I haven't posted anything before but I just found a pretty simple underdog system that was extremely profitable last year for the whole league and over the last 3 years was good as well when betting on American League teams only. I apologize if anyone has posted this before, as far as I know it's an original idea. The rules of the system are:
The game must be the first game of a series of at least 3 games.
The team you're betting has to be an underdog of +150 or more.
The team you're betting has to have scored 5+ runs in each of it's past 2 games.
If the team loses the 1st game of the series, you chase the series for a win, but, you don't double your bet or increase your bet at all. You just continue betting the same amount.
My thinking: While your not always going to be betting on a good team with odds of greater than +150, you are betting on a team that has scored some runs and may be hot. Plus because the team is an underdog you're almost always getting a good value. And with such high odds you can make up ground relatively quickly.
In 2011 this system was 22-19 for +18.25 units.
From 2009-2011, American League teams were +21.21 units and National League teams were -3.29 units.
There weren't a ton of plays but there was an average of 58 games over the last 3 years.
Because the 2011 season was so profitable, I'm inclined to use this system for the entire MLB rather than just the A.L. but there's going to be risk either way with a dog system.
I would appreciate any feedback and I will try to post the plays on this thread when they occur.
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
I haven't posted anything before but I just found a pretty simple underdog system that was extremely profitable last year for the whole league and over the last 3 years was good as well when betting on American League teams only. I apologize if anyone has posted this before, as far as I know it's an original idea. The rules of the system are:
The game must be the first game of a series of at least 3 games.
The team you're betting has to be an underdog of +150 or more.
The team you're betting has to have scored 5+ runs in each of it's past 2 games.
If the team loses the 1st game of the series, you chase the series for a win, but, you don't double your bet or increase your bet at all. You just continue betting the same amount.
My thinking: While your not always going to be betting on a good team with odds of greater than +150, you are betting on a team that has scored some runs and may be hot. Plus because the team is an underdog you're almost always getting a good value. And with such high odds you can make up ground relatively quickly.
In 2011 this system was 22-19 for +18.25 units.
From 2009-2011, American League teams were +21.21 units and National League teams were -3.29 units.
There weren't a ton of plays but there was an average of 58 games over the last 3 years.
Because the 2011 season was so profitable, I'm inclined to use this system for the entire MLB rather than just the A.L. but there's going to be risk either way with a dog system.
I would appreciate any feedback and I will try to post the plays on this thread when they occur.
If you go to game 2 or 3 of a series, are you still playing 1 unit regardless of the odds? Favorite (unlikely) or dog? Do you have to get +150 or more for games 2 and 3? Potentially, you could take an overall loss for the series even when you win game 3. Correct?
Do you have the game 1, game 2 and game 3 records available for 2011? I tracked Baltimore and Minnesota just to get a feel for the system. Even shorter odds (+135 - +145) looked good on that random sampling. I liked what I saw.
Good luck.
0
If you go to game 2 or 3 of a series, are you still playing 1 unit regardless of the odds? Favorite (unlikely) or dog? Do you have to get +150 or more for games 2 and 3? Potentially, you could take an overall loss for the series even when you win game 3. Correct?
Do you have the game 1, game 2 and game 3 records available for 2011? I tracked Baltimore and Minnesota just to get a feel for the system. Even shorter odds (+135 - +145) looked good on that random sampling. I liked what I saw.
Dan- Yes, I still played one unit on the 2nd and 3rd games regardless of the odds. And there were actually a few favorites in those games, usually it was Seattle or a team with one really good starter that would be a favorite if he pitched. And no just the first game has to be +150. And finally yes, you could take a loss if you lose the first 2 games and win the 3rd. The only way you wouldn't is with +200 or more on the 3rd game, unless the 2nd game was a favorite.
I didn't keep track of how each series did, just individual games. I felt weird calling it a chase since I essentially looked at each game as it's own wager.
Thanks guys. GL
0
Dan- Yes, I still played one unit on the 2nd and 3rd games regardless of the odds. And there were actually a few favorites in those games, usually it was Seattle or a team with one really good starter that would be a favorite if he pitched. And no just the first game has to be +150. And finally yes, you could take a loss if you lose the first 2 games and win the 3rd. The only way you wouldn't is with +200 or more on the 3rd game, unless the 2nd game was a favorite.
I didn't keep track of how each series did, just individual games. I felt weird calling it a chase since I essentially looked at each game as it's own wager.
I did a back check on the 2008 AL season. It netted +17.49 units. I used +1.40 and above on the first game. It went 12-4 in game 1. Overall it only lost game 3 once (Seattle). If you expanded the three game series to four, it won another 2.3 units. Maybe off a bit, but definitely worth following this year.
Interesting angle. Thanks again for sharing.
Good Luck..
0
BCap888,
I did a back check on the 2008 AL season. It netted +17.49 units. I used +1.40 and above on the first game. It went 12-4 in game 1. Overall it only lost game 3 once (Seattle). If you expanded the three game series to four, it won another 2.3 units. Maybe off a bit, but definitely worth following this year.
I have another system that was +49.6 units from the American League alone since 2009. I haven't even back checked the NL yet so I'm sure that number is going up! Once I finish the NL I put that one up. Probably tomorrow. GL everybody!
0
I have another system that was +49.6 units from the American League alone since 2009. I haven't even back checked the NL yet so I'm sure that number is going up! Once I finish the NL I put that one up. Probably tomorrow. GL everybody!
I'm not sure that I'm seeing any value since your back testing results. In your first post it says in 2011 it won 18.25 units. And the last post says it has won 35 units since 2004. This means you have won under 17 units in a 7 year period from 2004 thru 2010 which is an average just over 2 units a year.
0
I'm not sure that I'm seeing any value since your back testing results. In your first post it says in 2011 it won 18.25 units. And the last post says it has won 35 units since 2004. This means you have won under 17 units in a 7 year period from 2004 thru 2010 which is an average just over 2 units a year.
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.