Smack - PLEASE understand I only post mathematical FACTS, in an attempt to help. I know you are trying to devise a system that wins money, not games, but I have long been suspicious of any "super simple system" because if systems worked there would be no gambling. Bookmaking would be the worst vocation possible instead of being highly lucrative.
If a bettor wagered $100 flat on each of the 5 plays yesterday, he lost $246.63 and if he "laid the juice" he lost $400.00.
There is a discrepancy in ROI, depending on whether he followed the widely accepted practice of laying a flat 100 on the only dog, the Royals (+128 close), or followed the juice formula and wagered only $78.13 on the Royals, to stick with the intended profit of $100 on every play.
At any rate the ROI is only 50.7% of amount wagered on the flat bet system, 45.1% on the standard "add the juice and play dogs at 100" method and 42.5% on the "lay the juice and play dog to win 100" method.
We won't go to just the POD's as that gets worse at 1-2.
There is no hate here, just an effort to help you refine your handicapping and clarify again for the newbies and mathematically challenged that in MLB winning games and winning money are not the same thing.
Sincerely, Best of Luck
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
0
Smack - PLEASE understand I only post mathematical FACTS, in an attempt to help. I know you are trying to devise a system that wins money, not games, but I have long been suspicious of any "super simple system" because if systems worked there would be no gambling. Bookmaking would be the worst vocation possible instead of being highly lucrative.
If a bettor wagered $100 flat on each of the 5 plays yesterday, he lost $246.63 and if he "laid the juice" he lost $400.00.
There is a discrepancy in ROI, depending on whether he followed the widely accepted practice of laying a flat 100 on the only dog, the Royals (+128 close), or followed the juice formula and wagered only $78.13 on the Royals, to stick with the intended profit of $100 on every play.
At any rate the ROI is only 50.7% of amount wagered on the flat bet system, 45.1% on the standard "add the juice and play dogs at 100" method and 42.5% on the "lay the juice and play dog to win 100" method.
We won't go to just the POD's as that gets worse at 1-2.
There is no hate here, just an effort to help you refine your handicapping and clarify again for the newbies and mathematically challenged that in MLB winning games and winning money are not the same thing.
Smack - PLEASE understand I only post mathematical FACTS, in an attempt to help. I know you are trying to devise a system that wins money, not games, but I have long been suspicious of any "super simple system" because if systems worked there would be no gambling. Bookmaking would be the worst vocation possible instead of being highly lucrative.
If a bettor wagered $100 flat on each of the 5 plays yesterday, he lost $246.63 and if he "laid the juice" he lost $400.00.
There is a discrepancy in ROI, depending on whether he followed the widely accepted practice of laying a flat 100 on the only dog, the Royals (+128 close), or followed the juice formula and wagered only $78.13 on the Royals, to stick with the intended profit of $100 on every play.
At any rate the ROI is only 50.7% of amount wagered on the flat bet system, 45.1% on the standard "add the juice and play dogs at 100" method and 42.5% on the "lay the juice and play dog to win 100" method.
We won't go to just the POD's as that gets worse at 1-2.
There is no hate here, just an effort to help you refine your handicapping and clarify again for the newbies and mathematically challenged that in MLB winning games and winning money are not the same thing.
Sincerely, Best of Luck
KeyElement...mah man...I get it..I really do get what you are saying...this is why I have been very clear about what I have been doing....anyone who reads this thread understands what it's all about...
Blind followers who want nothing but picks will not do well long term following ANY system......at least, none that I know of...
However, understanding the concept of winning units..creating a positive ROI...and not paying attention specifically to wins/losses in baseball...all of these desired things do not lessen my desire to figure out, if possible, a system that long term will succeed with all of these parameters and criteria...
It is a work in progress...
But that being said...the process itself can and does have some value and has helped me to make money this season...as crude as it is in its current form...
I appreciate your input brutha!...
PM for the skinny on the down low
0
Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:
Smack - PLEASE understand I only post mathematical FACTS, in an attempt to help. I know you are trying to devise a system that wins money, not games, but I have long been suspicious of any "super simple system" because if systems worked there would be no gambling. Bookmaking would be the worst vocation possible instead of being highly lucrative.
If a bettor wagered $100 flat on each of the 5 plays yesterday, he lost $246.63 and if he "laid the juice" he lost $400.00.
There is a discrepancy in ROI, depending on whether he followed the widely accepted practice of laying a flat 100 on the only dog, the Royals (+128 close), or followed the juice formula and wagered only $78.13 on the Royals, to stick with the intended profit of $100 on every play.
