Printable View
.
one bet - one unit divided as such - NHL
60% Tampa Bay Lightning over Blue Jackets - -330_____________smallish loss of about 10% of total bet if win but fail to cover
40% Lightning -1.5 Puck Line - 128 (fanduel)___________the bet as a whole will return slightly less than 1/2 if they cover
.
.
too late to edit -
the above math is incorrect - sorry about that
if the Lightning win but fail to cover the loss will be slightly over 20% of the total bet amount - sorry about that
the calculation if they do cover is correct
.
.
today Yankees - one bet divided as such -
Yankees - 220 over Marlins_____80%_________a small win of about 16% of total bet if they win but fail to cover
Yankees -1.5 -105_________20%_________a profit of about 55% of total bet if they cover
Bet 365 has best odds for this bet right now
Marlins are 10-2 in losing by more than one run in the games they have lost
.
.
too late to edit
wanna change above bet to just money line - Yankees -220 over Marlins
.
.
Astros/Royals over 8.5 - 115
.
Game went over in less than 1 inning. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Don't you wish they were all this easy?
yesQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJGame went over in less than 1 inning. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Don't you wish they were all this easy?
I like picking the over when there are weak starting pitchers
Hunter Brown of the Astros shows weakness this year and last
Brady Singer of the Royals shows strength this year but only in 13 innings pitched and he was weak last year
anyway - just one game - not like I've found the Key to the Kingdom or anything like that_________________:)
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
.
NHL - one pick divided as such:
Edmonton tonight over Arizona - 290________80% of bet for a tiny win if they win but fail to cover
Edmonton on the Puck Line -1.5 -112 with the other 20% of the bet__________if they cover the win is about 45% of the total amount bet
Edmonton still has a shot at catching Vancouver for the top spot in the Pacific Division
this will be Arizona's 4th game in a row on the road - that has to be tough
.
.
MLS soccer
NY Red Bulls/Chicago Fire over 2.5 goals_____________-120
.
.
add one more pick for today -
Marco Gonzalez - Pirates Pitcher - giving up under 3.5 earned runs to Phillies _____-165_________DraftKings_______see link
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...=pitcher-props
.
I have a bit of time today, so some thoughts. :)
I am doing volume betting for the bonus money. Sometimes called bonus whoring. I try to make my picks based on a hodge podge of methods, trends of past results, my own handicapping, tagging along with picks from the guys at ESPN bet live, VISN, and Half Smoke and Dan Druff on this forum (Druff is streaky). Monet is also on that list, although he doesn't post much anymore.
That said, Half Smoke, I have been unwilling to go along with a couple picks this week where you are laying -250 or -300. That is just agaisnt my fiber. I don't like a bet where if I lose, I need to win 3 others to make up for it. And especially on ice hockey, where things are determined by a hunk of rubber bouncing on a patch of ice. :D I get what you are doing breaking up wager between money line and puck line. I just can't do that. Anyway that is just me.
As an general philosophy, I prefer under bets (totals) and underdog wagers with points and money line. I like totals unders because I believe in general the public likes to bet overs. They like a lot of scoring and this results in the lines being slightly artificially high in my opinion. So I bet more "unders". As far as side bets, I like the underdogs because in general The gap between player talent on a good team vs a mediocre team, or a mediocre team vs a bad team, is not as much as people think. Now one of the top teams in any league vs one of the bottom teams, that is another story, but still those lines ridiculously high. Not enough to blindly take dogs or anything, but certainly not laying these monster amounts.
Anyway, just some sports betting thoughts and talk. In the end, it still is all about the bonus money for me. :)
totally understandableQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I think a lot of bettors feel the same way
I think I'll be moving away from those types of picks also
ooth - it may be easier to find an edge (at least a theoretical one) on those types of bets since so many feel the same way and it may cause the line to skew and make the other side very disadvantageous and the very chalky side advantageous
this happens quite often I believe
I'm going to be looking more at DraftKings props - it can be a lot of work but it seems fairly easy to find a theoretical edge that's not so chalky
but you can't go to the mall with just a theoretical edge___________________:)
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by AccountInQuestion
.
have been kind of mediocre or a little worse than mediocre with my picks
gonna try and improve by focusing on proposition bets where I think there is a better chance of finding mispricings
today Nets at 6ers - Tobias Harris over 13.5 points -105 - (draftkings)
he's averaging 17 for the year - he's been over that total in the last 10 games and over 21-5 in the last 26 games
the last time the 6ers played the Nets Harris had 18
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...=player-points
.
