[LT Profits]

1 NHL Play Monday

Panthers +125 (5 Dimes)


YTD: 47-52-3, -0.32

[RollinDo]

I think you can win some good $ today backing each dog at +1.5
Nobody gets up for a home game vs. Ottawa, Buffalo, Arizona on a Monday in hockey.

[LT Profits]

NEVER bet +1.5 in hockey, the odds are simply too prohibitive. If you truly believe what you posted, then you should bet each dog on the ML.

[agendaman]

yeh i like all 4 dogs today

[RollinDo]

NEVER bet +1.5 in hockey, the odds are simply too prohibitive. If you truly believe what you posted, then you should bet each dog on the ML.

To each his own. I have done very well with the +1.5 in nhL.
There are so many 1-goal games and very few empty net goals. You can make an absolute killing betting the +1.5 in nhL.

[RollinDo]

I will eat crow tonight if Panthers +1.5 does not hit tonight. Boston could very easily win 3-2 or 2-1...maybe even OT.

Minnesota Wild have not lost by more than 1 goal all season. I'm kicking myself for not betting them at +1.5 every game.

[PorkChop]

I have to take shot with Coyotes +210. That's ridiculous

[RollinDo]

I have to take shot with Coyotes +210. That's ridiculous

I am looking at Ottawa and Buffalo, as I think they have legit shots at winning or taking their games to OT at least, and play better on the road. I don't think Pens or Caps will have their whole effort in the games, though I think Caps take this one - think their mindset is they need to get back on track.
Buffalo +1.5 and Ottawa +1/2 in regulation look tempting.

[LT Profits]

To each his own. I have done very well with the +1.5 in nhL.
There are so many 1-goal games and very few empty net goals. You can make an absolute killing betting the +1.5 in nhL.

But you are laying in excess of -200 every time, you can go 2-2 tonight and still lose quite a bit.

[PorkChop]

I am looking at Ottawa and Buffalo, as I think they have legit shots at winning or taking their games to OT at least, and play better on the road. I don't think Pens or Caps will have their whole effort in the games, though I think Caps take this one - think their mindset is they need to get back on track.
Buffalo +1.5 and Ottawa +1/2 in regulation look tempting.

Buffalo is tempting but Wsh has lost two straight.

I hit the Islanders +220 against them the other night, im not double dipping w/ Buffalo. Florida & Arizona parlay for me tonight only.

[RollinDo]

But you are laying in excess of -200 every time, you can go 2-2 tonight and still lose quite a bit.

I think you go 3-1 at worst. This is part of gambling - you have to have the balls to go for it sometimes and have confidence in your plays. I think going for the ML just so you don't lose on the juice is not how you win $.

[LT Profits]

I think you go 3-1 at worst. This is part of gambling - you have to have the balls to go for it sometimes and have confidence in your plays. I think going for the ML just so you don't lose on the juice is not how you win $.

It's not a matter of having "balls", it is a matter of the +1.5 being a -EV proposition long-term. Besides, I almost never lay more than -130 on favorites on any single event, so I absolutely have no interest in turning an underdog into a -200+ favorite by taking 1.5.

As for playing the MLs, it all depends on whether the plays are +EV or not, there is no blanket statement there. But one blanket statement I COULD probably make is betting all ML dogs is less -EV than betting every game +1.5.

[RollinDo]

Yeah, I forgot for a moment your preference in betting...and it seems you haven't changed in your thinking much since I joined. It's all good.
As long as you keep the profits coming!

It's not a matter of having "balls", it is a matter of the +1.5 being a -EV proposition long-term. Besides, I almost never lay more than -130 on favorites on any single event, so I absolutely have no interest in turning an underdog into a -200+ favorite by taking 1.5.



As for playing the MLs, it all depends on whether the plays are +EV or not, there is no blanket statement there. But one blanket statement I COULD probably make is betting all ML dogs is less -EV than betting every game +1.5.

[lakerboy]

+1.5-290 pretty much a lock

[CatHawk]

So, as I understand what LT is saying, and please tell me if I'm missing something or if I'm mistaken, if you ran a simulation for these games thousands of times, you'd lose "way more" money overtime because the expected value or EV is negative when taking doggy pucklines. You'd need to go like 75% or something crazy. If you have a positive expected value or +EV, you will make money if you only hit 50%, maybe even less of a percentage depending on the bet's EV.

I guess it's experience or something. Everyone is different and looks at maths differently, perhaps some people are good at finding doggy pucklines that hit. That person would be an exception to the rule though. Over time bettors realize their fallibility (no one really knows what is going to happen), therefore why not give yourself a statistical edge, or at least parameters to work by if you still want to pick on "feel."

I guess figuring out what plays are +EV is the hard part. An underdog can be + money but not a +EV play. And because the bookies tend to offer lines that are enticing to bettors, and reflect the "normal" geist of the layperson, a bettor who can actually find a +EV play in a sea of crap can make money over time... Theoretically. Easier said than done.

Besides, the f*cked up scenario of an empty net goal!! I mean what a way to lose a bet! Not having that aggravating event happen to you has value unto itself lol!

[CatHawk]

I'm no statistician but it makes intuitive sense. Probability can be tricky though and sometimes very non-intuitive. See the Monty Hall problem.

This video talks about expected value a little bit... Not sure of the validity of the premise of the title, but maybe, right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=658xlubwnDc&t=3s

[Igor_1965]

Guess what, betting the underdog at +money every time doesn't make you sharp.

[LT Profits]

Guess what, betting the underdog at +money every time doesn't make you sharp.

Correct, but you will lose less than you would playing all of those underdogs on the Puck Line.

The ultimate goal of course is to find the underdog subset that is +EV.

[CatHawk]

Right. For sure. Like if, by some weird circumstance, the bookies drop the ball and have the Capitals tonight vs the Sabers at a -130 favorite instead of -215, there would be +EV in that play because they'll win enough to cover the extra 30cents on a dollar if you took this same bet thousands of times... or every time there was a -130 fave that should be -215... or something. I dunno. I'll admit I'm a little ignorant to this kind of stuff. Figured someone would chime in with some elaboration or something. Maybe I'm just gumming up LT's thread lol.

[RollinDo]

Well you guys have good points, but I was on Sabres +1.5, Panthers +1.5, and Sens +1.5 tonight.
Hit 2 of 3, so made a nice little profit, as Panthers I wagered most on...also won Caps/Pens parlay.

Doing your HW on teams that cover the PL 90-95% of the time really helps...and Buffalo has been covering the PL on the road more often than not.
Minny Wild have not lost by more than 1 goal all season - just something to keep in mind.

[Nostradam]

Well you guys have good points, but I was on Sabres +1.5, Panthers +1.5, and Sens +1.5 tonight.
Hit 2 of 3, so made a nice little profit, as Panthers I wagered most on...also won Caps/Pens parlay.

Doing your HW on teams that cover the PL 90-95% of the time really helps...and Buffalo has been covering the PL on the road more often than not.
Minny Wild have not lost by more than 1 goal all season - just something to keep in mind.

Not quite:

http://www.espn.com/nhl/team/schedul...minnesota-wild

[RollinDo]

Not quite:

http://www.espn.com/nhl/team/schedul...minnesota-wild

Ouch! You got me! I missed that 6-3 loss.
My bad.