Go back to school punk my bank is always positive gambling is taking chances the Yankees were favorite yesterday because of CC I stayed away and to St. Louis and won you need to know how to pick them.
Go lecture some place else I bet you did'nt take Federer last week 3 times and three times he increased my bank roll get a job in Mcdonalds and leave us alone!!!!
Actually, you are right. But to lay wood with Fed (-300, -400) when he has been is questionable form is RETARDED as well. No, instead I cleaned house on Fernando Gonzalez over Murray and then cleaned house again with Soderling over Gonzo. One bet was -135, other was +135. This aint rockett science. And ATL was my best bet yesterday followed by Oakland and then Philly. All in black and white on these boards go read it. And ALL games I bet yesterday the line was -110 and under and I went 3-0. Go figure. Imagine that! I didn't have to lay wood and won- what a concept! I can see I'm dealing with morons here so I'll just leave it alone and let you all lose your money for being so fucking dumb. You deserve to lose if you are that dumb. Laying wood is what keeps sportsbooks in business. If you dont understand that then you shouldnt be betting sports unless of course its just entertainment for you and not a money making venture.
0
Quote Originally Posted by jpcowboy:
Go back to school punk my bank is always positive gambling is taking chances the Yankees were favorite yesterday because of CC I stayed away and to St. Louis and won you need to know how to pick them.
Go lecture some place else I bet you did'nt take Federer last week 3 times and three times he increased my bank roll get a job in Mcdonalds and leave us alone!!!!
Actually, you are right. But to lay wood with Fed (-300, -400) when he has been is questionable form is RETARDED as well. No, instead I cleaned house on Fernando Gonzalez over Murray and then cleaned house again with Soderling over Gonzo. One bet was -135, other was +135. This aint rockett science. And ATL was my best bet yesterday followed by Oakland and then Philly. All in black and white on these boards go read it. And ALL games I bet yesterday the line was -110 and under and I went 3-0. Go figure. Imagine that! I didn't have to lay wood and won- what a concept! I can see I'm dealing with morons here so I'll just leave it alone and let you all lose your money for being so fucking dumb. You deserve to lose if you are that dumb. Laying wood is what keeps sportsbooks in business. If you dont understand that then you shouldnt be betting sports unless of course its just entertainment for you and not a money making venture.
i dont think i have posted for a few years but read what is mostly useful info over that time here. but this one brings me out of retirement. you sound like you are in college or grad school and math finally dawned on you. be warned, there are quite a few people in here who understand stats pretty well, and there is a zero chance they would agree with some of your assumptions. challenging heavy money line favorite in any sport is valuable, but to draw any line anywhere without theoretical value i dont think works. if you believe a team will win 60 % of games in the data set, then you obviously would lay -130 evenly on each game. as someone referenced, halladay at home is expected to win more that 60 % of the time, so youd take -130 each and every time so long at you can weather (whether?) a 2 or 3 standard deviation move (i figured you would enjoy the mathy-talk). if i felt jays win only 56.5 % of roy's starts, then laying 130 is a poor choice. talk nice to people, words like never and always generally irritate the masses. gl to you and everyone else.
You tell others not to make assumptions yet you are assuming i'm a college student. Buddy, I'm 38 years old and have been running money since I was 22. I run a biotech venture capital fund with over $160M in equity and I bet baseball and tennis as a hobby but also to make money and I do quite well at both my day job and my sports betting hobbies because I adhere to one rule and one rule only - Discipline, which 90% of sports bettors and stock traders lack. Go ahead and bet all your favorites but you are betting against incredible statistical odds and are sure to lose in the long run. Be my guest pal.
0
Quote Originally Posted by hook21:
i dont think i have posted for a few years but read what is mostly useful info over that time here. but this one brings me out of retirement. you sound like you are in college or grad school and math finally dawned on you. be warned, there are quite a few people in here who understand stats pretty well, and there is a zero chance they would agree with some of your assumptions. challenging heavy money line favorite in any sport is valuable, but to draw any line anywhere without theoretical value i dont think works. if you believe a team will win 60 % of games in the data set, then you obviously would lay -130 evenly on each game. as someone referenced, halladay at home is expected to win more that 60 % of the time, so youd take -130 each and every time so long at you can weather (whether?) a 2 or 3 standard deviation move (i figured you would enjoy the mathy-talk). if i felt jays win only 56.5 % of roy's starts, then laying 130 is a poor choice. talk nice to people, words like never and always generally irritate the masses. gl to you and everyone else.