I am not sure this is the slam dunk that it initially appears to be. Embiid is the 76ers leading scorer at 30+ points a game (many coming from the foul line). He takes probably 35+ shots to get that 30 points. So in games he doesn't play, and he has missed roughly half the 76ers games, everyone else will get more shots and have a higher average than games in which Embiid plays. I would guess if you were to look at the splits for games in which Embidd plays and doesn't, Harris's average will be night and day. Probably 20+ without (more shots available) and 13 or 14 with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Not saying it is a bad bet, but I would want to see those splits. There are only so many shots available in a game and if one guy is taking 35 of them..... :rolleyes:
good point - I've linked the game logs of the 2 - it's maybe not a slam dunk - but I think a good betQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI am not sure this is the slam dunk that it initially appears to be. Embiid is the 76ers leading scorer at 30+ points a game (many coming from the foul line). He takes probably 35+ shots to get that 30 points. So in games he doesn't play, and he has missed roughly half the 76ers games, everyone else will get more shots and have a higher average than games in which Embiid plays. I would guess if you were to look at the splits for games in which Embidd plays and doesn't, Harris's average will be night and day. Probably 20+ without (more shots available) and 13 or 14 with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Not saying it is a bad bet, but I would want to see those splits. There are only so many shots available in a game and if one guy is taking 35 of them..... :rolleyes:
the last 3 games they've played together Harris has had 14, 15 and 18 points
also, they played together on Jan. 30 and Jan. 22 and Harris had 26 and 14 points - on Jan. 22 Embiid had 70 points
they both played most of January together and Harris went 7-4 over that total in January
https://www.espn.com/nba/player/game...18/joel-embiid
https://www.espn.com/nba/player/game.../tobias-harris
one more prop bet for today
Pistons vs. Spurs__________Jalen Duren over 5.5 rebounds -125
he's gone over that total 30-4 in his last 34 games
it definitely seems much easier to get a good prop bet than the standard bets - no guarantees of course
and it takes a lot of time but it's kinna fun trying to find a good bet - props are a whole different world that I really haven't looked into much before this
I'm enjoying it quite a bit
.
.
Turns out Embiid was an unexpected late scratch, making your bet look better (in my eyes). Unfortunately I didn't tag along.
andQuote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
yeahQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I had no idea
Harris had 21
who was it who said____________I'd rather be lucky than good__________?________________so very, very true
.
“One grain of luck sometimes worth more than whole rice field of wisdom.” - Charlie Chan at the Circus (1936)Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
great quote GarnabbyQuote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
.
one of yesterday's picks - Jalen Duren didn't play - any bets don't count - no action
today - Twins at Orioles -
Manuel Margot under 1.5 hits __________-195
he's gone under that total 11 of 12 times this season and 18 of his last 22 at bats last season
the Orioles starting pitcher is mediocre - the Orioles bullpen is very tough
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...bcategory=hits
.
.
prop for today - NBA - Lakers/Pelicans -
Rui Hachimura over 4.5 rebounds -135
he's been over that total in his last 6 games and 8 out of his last 10 games
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...egory=rebounds
.
.
one more for today - Warriors/Kings - De'Aaron Fox under 3.5 three pointers made - 155 - he's been under that total in 30 of his last 38 games
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...ategory=threes
I am withdrawing my pick on Fox for today - second thoughts - hope that's allowed____:) - he doesn't get a lot of threes - but it's a key game and he's just too good - my bad -Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
if anybody bet him because of my pick I still think they have a pretty good bet - just not up to par for me
.
