Each day I go to my book and look at the odds, spreads, and o/u. I then narrow my selections down to only the plays that look to good to be true. A perfect example would be Sundays game between the Padres and Reds where the O/U was 7.5. The under was -128. The consensus had over 60% of the people taking over which is obviously what you would figure most of Joe Public would take, especially since it was something like +108. It looked obvious that the powers that be reeled the average Joe in to take the over, thus the under hit easily. Over my years of gambling I have been that sucker many times. Now I have finally become able to play against the obvious. These seem like they hit 75% of the time. During baseball, I see about five of these type plays a week, but have never actually tracked them and have just began trying to really look for and play them. Does anybody else do this or feel this way? Is this something that can be counted on to produce?
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Each day I go to my book and look at the odds, spreads, and o/u. I then narrow my selections down to only the plays that look to good to be true. A perfect example would be Sundays game between the Padres and Reds where the O/U was 7.5. The under was -128. The consensus had over 60% of the people taking over which is obviously what you would figure most of Joe Public would take, especially since it was something like +108. It looked obvious that the powers that be reeled the average Joe in to take the over, thus the under hit easily. Over my years of gambling I have been that sucker many times. Now I have finally become able to play against the obvious. These seem like they hit 75% of the time. During baseball, I see about five of these type plays a week, but have never actually tracked them and have just began trying to really look for and play them. Does anybody else do this or feel this way? Is this something that can be counted on to produce?
I forgot to add that I started really looking for and playing these last week. I had the Pirates in 2 consecutive wins over the Cards. Under on Padres Sunday. Over 7.5 in the Brewers/Astros game. The only loss so far was the Nats losing 2-1 to the Pirates. The reason I took the Nats was because Maholm was pitching for the Pirates, yet they were big dogs. Once again the consensus indicated that majority had Pitt. It looked like it made no sense for the Nats to be -130 so I went with it. I hope I have made the rational clear. Anyway, so far I am 4-1.
0
I forgot to add that I started really looking for and playing these last week. I had the Pirates in 2 consecutive wins over the Cards. Under on Padres Sunday. Over 7.5 in the Brewers/Astros game. The only loss so far was the Nats losing 2-1 to the Pirates. The reason I took the Nats was because Maholm was pitching for the Pirates, yet they were big dogs. Once again the consensus indicated that majority had Pitt. It looked like it made no sense for the Nats to be -130 so I went with it. I hope I have made the rational clear. Anyway, so far I am 4-1.
For Wednesday, May 21 I will take Under 7.5 at -122 in the Angels/Mariners game and Under 7 at -113 in the Giants/Padres game. I guess I'll start tracking this here and see what happens.
0
For Wednesday, May 21 I will take Under 7.5 at -122 in the Angels/Mariners game and Under 7 at -113 in the Giants/Padres game. I guess I'll start tracking this here and see what happens.
As a matter of personal feeling it stuck out as the one that made the least sense. Why would the Rays be the dog here? Personally I felt like the Rays should be at least -125 favorite. Couple that with the fact that the covers consensus had the vast majority picking the Rays making it look like a trap. Taking the Marlins, to me, is going against the obvious and the public or going against what looks like a possible trap. This is not so easy to explain and I know that it will have no credibility without results. This is based on personal experience over the years of being burned by the obvious and now having the nerve to fade it. I was surprised to find that no one had an opinion or experience with something like this to post when I made this thread. I may find that I am wrong, but it over the years it has seemed like if you can find these special plays you can win the good majority of the time. Florida sure is getting smoked right now though. At least they were pounded early so I didnt have to suffer through actually having hope haha. I now fall to 5-2. Another play that almost qualified was the Under 7 in the Cubs/Padres game. The only reason that I didnt play it was the fact that surprisingly it was around a 50/50 consensus and the line indicated a 50/50 chance.
0
As a matter of personal feeling it stuck out as the one that made the least sense. Why would the Rays be the dog here? Personally I felt like the Rays should be at least -125 favorite. Couple that with the fact that the covers consensus had the vast majority picking the Rays making it look like a trap. Taking the Marlins, to me, is going against the obvious and the public or going against what looks like a possible trap. This is not so easy to explain and I know that it will have no credibility without results. This is based on personal experience over the years of being burned by the obvious and now having the nerve to fade it. I was surprised to find that no one had an opinion or experience with something like this to post when I made this thread. I may find that I am wrong, but it over the years it has seemed like if you can find these special plays you can win the good majority of the time. Florida sure is getting smoked right now though. At least they were pounded early so I didnt have to suffer through actually having hope haha. I now fall to 5-2. Another play that almost qualified was the Under 7 in the Cubs/Padres game. The only reason that I didnt play it was the fact that surprisingly it was around a 50/50 consensus and the line indicated a 50/50 chance.
I would really like to hear an opinion from Vanzack or Linesman? on this. Maybe this is simply not enough handicapping info. to be taken seriously. This is based around feeling and being in tune with MLB to the point that you are able to recognize opportunities. I feel like I am very in tune with MLB, but the gambling gods may have a different idea. We shall see.
0
I would really like to hear an opinion from Vanzack or Linesman? on this. Maybe this is simply not enough handicapping info. to be taken seriously. This is based around feeling and being in tune with MLB to the point that you are able to recognize opportunities. I feel like I am very in tune with MLB, but the gambling gods may have a different idea. We shall see.
Ok thanks. I know they are getting crushed 2nite, but that's not why I asked about the pick. I saw Florida was only a small fav. an only 64% were on the Rays (rather than say 70%+).
Thanks for providing your thought process, BOL rest of weekend!
0
Ok thanks. I know they are getting crushed 2nite, but that's not why I asked about the pick. I saw Florida was only a small fav. an only 64% were on the Rays (rather than say 70%+).
Thanks for providing your thought process, BOL rest of weekend!
Maybe I need to set a 70% perameter. I have always felt like 64% and up would be considered lopsided, especially with an odd looking line. Something to think about. I just though the line was WAY off.
0
Maybe I need to set a 70% perameter. I have always felt like 64% and up would be considered lopsided, especially with an odd looking line. Something to think about. I just though the line was WAY off.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.