All Forums | MLB Betting

Money Ball 8-13-2015

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 8761
Posts: 66
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2013
Posts: 392
Posted: #26
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2013
Posts: 871
Posted: #27
Key, when you put "$400" on a team at -258, are you actually betting $1032, or are you putting $400 to win $155?  
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2012
Posts: 2069
Posted: #28
Read his other posts - he makes it clear
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2009
Posts: 2858
Posted: #29
Quote Originally Posted by BountyHunter13:

Key, when you put "$400" on a team at -258, are you actually betting $1032, or are you putting $400 to win $155?  

To win 400
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2015
Posts: 479
Posted: #30
Quote Originally Posted by BountyHunter13:

Key, when you put "$400" on a team at -258, are you actually betting $1032, or are you putting $400 to win $155?  

Really dude...

The only thing wrong with this line is that it is not high enough. I have the Mets winning this exact matchup 8 out of 10 times and that makes the break-even point -395. “Add the juice” players will choke on the number but flat bet players like myself that risk $406 will receive a return of 38.8% on their investment and $157.53 ain’t bad for a three hour investment, provided the Mets win. It is all perspective. How many other investments do we hold today that are likely to make 38.8%.

Short card, no leans, see you tomorrow.

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2003
Posts: 1354
Posted: #31
Is key desperate for a win picking the biggest fav of the day lol
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #32
Quote Originally Posted by BountyHunter13:

Key, when you put "$400" on a team at -258, are you actually betting $1032, or are you putting $400 to win $155?  
I flat play. I never "add the juice", so today's wagers are EXACTLY $406, regardless of what the line is.
-258, -138, +138, +258, the WAGER is still $406. The profit varies, not the risk. It is NOT possible to control profit, only risk.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2010
Posts: 15753
Posted: #33
Nice work Key
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 2094
Posted: #34
I will ride Mets and Blue Jays wave until they get to the shore....

Today i decide just for the mets cause KE was with them too but my bet was on the RL..

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2007
Posts: 4059
Posted: #35
Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:

I flat play. I never "add the juice", so today's wagers are EXACTLY $406, regardless of what the line is.
-258, -138, +138, +258, the WAGER is still $406. The profit varies, not the risk. It is NOT possible to control profit, only risk.


For a dog like +258 why not risk less, like $157 to win $406 instead??
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #36
Quote Originally Posted by CMo256:


To win 400
This is NOT correct. The wager is $406.00, EXACTLY AS STATED. That is the TOTAL RISK. The profit is $157.36 if it wins.

Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2015
Posts: 792
Posted: #37
Quote Originally Posted by britman4321:

Is key desperate for a win picking the biggest fav of the day lol

LOL this idiot just refuses to learn... back to rehab for you! 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2014
Posts: 2515
Posted: #38
Nice win KeyElement.  I was tempted to lock in Mets last night but passed due to my bad luck betting big lines like that.  So you can thank me for not cursing the Mets today. 

Interesting that they covered the RL as a home team every game this series.  I have no clue what the RL win rate for home teams is this year, but I would imagine it's not that good.  For a relatively low scoring team like the Mets to do it for three straight games is impressive....or perhaps indicative of how horribly inept a road team the Rockies have, ha ha.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #39
Quote Originally Posted by mtx:



For a dog like +258 why not risk less, like $157 to win $406 instead??
 What you are talking about is what I call the “Sanford Wong School of Sports Wagering”, and, with all due respect to Mr. Wong as a card player, this method of money management is bogus and misleading. By playing $258.00 @-258 to win $100.00 or $38.76 @+258 to win $100.00 you are allowing the intended, or “target” profit to control the wager. Either can win or lose, but the target profit will have nothing to do with it. You would also have to believe that the book offered a line based on the true probability of the outcome. They don’t. The line is built to draw balanced action, not reflect true probability. In this case the probability indicated by -258 is 72.1%, but my calculation was 79.9% or a +EV factor of 7.8%.

