Lee is a bit worn and with him going on 4 days rest vs. a retooled lineup the young stud Diaz is worth a shot.
White Sox +1 1/2 -185 over Indians 220/118
White Sox +1 1/2 -185 over Indians 220/118
Monday
- Thread starter Nick Douglas
- Start date
Why are you risking so much for a run and 1/2? If Lee is worn out...why not play it straight? :shrug:
It's not a higher risk. I play most of my plays with a stake of 220 according to a daily maximum risk of 500.
The run line is simply the better bet than the moneyline in my opinion, that's all. It really varies from bet to bet as far as whether the run line or the money line is the better bet. You just have to look at everything involved in the play.
The run line is simply the better bet than the moneyline in my opinion, that's all. It really varies from bet to bet as far as whether the run line or the money line is the better bet. You just have to look at everything involved in the play.
How can you say its not a higher risk? You are 1-1 this week and down $100+
If that is not a higher risk..I don't know what to say?
If that is not a higher risk..I don't know what to say?
When it comes to intelligent comments, you never know what to say.
Handicapping is a lifetime pursuit. If you worry about your results for two days or even two months, then you might as well give up and do this for fun rather than money. I make the play that has the best value based on my work. Once the play is made all you can do is start your work on the next day.
Handicapping is a lifetime pursuit. If you worry about your results for two days or even two months, then you might as well give up and do this for fun rather than money. I make the play that has the best value based on my work. Once the play is made all you can do is start your work on the next day.
Can i have dialogue with you without you hurling insults....SHEESH.
All I am saying...I'll book your strategy any day.
Good Luck.
All I am saying...I'll book your strategy any day.
Good Luck.
I regret the unprovoked insult.
Trust me, you can't afford to book my action.
Actually, if you doubt my ability so much, put up a dime and we'll have a one on one contest on Best Bettor. 30 plays for one month.
Trust me, you can't afford to book my action.
Actually, if you doubt my ability so much, put up a dime and we'll have a one on one contest on Best Bettor. 30 plays for one month.
Not to be a jerk, but you seem to be paying too much for the extra run in these games. In the wsox game, I think you paid about 30 too much. Just saying you have a feel for the game doesn't make the math work out right. And its not winning or losing one game or even one week--but you won't win long term overpaying for the run line that much.
FYI: When teams win, they also cover the run line more than 70% of the time.
FYI: When teams win, they also cover the run line more than 70% of the time.
Last edited:
Numbers I have shot about 66-68% at home depending on the year and 74-76% on the road depending on the year. Failing to cover 1.5 runs in a win, especially at home, happens with higher frequency on low lines.
To be honest, it won't make a huge difference over a long period of time. In 2 games posted here it has cost me probably $120 or so. If anyone wants to track the "would be" on my runline plays, feel free. Heck, maybe I will even try it.
Wilson is a good guy but we just have a fun, antagonistic relationship. Of course I hope he does well in his gambling.
To be honest, it won't make a huge difference over a long period of time. In 2 games posted here it has cost me probably $120 or so. If anyone wants to track the "would be" on my runline plays, feel free. Heck, maybe I will even try it.
Wilson is a good guy but we just have a fun, antagonistic relationship. Of course I hope he does well in his gambling.
I was being sincere and wasn't being my old antagonizing self.....
But, if you play this way throughout the year....you would have to hit mid 60% range to make any kind of profit. You are 1-1 this week (from what I've seen) down $120...if you lose tonight...you would have to win 4 to just make a marginal profit. Seems like this type of gambling would have you chasing a great deal. But, Good Luck to ya.
But, if you play this way throughout the year....you would have to hit mid 60% range to make any kind of profit. You are 1-1 this week (from what I've seen) down $120...if you lose tonight...you would have to win 4 to just make a marginal profit. Seems like this type of gambling would have you chasing a great deal. But, Good Luck to ya.
http://www.drbobsports.com/baseball/baseball.cfm?p=7
Here is a good page IE once showed me about runlines and moneylines. The point isn't to look at the stats, but rather to understand that value is value.
Let's take the example of KC last night. You could have had them at pk, +120 or +1.5, -155. To make a profit on the runline, you need to hit 61%. To make a profit on the moneyline, you need to hit 46%. Sounds great to only have to hit 46%, but let's look further.
Last year home teams covered the run line 69% of the time. That means the 54% that you would lose on the moneyline would turn into 37.5% (0.54 * 0.69) losers on the moneyline. That means theoretically I win 62.5% of the time. That means I just turned an even money play into a 1.5% ROI play. Or you could look at it from the perspective that I added 2.4% ROI (1.5%/62.5% for increase vs. break even) to whatever ROI I would have had playing the moneyline.
My view is that if you want to just play runlines exclusively or moneylines exclusively that is fine. Go ahead and don't sweat what might have been. But if you want to max out your profits, then do the research and find out what mathematical edge you might get playing runline instead of the moneyline (or vice versa).
Here is a good page IE once showed me about runlines and moneylines. The point isn't to look at the stats, but rather to understand that value is value.
Let's take the example of KC last night. You could have had them at pk, +120 or +1.5, -155. To make a profit on the runline, you need to hit 61%. To make a profit on the moneyline, you need to hit 46%. Sounds great to only have to hit 46%, but let's look further.
Last year home teams covered the run line 69% of the time. That means the 54% that you would lose on the moneyline would turn into 37.5% (0.54 * 0.69) losers on the moneyline. That means theoretically I win 62.5% of the time. That means I just turned an even money play into a 1.5% ROI play. Or you could look at it from the perspective that I added 2.4% ROI (1.5%/62.5% for increase vs. break even) to whatever ROI I would have had playing the moneyline.
My view is that if you want to just play runlines exclusively or moneylines exclusively that is fine. Go ahead and don't sweat what might have been. But if you want to max out your profits, then do the research and find out what mathematical edge you might get playing runline instead of the moneyline (or vice versa).
