All Forums | MLB Betting

September Dogs - Starting with $4k

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 768906
Posts: 1630
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #601
Rangers come close. Nothing for today.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #602
Quote Originally Posted by herbshack:

Rangers come close. Nothing for today.
Winner there. Just didn't come in well enough as a top play.

For today:

$273 to win $425.88
Baltimore Orioles +156 
vs Boston Red Sox
SYSTEM: A that just lost by a single run and had scored runs in more innings than the other team goes 552-473 +82.44 units SU. - This is a powerful trend for many reasons; a couple of them being: A. Positive performance since inception. B. Logic- It is easy to understand why this one might work intuitively: if a team just lost, they'll be undervalued; dig a little deeper and you'll see that the loss really felt like a fluke....maybe it even was, but more importantly, it FELT like a win, but wasn't for our guys. Value + motivation here for the O's.

Your thoughts on the system are most welcome. That would be good discussion in this thread (as the topic has come up).
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #603
Quote Originally Posted by herbshack:

$273 to win $425.88
Baltimore Orioles +156 WINNER!
vs Boston Red Sox

Current Bankroll: $8,506.15
from $4000 (+112.65 units)
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #604
For today take:
Baltimore Orioles +129
Risked $118 to win $152.22

 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #605
For today take:
$236 to win $292.64
Tampa Bay Rays -1 +124 
vs San Francisco Giants
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #606
$354 to win $481.44 
Minnesota Twins +136 
vs New York Yankees

 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #607
Quote Originally Posted by herbshack:

$354 to win $481.44 
Minnesota Twins +136 WINNER!
vs New York Yankees

Current Bankroll: $8,633.59
from $4000 (+115.84 units)

New all time high.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2015
Posts: 510
Posted: #608
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2015
Posts: 510
Posted: #609
Quote Originally Posted by herbshack:

Winner there. Just didn't come in well enough as a top play.

For today:

$273 to win $425.88
Baltimore Orioles +156 
vs Boston Red Sox
SYSTEM: A that just lost by a single run and had scored runs in more innings than the other team goes 552-473 +82.44 units SU. - This is a powerful trend for many reasons; a couple of them being: A. Positive performance since inception. B. Logic- It is easy to understand why this one might work intuitively: if a team just lost, they'll be undervalued; dig a little deeper and you'll see that the loss really felt like a fluke....maybe it even was, but more importantly, it FELT like a win, but wasn't for our guys. Value + motivation here for the O's.

Your thoughts on the system are most welcome. That would be good discussion in this thread (as the topic has come up).

Decent hypothesis. The multiple inning part is the key ingredient. Makes sense that a team that was consistent, throughout the game, yesterday might bounce back vs a team that had a couple good innings (but snuck the win).
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2011
Posts: 5107
Posted: #610
Strasburg is a dog tonite!
Play AGAINSTLA DODGERS using the money line in All games after 3 or more consecutive wins
The record is 21 Wins and 33 Losses for the last three seasons (-25.90 units)
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2011
Posts: 5107
Posted: #611
Play OVERWASHINGTON on the total in All games in June games
The record is 13 Overs and 3 Unders this season (+10.40 units) 
SO PLAY UNDER 5.5??? LOL
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #612
Quote Originally Posted by gbpackman:

Play OVERWASHINGTON on the total in All games in June games
The record is 13 Overs and 3 Unders this season (+10.40 units) 
SO PLAY UNDER 5.5??? LOL

Whenever I see those crazy low totals and most of the public piled on the Over, I'm looking to bet the under. Nice call.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2011
Posts: 5107
Posted: #613
Quote Originally Posted by herbshack:


Whenever I see those crazy low totals and most of the public piled on the Over, I'm looking to bet the under. Nice call.
Thanks, these trends are killin it on totals but sides keep going the same way 
Play ONTEXAS using the money line in All games in all games.The record is 46 Wins and 25 Losses this season (+28.90 units)
This trend is red hot and I think BAL can win one, but no other team has the overall pitching to stop all 9 TEX hitters.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2011
Posts: 5312
Posted: #614
Hey Herb Quick Question

After watching the ARZ game where the underdog +100 won SU
and the underhit -8.5

I saw the same exact line for Col v Marlins and I took Colorado +100  and under 8.5 BOTH HIT

Do you ever see underdog lines that are simialr and have the same results at the end of games... I was surprised both underdogs won str8 up and the game went under
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #615
Quote Originally Posted by royboymiami:

Hey Herb Quick Question

After watching the ARZ game where the underdog +100 won SU
and the underhit -8.5

I saw the same exact line for Col v Marlins and I took Colorado +100  and under 8.5 BOTH HIT

Do you ever see underdog lines that are simialr and have the same results at the end of games... I was surprised both underdogs won str8 up and the game went under

Interesting. First thought I have is that it is coicidental, but anything is worth digging into....so long as you lean heavier on seeing most things as variance and not worth betting.

Here's what I've seen: 

#1. Since 2004, when the total has been very high (>10), the Underdog has profitted on the blind: 740-944 +23.67 units. Large sample, simple premise; this has to be considered whatever you're doing.

#2. MLB has 'handles'; 7 and 9. That is, where the actual scores of games most commonly land. With that said, the total 8.5 is a funny one right under a major handle. 8.5 is also the most commonly lined total (right a bit above 9) in all games since 2004. In those games, the home dog is 386-410 +62.90 units SU when the game went under the total. Perhaps an indication that: when you see that line (8.5) and like the under, maybe take a look at the home dog as well....

