best opportunities accordingly. In other words you really need to hammer away when good opportunities come along.
ROI is a simple benchmarking tool. It shows how good an handicapper is by measuring his many net units won against his total risked units. But you can also measure your ROI in special segments or markets like, MLB totals or MLB Run Lines or MLB Moneylines. Or NFL pointspreads and NFL totals or NFL Moneylines, in case we had played any. We can even use it on the unit size segment, in order to confirm if our top or big size plays were really the best, or if it were as good as the lower unit size plays.
If his lower unit size plays are not showing a real profit but his higher unit size plays are making a kill, the we just should drop the former and concentrate on the former. For me, a very square bettor, this makes a lot of sense to me. This way, I will get the most bang for the buck.
Why will I put myself at risk on plays that average a 3% ROI, when I have the same Volume of plays that average an 8% ROI? 
Does it make sense for me to risk money on plays that show a ROI lower than 1%? Only if I'm a degenerate gambler!!!
I might be very square, but I'm not that square.
Just my $0,02. PEACE!