You tell others not to make assumptions yet you are assuming i'm a college student. Buddy, I'm 38 years old and have been running money since I was 22. I run a biotech venture capital fund with over $160M in equity and I bet baseball and tennis as a hobby but also to make money and I do quite well at both my day job and my sports betting hobbies because I adhere to one rule and one rule only - Discipline, which 90% of sports bettors and stock traders lack. Go ahead and bet all your favorites but you are betting against incredible statistical odds and are sure to lose in the long run. Be my guest pal.
Actually, you are right. But to lay wood with Fed (-300, -400) when he has been is questionable form is RETARDED as well. No, instead I cleaned house on Fernando Gonzalez over Murray and then cleaned house again with Soderling over Gonzo. One bet was -135, other was +135. This aint rockett science. And ATL was my best bet yesterday followed by Oakland and then Philly. All in black and white on these boards go read it. And ALL games I bet yesterday the line was -110 and under and I went 3-0. Go figure. Imagine that! I didn't have to lay wood and won- what a concept! I can see I'm dealing with morons here so I'll just leave it alone and let you all lose your money for being so fucking dumb. You deserve to lose if you are that dumb. Laying wood is what keeps sportsbooks in business. If you dont understand that then you shouldnt be betting sports unless of course its just entertainment for you and not a money making venture.
It should read that STL not ATL was my best bet yesterday and you can look at my posts from yesterday that show it. I had three plays yesterday all for around even money. STL-OAK-PHI all winners. Tonight I am back on the Phillies and looking for another play or two.
0
Quote Originally Posted by vamosrafa:
Actually, you are right. But to lay wood with Fed (-300, -400) when he has been is questionable form is RETARDED as well. No, instead I cleaned house on Fernando Gonzalez over Murray and then cleaned house again with Soderling over Gonzo. One bet was -135, other was +135. This aint rockett science. And ATL was my best bet yesterday followed by Oakland and then Philly. All in black and white on these boards go read it. And ALL games I bet yesterday the line was -110 and under and I went 3-0. Go figure. Imagine that! I didn't have to lay wood and won- what a concept! I can see I'm dealing with morons here so I'll just leave it alone and let you all lose your money for being so fucking dumb. You deserve to lose if you are that dumb. Laying wood is what keeps sportsbooks in business. If you dont understand that then you shouldnt be betting sports unless of course its just entertainment for you and not a money making venture.
It should read that STL not ATL was my best bet yesterday and you can look at my posts from yesterday that show it. I had three plays yesterday all for around even money. STL-OAK-PHI all winners. Tonight I am back on the Phillies and looking for another play or two.
It should read that STL not ATL was my best bet yesterday and you can look at my posts from yesterday that show it. I had three plays yesterday all for around even money. STL-OAK-PHI all winners. Tonight I am back on the Phillies and looking for another play or two.
Take a look at Colorado back at home. They are on a decent run right now.
0
Quote Originally Posted by vamosrafa:
It should read that STL not ATL was my best bet yesterday and you can look at my posts from yesterday that show it. I had three plays yesterday all for around even money. STL-OAK-PHI all winners. Tonight I am back on the Phillies and looking for another play or two.
Take a look at Colorado back at home. They are on a decent run right now.
Baseball betting is simple. Look for all games where there is a favorite of more than 130. Now take a black marker and cross them off your board. Now start breaking down all the remaining games/teams and try to find some winners. If you are 52% on even money games you are winning. If you are 52% on underdogs you are winning more money. If you are 53, 54, 55% now you are really winning some serious cash. Bottom line? Cross every 135+ favorite off your board and analyze the games for a possible underdog in those games as well as all other games and hope you are in the 51-55% range on your picks.
[/Quote
I'll be following your picks for the next 3 days....lets get this thing going
0
[Quote: Originally Posted by vamosrafa]
Baseball betting is simple. Look for all games where there is a favorite of more than 130. Now take a black marker and cross them off your board. Now start breaking down all the remaining games/teams and try to find some winners. If you are 52% on even money games you are winning. If you are 52% on underdogs you are winning more money. If you are 53, 54, 55% now you are really winning some serious cash. Bottom line? Cross every 135+ favorite off your board and analyze the games for a possible underdog in those games as well as all other games and hope you are in the 51-55% range on your picks.