By setting the target profit as the control factor in wagering you are stepping onto some really thin ice, because profit cannot be controlled, only RISK can be controlled. Since any game can win or lose, why would I (or you) want to overplay the favorite or underplay the dog?

If you doubt what I say about Sanford Wong you can go buy a copy of Sharp Sports Betting and check it out. He claims to have learned his strategies from “The Poker Players” group, but I think he is either being facetious or they were pulling his leg.

Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 15755
Posted: #40
RL 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2012
Posts: 2069
Posted: #41
Key I think what you are saying is that IF you are going to have a variable stakes approach then it should be based on the amount or % that you think the line is off, almost irrespective of whether the line is plus or minus money.

In fact you used to do that, varying from 5 to 7 units.

The only problem with this is when we bet without using maths models and hence don't know how much the line is "really" off, we just know it is off somewhat....
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 5007
Posted: #42
[Quote: Originally Posted by KeyElement]

8-12

$416 Giants -124, Feldman (6-7) / Heston (11-10) L

$416 Indians -115, Salazar (16-4) / Sabathia (8-11) W

$416 Pirates +112, Cole (18-4) / Wacha (12-8) L

Leans: 2-2 Yesterday, 17-7 YTD

YTD 115-90 (56.1%), +$8.862.53 (+14.06% RoR)

(11-10 = 62%) à for the football-basketball mentality

8-13

$406 Mets -258, Butler (2-13) / Syndergaard (10-6)

The only thing wrong with this line is that it is not high enough. I have the Mets winning this exact matchup 8 out of 10 times and that makes the break-even point -395. “Add the juice” players will choke on the number but flat bet players like myself that risk $406 will receive a return of 38.8% on their investment and $157.53 ain’t bad for a three hour investment, provided the Mets win. It is all perspective. How many other investments do we hold today that are likely to make 38.8%.

I gotta say Key.......you come up with the most absurd comments on this site that I can remember in all my years here. Keep playing -258 faves and you'll be broke in no time.

You're not going to argue that are you????? Because I'd love to hear that nonsense.

 A $157.53 return on a $406.00 investment is one of the dumbest moves one can make in sports betting. You even suggested it would be a play at -395. Seriously?? Youre kidding right?? 

 

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 5007
Posted: #43

Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:

I flat play. I never "add the juice", so today's wagers are EXACTLY $406, regardless of what the line is.
-258, -138, +138, +258, the WAGER is still $406. The profit varies, not the risk. It is NOT possible to control profit, only risk.

yeah right right

Im beginning to think you arbitrarily make up theories on your own to try and dazzle us with your BS. It aint working man.

again, your statement is so ambiguous it's comical. it's like saying im going buy 1000 shares of Alibaba tomorrow morning when the markets opens AND I'm going to decide at what price it opens at.

a bettor controls how much he wants to profit by controlling how much he risks. its called "reactionary measure"

you nor I have any control what a line will be when it is released,  just like the markets in the morning. We as bettors then react to these lines......the linemakers in turn react trying to balance out the action on both sides as quickly as possible. WE AS BETTORS DECIDE HOW MUCH PROFIT WE DESIRE WITH OUR RISK AMOUNTS.

hey key..............i'm not one of your boot lickers, who's just going to agree with all the b u l l s h I t you come up with.

 

 

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 5007
Posted: #44

Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:

I show a high probability on the Cubs, but only at -180 or less is there any value. BOL

 

but you see value at -258 with the mets.

 hahahah ok

 I see now key that you truly 100%  do not understand the term "value" as it applies to ANY financial investment or endeavour.

youre just throwing the term around to suit your cockamamie ideas and suto math evaluations.

 

  

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2012
Posts: 2069
Posted: #45
Quote Originally Posted by Alien-1:

Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:

I show a high probability on the Cubs, but only at -180 or less is there any value. BOL

 
but you see value at -258 with the mets.
 hahahah ok
 I see now key that you truly 100%  do not understand the term "value" as it applies to ANY financial investment or endeavour.
youre just throwing the term around to suit your cockamamie ideas and suto math evaluations.