At any rate the ROI is only 50.7% of amount wagered on the flat bet system, 45.1% on the standard "add the juice and play dogs at 100" method and 42.5% on the "lay the juice and play dog to win 100" method.
We won't go to just the POD's as that gets worse at 1-2.
There is no hate here, just an effort to help you refine your handicapping and clarify again for the newbies and mathematically challenged that in MLB winning games and winning money are not the same thing.
Sincerely, Best of Luck
KeyElement...mah man...I get it..I really do get what you are saying...this is why I have been very clear about what I have been doing....anyone who reads this thread understands what it's all about...
Blind followers who want nothing but picks will not do well long term following ANY system......at least, none that I know of...
However, understanding the concept of winning units..creating a positive ROI...and not paying attention specifically to wins/losses in baseball...all of these desired things do not lessen my desire to figure out, if possible, a system that long term will succeed with all of these parameters and criteria...
It is a work in progress...
But that being said...the process itself can and does have some value and has helped me to make money this season...as crude as it is in its current form...
"But that being said...the process itself can and does have some value and has helped me to make money this season...as crude as it is in its current form..."
But only as a factor in handicapping, not as a playable system..........move on.......I will
BOL
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
0
"But that being said...the process itself can and does have some value and has helped me to make money this season...as crude as it is in its current form..."
But only as a factor in handicapping, not as a playable system..........move on.......I will
Quite a bit of chatter about OVER/UNDERs and specifically that OVERS are taking over the game...
Illustrative for "recency bias"...people tend to make decisions based on very recent results and often this is a mistake the books can take advantage of...
For example, in the month of June...here are the O/U numbers..
Over/Unders are 85-77-5 from June 1 to June 14...
In those 15 days, the daily record of Over/Unders... 5-8-1...
Breakdown by day...
June 1... 6-9-1
2............ 6-9
3............1-2-1
4............ 9-6
5........... 8-6
6........... 6-7
7...........3-9-2
8...........7-9-1
9........... 6-9
10......... 4-4
11.......... 12-5
12.......... 5-7
13......... 7-3
14..........12-2-1
So in the last 4 days...O/U record is 36-17-1...and guess what...that created a bunch of threads "Just bet overs all the time" etc., etc...
Wrong answer...the books have adjusted and will continue to adjust ... don't make the "recency bias" mistake...
PM for the skinny on the down low
0
Quite a bit of chatter about OVER/UNDERs and specifically that OVERS are taking over the game...
Illustrative for "recency bias"...people tend to make decisions based on very recent results and often this is a mistake the books can take advantage of...
For example, in the month of June...here are the O/U numbers..
Over/Unders are 85-77-5 from June 1 to June 14...
In those 15 days, the daily record of Over/Unders... 5-8-1...
Breakdown by day...
June 1... 6-9-1
2............ 6-9
3............1-2-1
4............ 9-6
5........... 8-6
6........... 6-7
7...........3-9-2
8...........7-9-1
9........... 6-9
10......... 4-4
11.......... 12-5
12.......... 5-7
13......... 7-3
14..........12-2-1
So in the last 4 days...O/U record is 36-17-1...and guess what...that created a bunch of threads "Just bet overs all the time" etc., etc...
Wrong answer...the books have adjusted and will continue to adjust ... don't make the "recency bias" mistake...
Quite a bit of chatter about OVER/UNDERs and specifically that OVERS are taking over the game...
Illustrative for "recency bias"...people tend to make decisions based on very recent results and often this is a mistake the books can take advantage of...
For example, in the month of June...here are the O/U numbers..
Over/Unders are 85-77-5 from June 1 to June 14...
In those 15 days, the daily record of Over/Unders... 5-8-1...
Breakdown by day...
June 1... 6-9-1
2............ 6-9
3............1-2-1
4............ 9-6
5........... 8-6
6........... 6-7
7...........3-9-2
8...........7-9-1
9........... 6-9
10......... 4-4
11.......... 12-5
12.......... 5-7
13......... 7-3
14..........12-2-1
So in the last 4 days...O/U record is 36-17-1...and guess what...that created a bunch of threads "Just bet overs all the time" etc., etc...
Wrong answer...the books have adjusted and will continue to adjust ... don't make the "recency bias" mistake...
smack, when da Books start to hang more totals @ say 12 - 15 , then I'll bet more unders again. probably bet more unders
Helping Kama'aina to beat their " Local " since 1994.
