Mlb 2014

[iloseagain]

Agreed, I loved Matthews. Think we gotta find a way to get Latimer or Robinson now, unless the front office has some elaborate free agent receiver plans in their heads

missed both.. broncos fan here and wondering why they took a WR?? Anyways, dont think theres much in FA in terms of WR so im not sure what your front office is doing.. I thought the browns had some serious potential next year until i heard gordon is going to be gone.

[BiffTFinancial]

missed both.. broncos fan here and wondering why they took a WR?? Anyways, dont think theres much in FA in terms of WR so im not sure what your front office is doing.. I thought the browns had some serious potential next year until i heard gordon is going to be gone.

If you want the perfect metaphor for Browns fanship, look at the last two days. Team makes multiple moves in draft, makes splash with controversial selection that most of fanbase loves, receives accolades for their work, star WR/best player suspended for season as round two starts, team takes no WR with next two picks.

It's honestly better to get out of bed and punch yourself in the pills first thing in the morning than to be a Browns fan. At least then you know that the worst part of the day is over.

[BiffTFinancial]

Not sure if i'm playing anything today or not, but hard to ignore some nice spots. planned to cap the games anyway because i love it. here are some leans in case anyone is interested:
LAA/TOR over 9'
MIN/DET FF over (should be 4, bet it's juiced when it opens)
Cards ML
White Sox ML
AZ/CWS under 8'
Dbacks TT under
Rangers ML
BOS/TX under 9
Red Sox TT under (should be 4')
Marlins ML
MIA/SD over 6'
Royals ML
KC/SEA over 6'

[whtsox13]

Biff sir, how strong is your StL moneyline lean?

[BiffTFinancial]

Biff sir, how strong is your StL moneyline lean?

i like it okay, but not one of my favorites relative to others. probably like Angels/Jays over, Twins/Tigers FF over, Red Sox/Rangers under and Royals -1 RL best.

[BiffTFinancial]

i like it okay, but not one of my favorites relative to others. probably like Angels/Jays over, Twins/Tigers FF over, Red Sox/Rangers under and Royals -1 RL best.

Hmmm, make that Royals FF ML. i think that's the angle there.

[twoods23]

i like it okay, but not one of my favorites relative to others. probably like Angels/Jays over, Twins/Tigers FF over, Red Sox/Rangers under and Royals -1 RL best.

why twins/tigers over FF?

[BiffTFinancial]

why twins/tigers over FF?

Day game at Tiger Stadium with breeze out to left field. Don't have numbers readily available, but FF overs for Tiger Stadium day games have been butter going back to the start of last season (GilMo on twitter has been detailing it for some time). Model loves it.

[whtsox13]

Day game at Tiger Stadium with breeze out to left field. Don't have numbers readily available, but FF overs for Tiger Stadium day games have been butter going back to the start of last season (GilMo on twitter has been detailing it for some time). Model loves it.

Very astute.

[twoods23]

Day game at Tiger Stadium with breeze out to left field. Don't have numbers readily available, but FF overs for Tiger Stadium day games have been butter going back to the start of last season (GilMo on twitter has been detailing it for some time). Model loves it.

thanks Buddy

I was gun shy cause Det screwed me big time yesterday. Took them ML in all parlays

what do you think of LAD ml, I parlayed them with Det in a lot today

[BiffTFinancial]

thanks Buddy

I was gun shy cause Det screwed me big time yesterday. Took them ML in all parlays

what do you think of LAD ml, I parlayed them with Det in a lot today

Lean Dodgers but pretty much skipped over that game. I have something I have to do from 3 to 7 so i knew that i wouldn't be able to watch that game. Hard not to like Greinke today though, esp with Belt out for Gigantes.

[BiffTFinancial]

Very astute.

Thanks!

[inZane]

Thanks, Biff! I took the over FF and the Tigers -1' as a backup. Hopefully, I can get a push at least. Now if I can just get that Toronto over...

[twoods23]

Dam angel pitcher played game of his life

[BiffTFinancial]

Sunday 5.11.2014
1* Rockies/Reds under 8' (-120)
1* Nationals/A's under 7 (-105)

[BiffTFinancial]

adding

1* Red Sox -1 RL (+114)

Sunday 5.11.2014 updated card
1* Rockies/Reds under 8' (-120)
1* Red Sox -1 RL (+114)
1* Nationals/A's under 7 (-105)

[RavensFan2k3]

Hmm...I feel like Texas is the play

[BiffTFinancial]

adding

1* Giants/Dodgers under 6 (+112)

Sunday 5.11.2014 updated card
1* Rockies/Reds under 8' (-120)
1* Red Sox -1 RL (+114)
1* Nationals/A's under 7 (-105)
1* Giants/Dodgers under 6 (+112)

[BiffTFinancial]

Hmm...I feel like Texas is the play

Based upon the way that i've been running of late, you're almost definitely right! BOL whatever you decide.

[upscope]

Based upon the way that i've been running of late, you're almost definitely right! BOL whatever you decide.

Keep your head UP bro, you'll be fine. Your approach is as solid as anyone's....results will follow

[BiffTFinancial]

adding

1* Diamondbacks/White Sox over 9 (-110)

Sunday 5.11.2014 updated card
1* Rockies/Reds under 8' (-120)
1* Diamondbacks/White Sox over 9 (-110)
1* Red Sox -1 RL (+114)
1* Nationals/A's under 7 (-105)
1* Giants/Dodgers under 6 (+112)

BOL to all today.

