All Forums | MLB Betting

CHC (+135): Talk me out of it.

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 3895
Posts: 71
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2013
Posts: 768
Posted: #26
Umm I just quickly looked through the reds schedule and they have only been in a position to sweep a series twice this year from what I see and are 1-1 and have a third chance today. Wtf you get your numbers from or am I kissing something.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2012
Posts: 295
Posted: #27

where did you get that cincy reds sweep season total 1-27 ?

those are the stats im asking about, did you just do the hard research or do you have a database that fed that stat to you.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 6446
Posted: #28
Quote Originally Posted by rmb5w:

CIN is 1-27 (.036) in sweeping a series this season.



I would put 0 emphasis on that. It doesn't tell us anything.

The probability of tossing 10 straight heads when flipping a coin is 0.1% (0.50^10).... but the probability is significantly higher when you've already had 9 straight heads. In fact, it's 50% (re: independent events)!

Basically, conditional probabilities are far different. The Reds have a much better than 50% chance of winning this game.


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 2793
Posted: #29
Dude, I'm leaning cubs and under. Thinking that the reds aren't going for the sweep, and that the rook's stuff is new to the reds so it might help the under?

Guessing an extra innings game that ends up 3-2 cubs?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2014
Posts: 2395
Posted: #30
I have Cubs winning 4-3 I'm on cubs small
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2014
Posts: 1594
Posted: #31

REDS ROMP!

 

 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2012
Posts: 1452
Posted: #32
Since 2002 (as far back as ESPN.com kept records) 
CIN is 0-29 in sweeping CHC at HOME 
in a scheduled series of 3 games or more.

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2012
Posts: 497
Posted: #33
This is just like yestarday tigers sat some guys and they still won leaving everything on the pitcher today the reds r leaving it up to the pitcher and his history vs the cubs
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2014
Posts: 1594
Posted: #34
What you arm chair handicappers and weekend warriors fail to grasp is that this kid never faced a linup like this- This aint the  Pleasant Town Hilltoppers, its the F-ing Cinncinatti Reds 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2012
Posts: 1452
Posted: #35
Quote Originally Posted by BirdsOnBat:



I would put 0 emphasis on that. It doesn't tell us anything.

The probability of tossing 10 straight heads when flipping a coin is 0.1% (0.50^10).... but the probability is significantly higher when you've already had 9 straight heads. In fact, it's 50% (re: independent events)!

Basically, conditional probabilities are far different. The Reds have a much better than 50% chance of winning this game.

for one... the Cubs dont lefties far better than they do righties... and Bailey OWNS the cubs. The Cubs are sending a guy making his debut.

Bailey vs. the Cubs since 2011:
Moneyline (currently -148): 10-1
-1.5 Runline (currently +140): 9-2
-2.5 Runline (currently +210): 5-6

The conditions ARE far different.  All of those Bailey records are based on CIN's line-up at full strength.  CIN is lacking 4 of their sluggers today.  

May I remind everyone that the big fat "1" in Bailey's 10-1 ML record JUST happened in his most recent start vs. CHC.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2012
Posts: 1452
Posted: #36
Quote Originally Posted by Rickyantonio:

where did you get that cincy reds sweep season total 1-27 ?

those are the stats im asking about, did you just do the hard research or do you have a database that fed that stat to you.


https://espn.go.com/mlb/team/schedule/_/name/cin/cincinnati-reds

Start counting. 
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2013
Posts: 741
Posted: #37
Quote Originally Posted by rmb5w:


The conditions ARE far different.  All of those Bailey records are based on CIN's line-up at full strength.  CIN is lacking 4 of their sluggers today.  

May I remind everyone that the big fat "1" in Bailey's 10-1 ML record JUST happened in his most recent start vs. CHC.

If it took them 10 games to win 1 I would place my money on the REDS any day.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 6446
Posted: #38
good lord... it's like people are just looking for a reason to bet on a last place team with hardly any real underdog return going up against a pitcher they struggle against, who throws with the hand they struggle the most against, a team that is red hot (no pun intended), behind a guy that is making his MLB debut.

I could see value in taking a gamble at +175 or higher... but at +135... yikes. I would bite at +200.

Outside of Hamilton, Phillips, and Bruce sitting... Frazier is back in the lineup. I seen much other than "the line has a plus in front, so I want to play it"

best of luck to you guys. you could very well win... i just feel the odds are significantly lower than what you are paying for. The ML/RL value is with the Reds here.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2014
Posts: 1594
Posted: #39

Don't overthink this friends, Its real simple...The Kid gets lit up

 

Hes very emotional

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2014
Posts: 1664
Posted: #40
I am on Cubs ML & Cubs +1.5
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 6446
Posted: #41
Quote Originally Posted by rmb5w:


The conditions ARE far different.  All of those Bailey records are based on CIN's line-up at full strength.  CIN is lacking 4 of their sluggers today.  