.
today -
royals/white sox -
Martin Maldonado under 0.5 hits_____________-140
he's a very light hitter batting just 0.65 and only 1.91 last season - he's gone hitless in 10 out of his last 12 games
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...bcategory=hits
.
.
today - 1:10 p.m.
Angels/Rays
Pitcher Ryan Pepiot under 6.5 strikeouts_______________-145
he's been under 6.5 Ks in 18 of his 21 starts in the last 3 seasons including this one
edit - they just worsened the line to -165 about one minute ago - it's still my pick
.
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...ikeouts-thrown
.
.
Rangers/Braves
pitcher Andrew Heaney under 4.5 strikeouts_____________-135
he's been under 4.5 Ks in 13 of his last 14 starts
he's facing the Braves - the best hitting team in the MLB (in batting average)
in his last 15 starts he has only pitched over 4 innings in one game - and is very often pulled well before that - current era - 6.75
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...=pitcher-props
.
.
Caris LeVert over 11.5 points +102
he's been over 11.5 in 6 of his last 7 games - his last 4 are 16,18,18, and 21 - he averages 14
.
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...ategory=points
.
one more for today
Miles Mikolas to allow more than 5.5 hits______________-145
he's allowed more hits than that in 3 out of 4 starts this year and 22 out of his last 34
he's facing the Brewers who are the 3rd best hitting team in the MLB (batting average)
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...y=hits-allowed
.
I have been fading Mikolas since halfway through last season. Usually some combination of being against cardinals for game or first 5 innings or betting the opponent team run line over, or betting the over for both teams for the first 5 innings. Anything that can take advantage of the guy giving up 4 or 5 runs in 5 innings.
.
one last one for today
Lane Thomas a .195 hitter for the Nationals going under 1.5 total bases________________-180
he's been under that total 15 of 19 times this year
he's facing starter Ronel Blanco of the Astros who has a 0.86 era
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...ry=total-bases
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
.
Pablo Reyes slumping for the Red Sox batting just .167 under 1.5 total bases______________-145
he's been under that total in 14 of his 15 games this year
facing Martin Perez of the Pirates who currently has a 2.55 era_____________1:35
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...ry=total-bases
.
.
gonna make tomorrow's pick - a non prop pick - early, because I think the line may get a lot worse as we approach game time
Bruins -135 over Maple leafs___________playoff game in TD Garden
Bruins crushed them on Saturday and beat them in all 4 regular season games
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/leagues/hockey/nhl
.
.
the pick on Reyes lost
.going to try and get some of that loss back
Darius Vines Braves pitcher tonight - under 2.5 earned runs allowed_________-120
he's played in 6 games in the majors and given up just 10 runs - only played 1 game this year and gave up just one run in four innings
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...d-runs-allowed
.
.
I found this site "Pickwise" that gives free "expert" MLB picks - see link
I didn't really expect them to do well but I've tracked a few days and they have gone 18-7 in that time
I'm not going to figure out exactly what the r.o.i. is but they average about - 120 - so they are way, way, ahead - they don't pick extreme faves - not that I've seen so far
Maybe they are an exception to the rule - you wouldn't expect to find good free picks at a dotcom like this
they have picked many totals - all unders - they like unders like Druff
I was quite surprised that they have done this well
I will keep tracking and report after I have tracked 100 games
they probably have all their picks up by about 11:00
https://www.pickswise.com/mlb/picks/
Here is an angle I found interesting. It comes courtesy of the ESPN Bet live crew (used to be called Daily Wager).
Since 2005. NBA teams returning home down 0-2 after losing the first 2 games on the road, which is the case tonight with Indiana, have covered the halftime spread 70 out of 100 times. (Even I can come up with the math on that....70%). ;)
The theory or reasoning is that they ride the enthusiasm of their fans to a quick start and early lead, which may or may not hold up for the entire game.
I already liked the Pacers to hit their team over 115, which they could hit and STILL lose, so adding this half time -5.5 fits right along with it.