[/Quote
I'll be following your picks for the next 3 days....lets get this thing going
Doesn't matter what the line is, it can have value or it can not. You can get a -300 line that still has lots of value, even if you're laying 3-1.
A stats course won't help you unless it's your life. Being an actuary is probably one of the hardest things to achieve. These people are no joke. I'm going to assume you are not one of them. You may have a strong financial background, all the more power to you....but don't think it equates to the betting world and statistical analysis.
You also assume that people are only bettting these types of wagers.
And in essence you are saying, don't ever back the team/angle that is favoured to win. Hmmmm...something doesn't sound quite right.
0
Silly argument.
Doesn't matter what the line is, it can have value or it can not. You can get a -300 line that still has lots of value, even if you're laying 3-1.
A stats course won't help you unless it's your life. Being an actuary is probably one of the hardest things to achieve. These people are no joke. I'm going to assume you are not one of them. You may have a strong financial background, all the more power to you....but don't think it equates to the betting world and statistical analysis.
You also assume that people are only bettting these types of wagers.
And in essence you are saying, don't ever back the team/angle that is favoured to win. Hmmmm...something doesn't sound quite right.
Sorry, -151 is too much under your strategy. How about Texas at -105 vs. the Dodgers?
I'm on the Phillies. Of Course if you like Boston that could qualify as they are only laying 125 but Philly is hard on lefties. Shit, they hit Johan the other night what do you think they will do to Lester? I'm also looking at Houston getting 170 against a team that can't hit lefties. Haren will pitch great but what happens when he comes out of the game in the 7th or 8th inning? To me Houston is a value play. Arizona only mustered a single run against walk-machine Jonathan Sanchez who is a lefty. Also looking at K.C.
0
Quote Originally Posted by tommysonfire:
Sorry, -151 is too much under your strategy. How about Texas at -105 vs. the Dodgers?
I'm on the Phillies. Of Course if you like Boston that could qualify as they are only laying 125 but Philly is hard on lefties. Shit, they hit Johan the other night what do you think they will do to Lester? I'm also looking at Houston getting 170 against a team that can't hit lefties. Haren will pitch great but what happens when he comes out of the game in the 7th or 8th inning? To me Houston is a value play. Arizona only mustered a single run against walk-machine Jonathan Sanchez who is a lefty. Also looking at K.C.
i dont think i have posted for a few years but read what is mostly useful info over that time here. but this one brings me out of retirement. you sound like you are in college or grad school and math finally dawned on you. be warned, there are quite a few people in here who understand stats pretty well, and there is a zero chance they would agree with some of your assumptions. challenging heavy money line favorite in any sport is valuable, but to draw any line anywhere without theoretical value i dont think works. if you believe a team will win 60 % of games in the data set, then you obviously would lay -130 evenly on each game. as someone referenced, halladay at home is expected to win more that 60 % of the time, so youd take -130 each and every time so long at you can weather (whether?) a 2 or 3 standard deviation move (i figured you would enjoy the mathy-talk). if i felt jays win only 56.5 % of roy's starts, then laying 130 is a poor choice. talk nice to people, words like never and always generally irritate the masses. gl to you and everyone else.
Great post hook21. Totally agree that laying big juice in a sport like baseball or hockey is not the way to go. However, having an artificially set cut-off point on when to not lay chalk is not prudent either.
It does make me somewhat ill to lay over -135 when betting a fav. in those two sports, and I've only done it twice this year in baseball. Doggies, even huge dogs, and small favs are they way to profit over the long haul.
0
Quote Originally Posted by hook21:
i dont think i have posted for a few years but read what is mostly useful info over that time here. but this one brings me out of retirement. you sound like you are in college or grad school and math finally dawned on you. be warned, there are quite a few people in here who understand stats pretty well, and there is a zero chance they would agree with some of your assumptions. challenging heavy money line favorite in any sport is valuable, but to draw any line anywhere without theoretical value i dont think works. if you believe a team will win 60 % of games in the data set, then you obviously would lay -130 evenly on each game. as someone referenced, halladay at home is expected to win more that 60 % of the time, so youd take -130 each and every time so long at you can weather (whether?) a 2 or 3 standard deviation move (i figured you would enjoy the mathy-talk). if i felt jays win only 56.5 % of roy's starts, then laying 130 is a poor choice. talk nice to people, words like never and always generally irritate the masses. gl to you and everyone else.
