4-2, +236 yesterday and if that is not satisfactory you are getting extremely greedy, lol. Note to CoverLane: I would love to accommodate you brother but much of what I do is dependent on last nights results and early line movement. I share your pain but there is really nothing I can do to get the picks up earlier. About today's card. I don't care how many guys post "easy" winners, it is a tough card for recognizable reasons. A) For the most part the favorites are who they should be, and B) Most of them are slightly overpriced. That does not necessarily make the dog a good investment, it actually means that the probabilities are very close to accurate. So, unless I see some radical line movement in our favor I do not expect to have much today. One dog and two totals are looking good so far but I need time and line movement before I pull the trigger. Hey, how about that Grand Salami yesterday. Under like Thunder at 102 Cya later.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
4-2, +236 yesterday and if that is not satisfactory you are getting extremely greedy, lol. Note to CoverLane: I would love to accommodate you brother but much of what I do is dependent on last nights results and early line movement. I share your pain but there is really nothing I can do to get the picks up earlier. About today's card. I don't care how many guys post "easy" winners, it is a tough card for recognizable reasons. A) For the most part the favorites are who they should be, and B) Most of them are slightly overpriced. That does not necessarily make the dog a good investment, it actually means that the probabilities are very close to accurate. So, unless I see some radical line movement in our favor I do not expect to have much today. One dog and two totals are looking good so far but I need time and line movement before I pull the trigger. Hey, how about that Grand Salami yesterday. Under like Thunder at 102 Cya later.
Agree completely. One of the first posts I made after publishing my breakdown sheets was a word of caution about how tight the lines are. Looks like we're both getting the same read off Vegas.
0
Agree completely. One of the first posts I made after publishing my breakdown sheets was a word of caution about how tight the lines are. Looks like we're both getting the same read off Vegas.
Agree completely. One of the first posts I made after publishing my breakdown sheets was a word of caution about how tight the lines are. Looks like we're both getting the same read off Vegas.
I hope it is just an aberration. It would kill us if bettors were getting smarter, lol.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
0
Quote Originally Posted by si1ly:
Agree completely. One of the first posts I made after publishing my breakdown sheets was a word of caution about how tight the lines are. Looks like we're both getting the same read off Vegas.
I hope it is just an aberration. It would kill us if bettors were getting smarter, lol.
as I look further into the plays you post I'm starting to understand just how tight MLB really is. I thank you for helping to expand my knowledge of MLB capping.
Best of luck this weekend Key
0
No problem sir,
as I look further into the plays you post I'm starting to understand just how tight MLB really is. I thank you for helping to expand my knowledge of MLB capping.
I will be surprised if I
don’t get crucified for this because it just does not fit the Covers
description of value. 99% of Covers posters simply can not accept the concept
that value is a matter of probability versus payback. At -220 the Nationals and
Strasburg pay back 45.5 cents on the dollar of risk and require a 68.8%
probability of a win to pass the break even point. I compute an extremely high
93% probability and an edge of 24.4% in this business is huge. Here is some
more good news. The margin I have computed is not just Strasburg over Pomeranz.
The Nationals also have a huge offensive edge. The Rockies
are reeling and ready to collapse. They are looking forward to the break
because that will give them three less days to lose games. This team stinks.
They have been passed up by San Diego for God’s sake! They have lost 7 of their
last 10 games overall and 15 of 20 to right handed starters and over the course
of 20 games you can figure pretty average pitching. Just to save you the
trouble the 5 they beat were Worley, Lewis, Jackson, Marquis and Kelly. That is
not exactly a murderer’s row. Over the course of their last 15 versus righty
they have established a 3.23 offensive era. The Nationals are improving rapidly
on offense and have established a 7.17 offensive era versus the last 15 lefties
they have seen. Pitching, offense and home field versus a team that just wants
a holiday as soon as possible make this line cheap, not expensive. How many
other investments do you have that are going to make 45.45% profit in just a
few hours today?
Full Game Plays
Nationals -213 (Pomeranz / Strasburg)
The principle is exactly the
same, so this is a good point to segue into………
95% of Covers viewers
considering this play will think in term of “Gee, I hate to risk $433 on one game
to try to make $200, Key’s other plays may not cover that.” Here is where I
will state, possibly for the last time since noone listens, adding the
juice to favorites is not necessarily correct. There has never been a documented
study that proved that. It is traditional only because the math is easy
and the books post the lines that way. Is it possible the books never encourage
a player to do it any other way because they really like the results? Well, the
standard line given is that it is correct because of the higher probability of
the favorite winning. Oh? Is that right? What is a favorite? Not necessarily
the better team on any given day, they are just the side the public favors to
win the game. That is where the term favorite comes from. If it were true a bettor
should only bet $114 on his favorites and $86 on his underdogs. Why? Because over
the long haul the favorites chosen by the public will only win 57% of the time.
