All Forums | MLB Betting

Bob's MLB Tuesday *** 5.26.15 ***

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 3750
Posts: 29
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 6446
Posted: #1
MLB 2015 --- Overall
YTD: 112-99-10 (53%) *** +5.03% Return on Risk ***
ML: 75-60 (56%)
F5: 4-5-2 (44%)
RL: 8-9-5 (47%)
O/U: 24-21-3 (53%)
Parlays: 1-4-0 (20%)
Starting / Current Bankroll: $5,216 / $5,789.46 (+$573.46, +10.99%)

MLB 2015 --- Picks of the Day
YTD: 30-29-6 (51%) *** -0.99% Return on Risk ***
ML: 20-15 (57%)
F5: 0-2-1 (0%)
RL: 3-6-4 (33%)
O/U: 7-5-2 (54%)

Month (2015)
April: 53-53-5 (50%) *** -1.89 Return on Risk ***
May: 59-46-4 (56%) *** +11.79% Return on Risk ***

MLB 2014
Overall: 826-685-112 (55%) *** +4.13% Return on Risk ***
PODs: 121-72-16 (63%) *** +16.60% Return on Risk ***

Monday's Results
No plays. Spent the day w/ family honoring those who lost their lives defending this amazing country.

Tuesday's Card
Not much time for commentary tonight. Have the parents visiting from out of town. For those interested, I will be back around tomorrow.

901 Washington Nationals (J. Zimmermann) FG, -114 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes) 

926 Minnesota Twins (M. Pelfrey) FG, +125 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

927 Detroit Tigers (D. Price) FG, -113 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)
Fun fact: Oakland 1-9 in games vs. lefty starters. They are hitting lefties to the tune of .214 (.585 OPS) and face one of the best lefties in the game (in Price) tomorrow. Meanwhile, the Tigers are hitting righties at a .281 clip (.763 OPS), which is good for the best in MLB.

Add to the fact that Oakland's bullpen has been putrid and we have ourselves a very nice opportunity to play the Tigers in this spot.

Leans
Orioles (C. Tillman) -115
Rays (A. Colome) -110 (prob layoff with how their bats have looked)
Marlins/Pirates Over 8 (looking for over 4/4.5 F5 tomorrow)
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2012
Posts: 34171
Posted: #2
Best of Luck  
Helping Kama'aina to beat their " Local " since 1994.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2012
Posts: 292
Posted: #3
hey man been following you and somewhat tailing for the past week or so. you do a very straight forward efficient job. thanks and gl
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 17459
Posted: #4

IOWA you say,   

GL Tuesday, BOB!!! 

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2002
Posts: 66016
Posted: #5
Good luck BOB!
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 17459
Posted: #6
Quote Originally Posted by Dogjimbo:

IOWA you say,   

GL Tuesday, BOB!!! 

  Sorry BOB, I thought you said they were visiting from Iowa.... My bad. I'm not a fast reader... ha
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2012
Posts: 22004
Posted: #7
On the Nats and leaning Twins 
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2006
Posts: 23247
Posted: #8
GL bro
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 6446
Posted: #9
Tuesday's Card *** Updated ***
Decided to play a few totals.

Picks of the Day

901 Washington Nationals (J. Zimmermann) FG, -114 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

921 Chicago (Danks) / Toronto (Dickey) Over 5 F5, -105 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

Regular Plays

926 Minnesota Twins (M. Pelfrey) FG, +125 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

927 Detroit Tigers (D. Price) FG, -113 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

903 Miami (Urena) / Pittsburgh (Locke) Over 4 F5, -125 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

Strong Lean:
Giants (Bumgarner) -137 (5dimes) / -135 (Bovada)
I like to keep my total risk at 5% or bankroll or less on any given day. I really like the Giants today. I am not sure that we will see a better line, but I am holding off for now. I would like this much more at -130 or better and the -1.5 RL is a bit rich (i.e., don't like the -1 RL at this price). Giants have been red hot (17-7 in May) and have Pence (who has been great) back in the lineup. After an awful April, the Brewers are playing more like a .500 team (11-13 in May). This is meaningful as their schedule wasn't light by any stretch of the imagination: 6 vs. Cubs; 4 vs. Dodgers; 3 vs. Detroit. In other words, they have played close to .500 ball over a stretch where > 50% of their games were against legitimate contenders. I know Garza is bad, but I am thinking this might be a Brewers or no play situation.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2012
Posts: 5074
Posted: #10
Quote Originally Posted by BirdsOnBat:

Tuesday's Card *** Updated ***
Decided to play a few totals.