Great post hook21. Totally agree that laying big juice in a sport like baseball or hockey is not the way to go. However, having an artificially set cut-off point on when to not lay chalk is not prudent either.
It does make me somewhat ill to lay over -135 when betting a fav. in those two sports, and I've only done it twice this year in baseball. Doggies, even huge dogs, and small favs are they way to profit over the long haul.
Doesn't matter what the line is, it can have value or it can not. You can get a -300 line that still has lots of value, even if you're laying 3-1.
A stats course won't help you unless it's your life. Being an actuary is probably one of the hardest things to achieve. These people are no joke. I'm going to assume you are not one of them. You may have a strong financial background, all the more power to you....but don't think it equates to the betting world and statistical analysis.
You also assume that people are only bettting these types of wagers.
And in essence you are saying, don't ever back the team/angle that is favoured to win. Hmmmm...something doesn't sound quite right.
What I'mm saying is simple: if you are a 55% player, which is quite an achivement, if you are betting at -140 with a 55% win rate you aren't making money. If you are betting at a 55% clip and you are only laying 115 on average you are doing very well. Laying more than 130 in baseball is a path to ruin and that's if you're above 50%. If you drop below 50% which a lot of bettors do every year then not only are you losing you are getting BLOWN OUT. The key is to still have a bankroll after a losing streak. If you are laying wood and you are on a losing streak wave bye-bye to your bankroll. Its hard enough to hit games as it is. Anyone can find multiple games every day to bet without laying wood. There is no reason to lay wood. Halladay may pitch 8 shutout innings tonight but what happens if Nolasco matches him and Scott Downs comes in a gives up a 2 run shot to Jorge Cantu? Then what? Was it worth laying the 300? C'mon now. You'd have to hit 3 even money bets in a row just to get EVEN. Do what you want, I can only provide facts and hard numbered stats. Am I perfect? Far from it. But when I lose at least I am only losing at even money. That lets you live to fight another day. Laying wood is a path to ruin.
0
Quote Originally Posted by MLBguru:
Silly argument.
Doesn't matter what the line is, it can have value or it can not. You can get a -300 line that still has lots of value, even if you're laying 3-1.
A stats course won't help you unless it's your life. Being an actuary is probably one of the hardest things to achieve. These people are no joke. I'm going to assume you are not one of them. You may have a strong financial background, all the more power to you....but don't think it equates to the betting world and statistical analysis.
You also assume that people are only bettting these types of wagers.
And in essence you are saying, don't ever back the team/angle that is favoured to win. Hmmmm...something doesn't sound quite right.
What I'mm saying is simple: if you are a 55% player, which is quite an achivement, if you are betting at -140 with a 55% win rate you aren't making money. If you are betting at a 55% clip and you are only laying 115 on average you are doing very well. Laying more than 130 in baseball is a path to ruin and that's if you're above 50%. If you drop below 50% which a lot of bettors do every year then not only are you losing you are getting BLOWN OUT. The key is to still have a bankroll after a losing streak. If you are laying wood and you are on a losing streak wave bye-bye to your bankroll. Its hard enough to hit games as it is. Anyone can find multiple games every day to bet without laying wood. There is no reason to lay wood. Halladay may pitch 8 shutout innings tonight but what happens if Nolasco matches him and Scott Downs comes in a gives up a 2 run shot to Jorge Cantu? Then what? Was it worth laying the 300? C'mon now. You'd have to hit 3 even money bets in a row just to get EVEN. Do what you want, I can only provide facts and hard numbered stats. Am I perfect? Far from it. But when I lose at least I am only losing at even money. That lets you live to fight another day. Laying wood is a path to ruin.
And besides, both the dog and the favourite pay the bookie juice, just in different forms.
The bookie obviously wants to get paid regardless of the outcome of the game. Therefore, it's wrong to assume that only the favourite is making them money. Yes, if I lay -130 I am laying juice. But if the opposite is +110, you may not be paying juice but you are getting less for your money than you should be, which would be +130 if you were to take true odds with no bookie. So you're still getting less for your money, just as you're getting less for your money -130. Hence why bookies always win.
0
And besides, both the dog and the favourite pay the bookie juice, just in different forms.
The bookie obviously wants to get paid regardless of the outcome of the game. Therefore, it's wrong to assume that only the favourite is making them money. Yes, if I lay -130 I am laying juice. But if the opposite is +110, you may not be paying juice but you are getting less for your money than you should be, which would be +130 if you were to take true odds with no bookie. So you're still getting less for your money, just as you're getting less for your money -130. Hence why bookies always win.
