406-357 +4077
G1 MIL -101
*CHW -103
MIN -168
MIN 1st5 -.5 -128
MIN TT O4.5 -130
G2 MIL -119
MIA -142
.5U MIA -1.5 +149
1.5U PHL U7.5 -123
PHL -132
DET +1.5 -148
TEX TT U4.5 -140
CHC +100
STL TT U3.5 +119
1.5U SD 1st5 U4.5 -113
406-357 +4077
G1 MIL -101
*CHW -103
MIN -168
MIN 1st5 -.5 -128
MIN TT O4.5 -130
G2 MIL -119
MIA -142
.5U MIA -1.5 +149
1.5U PHL U7.5 -123
PHL -132
DET +1.5 -148
TEX TT U4.5 -140
CHC +100
STL TT U3.5 +119
1.5U SD 1st5 U4.5 -113
406-357 +4077
G1 MIL -101
*CHW -103
MIN -168
MIN 1st5 -.5 -128
MIN TT O4.5 -130
G2 MIL -119
MIA -142
.5U MIA -1.5 +149
1.5U PHL U7.5 -123
PHL -132
DET +1.5 -148
TEX TT U4.5 -140
CHC +100
STL TT U3.5 +119
1.5U SD 1st5 U4.5 -113
@undermysac
I Like the under a lot.
I have explained the math behind why I occasionally do this in MLB and NHL. It has been profitable over the years. But it is just a rare situation that makes it have an edge all around.
Of course, if one team gets to a starter early, it likely will be a loser.
![]()
@undermysac
I Like the under a lot.
I have explained the math behind why I occasionally do this in MLB and NHL. It has been profitable over the years. But it is just a rare situation that makes it have an edge all around.
Of course, if one team gets to a starter early, it likely will be a loser.
![]()
@LuckyGuy
It was originally going to be a top play. Those with the asterisk were slated to be top plays. But I backed off for various reasons.
With that game I was worried that they looked so good yesterday a letdown might happen or the As could bounceback against a guy they have never seen, etc.
I just forgot to remove that one asterisk
![]()
@LuckyGuy
It was originally going to be a top play. Those with the asterisk were slated to be top plays. But I backed off for various reasons.
With that game I was worried that they looked so good yesterday a letdown might happen or the As could bounceback against a guy they have never seen, etc.
I just forgot to remove that one asterisk
![]()
@Raiders22
I completely understand the strategy, and like it personally. I have done similar stuff in the past.
The best part is that it's not a "boom or bust" betting pattern. It's a "boom or lose a fraction" strategy. It's a very safe way to risk your $, and quite frankly very professional. Especially if it's correlated with the under(that's why I asked).
Best of luck
![]()
@Raiders22
I completely understand the strategy, and like it personally. I have done similar stuff in the past.
The best part is that it's not a "boom or bust" betting pattern. It's a "boom or lose a fraction" strategy. It's a very safe way to risk your $, and quite frankly very professional. Especially if it's correlated with the under(that's why I asked).
Best of luck
![]()
@LuckyGuy
1.5 or 2 in regular season is about the most for me.
![]()
@LuckyGuy
1.5 or 2 in regular season is about the most for me.
![]()