There is a reason why with a 95-84 record in 9 inning plays I am up 2,587 and part
of that reason is that I do not lose added juice on favorites.
If I were a $100 player I would play these two picks for $100 each and accept $92.40
profit on the $200 risk if both won, but not bust the bankroll with a $433 dollar wager that
would be much harder to recover later if it lost.
Kick that around a while, I will be back with more.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
0
5 Inning POD
Nationals -220 (Pomeranz / Strasburg)
I will be surprised if I
don’t get crucified for this because it just does not fit the Covers
description of value. 99% of Covers posters simply can not accept the concept
that value is a matter of probability versus payback. At -220 the Nationals and
Strasburg pay back 45.5 cents on the dollar of risk and require a 68.8%
probability of a win to pass the break even point. I compute an extremely high
93% probability and an edge of 24.4% in this business is huge. Here is some
more good news. The margin I have computed is not just Strasburg over Pomeranz.
The Nationals also have a huge offensive edge. The Rockies
are reeling and ready to collapse. They are looking forward to the break
because that will give them three less days to lose games. This team stinks.
They have been passed up by San Diego for God’s sake! They have lost 7 of their
last 10 games overall and 15 of 20 to right handed starters and over the course
of 20 games you can figure pretty average pitching. Just to save you the
trouble the 5 they beat were Worley, Lewis, Jackson, Marquis and Kelly. That is
not exactly a murderer’s row. Over the course of their last 15 versus righty
they have established a 3.23 offensive era. The Nationals are improving rapidly
on offense and have established a 7.17 offensive era versus the last 15 lefties
they have seen. Pitching, offense and home field versus a team that just wants
a holiday as soon as possible make this line cheap, not expensive. How many
other investments do you have that are going to make 45.45% profit in just a
few hours today?
Full Game Plays
Nationals -213 (Pomeranz / Strasburg)
The principle is exactly the
same, so this is a good point to segue into………
95% of Covers viewers
considering this play will think in term of “Gee, I hate to risk $433 on one game
to try to make $200, Key’s other plays may not cover that.” Here is where I
will state, possibly for the last time since noone listens, adding the
juice to favorites is not necessarily correct. There has never been a documented
study that proved that. It is traditional only because the math is easy
and the books post the lines that way. Is it possible the books never encourage
a player to do it any other way because they really like the results? Well, the
standard line given is that it is correct because of the higher probability of
the favorite winning. Oh? Is that right? What is a favorite? Not necessarily
the better team on any given day, they are just the side the public favors to
win the game. That is where the term favorite comes from. If it were true a bettor
should only bet $114 on his favorites and $86 on his underdogs. Why? Because over
the long haul the favorites chosen by the public will only win 57% of the time.
There is a reason why with a 95-84 record in 9 inning plays I am up 2,587 and part
of that reason is that I do not lose added juice on favorites.
If I were a $100 player I would play these two picks for $100 each and accept $92.40
profit on the $200 risk if both won, but not bust the bankroll with a $433 dollar wager that
would be much harder to recover later if it lost.
Kick that around a while, I will be back with more.
BOL Key Appreciate the analysis. Not gonna hate. I think you are spot on. If you were an investor and you saw a 50% RoR potential on an investment with a 90+% probability of reaching that potential, wouldn't you snatch it in a heart beat? Assuming you have the roll to back it up of course. Its called a premium. Looking forward to your other plays.
0
BOL Key Appreciate the analysis. Not gonna hate. I think you are spot on. If you were an investor and you saw a 50% RoR potential on an investment with a 90+% probability of reaching that potential, wouldn't you snatch it in a heart beat? Assuming you have the roll to back it up of course. Its called a premium. Looking forward to your other plays.
Hey KEY great work buddy like Wash tonight to, Hey who do u like in the jays and white sox game tn, i wanna pull the trigger on the jays like them with lind back in the line up what do u think aboout this game?
thanks brother cheers
T
0
Hey KEY great work buddy like Wash tonight to, Hey who do u like in the jays and white sox game tn, i wanna pull the trigger on the jays like them with lind back in the line up what do u think aboout this game?
The last 12 times the Reds lost a quality start by Arroyo, they have come back to win on his next scheduled start.
Key
This stat doesn't apply to today unfortunately because the mets are starting a new series, but nonetheless, the mets are 9-1 in games when facing the same lineup that dickey pitched to the day before. I've been playing this one for the last month or so and it is
0
Quote Originally Posted by Getty3:
Weird stat of the day:
The last 12 times the Reds lost a quality start by Arroyo, they have come back to win on his next scheduled start.