What I'mm saying is simple: if you are a 55% player, which is quite an achivement, if you are betting at -140 with a 55% win rate you aren't making money. If you are betting at a 55% clip and you are only laying 115 on average you are doing very well. Laying more than 130 in baseball is a path to ruin and that's if you're above 50%. If you drop below 50% which a lot of bettors do every year then not only are you losing you are getting BLOWN OUT. The key is to still have a bankroll after a losing streak. If you are laying wood and you are on a losing streak wave bye-bye to your bankroll. Its hard enough to hit games as it is. Anyone can find multiple games every day to bet without laying wood. There is no reason to lay wood. Halladay may pitch 8 shutout innings tonight but what happens if Nolasco matches him and Scott Downs comes in a gives up a 2 run shot to Jorge Cantu? Then what? Was it worth laying the 300? C'mon now. You'd have to hit 3 even money bets in a row just to get EVEN. Do what you want, I can only provide facts and hard numbered stats. Am I perfect? Far from it. But when I lose at least I am only losing at even money. That lets you live to fight another day. Laying wood is a path to ruin.
Yea but who plays only those odds all season long? You rarely see someone play big dogs all day everyday....there are a few though.
So are you saying it's not wise to EVER play a -130?
What if I have 8 plays all for 2 units, 4 at -130 and 4 at +130.
There are still 4 plays -130, and yet I'm getting even money on my entire card.
0
Quote Originally Posted by vamosrafa:
What I'mm saying is simple: if you are a 55% player, which is quite an achivement, if you are betting at -140 with a 55% win rate you aren't making money. If you are betting at a 55% clip and you are only laying 115 on average you are doing very well. Laying more than 130 in baseball is a path to ruin and that's if you're above 50%. If you drop below 50% which a lot of bettors do every year then not only are you losing you are getting BLOWN OUT. The key is to still have a bankroll after a losing streak. If you are laying wood and you are on a losing streak wave bye-bye to your bankroll. Its hard enough to hit games as it is. Anyone can find multiple games every day to bet without laying wood. There is no reason to lay wood. Halladay may pitch 8 shutout innings tonight but what happens if Nolasco matches him and Scott Downs comes in a gives up a 2 run shot to Jorge Cantu? Then what? Was it worth laying the 300? C'mon now. You'd have to hit 3 even money bets in a row just to get EVEN. Do what you want, I can only provide facts and hard numbered stats. Am I perfect? Far from it. But when I lose at least I am only losing at even money. That lets you live to fight another day. Laying wood is a path to ruin.
Yea but who plays only those odds all season long? You rarely see someone play big dogs all day everyday....there are a few though.
So are you saying it's not wise to EVER play a -130?
What if I have 8 plays all for 2 units, 4 at -130 and 4 at +130.
There are still 4 plays -130, and yet I'm getting even money on my entire card.
I will show you how easy it is ... take under 5.5 .. in the hockey finals and parlay that with the Brewers ..then take the Yankees ... easy 3 teamer ... enjoy and you are welcome
0
I will show you how easy it is ... take under 5.5 .. in the hockey finals and parlay that with the Brewers ..then take the Yankees ... easy 3 teamer ... enjoy and you are welcome
Baseball betting is simple. Look for all games where there is a favorite of more than 130. Now take a black marker and cross them off your board. Now start breaking down all the remaining games/teams and try to find some winners. If you are 52% on even money games you are winning. If you are 52% on underdogs you are winning more money. If you are 53, 54, 55% now you are really winning some serious cash. Bottom line? Cross every 135+ favorite off your board and analyze the games for a possible underdog in those games as well as all other games and hope you are in the 51-55% range on your picks.
You are taking statistics out of context. Taking everything at the line and that percentage you mentioned yes, will eventually not be profitable. But the name of the game is knowing when to enter and when to exit your trades.
0
Quote Originally Posted by vamosrafa:
Baseball betting is simple. Look for all games where there is a favorite of more than 130. Now take a black marker and cross them off your board. Now start breaking down all the remaining games/teams and try to find some winners. If you are 52% on even money games you are winning. If you are 52% on underdogs you are winning more money. If you are 53, 54, 55% now you are really winning some serious cash. Bottom line? Cross every 135+ favorite off your board and analyze the games for a possible underdog in those games as well as all other games and hope you are in the 51-55% range on your picks.
