Anytime the first game of a series goes OVER the total, play the UNDER the rest of the series, chasing losses, and ending upon the completion of the series. I did some back-testing and it looks to be very profitable, though I don't have exact numbers. Going to use this thread to play, track, and let others watch. This will start up on Monday.
**If anyone wants to backtrack and test this system comprehensively, I'd be very appreciative.**
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Anytime the first game of a series goes OVER the total, play the UNDER the rest of the series, chasing losses, and ending upon the completion of the series. I did some back-testing and it looks to be very profitable, though I don't have exact numbers. Going to use this thread to play, track, and let others watch. This will start up on Monday.
**If anyone wants to backtrack and test this system comprehensively, I'd be very appreciative.**
I've been reading your posts lately and really enjoy your insight on handicapping.
I considered this method as well and backtracked it for 2009. It only seemed to project losses for me. I've been trying to find the 'Holy Grail" of OU MLB chases and I can't seem to find it. 3 game, 4 game, 5 game chases, you name it.
Here's what's left of a cut/paste spreadsheet I made for 2009 with just the OU results from Covers I used to search for patterns. Check it out if you want. It might give you ideas. This spreadsheet doesn't break up games by series'. This just happens to be a modified form of that.
From what I can tell, you need to beat 7 wins per loss to come out ahead when using 50/50 odds. In other words, the Pythagorean theory will prevail. All OU patterns seem to be stuck within this framework no matter how many chases.
Even when the odds numbers are adjusted for Dog chases and Fav chases, the 1 in 8 is still the "magic ratio" to beat.
It is for this reason one needs to chase games that are correlated in some way. There are chases on this site that try to follow this rule of correlated games but I haven't been able to prove any successful with my own backtesting.
I've considered chasing both sides of a series for each team to hit
an O or U but haven't had time to backtest completely. It seems to make sense because if you lose a chase, the other side still wins thus minimizing your losses and breaking into the "1 in 8" rule.
Anyhow, thanks for listening and...
Good Luck!
0
Hi DJ,
I've been reading your posts lately and really enjoy your insight on handicapping.
I considered this method as well and backtracked it for 2009. It only seemed to project losses for me. I've been trying to find the 'Holy Grail" of OU MLB chases and I can't seem to find it. 3 game, 4 game, 5 game chases, you name it.
Here's what's left of a cut/paste spreadsheet I made for 2009 with just the OU results from Covers I used to search for patterns. Check it out if you want. It might give you ideas. This spreadsheet doesn't break up games by series'. This just happens to be a modified form of that.
From what I can tell, you need to beat 7 wins per loss to come out ahead when using 50/50 odds. In other words, the Pythagorean theory will prevail. All OU patterns seem to be stuck within this framework no matter how many chases.
Even when the odds numbers are adjusted for Dog chases and Fav chases, the 1 in 8 is still the "magic ratio" to beat.
It is for this reason one needs to chase games that are correlated in some way. There are chases on this site that try to follow this rule of correlated games but I haven't been able to prove any successful with my own backtesting.
I've considered chasing both sides of a series for each team to hit
an O or U but haven't had time to backtest completely. It seems to make sense because if you lose a chase, the other side still wins thus minimizing your losses and breaking into the "1 in 8" rule.
Ya you're right... I did further backtesting and it came up negative -- the only way I could get it into the positive was putting the parameter of only playing the system on NL teams with a win % of .500 or better.
What are some of your best series chase ideas?
0
Ya you're right... I did further backtesting and it came up negative -- the only way I could get it into the positive was putting the parameter of only playing the system on NL teams with a win % of .500 or better.
There is one idea for a chase I've been thinking about...
It involves chasing both sides of a series until both an O and U hit.
Let's take a hypothetical series of TOR at CLE with an O/U of 9.5 as an example:
If you play to win $5 on both sides of a series and chase until you win one of each, you will have 2 basic outcomes.
Example 1 shows us winning both the O and U for a net profit of $10. Example 2 shows us losing one of our chases for a total loss of about $40. (odds of -110 used for calculations)
We can conclude from this that if we lose a chase only 1 out of every 6 times or less, we should come out ahead, right? After all, a coinflip chase will lose on average of 1 out of every 8 times according to Pascal (https://www.mathsisfun.com/pascals-triangle.html}.
It still needs some rules and guidlines. For instance, how do you choose which games are more likely to split an OU? And how do you handle game 2 and 3 pushes?
Any feedback or thoughts on this system would be appreciated. Maybe soon we can run with this thing and make some .
0
There is one idea for a chase I've been thinking about...
It involves chasing both sides of a series until both an O and U hit.
Let's take a hypothetical series of TOR at CLE with an O/U of 9.5 as an example:
If you play to win $5 on both sides of a series and chase until you win one of each, you will have 2 basic outcomes.
Example 1 shows us winning both the O and U for a net profit of $10. Example 2 shows us losing one of our chases for a total loss of about $40. (odds of -110 used for calculations)
We can conclude from this that if we lose a chase only 1 out of every 6 times or less, we should come out ahead, right? After all, a coinflip chase will lose on average of 1 out of every 8 times according to Pascal (https://www.mathsisfun.com/pascals-triangle.html}.
It still needs some rules and guidlines. For instance, how do you choose which games are more likely to split an OU? And how do you handle game 2 and 3 pushes?
Any feedback or thoughts on this system would be appreciated. Maybe soon we can run with this thing and make some .
4 yes, 2 no... Only one loss was a 4 gamer. Remember that a 4-game series will produce a 3-game chase and a 3-game series will produce a 2-game chase because you obviously don't bet on the first game.
Also, sometimes I buy the hook on the last game of a chase if the juice isn't too bad and it's helped a couple times. Don't know if it's mathematically worth it but that little filter was used in calculating those units ^^
0
4 yes, 2 no... Only one loss was a 4 gamer. Remember that a 4-game series will produce a 3-game chase and a 3-game series will produce a 2-game chase because you obviously don't bet on the first game.
Also, sometimes I buy the hook on the last game of a chase if the juice isn't too bad and it's helped a couple times. Don't know if it's mathematically worth it but that little filter was used in calculating those units ^^
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.
.
Hot Forum Topics
