Lastly, I don't recommend betting the -1 RL even if it's offered by your book if you don't understand perfectly the probability behind that line.
Playing a -1 RL is the same than playing both the ML and RL -1.5. Therefore, you have to think there is value in both bets to play the RL -1 and be profitable.
If your calculation results in a probability higher than implied that the game finish by a margin of 1 run, then play the ML. If you think the opposite, then play the RL -1.5. No need to bother with the RL -1. Just my two cents!
0
Both of these quotes are from THE ACTUARY:
Lastly, I don't recommend betting the -1 RL even if it's offered by your book if you don't understand perfectly the probability behind that line.
Playing a -1 RL is the same than playing both the ML and RL -1.5. Therefore, you have to think there is value in both bets to play the RL -1 and be profitable.
If your calculation results in a probability higher than implied that the game finish by a margin of 1 run, then play the ML. If you think the opposite, then play the RL -1.5. No need to bother with the RL -1. Just my two cents!
Then you decide the amount you want to bet and you calibrate using $120 on the ML and $100 on the RL -1.5... so you put 120 / 220 of the amount you want to bet on the ML, and 100 / 220 of the amount you want to bet on the RL -1.5
0
Then you decide the amount you want to bet and you calibrate using $120 on the ML and $100 on the RL -1.5... so you put 120 / 220 of the amount you want to bet on the ML, and 100 / 220 of the amount you want to bet on the RL -1.5
For the Monday dogs in July, the most profitable subset has been away non-divisional conference dogs with a winning percentage of <=50%, which fits Angels, Reds, Diamondbacks tonight
0
For the Monday dogs in July, the most profitable subset has been away non-divisional conference dogs with a winning percentage of <=50%, which fits Angels, Reds, Diamondbacks tonight