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
0
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$) even tho it wins at a 91% made me just table this system
I still belief it can work. contact me if you like
GL To you
Secondandtwo
0
kevnbs
i have tracked betting both sides with RL -1.5. i have data goingback to 2004 and have looked at Colo home ( altitude) Hou home ( high runs park) tried to look at high run ball parks. figuring higher runs would stay away from close games. was kinda correct there
never saw a -1 RL where did you see that??. my calculations finished that as long as you had bet both sides and could win 75$ 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
0
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
