Profile | Entries | Thread Author | Posts | Activity |
---|---|---|---|---|
Not seeing many "old timers" these days. Contributors are pretty much as good/bad as they ever were. Weebs will steady out boys; if you liked him in the past, stick with him.
|
weeble5672 | 6 |
|
|
replied to
Ohtani’s interpreter lost $183 million and won $142 million so where did he get the other 25 million from if he stole 16 million?
in MLB Betting @buffer What legal bookie do you know that would turn him in? Only an illegal would extend 25 mil in credit and not even Pete Rose bookie was that dumb. I would wager there is still a lot to be known, and we will be the last to know it. |
buffer | 43 |
|
|
replied to
Ohtani’s interpreter lost $183 million and won $142 million so where did he get the other 25 million from if he stole 16 million?
in MLB Betting @maxwagers781 "there was so much money for him to gamble with he should've came onto covers and asked for some advice." Maybe that was where he got his advice
|
buffer | 43 |
|
|
Rarely is a team that has won 7 straight with lights out pitching AND great hitting an underdog. Very confusing. Betting against a streak is also not known to be a wise idea. Is there some "insider knowledge" we are unaware of? Just sayin............ |
PUSSYGALORE333 | 15 |
|
|
Yeah, they suck and Soroka looked like (**&^@&*) his first outing, but the Royals? +164 was just too tempting, especially with the Covers consensus thinking the Royals have a 72% chance of winning any game. |
KeyElement | 7 |
|
|
@kurtiejoe Ah! Now here is a guy that could literally stone me. Lives nearby in Mesa and it is probably him that stones my house when I sing in the shower! Hard to trust anyone you met on Covers!
|
KeyElement | 30 |
|
|
@lltb43 Yeah bud, I know there were some doubts, thanx to my age (78) and some recent health problems, but for the most part I am well. Slowing down a little though. I am going to start late, 2/3 weeks, and probably play less this year. 2 All |
KeyElement | 30 |
|
|
Yeah, I'm back! For "the four that wanna own me, three that wanna stone me, and one that says he/she is a friend of mine." Nothing to post yet, maybe two or three weeks, just thought a few might care. JEG, oldest friend on this site, you still around? Who else goes way, way back? |
KeyElement | 30 |
|
|
Nice odds, but you need both McClanahan and Valdez to disappear. If either falls out, the other will be a lock. The writers are not fans that stuff ballot boxes, they know who deserves what. Ohtani is very, very good, but not in that class. |
LuffyMango | 8 |
|
|
Teheran looks very good so far. If I knew the umpire I would consider under 9.5. Looks like the brewers can't hit lefties and the Reds have a hot starter going at them. The park is a problem, but if the chuckers do their job, who knows? Opinion? |
yeghia | 8 |
|
|
@JFelty The next two days we are looking at Kaprelian/Keller and you can't see any hope there, but then it is Harris/Contreras, and the new kid (Harris) is impressive so far. With Sears the A's have a shot in two of three. That keeps the series price down right there. |
KeyElement | 43 |
|
|
Let me clarify something. When I state the 5-6 on Sears and 6-5 on Oviedo, those are starter vs. starter results, not the eventual outcome of the games. Sears is almost as good at putting his team in a position to win as Oviedo. Granted, the A's bullpen has not finished off the opponents, but with some help from the offense perhaps they can for a change. You do not get +160 because your team is a clear favorite, you get that for taking some small chances. A's are down around +145/150 now so I am not the only one that thinks they are a good choice. Only 23% of people think the A's are the right side, so the line should not have gone against them. I pointed out that Oviedo at -180 was ridiculous and some folks with money agree with me. We'll see. Think about that. Oviedo -180? |
KeyElement | 43 |
|
|
@bigred84
Can't possibly be "fact" since they have not, and will not, play each other. Again, you are looking at "team vs. team" baseball, not A's/Sears vs. Pirates/Oviedo. Most of your good team/bad team theory goes up in smoke right there. Think "value" for a moment. At -180 the Pirates pay 56 cents on the dollar of risk. The A's pay 160 cents on the dollar of risk. Are the Pirates so much better in tis matchup that they are worth $1.04 cents less value than the A's? |
KeyElement | 43 |
|
|
@MITM
"I completely 100% did not factor the starting pitcher into the equation. This could make or break the whole thing but it's my belief the books put to much emphasis on starting pitching in setting the line as do most handicappers." Groan. The opening line is, as you say, at the bookmakers discretion; however, after that it is entirely at the players discretion. Line can move radically based on how they are bet into. Players are responsible for everything that happens to that line, and it can move radically. The closing line has been set by the players, not the bookmakers. An opening line without pitching considerations would get the books badly sided on every game. It makes no sense to think otherwise. Would you propose to look at Rays/McClanahan the same as Rays/Kelley?. The Yankees/Cole same as Yankees/Schmidt? Ludicrous. You know I admire much of your work, and wish you well with it, but this is really out of the box and silly to begin with. I currently list starting pitching as 65.51% of a teams probability, and if you will check starters vs. end result you will find very little difference in team winning percentages beyond starter vs. starter. Good/bad bullpens make a little difference, but basically if your starter beats the others guy starter you are probably going to win the game. You are also right that everything is factored into the opening line, but not everything is of equal weight. So, when some guy wants to try his trend or angle against a starter that has a big advantage over his guy, he is flailing at windmills. Trends and angles do not beat superior pitching. Need more proof? Who goes to the playoffs, and eventually the World Series? The teams that got the outstanding pitching, not teams with lots of little extraneous features that make them interesting. They go home and watch the playoffs on TV. Good luck, but I am highly skeptical about this angle.
|
MITM | 50 |
|
|
All plays $100 flat, until further notice 2023 Season, 20-23-6, -667.93 (-15.2% RoR) 6/05/2023 A’s +160 (Sears/Oviedo) Thank the Heavens for “team” baseball. Bettors all over the “good team”, Pirates, and full bore against the “bad team”, the A’s. I wonder how many have noticed the A’s are 5-6 when Sears takes the ball, and the Pirates are 6-5 when Oviedo does. Not much difference, but Sears is 6-5 for quality starts and Oviedo is 5-6, which sort of seems to average things out. Sears is also much higher in the more important pitching categories than Oviedo, and that sort of eliminates HFA. A coin-flip at +160? Yeah, I’ll bite. |
KeyElement | 43 |
|
|
@MIZARD Clogging this forum with worthless crap is standard procedure. Just going along with what the boys like to do. Since you are not a friend ignore the posts. I do that with hundreds of guys every day. |
KeyElement | 8 |
|
|
Granted, LAA is the better value. I make Houston -132, so on today's line they are very high. BOL
|
TheBuddah | 14 |
|
|
How's that for calling a game "Even-Steven". Going to O.T. tied 1-1 |
KeyElement | 8 |
|
|
2023 Season, 20-21-6, -667.93 (-15.2% RoR) 2023 Season, 20-23-6, -667.93 (-15.2% RoR) Sorry, forgot to edit one line.
|
KeyElement | 8 |
|
|
All plays $100 flat, until further notice 2023 Season, 20-21-6, -667.93 (-15.2% RoR) 6/03/2023 No play today. The only dog qualifier is the Tigers and it is a very slim margin on that one. Some nice looking short favorites, but I am not inclined to go with them either. I hope undermysac is having better luck in his fishing tournament than I am having picking games.
|
KeyElement | 8 |
|
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.