All Forums | MLB Betting

On the subject of OVERS

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 2949
Posts: 47
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #1
The Covers MLB Forum seems to be convinced that only overs can win in totals and betting unders is nuts.

For all the screaming did you know that the average runs per game in MLB this season is 9.08 runs in 9 innings and 9.24 with extra innings? No, of course you didn't. You think all those totals the books set are way too low. The way the public perceives the situation may create a gold mine for unders. Time and time again, perception versus reality.

BOL 
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2016
Posts: 26231
Posted: #2
STAY HUNGRY MY FRIENDS!!!!!
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2004
Posts: 23615
Posted: #3
Would I be nuts if I liked the 1$T 5 under 5.5. NY/CWS 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2012
Posts: 4815
Posted: #4
Overs went 12-2-1yesterday excluding that cards Mets make up game 
Yeeeesh
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2016
Posts: 26231
Posted: #5
Quote Originally Posted by Wizz_KIDD35:

Shall see if Unders do better today!!
STAY HUNGRY MY FRIENDS!!!!!
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 19355
Posted: #6
Just the Same ole knuckleheads Key
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2014
Posts: 47812
Posted: #7
Thanks for the PM
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2008
Posts: 138
Posted: #8

OVER VS. UNDER TRENDS

CategoryOversPercentUndersPercent
Extra Inning Games4150.00%4150.00%
Non-Extra Inning Games46250.77%44849.23%
All Games50350.71%48949.29%
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2003
Posts: 9064
Posted: #9

Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:

The Covers MLB Forum seems to be convinced that only overs can win in totals and betting unders is nuts.For all the screaming did you know that the average runs per game in MLB this season is 9.08 runs in 9 innings and 9.24 with extra innings? No, of course you didn't. You think all those totals the books set are way too low. The way the public perceives the situation may create a gold mine for unders. Time and time again, perception versus reality.BOL
Although the avg number of runs is important I think a better stat is the actual numbers of unders vs overs that have come out. You are not factoring the average total line and even then that's not exactly the best way to look at it. 

 

The 9.08 avg/9 still could still exist with Overs are hitting 70% even if the avg total is 9.5 (over the 9.08 average runs scored per 9), using averages of course.

 

This is why averages suck for stats like this.

The pen is mightier than the pigs
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2015
Posts: 20244
Posted: #10
50/50
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2017
Posts: 2838
Posted: #11

In related news. ..

The sky is blue (well, in Vegas!),

Politicians suck,

Cocktail waitresses at the Wynn (especially certain Asian ones) get bigger tips, 

and Bubba inhaled.

 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2016
Posts: 19007
Posted: #12
20  games OVER YTD.....

Not much...

Mariners +26

Pirates +16

Reds Under Machine  - 19....
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 600
Posted: #13
KeyElement. Wanted to PM you. Check your inbox. TY
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #14
Quote Originally Posted by brent0887:

Just the Same ole knuckleheads Key
Why am I not surprised. One even uses yesterday as some sort of example. Yesterday was yesterday, not the season, or even today. If 8 of 15 go over today I suppose that will also help prove why overs are the only way to go. Not one poster even mentioned the balance presented by Depersio (thank you) 

Just keep pumping those totals up there boys, works for me.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #15
Quote Originally Posted by BarneysDad:

Would I be nuts if I liked the 1$T 5 under 5.5. NY/CWS 
Not fully done yet, when I reach a conclusion I will post a note in your thread. Plenty of time on that one.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2014
Posts: 47812
Posted: #16
Quote Originally Posted by Depersio:

OVER VS. UNDER TRENDS

CategoryOversPercentUndersPercent
Extra Inning Games4150.00%4150.00%
Non-Extra Inning Games46250.77%44849.23%
All Games50350.71%48949.29%

Hey, a stone cold fact. Nice.

On top of this(and I can't produce 100% evidence) we all know with out a doubt the books are doing very well in the totals department.

Every single day I see anywhere from 60% to 75% of the games where a higher majority is on the over. Pretty much no one can argue with me on this one. The books aren't getting no where near a 50/50 split on the total. But the outcomes according to the post I quoted are.

