5 & 9 Innings – ALWAYS Specify Pitchers – NO action plays
All plays are 5 Units Flat, unless otherwise noted
Today’s comment: Since there was a lot of bantering about it yesterday I will restate for about the hundredth time that the odds you can ly-take on any proposition are relative to the pay back. Value is not dependent on any +$ or very low -$ number. Value is related to win probability. Since Kershaw had literally everything going for him yesterday I computed his win probability at 74%. If that is a true edge, and I have no reason to think it is not, I can lay up to -212 with him and still have fair bet. Since I only had to lay -190, Kershaw is the value side. Lay it. Don’t look back. -190 pays 52.6 cents on the dollar of risk. Is it not value to make an investment that pays a gain of 52.6% in a matter of hours?
Angels F5 +150 FG +159 (Richards / Kuroda)
Let’s flip a coin. You call heads or tails. If you are correct I will pay you $1.59. If you are wrong you pay me $0.59. That is about the status of this game. It can easily go either way (nature of the beast), but only one side is worthy of investment. Maybe wagering on the Angels in this spot is gambling, but it is absolutely for sure wagering on the Yankees is gambling. They have nowhere near a 62.8% probability of winning this game.
Diamondbacks F5 -118 FG -113 (Feldman / Miley)
Bounce back time for the Dbacks and Feldman is almost the perfect choice of victims. The O’s are not the greatest lefty hitters in the world and Miley is on the uptick. Reversal of fortune often happens when a team like the Orioles goes to a highly touted venue to play the reigning champs, comes away successful, then faces a home team coming off a bad series versus an invader that should not have been able to take two of three from them in their own crib.
BOL
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
8-11-13, 1-2, -7.37 Units, -49.1% ROI
YTD – 192-204-36, +53.1 Units, +2.69% ROI
5 & 9 Innings – ALWAYS Specify Pitchers – NO action plays
All plays are 5 Units Flat, unless otherwise noted
Today’s comment: Since there was a lot of bantering about it yesterday I will restate for about the hundredth time that the odds you can ly-take on any proposition are relative to the pay back. Value is not dependent on any +$ or very low -$ number. Value is related to win probability. Since Kershaw had literally everything going for him yesterday I computed his win probability at 74%. If that is a true edge, and I have no reason to think it is not, I can lay up to -212 with him and still have fair bet. Since I only had to lay -190, Kershaw is the value side. Lay it. Don’t look back. -190 pays 52.6 cents on the dollar of risk. Is it not value to make an investment that pays a gain of 52.6% in a matter of hours?
Angels F5 +150 FG +159 (Richards / Kuroda)
Let’s flip a coin. You call heads or tails. If you are correct I will pay you $1.59. If you are wrong you pay me $0.59. That is about the status of this game. It can easily go either way (nature of the beast), but only one side is worthy of investment. Maybe wagering on the Angels in this spot is gambling, but it is absolutely for sure wagering on the Yankees is gambling. They have nowhere near a 62.8% probability of winning this game.
Diamondbacks F5 -118 FG -113 (Feldman / Miley)
Bounce back time for the Dbacks and Feldman is almost the perfect choice of victims. The O’s are not the greatest lefty hitters in the world and Miley is on the uptick. Reversal of fortune often happens when a team like the Orioles goes to a highly touted venue to play the reigning champs, comes away successful, then faces a home team coming off a bad series versus an invader that should not have been able to take two of three from them in their own crib.
Look good. DBacks ought to score in heaps w/just a few key hits. Not sure about the Halos, but my being sure abt something means little.I see a lot of hometeams winning today.
0
Look good. DBacks ought to score in heaps w/just a few key hits. Not sure about the Halos, but my being sure abt something means little.I see a lot of hometeams winning today.
I'm on opposite sides on both. Cant pass on kuroda and a team that just won a series against the hottest team in baseball. & love the heavy bat swinging orioles against the lowly angels.
0
I'm on opposite sides on both. Cant pass on kuroda and a team that just won a series against the hottest team in baseball. & love the heavy bat swinging orioles against the lowly angels.
Also think you are being very smart with the LAA call -- loaded with value. Heavy public betting on NYY (as usual) after beating the Tigers -- who got some unfavorable calls and couldn't cash in on some base runners.