Key
This stat doesn't apply to today unfortunately because the mets are starting a new series, but nonetheless, the mets are 9-1 in games when facing the same lineup that dickey pitched to the day before. I've been playing this one for the last month or so and it is
I will be surprised if I don’t get crucified for this because it just does not fit the Covers description of value. 99% of Covers posters simply can not accept the concept that value is a matter of probability versus payback. At -220 the Nationals and Strasburg pay back 45.5 cents on the dollar of risk and require a 68.8% probability of a win to pass the break even point. I compute an extremely high 93% probability and an edge of 24.4% in this business is huge. Here is some more good news. The margin I have computed is not just Strasburg over Pomeranz. The Nationals also have a huge offensive edge. The Rockies are reeling and ready to collapse. They are looking forward to the break because that will give them three less days to lose games. This team stinks. They have been passed up by San Diego for God’s sake! They have lost 7 of their last 10 games overall and 15 of 20 to right handed starters and over the course of 20 games you can figure pretty average pitching. Just to save you the trouble the 5 they beat were Worley, Lewis, Jackson, Marquis and Kelly. That is not exactly a murderer’s row. Over the course of their last 15 versus righty they have established a 3.23 offensive era. The Nationals are improving rapidly on offense and have established a 7.17 offensive era versus the last 15 lefties they have seen. Pitching, offense and home field versus a team that just wants a holiday as soon as possible make this line cheap, not expensive. How many other investments do you have that are going to make 45.45% profit in just a few hours today?
Full Game Plays
Nationals -213 (Pomeranz / Strasburg)
The principle is exactly the same, so this is a good point to segue into………
95% of Covers viewers considering this play will think in term of “Gee, I hate to risk $433 on one game to try to make $200, Key’s other plays may not cover that.” Here is where I will state, possibly for the last time since noone listens, adding the juice to favorites is not necessarily correct. There has never been a documented study that proved that. It is traditional only because the math is easy and the books post the lines that way. Is it possible the books never encourage a player to do it any other way because they really like the results? Well, the standard line given is that it is correct because of the higher probability of the favorite winning. Oh? Is that right? What is a favorite? Not necessarily the better team on any given day, they are just the side the public favors to win the game. That is where the term favorite comes from. If it were true a bettor should only bet $114 on his favorites and $86 on his underdogs. Why? Because over the long haul the favorites chosen by the public will only win 57% of the time. There is a reason why with a 95-84 record in 9 inning plays I am up 2,587 and part of that reason is that I do not lose added juice on favorites. If I were a $100 player I would play these two picks for $100 each and accept $92.40 profit on the $200 risk if both won, but not bust the bankroll with a $433 dollar wager that would be much harder to recover later if it lost.
Kick that around a while, I will be back with more.
I don't disagree with the pick and the analysis. In fact, I may play Washington today. But I think this reasoning about 45% profit in a few hours is very, very deceptive because IMO it implies a "can't lose" proposition.
If there's any one think I've learned about sports betting, is that there's always a risk the favorite will not cover.
There's very few investments where I lose 100% of principal in 2 hours.
Either way, thanks for sharing your picks and GL today.
0
Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:
5 Inning POD
Nationals -220 (Pomeranz / Strasburg)
I will be surprised if I don’t get crucified for this because it just does not fit the Covers description of value. 99% of Covers posters simply can not accept the concept that value is a matter of probability versus payback. At -220 the Nationals and Strasburg pay back 45.5 cents on the dollar of risk and require a 68.8% probability of a win to pass the break even point. I compute an extremely high 93% probability and an edge of 24.4% in this business is huge. Here is some more good news. The margin I have computed is not just Strasburg over Pomeranz. The Nationals also have a huge offensive edge. The Rockies are reeling and ready to collapse. They are looking forward to the break because that will give them three less days to lose games. This team stinks. They have been passed up by San Diego for God’s sake! They have lost 7 of their last 10 games overall and 15 of 20 to right handed starters and over the course of 20 games you can figure pretty average pitching. Just to save you the trouble the 5 they beat were Worley, Lewis, Jackson, Marquis and Kelly. That is not exactly a murderer’s row. Over the course of their last 15 versus righty they have established a 3.23 offensive era. The Nationals are improving rapidly on offense and have established a 7.17 offensive era versus the last 15 lefties they have seen. Pitching, offense and home field versus a team that just wants a holiday as soon as possible make this line cheap, not expensive. How many other investments do you have that are going to make 45.45% profit in just a few hours today?
