Question for the board about sweep/anti-sweep

[CrazyHorse]

Any replies would be greatly appreciated.

How much stock do you guys put in teams that are about to be swept or teams going for the sweep? In other words if you have a team that fits all your criteria for a play but they are the dog (or even the fav) in the series and this particular game would give them the sweep (Cincy would be an example today and I love them but they would be going for the sweep and were the dog in every game) would you still play them. It seems whenever I bet with a team going for the sweep they lose. But then if I decide not to play that particular team they win anyway.

I really like Cincy today and the Mets but both would be going for the sweep. On sunday I bet with 3 teams going for the sweep and all of them lost. Is there any W/L's #'s to back up the fact that playing teams going for the sweep is not a good idea? Does anyone automatically not play teams (esp if they are the dog) if they are going for the sweep.

It is a pretty general question I know. But if anyone can give me their thoughts on how they factor in sweep/anti-sweep games it would be appreciated.

 

[taker02000]

This is just my opinion, but if a visiting team is going for the sweep, then 9 times out of 10, I will go with the Home Team regardless. Only exceptions being a OVERWHELMING pitching matchup such as Pedro, Randy Johnson going for the visiting sweep. I have gotten burned too many times to count on this scenario and I usually go with the Home Team to avoid the sweep.

If the Home Team is going for the sweep, I usually look at it the same way based mainly on pitching matchups and quality of the team that is getting swept.

JMO

Taker

 

[tyro]

CrazyHorse,

I think it's a winning strategy to bet on road dogs going for sweeps. I suffered along with you on Sunday. In Mike Lee's book "Betting The Bases" (pretty old now but still worth a read) there's a chapter called "The Sweep Game Fallacy". Here are some of Lee's conclusions:

1. Betting on the club in danger of losing a three game series at home does not show a profit in the long run. In fact, a substantial loss.

2. Penant contenders do not show a profit in this situation either.

3. In a four game series, however, there is a small profit in wagering on the club in danger of being swept - these plays are few and far between.

4. In a three game series, wager against the club in danger of being swept if they are the favorite.

With you on the Mets and Reds!

 

[Wilson]

Before you go wasting your money on the Reds...Willis will probably mow down Reds big lefties casey, Griffey and Dunn...Florida is the play in my opinion.

 

[CrazyHorse]

Thanks for all the replies, it is much appreciated. I just seem to go back and forth: losing with the team going for the sweep then not playing teams in that spot the next time and they win. I really feel that I should just play a team if they fit the criteria regardless but at the same time I know I may need to be cautious in these situations. I may need to get a copy of that book as my bases plays have gone downhill the past 3 weeks. It would be interesting to know the records of teams going for the sweep the past few years whether they are the dog or fav.

Wilson,

With Willis holding lefties to a .176 avg this year you are probably right. But I still think Cincy has a good shot at this price and I love backing Lidle on the road as he is a career 27-15 on the road. gl in ur plays today.

 

[geeze]

I wonder how Mike Lee would address the 58-0 no sweep record Of the Cubs? Now 60-0. (see skulldog's post.)

I suspect he would call it a statistical anomaly. It sure doesn't look like a standard deviation to me.

Maybe the Cubs have a fighting spirit that other teams do not possess. ( Although they didn't show it tonight.)

Does anyone know if any other teams have a similar no-sweep record?

 

[Jaxx]

The following is for teams down 0-2 in a three game series over the previous 7 seasons:

Away Favs 138-115 -22.5 units
Away Dogs 310-488 -42.1 units*
Home Favs 230-164 -5.8 units
Home Dogs 163-197 +18.9 units

Hope this helps.
GL

 

[geeze]

Thank you, Rick!

Skulldog compiled his his 60-0 record with a two-part method.

If the Cubs lost the first game, he would bet them to win the second game. If they won, that ended the play.

If the Cubs lost the second game, and were now 0-2, he would double-up and bet them again to win the final game.

Is it possible to break down the information one more step, to conform to his system and see how other teams fared using the same method?

Thank you!

 

[CrazyHorse]

Ricknjax,

That is a big help, thank you very much for posting that. Very interesting stuff. I really think from now on I am going to play a team if they fit the criteria, regardless of whether its a sweep/anti-sweep game. Been thinking about it and I really think I would have been better off doing that to this point this year. Thanks again for all the replies..it really is appreciated!

 

[Jackanape]

I think that, in the long run, teams look at winning 2 of 3, or 3 of 4, of each series, and this could be the reson the stats don't support a sweep or no sweep theory...quite often, after winning the first two of a set, the winning team will rest some starters, or give a young arm a shot, playing the season for the long run...

 

[geeze]

Now 61-0

Game 1 Friday June 4 Lost

Game 2 Sat June 5 Won.