i havent been wagering baseball except for this year so i dont know the statistical answer to this. i played the white sox u 9 at even odds instead of u 9.5 at -125. is there an advantage either way that anyone knows of. i relate it to football where you absolutely risk an extra.10 on the 1.00 when you are betting a line at 3 or 7 and buy the .5 point.
Which better? u 9 even or u 9.5 -125
- Thread starter nole47
- Start date
Without statistical analysis to back this up, my gut says to always take the half-run advantage and lay the extra juice if need be.
I'll be very interested to read what others have to say to document whether my instinct is true or full of crap.
I'll be very interested to read what others have to say to document whether my instinct is true or full of crap.
Good question and my opinion may differ greatly from others, but here goes.
To overcome the difference in -100 and -125 win percentage would need to increase by about 5.5%. (Which is an 11% increase over the 50% mark.) In other words you could break even with 50% wins at under 9 -100 and you would need to win more than 55.5% of the time at under 9.5 -125 to break even. I can supply charts to show that if anyone questions that figure.
So the question becomes . . . Does it increase your chances of winning by 11% to lay the -125 and get the hook on your side considering nine is still a push?
My opinion is that it wouldn't be worth it over the long haul. We will see what others have to say.
You are right about one thing . . . nine is a critical number in baseball just like three and seven are in football.
[This message has been edited by Never Caught Up (edited 07-02-2001).]
To overcome the difference in -100 and -125 win percentage would need to increase by about 5.5%. (Which is an 11% increase over the 50% mark.) In other words you could break even with 50% wins at under 9 -100 and you would need to win more than 55.5% of the time at under 9.5 -125 to break even. I can supply charts to show that if anyone questions that figure.
So the question becomes . . . Does it increase your chances of winning by 11% to lay the -125 and get the hook on your side considering nine is still a push?
My opinion is that it wouldn't be worth it over the long haul. We will see what others have to say.
You are right about one thing . . . nine is a critical number in baseball just like three and seven are in football.
[This message has been edited by Never Caught Up (edited 07-02-2001).]
i dont trust the action like i do in the other sports. i just think people are missing the boat on some of these totals. i think they are looking at win/losses or something (this is the most useless stat in all of sports in my eyes) or taking a team because they seem to hit good. I dont research into days off since last start too much, so i guess that helps. But this White Sox game, statiscally based on this years info shouldnt be more than 6 -7 runs scored. Another thing that has helped me is throwing out big innings. If you had under 8.5 in that San fran game , and 5 runs sf got at 1 inning, and it land on 9, thats an under to me. cant count on those big innings. sorry to ramble
I allways play for the push instead of paying the extra vig.If I were playing over I would pay extra to get to 9 opposed to 8.5.
i actually wasnt relating 9 to the 3,7 or 10 in football because i dont buy points or runs or whatever in baseball. i do know this , i always thought in football 3,7,10 were the 3 most common numbers for final scores until last year when i read differently because i always bought the half on all those numbers. the actual 3 are 3,7 and 4! So last year i dropped 10 and just played 3 and 7. In essence, if you are buying a .5 on 10 you should do it on 4 then, thats too much for me. With the 2pt conversion teams strive to be down/up by 7 or 3 so that makes those numbers even more valuable.
An example of this is todays Yankees game.
Some books have Over 9 -120, others have Over 9.5 +100.
I'll take the lower number and the extra juice because I think it will be close and I hate to lose by 1.
This is a rematch of a game on 6/22 between Messina and Lopez. The line on that game was 9.5, Messina won 6-3!
Some books have Over 9 -120, others have Over 9.5 +100.
I'll take the lower number and the extra juice because I think it will be close and I hate to lose by 1.
This is a rematch of a game on 6/22 between Messina and Lopez. The line on that game was 9.5, Messina won 6-3!
You are right about the four in football. I remember reading an in depth artile in Gaming Times about that. Actually the only time I buy the point is on three and many books now charge .20 when moving off of 3. I guess they are waking up to the value in that as well.
On further note . . . the difference in -120 and -125 changes things. In order to overcome -120 your win percentage needs to be about 54.8%.
[This message has been edited by Never Caught Up (edited 07-02-2001).]
On further note . . . the difference in -120 and -125 changes things. In order to overcome -120 your win percentage needs to be about 54.8%.
[This message has been edited by Never Caught Up (edited 07-02-2001).]
Your answer lies in your own perception of value and risk. I would hate giving up 20% just to avoid a push. If you believe that this game shouldn't exceed 6, 7, or 8 runs, then the "under 9" has an X amount of value. If you believe that 9 is a likely number (and it sounds like you think it might be), why bet on the game at all? There would be little perceived value. Of course, everyone measures value and their risk threshhold differently. But if I were uncertain by a half a run, I would not give up 20%, I would find another game.
------------------
If you're not the lead dog, your view never changes.
------------------
If you're not the lead dog, your view never changes.