0
Quote Originally Posted by smacksmiter:
Quite a bit of chatter about OVER/UNDERs and specifically that OVERS are taking over the game...
Illustrative for "recency bias"...people tend to make decisions based on very recent results and often this is a mistake the books can take advantage of...
For example, in the month of June...here are the O/U numbers..
Over/Unders are 85-77-5 from June 1 to June 14...
In those 15 days, the daily record of Over/Unders... 5-8-1...
Breakdown by day...
June 1... 6-9-1
2............ 6-9
3............1-2-1
4............ 9-6
5........... 8-6
6........... 6-7
7...........3-9-2
8...........7-9-1
9........... 6-9
10......... 4-4
11.......... 12-5
12.......... 5-7
13......... 7-3
14..........12-2-1
So in the last 4 days...O/U record is 36-17-1...and guess what...that created a bunch of threads "Just bet overs all the time" etc., etc...
Wrong answer...the books have adjusted and will continue to adjust ... don't make the "recency bias" mistake...
smack, when da Books start to hang more totals @ say 12 - 15 , then I'll bet more unders again. probably bet more unders
Old horse racing term, “spit the bit”! Love it, especially the numbers on totals. Thought there to be a correlation to totals, much higher on the backend of rotations. Doesn’t appear so from your daily layout. One would think there would be similarities every 5th to 6th day, but doesn’t seem to be so. However with multiple double digit games happening all the time. If one finds the common thread to what produces this, a single team can fetch you your over. And with TT posted, identifying said team allows one to cut the total in half. I have found nothing more enjoyable than a winning ticket in the 2nd inning!!
i would like to think some of you data driven analytics guys and system players to be hard at work to find the missing or key link here. It’s doable.
There would be a 4,5,6 day pattern if all teams and all rotations followed the same schedule and played (pitched) on the same day. After the first week teams have had days off, rain outs, guys u and down from the minors etc. and the rotations do NOT follow the order of all #1's on Monday, all numbers 2's on Tuesday etc. It is still possible to get an inordinate number of aces or azzes on the same day, but it happens by happenstance, not because of any set pattern. Again, it comes down to individual game handicapping.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
0
Quote Originally Posted by Unclebenelli:
Old horse racing term, “spit the bit”! Love it, especially the numbers on totals. Thought there to be a correlation to totals, much higher on the backend of rotations. Doesn’t appear so from your daily layout. One would think there would be similarities every 5th to 6th day, but doesn’t seem to be so. However with multiple double digit games happening all the time. If one finds the common thread to what produces this, a single team can fetch you your over. And with TT posted, identifying said team allows one to cut the total in half. I have found nothing more enjoyable than a winning ticket in the 2nd inning!!
i would like to think some of you data driven analytics guys and system players to be hard at work to find the missing or key link here. It’s doable.
There would be a 4,5,6 day pattern if all teams and all rotations followed the same schedule and played (pitched) on the same day. After the first week teams have had days off, rain outs, guys u and down from the minors etc. and the rotations do NOT follow the order of all #1's on Monday, all numbers 2's on Tuesday etc. It is still possible to get an inordinate number of aces or azzes on the same day, but it happens by happenstance, not because of any set pattern. Again, it comes down to individual game handicapping.
Of course, it was bugging me that I needed to go ahead and SUCK IT UP and do the June numbers...
Overall O/U record for June 2019.... 196-185-17...
Daily record for day by day results...16-10-4...
And, of course, the combined totals for all of May and up to June 14th...
Combined overall record for May/June...281-262-23...
Combined daily record for May/June...21-18-5...
Interestingly..in May, there were 4 of 30 days that were pushes and 6 more days were within 1 win/loss...
But in June...only have had 1 push day of the 15 days and 2 days within 1 win/loss...
One would think the books want more push days...the fact is they are having more trouble in June than they did in May in producing the PUSH days...
These last 4 days might create an opportunity...remember, the O/Us went 36-17-1 in the last 4 days...that affects bettors...and thus will affect the books...
The books SHOULD be shading the O/U numbers higher for multiple reasons...
1. The actual numbers for May/June clearly show they have been setting the numbers too low...
2. Weather is heating up and those juiced balls should be heating up as well...
3. Bettors love to bet overs more than unders anyways...why not raise the numbers up based on on the bettors love of them and the widespread beliefs about juiced balls and bad bullpens...
Hate to say it...but the sharp plays going forward must be considered, in general, to be unders...
PM for the skinny on the down low
0
Of course, it was bugging me that I needed to go ahead and SUCK IT UP and do the June numbers...