Go Pacers. Smack down those snotty Villanova Boys. :cool:
BTW, Half Smoke, PickWise went 0-7 yesterday. their "expert" picks weren't so expert. lets hope they got that out of their system. :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdog
.
earlier I posted that I would track 100 games of Pickswise - I've now tracked 76 picks - I've seen enough
they went 40-36 almost always picking the fave at odds averaging about -125
they're well down
conclusion - their picks have no value______________surprise, surprise, surprise
.
.
I'll probably be making a wimpy show bet (unless he's bet way down which I don't expect to happen) on Catching Freedom today in the Preakness morning line 7/2
he's a deep closer - he comes running late - I'm hoping he won't be too far back to make up the ground
he finished 4th in the Derby only about 2 lengths back of the winner
the probable fave - Mysitk Dan who won the Derby has has 2 clunkers in his record - both times finishing 5th - he's only won 3 out of his 7 races - he's not a powerful fave imo
if he's out of the money and Catching Freedom is in the money the show payout should be larger - all the huge show money bet on the fave will go to the others
.
Winner Winner - Chicken McNuggets dinner - can maybe afford some fries and I'll Super Size my Coke - but the fave was in the money so, the payout won't be great - a shot won it - so maybe a halfway decent payout - waiting to see the payouts
he came strong late as I was hoping
edit - the payout for show was $3.20 for a $2.00 bet - - 60% of the bet was profit - yes, I did bet much more than $2.00 - not a great return but I'll take it - I don't bet often - so when I do and win it feels good
.
.
just for fun
I just found out about this modified martingale strategy - of course I know it's not a winning system but it's pretty interesting
9 stage bets progress as follows with a $10 base - 10 10 40 80 160 320 640 1280 2560
the total risk is $5100 if a bettor loses 9 in a row - pretty interesting that the total risk is actually $10 less than that of a traditional marty of just doubling each time
note that the bettor only gets a tie if he wins his second bet but from his 3rd bet on any win will be 2 units ($20)
I'm going to make a sports pick every day or almost every day with positive odds (slightly negative odds okay if on the 1st or 2nd bet) and see how long I can last before losing 9 in a row - and tracking the winnings as I progress
PREDICTION - I will not lose 9 in a row before they close the lid on my coffin or I'm too feeble to think and type
but I might croak when I'm down - that's okay - I won't need the money then (I'm not actually betting - just picking)
the odds are from covers.com com in the early a.m. - I believe they quote the most common line
and I'm not claiming these are great picks - but some thought is going into them - but I'm not really recommending them - this is just an experiment
today's pick:
Orioles - 102 over Cardinals
.
.
lost step 1
step 2 - $10 - Guardians -116 over Mets
.
.
won yesterday's pick - total - down ($1.38)
today - step 1 - $10 - Phillies -134 over Rangers
.
.
yesterday's pick won - total - up $6.04__________in case you're wondering I do know that a marty can't be a winning system - and is unprofessional - I don't care - it's fun for me - and if I have a small edge then things might be different
.
today's pick - step 1____$10_____Philly - 1.5 + 102 over Rangers
. K.J. made the very good point that playing the spread on the home team means they won't bat in the bottom of the 9th if they're ahead by just one run which is a negative thing about the bet - but the payout is better than if the -1.5 is on the away team - in this case it went from -205 to +102
.
.
I won today's pick - but I've changed my mind - I don't feel like continuing with this - feeling kinna lazy - I've kinna lost interest
I am working on something very interesting - tracking certain MLB bets - and right now things look great - I need a couple more weeks to be sure - if it works out well as I am pretty sure it will I will post about it
.
I am looking forward to reading about your new project. I need all the help I can get as my own picks are running about 30% over the past 5 days. :rolleyes:
With laying a run and half with home teams, if you get late in the game of a 1 run game, you are kind of screwed. I have had times where I am winning by a run after 8 inning, and then you end up rooting for the other team to score in the top of the ninth, just so you have a chance of winning with a 2+ run homer. That is the only way you can win.
But with the away team laying 1.5, you can still have a big inning in the ninth or even extra innings without that multi run homer.
