laying more than 130 in baseball is financial suicide

Finally! someone with a working intellect.

I just can't help myself here... it is a royal waste of precious time, but this idiot just attracts it, lol... so,... based on your theory: Pros do not lay heavy odds (for those of you not up to speed on this post, I know absolutely by my experience, and the fact that I am in the company of other book pros each and everyday) on high probability plays...ever...never...as you said: "anyone doing this once cannot be taken seriously".   So, that would mean you would have to (have to, or you are going against the very basis of your theory) subscribe to parlaying many, if not most of your plays.  You cannot oppose this suspicion of mine b/c you subscribe to the concept of playing less likely plays for better odds, correct? Do not even attempt to say that parlays are low percentage plays so you steer clear, do even try it, because some of the most brilliant minds in any given sport sets the odds, and bets the odds... the line is moved by action, and the line moves to try to get the book to a 50/50 (each side) balance, so the book is not gambling, and only taking juice..... so....either you are a heavy parlay guy, or....better yet, you are the guy waiting to see a game misplayed by the big money in a certain game..... putting your money on the winner when all the rest of the betting world is blind to what your genuis sees so clearly.... which is it? or is it both?  now, I suppose you will say that all the pro's parlay heavy as well, yes?  Either way, you are an idiot, parlays are many times more rare in pro money than heavy favorites, and what pros wait around weeks at a time waiting for the magical game everyone else has so wrong?  your entire theory is completely idiotic.  I am not saying dogs are not profitable, they can be, but favs, and yes...heavy favs can be too, parlays as well (very spuratic, and usually on prime days and usually in a round robin format), but to say that "pros don't lay heavy odds" is just stupid, and once again, if you come to Vegas for even a month, you will realize the insanity of what you say.

LMAO....Ok Ok...just one more, then that is it, I swear..lol.... Ok..... Team A is a -200 fav (way above your line in the sand), you know, we know, and everyone knows that Team A would beat Team B on the said field, with said pitchers, said lineups, said conditions entirely, 4 of 5 games minimum.  Your theory says this is a bad bet b/c those of us that take this bet cannot be taken seriously, I am correct in these facts yes?

Now,...... "basic math" as you call it.

You make this bet 5 times for a dime per play, how much do you win or lose? 

Answer for the cocky genuis:

+$1,000

Ok, here is another......... not giving you opinions, just taking the science of math, probabilities, and scenarios....

we flip a coin, and I offer to pay you $10 for every time the coin lands heads 5 times in a row, but you pay me $5 everytime the coin lands heads, for 1,000 flips, now I am laying you 2-1 odds (or taking a -200 favorite.... by your hypothesis, this would be a bad bet, yes? lol..... no, no, no, don't say "only in baseball", because what we do is lay money with the best of it, in whatever we know well enough to effectively investigate enough, and detailed enough so that we can calculate on a table that this envent will play out in our favor this many times, and use a simple calculator to determine if it is a profitable play.  I am no expert in coin flipping, but take the above bet and I am bringing my entire bankroll to the party.   In short, your theory is pathetically misguided, and off base.

You pay me for everytime the coin lands tails <<< CORRECTION FOR ABOVE SCENARIO