September Dogs - Starting with $4k

Thanks

Oh sorry, I took the Orioles as well, but didn't post. They lost 0-10 super badly, so yalls lucked out!

MLB TREND OF THE DAY: Since 2012, Dogs facing teams (likely clinched) with over 33 more wins than losses, in regular season from 9/1's on, are 57-49 +39.06 units, +36.8% roi SU! (Take the Jays today!)

MLB TREND OF THE DAY: In recent database history, favorites or road dogs lined more expensive in their last 3 games including current are 117-688 63.1% SU +238.62 units against a team the books have made cheaper in price in their last 3 games including this one. (Active on the Mets and Cardinals today)

Thanks Jackscaps and barneybeans. Welcome to the thread.

Just a note for folks who are just seeing the thread and looking at the Title: September Dogs.

September is when, in MLB, Dogs tend to thrive, and when betting any professional sport, I have the philosophy that: the only reasonable assumption should, by and large, ever be is that...these are all professional teams; it isn't like College sports where you'll have some B12 team dial up some wackiy 50 point margin in football against some tomato can team no one has ever heard of. Rather, the exploit we're tapping into here is to fade the fallacy the herd sometimes gathers that one team is better than another by that same kind of landslide you might observe in College sports where fair / parity driven scheduling is nearly impossible. In pro sports it is more than possible: for the prosperity of the different businesses (NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB, etc) parity is sought after for a number of reasons, namely, to keep the fans excited by having as many nail pincher tight games that get the blood flowing as possible. Good for business; its how the MLB has been around for 100 years....keep things exciting.

So the bottom line is: at its very core, the main premise here, after considering that logic (and you don't have to, but it works for me and to each his own): If these are all professional teams, we'd be wise to snuff out all of the combinations and permutations of situations where the public is coaxed, by their own fascination or by the stuffed suit media or a little of both or overreactions to unimportant injuries and such (very long list so etc etc), into favoring one team en masse over another. 

And I'm not specifically referring to literal favorites or underdogs in that last statement; however, it is important to understand the basic psychology of implied odds: 'Implied odds' as the greatest driving force above all other factors on where the public bets will gravitate.

The only wise way of thinking about all of this is to first acknowledge and realize that these are exciting sports that major entities dump enourmous resources into towards, making their businesses prosper. Setting up systems like the ole 'suck for Luck' thing in NFL. The worst teams get rewarded the most heavily in drafts and so we see things like the Houston Astros going from one of the most winless teams in history to a reallocation of things and now a string of seasons where we're seeing them getting lined -200 and up and breaking the .500 mark. 

It is hard to see this in the day to day, but in the long run its all 50/50 coin flips if you average it all out. We optimize that by picking out spots and trying to coattail the linemaker trap setting and understand that, day to day, week to week things are just meaningless blips that throw 90% of gamblers off. Most tracking sites out there think that 1 year is pushing it when rating and databasing their participating cappers; however, even 1 year is a sample size that is only exploited harder than any perhaps by the house. 50/50 -- so why bet the chalk? If all of these wagers go by a coin toss, the way I personally see it, by restricting myself to the realm of pro sports and not college, AAA stuff, I know I'll keep that coin flip somewhere around 45-50% at worst and keeping it tight like that equates to the most important thing: Money in the bank...