You are taking statistics out of context. Taking everything at the line and that percentage you mentioned yes, will eventually not be profitable. But the name of the game is knowing when to enter and when to exit your trades.
excellent, you are a trader. even better, a stock trader - nothing like pure delta to challenge the soul. 160 MM is a nice start. you sound like most stock traders i have worked with. i have no doubt you and everyone else here does well at their day job, but honestly - nobody cares. my age point was that you are coming off like a college kid. if you have something smart to say, say it smartly. enough internet tough guy talk by both of us - lets say we are both masters of the universe (ever talk with someone on internet who isnt?). im unsure if you addressed what i was saying. as a trader/investor/whatever you probably believe in theoretical value (i do). if all teams end up winning less than 55 % of their games, and the line for every game is -130, i agree with you. but the trick is to identify when there may be value in the line. the player disadvantage is in the spread of the line, not that the line has a favorite. a theoretically accurate -130/+110 line has 10ish cents of theoretical disadvantage to EITHER the fav or dog. by the same token, taking a 'dog that isnt getting enough "plus" is the wrong bet. its the spread we fight, not the favorite or the dog. nobody bets all favorites, and i dont think anyone is suggesting it is a lock and load winning strategy. but to contend betting any and all -131 or higher favorites is stupid is, well ....
well pal, time to run and blindly bet my faves.
gl to all.
0
excellent, you are a trader. even better, a stock trader - nothing like pure delta to challenge the soul. 160 MM is a nice start. you sound like most stock traders i have worked with. i have no doubt you and everyone else here does well at their day job, but honestly - nobody cares. my age point was that you are coming off like a college kid. if you have something smart to say, say it smartly. enough internet tough guy talk by both of us - lets say we are both masters of the universe (ever talk with someone on internet who isnt?). im unsure if you addressed what i was saying. as a trader/investor/whatever you probably believe in theoretical value (i do). if all teams end up winning less than 55 % of their games, and the line for every game is -130, i agree with you. but the trick is to identify when there may be value in the line. the player disadvantage is in the spread of the line, not that the line has a favorite. a theoretically accurate -130/+110 line has 10ish cents of theoretical disadvantage to EITHER the fav or dog. by the same token, taking a 'dog that isnt getting enough "plus" is the wrong bet. its the spread we fight, not the favorite or the dog. nobody bets all favorites, and i dont think anyone is suggesting it is a lock and load winning strategy. but to contend betting any and all -131 or higher favorites is stupid is, well ....
excellent, you are a trader. even better, a stock trader - nothing like pure delta to challenge the soul. 160 MM is a nice start. you sound like most stock traders i have worked with. i have no doubt you and everyone else here does well at their day job, but honestly - nobody cares. my age point was that you are coming off like a college kid. if you have something smart to say, say it smartly. enough internet tough guy talk by both of us - lets say we are both masters of the universe (ever talk with someone on internet who isnt?). im unsure if you addressed what i was saying. as a trader/investor/whatever you probably believe in theoretical value (i do). if all teams end up winning less than 55 % of their games, and the line for every game is -130, i agree with you. but the trick is to identify when there may be value in the line. the player disadvantage is in the spread of the line, not that the line has a favorite. a theoretically accurate -130/+110 line has 10ish cents of theoretical disadvantage to EITHER the fav or dog. by the same token, taking a 'dog that isnt getting enough "plus" is the wrong bet. its the spread we fight, not the favorite or the dog. nobody bets all favorites, and i dont think anyone is suggesting it is a lock and load winning strategy. but to contend betting any and all -131 or higher favorites is stupid is, well ....
well pal, time to run and blindly bet my faves.
gl to all.