You are damned if you do and damnef if you don't with this sports betting. :D
Studying Up so that I may pretend that I am actually betting.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Nothing funnier than the forums. Ha.
Too bad that they started out serious, but, then, when this route, instead of the other way around, the natural progression of things.
Garnabby
Garnabby is offline
Platinum
Garnabby's Avatar
Join Date
Aug 2020
Posts
1,042 --------------> 142
.
Yankees - 124 over Padres
Yanks hurler Schmidt 2.59 era______________1.13 whip
Padres Musgrove 6.14 era_________________ 1.52 whip
Yanks are 18-9 away__________Padres are 10-17 at home
Padres have a much better record away then at home which is pretty unusual
.
.
I read on a couple of different sites that MLB underdogs could be a very good bet when playing their same division rivals under certain conditions
but the conditions were restrictive - and meant taking a long time to do a significant tracking
so I decided to track 100 games of all MLB underdogs against their within the same division rivals because I was curious about it
the results were quite astonishing
I now have 81 games - I don't think I need to go to 100 - I'm convinced - but I will track then next 100 games of the same thing
I have done several of these kinds of trackings - all but one were losers so I didn't post about them - and the one that won was not nearly as impressive as this
I kept waiting for a long losing streak to wipe out the winnings - that never happened
also, quite surprising was how many times the extreme fave - such as -190 got beat - meaning a large win for the dog
if you don't believe the results - I don't blame you - and I invite you to go back over the games at covers.com
I always used the early a.m. line and so many times the fave gets bet down late so if my tracking was close to game time my results prolly would have been even better
an obvious question is whether or not this is an anomaly__________I don't think so______but as I said I will keep tracking for a very long time and I will find out for sure
RESULTS_______ last 81 games_____________MLB underdogs against within division rivals_________:
43-38__________profit of $1485 based on $100 bets___________R.O,I.__________18%
.
in the early a.m. yesterday the Rockies were +265 and the Dodgers iirc were something like -360Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
the Rockies won the game 4-1
that's the most extreme fave getting beat that I've seen since I've been tracking - but there are many dogs winning at somewhere around +160
..[/QUOTE]
How active is the site? Can I ask a few questions about where there is a better chance of analyzing the upcoming victory? In regular sports or in more specialized ones like betting on horse racing?
the leader of this site - Dan Druff - gives some picks on some days - check the "what's new" every day to see his picksQuote:
Originally Posted by Elise
you can try Docsports.com for MLB, NFL and NBA
for horse racing you can try drf.com and racing dudes.com
I've linked those 3 sites for you
.
https://www.docsports.com/free-picks...bets-odds.html
https://racingdudes.com/free-picks/#...0the%20country.
https://www.drf.com/
.
thx
one more question
Are there any traits of unscrupulous online casinos?
Or is it all simple, just use the most popular ones and everything will be fine?
or ask a question in another thread?
my answer would be that I don't trust any of themQuote:
Originally Posted by Elise
a very common complaint from sports bettors is that they limit the action of winning players
no doubt some of the morons in online casinos are limiting the action (in sports betting) of players who just got lucky - who are no more capable of beating the lines long term than someone just flipping a coin
the link provides some discussion of this question
https://www.actionnetwork.com/casino...igged-or-legit
.
.
.
at the present time my theory of underdogs against same division rivals having an edge is going down the tubes
in my tracking of the 2nd 100 (for me) - they are currently 7-20 and down 843 - they're getting crushed - completely different than my first tracking of 81 games where they went 43-38 with an r.o.i. of 18%
I will keep tracking until I get 100 - maybe things will turn around
but right now it doesn't look good at all
back to the ole drawing board
.
A couple years ago, I read about a similar but slightly more narrow angle of divisional underdogs that ran well and resulted n a positive result for the entire season.
I haven't followed up to are how that ran out n subsequential seasons. And mlb has gone to fewer divisional game format since.
yes, the link shows that - the guy tracked over 12,000 games and found a 0.6 % edge and a greater edge when limiting the bets to when the totals are higherQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
but who knows if this will hold up - things change all the time
still might be great for scoring bonuses, boosts, and free play
I'm thinking my couple hundred game tracking is not really enough to prove anything
https://www.sportsinsights.com/blog/...nal%20opponent.
