Just ran some numbers for April where if you bet the Dog and the FAvorite on the -1' line where both lines offered a minimum of +120 you would have went 80-9 with about a 12 1/2 unit gain.
Assuming a $100 bet on each side a loss would be -$200 and each paid an average of $38.15.
Anyone have actual numbers on this theory and not just speculation of how it would perform.
Thanks
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Just ran some numbers for April where if you bet the Dog and the FAvorite on the -1' line where both lines offered a minimum of +120 you would have went 80-9 with about a 12 1/2 unit gain.
Assuming a $100 bet on each side a loss would be -$200 and each paid an average of $38.15.
Anyone have actual numbers on this theory and not just speculation of how it would perform.
i have tracked betting both sides with RL -1.5. i have data goingback to 2004 and have looked at Colo home ( altitude) Hou home ( high runs park) tried to look at high run ball parks. figuring higher runs would stay away from close games. was kinda correct there
never saw a -1 RL where did you see that??. my calculations finished that as long as you had bet both sides and could win 75$ per 500$ combined it worked
Example : Team A - 140 Team B +130 and Team A was -1.5 (+130)
then you would wager
Team A -1.5 +130 250$ wins 575$
Team B (dog) +130 250$ wins 575$
This could be adjusted accordingly but as long as the win was 75$ it was deemed worthy.
Also as long as the one run winner wasnt the fave we were okay.
Its late and i dont have my info readily available. BUT it should be here somewhere on Covers.com
seemed to me that something like 83% of all games where NOT ONE RUN and 1/2 of those were underdog.
Simply put outta 10 plays at 500$ each (combined as a single)
9 winners +75$-100$ ( call it 80$ avg)..............1.44 units
1 BIG WHACK LOSER .................................-1.00 unit
so .44 unit( 220$) for every 10 plays.
It worked but the situational game searching made it tedious and the big balls it took ( who really wagers 500$ to win 80$) even tho it wins at a 91% made me just table this system
I still belief it can work. contact me if you like
GL To you
Secondandtwo
kevnbs
i have tracked betting both sides with RL -1.5. i have data goingback to 2004 and have looked at Colo home ( altitude) Hou home ( high runs park) tried to look at high run ball parks. figuring higher runs would stay away from close games. was kinda correct there
never saw a -1 RL where did you see that??. my calculations finished that as long as you had bet both sides and could win 75$ per 500$ combined it worked
Example : Team A - 140 Team B +130 and Team A was -1.5 (+130)
then you would wager
Team A -1.5 +130 250$ wins 575$
Team B (dog) +130 250$ wins 575$
This could be adjusted accordingly but as long as the win was 75$ it was deemed worthy.
Also as long as the one run winner wasnt the fave we were okay.
Its late and i dont have my info readily available. BUT it should be here somewhere on Covers.com
seemed to me that something like 83% of all games where NOT ONE RUN and 1/2 of those were underdog.
Simply put outta 10 plays at 500$ each (combined as a single)
9 winners +75$-100$ ( call it 80$ avg)..............1.44 units
1 BIG WHACK LOSER .................................-1.00 unit
so .44 unit( 220$) for every 10 plays.
It worked but the situational game searching made it tedious and the big balls it took ( who really wagers 500$ to win 80$) even tho it wins at a 91% made me just table this system
I still belief it can work. contact me if you like
I typed in -1 1/2 though I used the little hash mark symbol to indicate the 1/2.
Not usre I'm willing to pull the trigger on this one just yet. Think I'll keep tracking it and maybe set aside a special fund for it in July or August.
Thanks
I typed in -1 1/2 though I used the little hash mark symbol to indicate the 1/2.
Not usre I'm willing to pull the trigger on this one just yet. Think I'll keep tracking it and maybe set aside a special fund for it in July or August.
Hot Forum Topics