It had been my overwhelming experience that laying over 130 in baseball is not only a stupid move but a move that is not needed in any circumstance. There are plenty of games on the board with favorites up to 130 and there are also many 110-115-120 games every single day. The key is to find winners in those games. Using the Halladay game as an example tonight illustrates how one could blow their entire weekend bankroll on one game and for what? For what reason? Is Halladay really a lock? What happens if he throws 9 pitches and his elbow starts bothering him and they are overly cautious and take him out? Is Toronto's lineup really that much better than the Marlins where they are worth laying 3-1? Anything can and does happen at sports betting. There are no locks, ever, at any price. One must accept that as fact before they can move forward and pursue steady profits. Once one accepts that there are no locks, ever, at any price and for a number of reasons then one realizes that the only games to bet on the board are games with almost even money odds. If you need proof positive just bet every favorite over 130 every night for 1 week. You may get lucky. So go to two weeks, then three, then four. Get back to me and let me know how luch you have left, if anything, at the end of 4 weeks. You can easily prove to yourself that favorite betting is a path to ruin even if you "pick your spots". A good handicapper should be able to find winners from even money games, just like in football. But that fact of the matter is baseball is a much easier sport to handicapp than football because there are way less variables mainly turnovers, penalties and weather. Baseball is where its at if you want to make money sports gambling, but you need to be even money games or at the MOST lay 130. One could say Detroit is a bet tonight with Porcello on the mound (not me I'd leave that game alone) againt a weak Pirate team but there is an example of a favorite laying 130. One could argue they look like a good favorite tonight over Pitt. Is Halladay reallly a 3-1 favorite? There is no reason to risk blowing yourself out when there are a TON of games every day for even money or up to 130 that make sense. I like the Phillies tonight. I think that is great value for a team that is the World Champs and murders lefties. But lets say you disagree and tell me that the A.L. owns the N.L. (true) and that Boston is about to go on a roll as is Lester. Well you know what? You only have to lay 125 with a team and lineup like Boston's tonight. So why in a million years would anyone bother playing with fire laying 3-1 when there are games and value like that on the board on either side? I don't see how this doesn't make sense to you. If you are a 55% player and you AVERAGE laying 140 you are DOWN at the end of the season- and that's being a 55% player. Now if you tell me you only lay 200 once a week and other times you bet +150 dogs etc I can retort that also. Its simple, really. Just eliminate all favorites of 130 every day and look at the other sides as well as the many other games that are left and break them down. You are sure to find some angels and trends that are in your favor and you won't have to lay the wood. Just do the work and you won't have to lay wood.
0
Quote Originally Posted by hook21:
excellent, you are a trader. even better, a stock trader - nothing like pure delta to challenge the soul. 160 MM is a nice start. you sound like most stock traders i have worked with. i have no doubt you and everyone else here does well at their day job, but honestly - nobody cares. my age point was that you are coming off like a college kid. if you have something smart to say, say it smartly. enough internet tough guy talk by both of us - lets say we are both masters of the universe (ever talk with someone on internet who isnt?). im unsure if you addressed what i was saying. as a trader/investor/whatever you probably believe in theoretical value (i do). if all teams end up winning less than 55 % of their games, and the line for every game is -130, i agree with you. but the trick is to identify when there may be value in the line. the player disadvantage is in the spread of the line, not that the line has a favorite. a theoretically accurate -130/+110 line has 10ish cents of theoretical disadvantage to EITHER the fav or dog. by the same token, taking a 'dog that isnt getting enough "plus" is the wrong bet. its the spread we fight, not the favorite or the dog. nobody bets all favorites, and i dont think anyone is suggesting it is a lock and load winning strategy. but to contend betting any and all -131 or higher favorites is stupid is, well ....
well pal, time to run and blindly bet my faves.
gl to all.
It had been my overwhelming experience that laying over 130 in baseball is not only a stupid move but a move that is not needed in any circumstance. There are plenty of games on the board with favorites up to 130 and there are also many 110-115-120 games every single day. The key is to find winners in those games. Using the Halladay game as an example tonight illustrates how one could blow their entire weekend bankroll on one game and for what? For what reason? Is Halladay really a lock? What happens if he throws 9 pitches and his elbow starts bothering him and they are overly cautious and take him out? Is Toronto's lineup really that much better than the Marlins where they are worth laying 3-1? Anything can and does happen at sports betting. There are no locks, ever, at any price. One must accept that as fact before they can move forward and pursue steady profits. Once one accepts that there are no locks, ever, at any price and for a number of reasons then one realizes that the only games to bet on the board are games with almost even money odds. If you need proof positive just bet every favorite over 130 every night for 1 week. You may get lucky. So go to two weeks, then three, then four. Get back to me and let me know how luch you have left, if anything, at the end of 4 weeks. You can easily prove to yourself that favorite betting is a path to ruin even if you "pick your spots". A good handicapper should be able to find winners from even money games, just like in football. But that fact of the matter is baseball is a much easier sport to handicapp than football because there are way less variables mainly turnovers, penalties and weather. Baseball is where its at if you want to make money sports gambling, but you need to be even money games or at the MOST lay 130. One could say Detroit is a bet tonight with Porcello on the mound (not me I'd leave that game alone) againt a weak Pirate team but there is an example of a favorite laying 130. One could argue they look like a good favorite tonight over Pitt. Is Halladay reallly a 3-1 favorite? There is no reason to risk blowing yourself out when there are a TON of games every day for even money or up to 130 that make sense. I like the Phillies tonight. I think that is great value for a team that is the World Champs and murders lefties. But lets say you disagree and tell me that the A.L. owns the N.L. (true) and that Boston is about to go on a roll as is Lester. Well you know what? You only have to lay 125 with a team and lineup like Boston's tonight. So why in a million years would anyone bother playing with fire laying 3-1 when there are games and value like that on the board on either side? I don't see how this doesn't make sense to you. If you are a 55% player and you AVERAGE laying 140 you are DOWN at the end of the season- and that's being a 55% player. Now if you tell me you only lay 200 once a week and other times you bet +150 dogs etc I can retort that also. Its simple, really. Just eliminate all favorites of 130 every day and look at the other sides as well as the many other games that are left and break them down. You are sure to find some angels and trends that are in your favor and you won't have to lay the wood. Just do the work and you won't have to lay wood.