.
gonna make a wimpy bet to show today on the Belmont Stakes (which is being run at Saratoga due to construction at Belmont) on the the morning line favorite - Sierra Leone
he's never finished worse than 2nd - he lost by a nose in the Derby - he always tries hard - and his connections upgraded to one of the top jocks in the country
he's a closer who comes running late
with all of the soft money who usually love the shots I believe the show prices on low odds horses will be better than average - especially since there is no possible Triple Crown winner to attract attention
there will be $ millions bet on on this one race
2014 set a record - $151 million and some change from all sources - they watched California Chrome have his Triple Crown bid spoiled by Tonalist
.
I am doing really bad with betting baseball. This is my4th "cycle" of sports betting bonus whoring since last September, where it is really all about the bonuses and eating as little as possible away during the rollover, rather than winning out right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smokeyes, the link shows that - the guy tracked over 12,000 games and found a 0.6 % edge and a greater edge when limiting the bets to when the totals are higherQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
but who knows if this will hold up - things change all the time
still might be great for scoring bonuses, boosts, and free play
I'm thinking my couple hundred game tracking is not really enough to prove anything
https://www.sportsinsights.com/blog/...nal%20opponent.
I am trying to focus on a variety of angles discussed, like divisional underdogs, and betting over the 7 and 7.5 run line, and worry less about starting pitchers (who only pitch 5 innings anyway), but have just not been doing well. If things keep going at this rate, I may not make a profit this cycle. :( And on top of that, I lost one of my 4 off shore sportsbooks who is no longer offering me any decent bonuses.
I have been traveling a lot over the past 3 months and making my picks on the fly. Now home for the summer, I am going to try to really buckle down and salvage what I can from this cycle and probably a second baseball cycle to follow (at least part of a cycle heading into football season).
.
when I first started betting sports I had a nice run (luck) and I thought to myself - hey - it's easy to win betting sports
then things changed
now I know - it ain't easy to beat sports - not at all
.
.
the favorite/longshot bias has been well documented in horse racing -
there are many academic studies of it
the takeout in the win pool averages about 16%
but if you bet on all favorites - in the long run you would lose much less than indicated by the takeout
and if you bet on all longshots you would lose much more than indicated by the takeout
but is this true for sports betting________? - I'm referring to bets on the money line - not on the spread
I dunno - but I don't think so - I've never seen a study of it - googling got me nowhere
why might it be different in sports betting than in racing______?
my best guess is that the longshots in racing are generally much longer and more easily activate the risk love instinct in humans
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favour...0by%20Griffith.
.
I think it has to do with the home field/court advantage.
I have always wondered why that should matter so much? It is the same size field, court, ice rink. Baseball some variation, but still the same for both teams. So the big difference is there are some fans rooting against you. Big deal! Seems like a professional athlete should get over that real quickly.
BUT, when you look at home and away records for most teams, it is huge.
And being that most away teams are the underdogs, I think that is the difference.
there are a couple of links that suggest that the home team is overvalued in the betting - but not manyQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
in the link he claims that hfa is vastly overvalued in NFL betting - although I don't recall seeing that claim anywhere else
he states that the hfa is overvalued in college football
and he has a very interesting documentation that shows the road team doing much better in college football when the totals are lower
https://www.sportsinsights.com/blog/...eld-advantage/
.
.
I almost forgot - Mickey's parlay card thread reminded me
the Wiz tracked thousands of NFL bets and found that all away had a small positive return and all away underdogs also did - not as small - 2.57% - see link
he also shows the away pick having a very large edge - but maybe not enough games to be sure
I think I may have posted this before - but it's worth mentioning again - it's very valuable info
Mike did not find anything like this in his trackings of the NHL and the MLB
https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/
.
https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...-of-the-n-wordQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
.
a couple of props offered by DraftKings at this moment
-110 -Keider Montero (Tigers) under 4.5 KOs vs. the Twins - he's been under that in 4 out his last 5 games
- 120 - Gavin Stone (Dodgers) under 17.5 outs vs. Astros - he's had 3 short outings in a row and has been under that in 4 out of his last 5 times out
glta
.