It's you who doesn't understand value and your jealous rants against Key and his ROI and attention are getting embarrassing. Man I used to follow you and I still respect you as a capper but this is getting ridiculous

Why can the Mets not be value at -258 just because an unrelated team is at -180? Value is where the likelihood of a win is far in excess of the stated odds. So a heavy favourite can still be value. As a guy I thought was a good capper I am astounded you don't understand this. Or is your resentment of Key blinding you to reason. Get it together man!
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2013
Posts: 260
Posted: #46
Quote Originally Posted by Alien-1:

 

but you see value at -258 with the mets.

 hahahah ok

 I see now key that you truly 100%  do not understand the term "value" as it applies to ANY financial investment or endeavour.

youre just throwing the term around to suit your cockamamie ideas and suto math evaluations.  


"suto"  Amazing how many spelling errors this idiot makes when he has auto-correct right there on his phone. Alien, it appears that sports betting concepts and investments might be a little too much for your tiny bird brain to understand seeing as how you contribute little to nothing to this forum with you inane babbling on a constant basis. 

You're so quick to harp on another player's plays when you have no documented record, provide no analysis for your garbage plays, and use stupid rating systems like "2**s" and "5*" plays but don't even keep track of your silly stars. It's cute that you believe every bet needs to be -110 or greater odds in order for you to make a profit but an experienced and knowledgeable bettor knows how to recognize line value even at -280 or -340. Are you telling me that if the Miami Marlins were playing the UNC Tarheels and lined at (-350) you wouldn't unload you house on the Marlins?
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #47
Interesting that some who wind up in rehab still get to post in the MLB Forum. I was not afforded that privilege, and others that should be in rehab are not even admonished. Oh well, life goes on. 
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2011
Posts: 101
Posted: #48
Quote Originally Posted by TreesWithKnees:


"suto"  Amazing how many spelling errors this idiot makes when he has auto-correct right there on his phone. Alien, it appears that sports betting concepts and investments might be a little too much for your tiny bird brain to understand seeing as how you contribute little to nothing to this forum with you inane babbling on a constant basis. 
 
Well said Trees with Knees and Julespussy. Boys just going to be a jealous hater. BOL  Key

 
You're so quick to harp on another player's plays when you have no documented record, provide no analysis for your garbage plays, and use stupid rating systems like "2**s" and "5*" plays but don't even keep track of your silly stars. It's cute that you believe every bet needs to be -110 or greater odds in order for you to make a profit but an experienced and knowledgeable bettor knows how to recognize line value even at -280 or -340. Are you telling me that if the Miami Marlins were playing the UNC Tarheels and lined at (-350) you wouldn't unload you house on the Marlins?
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 5007
Posted: #49
Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:

Interesting that some who wind up in rehab still get to post in the
MLB Forum. I was not afforded that privilege, and others that should be in rehab are not even admonished. Oh well, life goes on.


I ve noticed when someone doesn't agree with you .......you get easily offended and get on the defensive.
 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 5007
Posted: #50

Quote Originally Posted by Julespussy:


 
but you see value at -258 with the mets.
 hahahah ok
 I see now key that you truly 100%  do not understand the term "value" as it applies to ANY financial investment or endeavour.
youre just throwing the term around to suit your cockamamie ideas and suto math evaluations.
It's you who doesn't understand value and your jealous rants against Key and his ROI and attention are getting embarrassing. Man I used to follow you and I still respect you as a capper but this is getting ridiculous

Why can the Mets not be value at -258 just because an unrelated team is at -180? Value is where the likelihood of a win is far in excess of the stated odds. So a heavy favourite can still be value. As a guy I thought was a good capper I am astounded you don't understand this. Or is your resentment of Key blinding you to reason. Get it together man!

 

it's obvious you don't understand what value investing means Jules.

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.