Flat betting in Baseball....

Quote Originally Posted by ILL:

vanzack i have a question for ya, i'm not that experienced with baseball betting but am trying it out this year..

 

anyway, my local offers all run lines at 10% juice.  that is, if the cubs are -1.5 at +150 and the cardinals are +1.5 at -170, it doesn't matter - i get the cubs -1.5 at 10% and cardinals +1.5 at 10%.

 

i realize that this is a huge fuck up on his part, but he does not realize this. 

 

my question is, what would be the best way to exploit this advantage?  it seems as if i should just bet every single +1.5 run line every single day, since +1.5 run lines usually are like -150 and up, but i'm getting it at 10%.

 

anyway, any advice is valued and appreciated.

If I am understanding this correctly - which I doubt I am - you are laying -110 on all run lines regardless of who is playing?

If this is the case, you should bet as much as you can on a sliding scale (for amount) the further you get away from -110.  For instance:

If a team is -150 really, and you can lay -110, you bet an amount that is less than a team that is -200 that you can lay -110.  I think the Kelly Critereon would be a good thing for you to investigate.

My guess is that your local bookie is going to be out of business very soon.

Quote Originally Posted by lanastasis:

Hey Van.

My -180 are as successful over time as well as -130 and +130 and +180. I've been risking 1 unit on every bet, no matter what. Every bet is the same. Do you see a reason to change this to your method?

I would change if you want to flat bet.

Simply put - your games are not equal in value and importance - which is the essence of flat betting.

Your -180s and your +180s are much more important in terms of value than your -110s and +110s.

Its just a matter of philosophy what you decide to do.

You are correct basically...

I put "(weighted)" in my explanation above that you quoted - and it is important.  You are correct in your assumption that you could lose more +180 games than +130 games and still be profitable - but not when you weight them.

You are saying that you should bet the same base unit on all dogs, but when you do this you inherently are putting more relative value in bets that are farther away from +101.

In other words, you will have to do better on your +200 bets than your +110 bets (weighted) over time in order to be profitable - therefore your +200 bets are more important for you to win than your +110 bets.

The way you bet, the farther you are away from the expected value on your higher dogs is much more impactful on your profitability than your lower dogs.

For instance, if you are 5% above your EV for +110 dogs, but 5% below EV for your +200 dogs - YOU ARE NOT EVEN.  You are down money, and the purpose of flat betting is to make all games equal value, and you are not doing it with your method - your method will always have a higher importance the farther you are away from +101.

Make sense?

Quote Originally Posted by HeadOverHeart:

Flat betting?

Flat betting to me is betting the same amount, let's say $100, on every wager/proposition no matter the odds.

+130 @$100

-130 @$100

-260 @$100

+310 @$100

etc.

Flat-betting is great, that's what I do, because it allows you to concentrate more on the +/1 of a certain proposition winning as opposed to is 160 to much to pay or will I go up to 170 on this?    Who cares....think that side wins?  Yes?  Then flat bet it.

At least that's what flat betting is to me.

It is easier when the odds are listed in decimals instead of +/- as well.

You sir are not flat betting, and advocate a strategy that will lead you and anyone who will listen to ruin.

is 160 to much to pay or will I go up to 170 on this?    Who cares....think that side wins?  Yes?  Then flat bet it.

This is horribly misguided.

Please do some math - you will find what I stated above - that if you bet based on 1 unit every time that your overall profitability is determined with more impact the farther you are away from 100 on any bet.

And your second assumption is not too far off.......

vanzack, you've got it right - i lay -110 no matter who's playing, what the actual run line is, etc.  10% on all run lines.  The only reason he's still in business (he's very amateur, just started up during middle of basketball) is because he has some serious rookie bettors playing favorites -1.5 straight down the card almost.  For instance, one guy showed me his card last tuesday and he was playing like 9 -1.5 favorites and 9 totals - little does he know if he plays 9 or 10 -1.5 favs everyday he should be getting like +150 or so on all his plays..

So anyway, i'm not sure that i understand the sliding scale..?  For example:

Bo Sox are +1.5  at -175  tonight.. does that mean i should bet more on them then say the orioles +1.5 -145?  Say the max bet is 100, would i put 75$ on Bo Sox and 45$ on orioles?

As always, thanks for the help - thanks to you some people understand sports gambling outside of just picking teams

Quote Originally Posted by brendanb438:

vanzack thank you for your posts as always.  Very good info for the people on these boards.

Do you yourself flat bet?  I would guess no, probably use full Kelly or some sort of half Kelly system.

Any chance of you posting daily baseball picks on the forum? 

I actually do flat bet.

The one thing about Kelly that is critical is actually predicting the edge you have, and if you are flawed in this you have a flawed system - and I just havent been able to do this consistently.

So I flat bet....