I am tagging along on both, JUST because you are a good guy. :) Also because I have some rollover to get through at two books so I can start a new cycle for Football season. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
best I could get on Montero was -120. I played. Maybe you wouldn't have even liked it at those odds.
I'm not sharp enough to say that a bet is a good bet at -110 but not at -120 - maybe some areQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
if 4 out of the last 5 is a good indicator then it's still a very good bet imo - no reason to believe it's not a good indicator - but it might not be - gambling is trying to see the future - it ain't easy ____-:)
.
3 innings. 5 ko's. Including striking out the side in the 2nd.
Sometimes you are the windshield, sometimes the bug. :rolleyes:
Today didn't work out too well Half Smoke. Tomorrow is another day. :)
.
tanked yesterday
new strategy using covers.com (trends click) picking an over or under based on when both teams have significant positive r.o.i. on the over or both have a significant positive r.o.i. on the under for a significant no. of games
yesterday there were 7 picks from this that went 7-0 - I didn't post them - not tryin to brag about stuff I didn't post - just showing reason for hopefulness
today:
reds/rays u 7.5
guardians/phillies u 9
twins/tigers o 7
cubs/royals u 8.5
dodgers/astros u 8.5
nationals/cardinals o 8
yankees/red sox o 9.5
rockies/giants o7.5
.
.
yesterday's o/u picks went 4-3
not posting the odds - they're not always -110 but I think they average out to be about that
today:
reds/rays u 7.5
guardians/phillies u 9.5
twins/tigers o 8
cubs/royals u 8.5
nationals/cardinals o 8.5
rockies/giants o 7.5
yankees/red sox o 9
.
.
the MLB o/u strategy that I'm using went 4-3 yesterday and what I've posted is 8-6 - I tracked another 7 games that I didn't post that went 7-0
so, it's a total of 15-6
but I'm not sure it's a winning strategy and I don't wanna keep posting until I'm pretty sure it has value
I'm going to keep tracking until I have done 100 games - a few more weeks
if I believe it truly has value I will report back
.
.
I'll try on another prop
Cubs over 4.45 runs +105 on DraftKings
they average 4.22 runs per game
the Jays Chris Bassitt got bombed last time out and in his last 5 games he's allowed 22 runs in 26 innings pitched
.
.
tanked yesterday -
no problem
I'll go with the ole martingale - double up and get ahead
just kidding
Jake Burger - Marlins - over 1.5 hits, runs and rbis - 125 DraftKings
.
.
NFL picks - first 2 weeks - all underdogs ats_______it's that time____the season starts tomorrow
I surmised that the first 2 weeks would be very unpredictable and that unpredictability would favor the underdogs
I have now tracked the first 2 weeks of 11 seasons and the dogs have won just over 57% for about a 9% r.o.i. (pushes not considered)
in the 11 years I tracked the faves have never had a winning year - they did tie one year which caused a slight loss due to the vig
this is related to the Wizard's tracking of thousands of games and showing all underdogs losing only a tiny % and road dogs being slightly profitable - see link
my goal was to improve on that r.o.i. with selectivity
KJ and maybe a couple of others here made $ with this last season when I first posted it
.
https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/
I really like this play and look forward to it again this year. Last year both weeks went 10-6 IIRC and that jump started my good start to my bonus chasing that I was doing. It is an extension of Wizards all NFL underdogs which I believe shows a small positive return for a much larger number of years and sample size, and frankly besides being backed by data for years, this first two weeks of underdogs just makes common sense. ESPECIALLY in this era where many teams don't even play starters very much, some not at all during the 3 preseason games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Additionally, underdogs have done well the first week or week plus (counting the Ireland game) of the college football season. I don't know what the data shows, but again it just makes sense on several levels.