I don't want to lead you down the wrong path there with #2. That might all be hogwash; whereas, I actually think there is something to #1 and believe it might be something worth pursuing...making a system out of one specific (arbirtray let's say) integral total is a statistical no-no.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 1982
Posted: #616
Herb, I have a fellow gambler we always says take the highest total and bet over and the lowest and bet under. He has done well with these plays. hope to see your play for today. Thanks for posting.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2011
Posts: 5312
Posted: #617
Much respect
Thanks for the insight . i see what you're saying
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2011
Posts: 5107
Posted: #618
Quote Originally Posted by mandy1:

Herb, I have a fellow gambler we always says take the highest total and bet over and the lowest and bet under. He has done well with these plays. hope to see your play for today. Thanks for posting.

Do you really believe it's THAT simple??? Well, let's all quit our day jobs and bet over on the high and under on the low!It's nothing but a trend. Wrigley Field used to be a mecca for overs and the books would actually stop taking bets on the total. Now, the under has been doing better.
Who knows...maybe the pitchers were paid to throw gopher balls?Maybe they found their duffle bag miraculously had 100K in it? I don't know but it was really weird to see that... 
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #619
For today:
(Goes off soon!)
Risk $119 to win $183.26 
Atlanta Braves +154 vs Miami Marlins

Been bullish on the Braves lately. I like an undervalued, sub .400 team on a nice run. Atlanta could be putting a little something together. Grinding the risk and value...

 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #620
Quote Originally Posted by mandy1:

Herb, I have a fellow gambler we always says take the highest total and bet over and the lowest and bet under. He has done well with these plays. hope to see your play for today. Thanks for posting.


I am in complete agreement with you. And I'll answer gbpackman's question ("Do you really believe it's THAT simple???") with some cold hard facts:

Since 2004, totals of 6.5 or lower (6,5.5) are money on the blind (or should I say, 'it really IS that simple'): 598-506-16 +52.32 units for the Under.

Most people see that total and cringe, but if you follow the premise: ANY bet in any sport that gives you a knot in your stomach is worth a second look; this one fits that bill.

As for the Over outliers:
Since 2007 anything over 11, the OVER went 44-36-2 +4.62 units.
Not as strong, but the trend exists.



 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2010
Posts: 861
Posted: #621
Quote Originally Posted by gbpackman:

Do you really believe it's THAT simple??? Well, let's all quit our day jobs and bet over on the high and under on the low!It's nothing but a trend. Wrigley Field used to be a mecca for overs and the books would actually stop taking bets on the total. Now, the under has been doing better.
Who knows...maybe the pitchers were paid to throw gopher balls?Maybe they found their duffle bag miraculously had 100K in it? I don't know but it was really weird to see that... 

Lol. Well...

There have been plenty of quit-your-day-job betting exploits that come and go in props. It is harder now than ever before, but when you find something you just grind it out and be conservative about getting out once you've made profits. 

Example: About 4 years back I think it was, books were putting out dog odds on the "Yes" for 'Will there be a run scored in the first inning. I checked my database and saw this:

29,542 instances where a run was NOT scored in the 1st ("No")
31,600 instances where a run WAS scored in the 1st ("Yes")

So a little bit more than 50% of the time in a huge sample size and you're getting dog odds...this one was simple. I was grinding out "Yes" for every single bet....as were some other people that picked up on the trend and now it is dead. You can't really find an edge in this prop but the books actually skrewed up there.

Another example where things were really simple:

Up until 2011, HOME DOGS were money on the blind at 2399-2861 45.6% +98.07 units SU. I rode that for a couple of seasons picking up on it in 2009. In 2011, I'm not sure what changed, but I still sort of stay away from betting against home dogs. I have a lot of home dog systems I still bet, but they aren't as simple as just a straight up home dog.

If something is very simple and broad and seems too good to be true: ask yourself this: is it logical? is it contrarian (ie. are the books probably aware of this loophole but not covering it because the public doesn't like to make this bet and likely never will (ie. betting the under on super low totals?). If yes to those, than it might be too good and it might be true!



 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2011
Posts: 5107
Posted: #622
SYSTEM: A that just lost by a single run and had scored runs in more innings than the other team

Wash lost by 1 run and they scored in 2 innings where Doyers scored in 1
Play on Wash?
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2011
Posts: 5107
Posted: #623
Quote Originally Posted by herbshack:

For today:
(Goes off soon!)
Risk $119 to win $183.26 
Atlanta Braves +154 vs Miami Marlins

Been bullish on the Braves lately. I like an undervalued, sub .400 team on a nice run. Atlanta could be putting a little something together. Grinding the risk and value...
Glad I missed it!
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2011
Posts: 5107
Posted: #624
Quote Originally Posted by gbpackman:

SYSTEM: A that just lost by a single run and had scored runs in more innings than the other team

Wash lost by 1 run and they scored in 2 innings where Doyers scored in 1
Play on Wash?
Yes or no?
 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2016
Posts: 476
Posted: #625
Quote Originally Posted by herbshack:

Winner there. Just didn't come in well enough as a top play.

For today:

$273 to win $425.88
Baltimore Orioles +156 
vs Boston Red Sox
SYSTEM: A that just lost by a single run and had scored runs in more innings than the other team goes 552-473 +82.44 units SU. - This is a powerful trend for many reasons; a couple of them being: A. Positive performance since inception. B. Logic- It is easy to understand why this one might work intuitively: if a team just lost, they'll be undervalued; dig a little deeper and you'll see that the loss really felt like a fluke....maybe it even was, but more importantly, it FELT like a win, but wasn't for our guys. Value + motivation here for the O's.

Your thoughts on the system are most welcome. That would be good discussion in this thread (as the topic has come up).


GBpackman, this was posted this a few posts above you
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.