Saturday MLB
- Thread starter NBA_Kid
- Start date
Nice number on the A's... best I see at B&M books is -170 now.
I see that the overnight was at -140... I think that at the new price, the value has disappeared, but as an A's fan and a Kid fan, I sure as hell hope they win.
:toast:
I see that the overnight was at -140... I think that at the new price, the value has disappeared, but as an A's fan and a Kid fan, I sure as hell hope they win.
:toast:
I really don`t know what the word value means when it comes to gambling....I see the word used a lot in the forums.
If you ask me....The A`s should be at least -170 against this crappy Jays team.
The A`s are a red hot baseball team.
I guess there`s always value in a winner :facepalm:
value ....Schmalue
value ....Schmalue
Yeah i ain't never had that explained to me either ...ok dms ur on the spot at what number does Oakland lose its value and how did u come up with the number .....Ah is all ears............can't poss be there's somethin' out there i don't know !!!!
value ....Schmalue
Yeah i ain't never had that explained to me either ...ok dms ur on the spot at what number does Oakland lose its value and how did u come up with the number .....Ah is all ears............can't poss be there's somethin' out there i don't know !!!!
I guess there`s always value in a winner Exactly..........The only value is in a winner !!! Here here !!!!!!
A few days ago there was a day game.....White Sox vs Twins....Peavy against Diamond.....The Sox were -117.
There was a thead in another forum with the title...."The Twins and Diamond are great value today"
I said to myself....What does he mean by value...I see that word used in so many different terms.
If you ask me....The Twins are a garbage team this season....They were playing a 1st place team with there ace on the mound in Jake Peavy.....anyways the Sox won the game 3-2.
i respectively disagree.. there is value with certain pitchers that are flying under the radar, like a diamond..joe public may not know about this guy like they would with a josh beckett, or roy halladay--speaking of halladay, imo it was good value to play against him as the odds vegas was slapping on him was def inlfated,presenting us with value..
for example:severall years ago i got a call about this rookie named dontrell willis getting the call up. It went like this, this kid can throw it, he is for real, he will be a dog. about 6 starts later he was never below -200---thus presenting us with value...
also would like to add, i dont see value being measured wether we win or lose the selected play.. many times i lose a play, and after im fine with it..cause i know at the price i was getting with a specific pitcher, i feel i made the right play, and in the long run with that price,i will be ahead.. for example i have series bet with the pirates +150 yes they lost game 1 and may get swept--but no votto, no phillps.. i love that price---reds won yest, but pirates smoked 3 balls that led to double plays( cant predict that)--inside the park home-run--and latos went yard...but my point im tryin to make is +150 is a solid number for the 4th best record in baseball
imo--betting texas or yankees to win the world series this year is not great value...yes they are the best teams, but this is baseball, teams get hott..i see value when the tigers were 14 to 1 a few weeks ago. also this year there are so many capable teams imo... reds, giants, dodgers, washington, tigers..
for example:severall years ago i got a call about this rookie named dontrell willis getting the call up. It went like this, this kid can throw it, he is for real, he will be a dog. about 6 starts later he was never below -200---thus presenting us with value...
also would like to add, i dont see value being measured wether we win or lose the selected play.. many times i lose a play, and after im fine with it..cause i know at the price i was getting with a specific pitcher, i feel i made the right play, and in the long run with that price,i will be ahead.. for example i have series bet with the pirates +150 yes they lost game 1 and may get swept--but no votto, no phillps.. i love that price---reds won yest, but pirates smoked 3 balls that led to double plays( cant predict that)--inside the park home-run--and latos went yard...but my point im tryin to make is +150 is a solid number for the 4th best record in baseball
imo--betting texas or yankees to win the world series this year is not great value...yes they are the best teams, but this is baseball, teams get hott..i see value when the tigers were 14 to 1 a few weeks ago. also this year there are so many capable teams imo... reds, giants, dodgers, washington, tigers..
Agree. Well put. I was going to post something exactly like this but didn't have the energy and was hoping someone would. After all value = getting a team @ a good price when the other team is over priced.
Good and reasonable question. My background is in psychology and international relations, and I cap with both quantitative and qualitative tools.
Much like the stock market, I try to bet on teams that are undervalued for whatever reason... starting pitcher, recent trends, whatever.
Here's what I mean by value, and I don't know if it's different than anyone else's. The A's win today's game more often that they lose. If the line is a pick 'em, they only have to win 50.000001% of the times this game is played for me to make money. If they're -150, I gotta win 60% of the time; at -200, 66.6% of the time, etc.
I'm too lazy to do the math offhand, but -140 (opener) to -170 (best *I* saw today) is a huge swing. Romero may be scuttling, but he's a serviceable, legit big league pitcher with above average stuff (IMO).
Like I said, the A's clearly win today's game more than 50% of the time. Let's say the "true," vig-free line, for whatever magical reason, was -300/+300. The Blue Jays would only have to win 1 of 4 times for us to make money. I'd have unloaded on that, getting good "value" from the bet, while expecting them to lose at least 55-65% of the time.
I hope that explanation made sense. "Value" is why I backed off the O's/Rays under after it moved from 8 overnight to 7 today. "Value" is taking advantage of market inefficiencies.
Anyone buying this? Would love to discuss further.
Hammer, good question. I don't know exactly where they lose "value," i.e., where does it become a long term unprofitable bet?
I know this: poker is my main source of income, and I am working to improve my capping by balancing the objective and subjective "feel" stuff, just like I do in poker. FWIW, I am excellent at poker and getting pretty decent at capping.
I can tell you this: I would have taken today's game at -140 and avoided it like the plague at -170. -150 to 155 feels about spot-on.
Thanks for the opportunity to discuss capping nuances... just when I think I have something down, this "sport" bites me in the ass.
:toast:
opcorn2 EXACTLY.
I don't bet futures, but if you do, the value is never in the Patriots, Yanks, or other teams that are even to about 5:1. "Value" is in the 8 to 20:1's, imo.
I agree with you about "value" being about the right play and not being results oriented. Good example (hindsight being 20/20 here) was if you bet the Mariners today. Pitchers' duel, anyone's ballgame, and it was basically a coinflip. If the M's had lost 2-1 and you were getting +135 to 140, you made a good bet.
The above isn't a perfect example, but I hope it exemplifies the point.