Picks of the Day

901 Washington Nationals (J. Zimmermann) FG, -114 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

921 Chicago (Danks) / Toronto (Dickey) Over 5 F5, -105 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

Regular Plays

926 Minnesota Twins (M. Pelfrey) FG, +125 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

927 Detroit Tigers (D. Price) FG, -113 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

903 Miami (Urena) / Pittsburgh (Locke) Over 4 F5, -125 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

Strong Lean:
Giants (Bumgarner) -137 (5dimes) / -135 (Bovada)
I like to keep my total risk at 5% or bankroll or less on any given day. I really like the Giants today. I am not sure that we will see a better line, but I am holding off for now. I would like this much more at -130 or better and the -1.5 RL is a bit rich (i.e., don't like the -1 RL at this price). Giants have been red hot (17-7 in May) and have Pence (who has been great) back in the lineup. After an awful April, the Brewers are playing more like a .500 team (11-13 in May). This is meaningful as their schedule wasn't light by any stretch of the imagination: 6 vs. Cubs; 4 vs. Dodgers; 3 vs. Detroit. In other words, they have played close to .500 ball over a stretch where > 50% of their games were against legitimate contenders. I know Garza is bad, but I am thinking this might be a Brewers or no play situation.


I actually got on SF which might not be the best idea but out of principle (and numbers of course).  Bumgarner has a 1.65 lifetime ERA against Milwaukee and while the Brewers are playing much better of later, the Giants are playing the best.  The price might be high but given the pitcher on the mound and the roll that the Giants are on, it's hard for me to turn away.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 6446
Posted: #11
Tuesday's Card *** FINAL ***
I decided to push my informal max risk for the day (6% of Bankroll). This is the third time I have done this so far this year. Last season, I tended to risk 5-10% of bankroll, with more risk placed toward the end of the season. In terms of dollars at risk, playing six games @ 1% of bankroll is the same as playing 3 games @ 2% of bankroll with the added benefit of diversification. I don't aim to necessarily play X number of games. I play what qualifies under my criteria for line value. Good luck tonight fellas!

Picks of the Day

901 Washington Nationals (J. Zimmermann) FG, -114 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

909 San Francisco Giants (M. Bumgarner) FG, -128 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)
I decided to bite @ -128 (implied probability of 56.1%). That's more than a full percentage point reduction in implied probability over the last few hours (3pts since the opening line). At my calculated win probability (~62%) this game offers an expected return on risk of ~10%, which qualifies as a POD for me.

921 Chicago (Danks) / Toronto (Dickey) Over 5 F5, -105 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

Regular Plays

926 Minnesota Twins (M. Pelfrey) FG, +125 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

927 Detroit Tigers (D. Price) FG, -113 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

903 Miami (Urena) / Pittsburgh (Locke) Over 4 F5, -125 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2015
Posts: 701
Posted: #12
What made you switch the Tigers from a "Pick of the Day" to just one of your regular plays?
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 6446
Posted: #13
^^^ Wow. Copy and paste error. Nationals are NOT a POD. Good catch, and thank you.

CORRECTION:

Picks of the Day

909 San Francisco Giants (M. Bumgarner) FG, -128 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

927 Detroit Tigers (D. Price) FG, -113 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

921 Chicago (Danks) / Toronto (Dickey) Over 5 F5, -105 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

Regular Plays

901 Washington Nationals (J. Zimmermann) FG, -114 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

926 Minnesota Twins (M. Pelfrey) FG, +125 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)

903 Miami (Urena) / Pittsburgh (Locke) Over 4 F5, -125 --- Risk 1.00% of Bankroll (5dimes)
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2013
Posts: 197
Posted: #14
Was wondering, why do you have PODs if you're doing the same amount for each bet?
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2015
Posts: 701
Posted: #15
you're welcome man. With you on Twins and Tigers. GL to all your plays 
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2012
Posts: 58766
Posted: #16

In the Mets' last 37 games, the favorite is 33-4 SU. If the $100 bettor blind bet on the fav in the Mets' games over that run, they'd be up $2,785. 