For those who understand simple math then cheers.


 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #17
One more gentlemen (and others) game totals right now add up to 133, 8.9 per game on average. But, the Grand Salami is set at 137.5. Why? because the books know most bettors will like the over, so they have a 4.5 run cushion built into the GS.
 
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2014
Posts: 47812
Posted: #18
Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:

One more gentlemen (and others) game totals right now add up to 133, 8.9 per game on average. But, the Grand Salami is set at 137.5. Why? because the books know most bettors will like the over, so they have a 4.5 run cushion built into the GS.
 

Absolutely Key. Also if you add up the TT's, you'll get discounted another couple runs.

Nothing like that day I found a 12 run discrepancy though...that was gold on a silver platter.

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2014
Posts: 47812
Posted: #19
Oh and I do consider myself part of the "others"


Being a gentleman in 2019 doesn't go far like it used to
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #20
My best over computes to a 2.2 run margin and best under is a -1.3 so no totals are playable for me today. However; My program calls for 142 total runs, so if there were no cushion built in for the books I could play the GS over. Don't think I am backtracking, everything I said before is true, but each day is its own animal and the basis of the program is unbiased. I CAN"T make it say what I want it to say.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2016
Posts: 1882
Posted: #21

Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:

The Covers MLB Forum seems to be convinced that only overs can win in totals and betting unders is nuts.For all the screaming did you know that the average runs per game in MLB this season is 9.08 runs in 9 innings and 9.24 with extra innings? No, of course you didn't. You think all those totals the books set are way too low. The way the public perceives the situation may create a gold mine for unders. Time and time again, perception versus reality.BOL

 

OU's pay the same in a reg or extra inning game so that doesnt matter.

 

I have the average number of runs/game at 9.5.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2019.shtml

 

You can easily plot the number of runs per game scored which is progressively higher each year but does anybody have

the same data for books OU spreads? That would squash the debate instantly if we could show books OU lines are increasing just as fast as runs/game.

 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #22
That discrepancy is OK, but I delete the effectiveness of all stats as they age, and my numbers are current for where we are at today, roughly the last 4 weeks, with some honor given to April stats and a little more to May. 

I think books historical numbers would prove the point if we had them. We used to see a lot more 6 and 7 on the west coast where we are now seeing 7 and 8. Colorado is what it is and confuses the issue because it seems games there go way over or way under, seldom a squeaker on those.  

We also have to remember the books do not stand pat on a number, after it opens it floats, and bettors determine the final numbers. 
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 816
Posted: #23

Key, you're  correct but what's the best over play today? Scotty Wynn, YEA BABY

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2017
Posts: 492
Posted: #24

Quote Originally Posted by undermysac:

Quote Originally Posted by Depersio:

OVER VS. UNDER TRENDSCategoryOversPercentUndersPercentExtra Inning Games4150.00%4150.00%Non-Extra Inning Games46250.77%44849.23%All Games50350.71%48949.29%
Hey, a stone cold fact. Nice.On top of this(and I can't produce 100% evidence) we all know with out a doubt the books are doing very well in the totals department.Every single day I see anywhere from 60% to 75% of the games where a higher majority is on the over. Pretty much no one can argue with me on this one. The books aren't getting no where near a 50/50 split on the total. But the outcomes according to the post I quoted are.For those who understand simple math then cheers.

 

I was on Under 10 on KC/Minn and I seen 90% of total bet were on Over, people think im crazy by basing my judgements on Pitcher vs Batter stats but it has worked out well for me, also was on STL alt RL based on Matz past poor performance against them. It could really give u a good base number to start w then bullpen vs batter finishes it off.

 
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 23140
Posted: #25
Quote Originally Posted by ryan3212:

Key, you're  correct but what's the best over play today? Scotty Wynn, YEA BABY

I am not playing it, so don't quote me, but "gun to my head" I would play Pitt-Miami Over 7.5. I think it gets there even if Pitt has to score 8 runs, and HP umpire Wolcott hates pitchers. Wind will be in from left, but only 7 or 8 mph, really no concern. BOL 
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
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.