Full Game Plays
Nationals -213 (Pomeranz / Strasburg)
The principle is exactly the same, so this is a good point to segue into………
95% of Covers viewers considering this play will think in term of “Gee, I hate to risk $433 on one game to try to make $200, Key’s other plays may not cover that.” Here is where I will state, possibly for the last time since noone listens, adding the juice to favorites is not necessarily correct. There has never been a documented study that proved that. It is traditional only because the math is easy and the books post the lines that way. Is it possible the books never encourage a player to do it any other way because they really like the results? Well, the standard line given is that it is correct because of the higher probability of the favorite winning. Oh? Is that right? What is a favorite? Not necessarily the better team on any given day, they are just the side the public favors to win the game. That is where the term favorite comes from. If it were true a bettor should only bet $114 on his favorites and $86 on his underdogs. Why? Because over the long haul the favorites chosen by the public will only win 57% of the time. There is a reason why with a 95-84 record in 9 inning plays I am up 2,587 and part of that reason is that I do not lose added juice on favorites. If I were a $100 player I would play these two picks for $100 each and accept $92.40 profit on the $200 risk if both won, but not bust the bankroll with a $433 dollar wager that would be much harder to recover later if it lost.
Kick that around a while, I will be back with more.
I don't disagree with the pick and the analysis. In fact, I may play Washington today. But I think this reasoning about 45% profit in a few hours is very, very deceptive because IMO it implies a "can't lose" proposition.
If there's any one think I've learned about sports betting, is that there's always a risk the favorite will not cover.
There's very few investments where I lose 100% of principal in 2 hours.
Either way, thanks for sharing your picks and GL today.
neither pitcher has faced any of these hitters. I think the line is closer to being right than you think. I like your plays KEY! But I think this is not your style. Why are you not on CHC or ARI tonight?
0
neither pitcher has faced any of these hitters. I think the line is closer to being right than you think. I like your plays KEY! But I think this is not your style. Why are you not on CHC or ARI tonight?
neither pitcher has faced any of these hitters. I think the line is closer to being right than you think. I like your plays KEY! But I think this is not your style. Why are you not on CHC or ARI tonight?
actually, Strasburg faced this lineup 2 weeks ago and lost, but it was in CO
0
Quote Originally Posted by tafter12:
neither pitcher has faced any of these hitters. I think the line is closer to being right than you think. I like your plays KEY! But I think this is not your style. Why are you not on CHC or ARI tonight?
actually, Strasburg faced this lineup 2 weeks ago and lost, but it was in CO
Strasburg had difficulty pitching in record Atlanta temperatures in his
last start, laboring through three innings and leaving with heat-related
issues. It's supposed to be hot again Friday in Washington.
Guys, this is not a play to put a lot of money on. Good luck though.
0
Strasburg had difficulty pitching in record Atlanta temperatures in his
last start, laboring through three innings and leaving with heat-related
issues. It's supposed to be hot again Friday in Washington.
I don't disagree with the pick and the analysis. In fact, I may play Washington today. But I think this reasoning about 45% profit in a few hours is very, very deceptive because IMO it implies a "can't lose" proposition.
If there's any one think I've learned about sports betting, is that there's always a risk the favorite will not cover.
There's very few investments where I lose 100% of principal in 2 hours.
Either way, thanks for sharing your picks and GL today.
I feel I addressed that with the comparison of losing $200 versus losing $433, but so be it. Agreed, there are no locks, proof again that profit can not be controlled, only risk, so my method is to control risk, not target a certain profit, like $100 by adding the juice.
tafter12: There is more coming, but what I do is always value oriented and high priced favorites can present value just as low favs and dogs can. It is all in the probability. It does not happen often but it does happen. Example: The Angels opened even higher, but have come down and I think that is correct and I am not interested. This is a rare occurrence indeed.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
0
Quote Originally Posted by composite:
I don't disagree with the pick and the analysis. In fact, I may play Washington today. But I think this reasoning about 45% profit in a few hours is very, very deceptive because IMO it implies a "can't lose" proposition.
If there's any one think I've learned about sports betting, is that there's always a risk the favorite will not cover.
There's very few investments where I lose 100% of principal in 2 hours.
Either way, thanks for sharing your picks and GL today.
I feel I addressed that with the comparison of losing $200 versus losing $433, but so be it. Agreed, there are no locks, proof again that profit can not be controlled, only risk, so my method is to control risk, not target a certain profit, like $100 by adding the juice.
tafter12: There is more coming, but what I do is always value oriented and high priced favorites can present value just as low favs and dogs can. It is all in the probability. It does not happen often but it does happen. Example: The Angels opened even higher, but have come down and I think that is correct and I am not interested. This is a rare occurrence indeed.
Money management, Discipline and overall betting value thrown out of the window because of one tough MLB card, Not only is it the squarest play today it's an extremely inflated line but when he wins this he will say how 'I told you so'.
I've got a sneaky feeling Smartbets part 2 maybe on the cards here folks
0
Money management, Discipline and overall betting value thrown out of the window because of one tough MLB card, Not only is it the squarest play today it's an extremely inflated line but when he wins this he will say how 'I told you so'.
I've got a sneaky feeling Smartbets part 2 maybe on the cards here folks
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.
i can't figure out the phils! but they say howard is close.
2day
Hot Forum Topics