Overall O/U record for June 2019.... 196-185-17...
Daily record for day by day results...16-10-4...
And, of course, the combined totals for all of May and up to June 14th...
Combined overall record for May/June...281-262-23...
Combined daily record for May/June...21-18-5...
Interestingly..in May, there were 4 of 30 days that were pushes and 6 more days were within 1 win/loss...
But in June...only have had 1 push day of the 15 days and 2 days within 1 win/loss...
One would think the books want more push days...the fact is they are having more trouble in June than they did in May in producing the PUSH days...
These last 4 days might create an opportunity...remember, the O/Us went 36-17-1 in the last 4 days...that affects bettors...and thus will affect the books...
The books SHOULD be shading the O/U numbers higher for multiple reasons...
1. The actual numbers for May/June clearly show they have been setting the numbers too low...
2. Weather is heating up and those juiced balls should be heating up as well...
3. Bettors love to bet overs more than unders anyways...why not raise the numbers up based on on the bettors love of them and the widespread beliefs about juiced balls and bad bullpens...
Hate to say it...but the sharp plays going forward must be considered, in general, to be unders...
I will probably go back and get the rest of June and do May as well but the initial findings there are significantly more skewed to the unders...
Well...June changed and in a big hurry...of course, knowing that the last 4 days the overs have been CRUSHING I should have known that the start of June with a lot of unders would be balanced back with overs quickly...and that is exactly the case...
The second week of June current up to yesterday...the O/U F5 record was 43-27-3...
Add that to the first week above and we get a 88-87-8 for the month of June to date...
In the last 4 days, the F5 O/U record posted a 37-15-1...crazy ..
Just knowing that the books strive to get a 50/50 can give us an advantage when this or any number swings so hard to one side or the other of the median...
If I had been tracking the O/U in the 7-10 days of June...and saw that after 10 days the record was...
52-72-8...
I would have known that it was going to swing back HARD at some point soon and sure enough in the next 4 days it posts that...
43-27-3...
Will be keeping an eye on this as it surely will repeat at some point this year...
PM for the skinny on the down low
0
Quote Originally Posted by smacksmiter:
How about the F5 Over/Unders?...
Took a look at the first 8 days in June...
O/U record was 45-60-5... ...
I will probably go back and get the rest of June and do May as well but the initial findings there are significantly more skewed to the unders...
Well...June changed and in a big hurry...of course, knowing that the last 4 days the overs have been CRUSHING I should have known that the start of June with a lot of unders would be balanced back with overs quickly...and that is exactly the case...
The second week of June current up to yesterday...the O/U F5 record was 43-27-3...
Add that to the first week above and we get a 88-87-8 for the month of June to date...
In the last 4 days, the F5 O/U record posted a 37-15-1...crazy ..
Just knowing that the books strive to get a 50/50 can give us an advantage when this or any number swings so hard to one side or the other of the median...
If I had been tracking the O/U in the 7-10 days of June...and saw that after 10 days the record was...
52-72-8...
I would have known that it was going to swing back HARD at some point soon and sure enough in the next 4 days it posts that...
43-27-3...
Will be keeping an eye on this as it surely will repeat at some point this year...
Let's take a look at a couple of things from today...
The record of the (-180) or higher favorites...I have been watching this and will be working on posting it daily...I had posted earlier in the thread that the (-180) or higher favorites had an astounding 75% or better win rate in June so far...
7-1 with the Dodgers being right on the borderline of qualifying at -179/-180...you could have left them off and had a perfect 8 team money line parlay...Hmm..wonder what an 7 team parlay pays...?
Boston -315 Winner
Houston -220 Winner
Cleveland -240 Winner
Minnesota -250 Winner
NYY -195 Winner
Colorado -180 Winner
Oakland -215 Winner
LA Dodgers -179/-180 Loser
The OVER/UNDER full game records for today...
7-4-4...surprising 4 pushes in one day...
The O/U for the F5...
10-4-1...another solid OVER day...
PM for the skinny on the down low
0
Let's take a look at a couple of things from today...
The record of the (-180) or higher favorites...I have been watching this and will be working on posting it daily...I had posted earlier in the thread that the (-180) or higher favorites had an astounding 75% or better win rate in June so far...
7-1 with the Dodgers being right on the borderline of qualifying at -179/-180...you could have left them off and had a perfect 8 team money line parlay...Hmm..wonder what an 7 team parlay pays...?
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.
...at least, none that I know of...
Hot Forum Topics