Odds may even inch more in favor as we get closer to game time
Again... GL
0
Also think you are being very smart with the LAA call -- loaded with value. Heavy public betting on NYY (as usual) after beating the Tigers -- who got some unfavorable calls and couldn't cash in on some base runners.
Odds may even inch more in favor as we get closer to game time
Don"t like Feldman, but Ariz has a -182 batting avg vs Feldman, Ariz is 4-0 at home vs A.L. opponents. As for the LAA-N.Y. Game, Richards is 0-1 & 1-0 o/u at N.Y. in Augast he lasted just 5IP & lost3-9. Kuroda is 2-1 & 1-2 o/u home vs LAA & N.Y. is 6-3 home vs LAA L 3 yrs.
0
Don"t like Feldman, but Ariz has a -182 batting avg vs Feldman, Ariz is 4-0 at home vs A.L. opponents. As for the LAA-N.Y. Game, Richards is 0-1 & 1-0 o/u at N.Y. in Augast he lasted just 5IP & lost3-9. Kuroda is 2-1 & 1-2 o/u home vs LAA & N.Y. is 6-3 home vs LAA L 3 yrs.
Today’s comment: Since there was a lot of bantering about it yesterday I will restate for about the hundredth time that the odds you can ly-take on any proposition are relative to the pay back. Value is not dependent on any +$ or very low -$ number. Value is related to win probability. Since Kershaw had literally everything going for him yesterday I computed his win probability at 74%. If that is a true edge, and I have no reason to think it is not, I can lay up to -212 with him and still have fair bet. Since I only had to lay -190, Kershaw is the value side. Lay it. Don’t look back. -190 pays 52.6 cents on the dollar of risk. Is it not value to make an investment that pays a gain of 52.6% in a matter of hours?
No doubt kershaw was the better pitcher on the hotter team playing at home. And the odds reflected that. But how do you accurately compute a win percentage of 74%? it seems a bit arbitrary. Maybe you have a system you believe to be a fairly accurate in computing that.
But as mentioned in the previous thread, Kershaw had 2 wins 4 losses and 4 ties in his previous 10 1st 5inn starts. Whatever system (sabermetrics, matchups, trends etc) you used, youd probably compute a high win percentage on all those starts too... right?
And obviously if you win, whatever odds you got were good enough. But you cant bring up winning this much money in a couple hours on a game when there were other plays made that lost. Not being an behind about that just pointing out that it may be irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
New day of games and we move on...
0
Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:
Today’s comment: Since there was a lot of bantering about it yesterday I will restate for about the hundredth time that the odds you can ly-take on any proposition are relative to the pay back. Value is not dependent on any +$ or very low -$ number. Value is related to win probability. Since Kershaw had literally everything going for him yesterday I computed his win probability at 74%. If that is a true edge, and I have no reason to think it is not, I can lay up to -212 with him and still have fair bet. Since I only had to lay -190, Kershaw is the value side. Lay it. Don’t look back. -190 pays 52.6 cents on the dollar of risk. Is it not value to make an investment that pays a gain of 52.6% in a matter of hours?
No doubt kershaw was the better pitcher on the hotter team playing at home. And the odds reflected that. But how do you accurately compute a win percentage of 74%? it seems a bit arbitrary. Maybe you have a system you believe to be a fairly accurate in computing that.
But as mentioned in the previous thread, Kershaw had 2 wins 4 losses and 4 ties in his previous 10 1st 5inn starts. Whatever system (sabermetrics, matchups, trends etc) you used, youd probably compute a high win percentage on all those starts too... right?
And obviously if you win, whatever odds you got were good enough. But you cant bring up winning this much money in a couple hours on a game when there were other plays made that lost. Not being an behind about that just pointing out that it may be irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
what do you think about Cleveland versus a lefty today ?
I lean toward Cleveland but I believe we need more book on Salazar and Albers both. That said, I don't feel comfortable laying juice on the road in this situation.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
0
Quote Originally Posted by breakeven001:
what do you think about Cleveland versus a lefty today ?
I lean toward Cleveland but I believe we need more book on Salazar and Albers both. That said, I don't feel comfortable laying juice on the road in this situation.
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.