May I remind everyone that the big fat "1" in Bailey's 10-1 ML record JUST happened in his most recent start vs. CHC.
\

coming from the guy:

(i)  quoting W/L records from how long ago?
(ii) quoting sweep records without conditioning it (i.e., record when they are 1 game away from the sweep)


also, yeah I 100% acknowledge that in my picks thread... that game was in chicago (not a home game) and he only gave up 4 hits. I wouldnt put much faith into that outcome.

4 hits + 2 walks in 5.1 innings doesnt equate to 4 ERs all too often... his WHIP in that game would imply an ERA closer to 2.75, so in repeated experiments he would give up closer to 1.65 runs every 5.1 innings with how he pitched that day.

anyway, I have said my peace... I would never talk anyone out of a wager. There are two sides. I see the value in the Reds... if we played this game 100 times, betting 100 times on the Reds were be profitable in my view and according to my analysis. The Cubs would not.

Just my 0.02. GOod luck.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2012
Posts: 1452
Posted: #42
In the last 7 days:

Coghlan 11 for 24 (.458)
Alcantara 8 for 26 (.308)* (Triple-A)
Rizzo 8 for 29 (.276)
Baker 4 for 7 (.571)
Sweeney 5 for 15 (.333)
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2014
Posts: 1354
Posted: #43
Public is on the Reds heavily (around 75%). Line opened at Reds -185. Now its down to Reds -138 

I would have an uncomfortable feeling if i had money on the Reds.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2012
Posts: 1452
Posted: #44
Quote Originally Posted by BirdsOnBat:

good lord... it's like people are just looking for a reason to bet on a last place team with hardly any real underdog return going up against a pitcher they struggle against, who throws with the hand they struggle the most against, a team that is red hot (no pun intended), behind a guy that is making his MLB debut.

I could see value in taking a gamble at +175 or higher... but at +135... yikes. I would bite at +200.

Outside of Hamilton, Phillips, and Bruce sitting... Frazier is back in the lineup. I seen much other than "the line has a plus in front, so I want to play it"

best of luck to you guys. you could very well win... i just feel the odds are significantly lower than what you are paying for. The ML/RL value is with the Reds here.

I look at it as (+135) to fade a 5-game sweep.

GL to you regardless.   

Always appreciate the insight.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2012
Posts: 1452
Posted: #45
For Seasons since 1998
Category2 Game Series3 Game Series4 Game Series5 Game Series
Total Series10819278220836
Series Sweep Percentage
(Total Sweeps divided by Total Series)		52.17%27.11%14.22%11.11%
Home Team Sweeps30115881873
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2009
Posts: 1993
Posted: #46
If the reds romp then why does line drop from -162 this morning to -133 now?? Vegas is getting drilled on reds money at over 80% clip. I know line dropped due to the lineups being posted but there making it real easy to take reds now, anything can happen but I'll be on cubs ml with Vegas! Goodluck
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 6446
Posted: #47
on the last table...

how many of those 5 game series were between a team who has contended for several years vs a team that has been losing 90-100 games each year?

always need to normalize stats to adjust for the situation at hand.

also, you mentioned the Reds' lineup today... thought I would share this. take a look at this box score

https://espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?id=320810116

Cubs had a better lineup than the one they have today and the Reds played the B team.


 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2014
Posts: 1594
Posted: #48

Quote Originally Posted by gtnp:

If the reds romp then why does line drop from -162 this morning to -133 now?? Vegas is getting drilled on reds money at over 80% clip. I know line dropped due to the lineups being posted but there making it real easy to take reds now, anything can happen but I'll be on cubs ml with Vegas! Goodluck

 

Ah..One idiot somwhere bet big on the Cubs...Its back up -155 now- The SMART money is pouring in on the REDS

 

Bet whatever you want..I told ya the Reds are gonna romp- My work is done

 

"You can lead a horse to water but ya can't make them swim"

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2012
Posts: 1452
Posted: #49
Quote Originally Posted by BirdsOnBat:

on the last table...

how many of those 5 game series were between a team who has contended for several years vs a team that has been losing 90-100 games each year?

always need to normalize stats to adjust for the situation at hand.

also, you mentioned the Reds' lineup today... thought I would share this. take a look at this box score

https://espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?id=320810116

Cubs had a better lineup than the one they have today and the Reds played the B team.



Is anyone else aware that CHC is 38-52 (.422)?  They are bad, but they have still won 42.2% of their games.  

The last time the Cubs had a 6-game losing streak was last season; they snapped it with a victory @ CIN, 5-4 in extra innings. 
 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 808
Posted: #50
The Cubs are a bad team with a reg. starter. Give me the Reds against a kid any day.
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 - 2024 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.