The Mets are 0-12 in their last 12 games as an underdog but they are 20-3 in their last 23 games as a favorite.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 6446
Posted: #17
Quote Originally Posted by PlayWithThem:

Was wondering, why do you have PODs if you're doing the same amount for each bet?


Last season, I played my PODs at 1% until I established a track record that warranted sizing them differently (ultimately sized them at 1.50%). I began this season at 1.50% and wasn't hitting at a rate that reflected the "value" I saw in the lines. So, I decided to scale back (to be prudent) until I established a discernable difference in performance between PODs and Regular Plays (from a return on risk perspective).

If you look at last season, my RoR for PODs was ~3X what it was for my overall performance which suggests the RoR was > 3X that of regular plays. My performance on PODs has been trending upward over the last month so I might begin resizing them again.


 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 2094
Posted: #18
Why washington?


The right-hander has a 5.06 ERA on the road compared to 2.51 at home, and he's 0-3 with a 6.27 ERA in three career outings at Wrigley. He has allowed five homers in 18 2-3 innings there.

Zimmermann is 1-4 with a 4.81 ERA in seven overall starts against the Cubs. Four Chicago hitters have at least 10 at-bats against him - Starlin Castro (3 for 19), Miguel Montero (6 for 17), Chris Coghlan (4 for 16) and Dexter Fowler (2 for 13).

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 6446
Posted: #19
Quote Originally Posted by nurich:

Why washington?


The right-hander has a 5.06 ERA on the road compared to 2.51 at home, and he's 0-3 with a 6.27 ERA in three career outings at Wrigley. He has allowed five homers in 18 2-3 innings there.

Zimmermann is 1-4 with a 4.81 ERA in seven overall starts against the Cubs. Four Chicago hitters have at least 10 at-bats against him - Starlin Castro (3 for 19), Miguel Montero (6 for 17), Chris Coghlan (4 for 16) and Dexter Fowler (2 for 13).



bc I think the Nationals have a starting pitching advantage, significant bullpen advantage, better offense, notably better offense vs. righties... and have a win probability that is higher than what is implied by the line.

as far as the ABs vs. Zimmermann goes.. if you take those 4 hitters, they have gone a combined 15-65 (.231 BA) w/ 5 extra-base hits and 0 HRs. Is that really a selling point to take the Cubs?

That said, i dont put much weight into W/L and ERA vs. teams unless they are recent data points. Teams can change significantly from year to year, and if Zimmermann is facing a different Cubs team, then I am going to cap him and the Nationals against that Cubs team (i.e., the current one). Zimmermann's last start at Wrigley was in 2013 and here is lineup from that day:

1) Lake 2) Barney 3) Navarro 4) Schierholtz 5) Castro 6) Murphy 7) McDonald 8) Ransom

Does that resemble today's team?

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2013
Posts: 197
Posted: #20

Quote Originally Posted by BirdsOnBat:



Last season, I played my PODs at 1% until I established a track record that warranted sizing them differently (ultimately sized them at 1.50%). I began this season at 1.50% and wasn't hitting at a rate that reflected the "value" I saw in the lines. So, I decided to scale back (to be prudent) until I established a discernable difference in performance between PODs and Regular Plays (from a return on risk perspective).

If you look at last season, my RoR for PODs was ~3X what it was for my overall performance which suggests the RoR was > 3X that of regular plays. My performance on PODs has been trending upward over the last month so I might begin resizing them again.


Makes sense!

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 2017
Posted: #21
GL
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2008
Posts: 5149
Posted: #22
I think it's crucial you get your parents involved with a play or two and then our time will be your time!
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #23
BOL
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2011
Posts: 12178
Posted: #24
Thanks for those over 1st 5 bob . Tailed you on those 
 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2011
Posts: 1401
Posted: #25
All Forums | MLB Betting
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2025 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

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.