to me it is independent event concept. when strictly looking for profit (i am a yankee fan and feel happy if i can give up minimal edge for games i get time to watch, so i dont count that - its the cost of entertainment) i look merely for edge, fav/dog, home/away, etc. ill lay 4 to 1 if i think the fav wins 5 out of 6 times i make same bet. conversely, ill take 4 to 1 if i think my dog only loses 3 out or 4 times they play the game. naturally, you never risk your bankroll on any game when looking for profit - ill lay 8 to 1 on florida at home in ncaaf if i think they in 9 of 10 times, etc. at some point the price is silly, i am not going to sell lotto tickets. but for me, and this is just for me, my cut off is at a different line.
gl to all.
0
to me it is independent event concept. when strictly looking for profit (i am a yankee fan and feel happy if i can give up minimal edge for games i get time to watch, so i dont count that - its the cost of entertainment) i look merely for edge, fav/dog, home/away, etc. ill lay 4 to 1 if i think the fav wins 5 out of 6 times i make same bet. conversely, ill take 4 to 1 if i think my dog only loses 3 out or 4 times they play the game. naturally, you never risk your bankroll on any game when looking for profit - ill lay 8 to 1 on florida at home in ncaaf if i think they in 9 of 10 times, etc. at some point the price is silly, i am not going to sell lotto tickets. but for me, and this is just for me, my cut off is at a different line.
The whole the gambling thing is a crap shoot,,,come on. we do it for the excitement of the action. Nobody has a clear edge in anything whether it be stats trends or whatever, It's all bullshit, It's how lucky you are to have the team hitting the ball that night or not PERIOD! Let's get real.
0
The whole the gambling thing is a crap shoot,,,come on. we do it for the excitement of the action. Nobody has a clear edge in anything whether it be stats trends or whatever, It's all bullshit, It's how lucky you are to have the team hitting the ball that night or not PERIOD! Let's get real.
Ok where are the genius' that were laying 300 with Halladay? Do you remember what I wrote about LAYING and who argued with me? You want me to find the post where I said what happens if Halladay comes out with an injury? Well lookie there. And that ladies and gentlemen is why you never lay wood over 130 and laying wood like 3-1 is just plain retarded. You are BEGGING to get cleaned out. The risk/reward is NOT THERE. AT ALL. One guy even said "there are times when you have to lay wood, like with a lock like Halladay tonight" Get a grip fellas and learn the right way or learn the hard way. I learned the hard way long ago and now only play the right way which is never, ever, laying over 130.
0
Ok where are the genius' that were laying 300 with Halladay? Do you remember what I wrote about LAYING and who argued with me? You want me to find the post where I said what happens if Halladay comes out with an injury? Well lookie there. And that ladies and gentlemen is why you never lay wood over 130 and laying wood like 3-1 is just plain retarded. You are BEGGING to get cleaned out. The risk/reward is NOT THERE. AT ALL. One guy even said "there are times when you have to lay wood, like with a lock like Halladay tonight" Get a grip fellas and learn the right way or learn the hard way. I learned the hard way long ago and now only play the right way which is never, ever, laying over 130.
Hot Forum Topics