[BiffTFinancial]

Keep your head UP bro, you'll be fine. Your approach is as solid as anyone's....results will follow

Roger that, thanks. Just gotta keep choppin wood...

BOL to you today.

[SlickRick1382]

Amazing work on the Rockies / Reds line....

It closed at O/U 7' -105 on 5 Dimes. You got it a full run higher ...

[RavensFan2k3]

Based upon the way that i've been running of late, you're almost definitely right! BOL whatever you decide.

Lol I've been struggling a bit myself

[EVfollower]

Hi Biff,
I look for cappers who in the long run are +EV. While you do make good plays and seem to do decent I think your major problem is you make WAY too many plays. "Finding value" on the amount of plays you make is nearly impossible, it can happen but its rare. You see that since opening month you've been on a gradual decline, not huge but its significant. Based on your stats I attribute this to making too many plays. I would narrow your plays down so the house edge you are trying to beat isn't as much. Variance is not on your side as you make all these plays day after day. Not trying to be an ass just giving you some feedback. If you want to make some extra money, consider putting half a unit on Bigpage's plays and Hardcoar (in the tennis section) plays. Hardcoar is up 300+ units and Bigpage is doing well as well. Never hurts to make extra money.

[BiffTFinancial]

Sunday 5.11.2014 final card
1* Rockies/Reds under 8' (-120) - WINNER
1* Diamondbacks/White Sox over 9 (-110) - LOSER
1* Red Sox -1 RL (+114) - WINNER
1* Nationals/A's under 7 (-105) - LOSER
1* Giants/Dodgers under 6 (+112) - LOSER

2-3 -1.01u

[BiffTFinancial]

Week-by-Week
Week One: 22-10-5 +14.22u
Week Two: 22-13-1 +8.31u
Week Three: 15-18 -3.18u
Week Four: 3-7 -4.04u
Week Five: 15-17-5 -1.95u
Week Six: 5-18-3 -13.71u
Season to date: 82-83-14 -0.35u

[BiffTFinancial]

Amazing work on the Rockies / Reds line....

It closed at O/U 7' -105 on 5 Dimes. You got it a full run higher ...

Thanks!

[BiffTFinancial]

Hi Biff,
I look for cappers who in the long run are +EV. While you do make good plays and seem to do decent I think your major problem is you make WAY too many plays. "Finding value" on the amount of plays you make is nearly impossible, it can happen but its rare. You see that since opening month you've been on a gradual decline, not huge but its significant. Based on your stats I attribute this to making too many plays. I would narrow your plays down so the house edge you are trying to beat isn't as much. Variance is not on your side as you make all these plays day after day. Not trying to be an ass just giving you some feedback. If you want to make some extra money, consider putting half a unit on Bigpage's plays and Hardcoar (in the tennis section) plays. Hardcoar is up 300+ units and Bigpage is doing well as well. Never hurts to make extra money.

Thank you very much for your thoughts. I appreciate your taking the time to share them and appreciate them in the spirit which they are intended (i.e., don't think that you're trying to be an ass at all). Truth be told, since May 1st, the only edge for me is making no plays at all. While the last two weeks of April weren't good, i simply gave back what I was up from Week Two, so I still had my Week One profit. I'm on like a 10-30 run right now since May 1st.

In response to your shrewd constructive criticism, I have a question: How do I narrow down my plays properly? My model shows relative value of plays, but it also yields a lot of potential plays. I'm narrowing it down as it is to keep things to 4-6 plays per card. For example, the model liked Rockies/Reds under as much as Dbacks/White Sox over. One was a very good play, one was a bad play. How do I decide? This is an essentially rhetorical and borderline existential question. I've been wrestling with it on a regular basis, so I don't expect you to be able to answer it properly for me, but i ask it to illustrate my present conundrum. If i could answer it, i'd be a lot better at this.

Oh well. Onward and upward.

[alamo]

Thank you very much for your thoughts. I appreciate your taking the time to share them and appreciate them in the spirit which they are intended (i.e., don't think that you're trying to be an ass at all). Truth be told, since May 1st, the only edge for me is making no plays at all. While the last two weeks of April weren't good, i simply gave back what I was up from Week Two, so I still had my Week One profit. I'm on like a 10-30 run right now since May 1st.

In response to your shrewd constructive criticism, I have a question: How do I narrow down my plays properly? My model shows relative value of plays, but it also yields a lot of potential plays. I'm narrowing it down as it is to keep things to 4-6 plays per card. For example, the model liked Rockies/Reds under as much as Dbacks/White Sox over. One was a very good play, one was a bad play. How do I decide? This is an essentially rhetorical and borderline existential question. I've been wrestling with it on a regular basis, so I don't expect you to be able to answer it properly for me, but i ask it to illustrate my present conundrum. If i could answer it, i'd be a lot better at this.

Oh well. Onward and upward.

Excellent constructive answer to an oft asked question. Take a bow Biff. Only a matter of time before you start pushing out those "W"s again.

[No coincidences]

Thank you very much for your thoughts. I appreciate your taking the time to share them and appreciate them in the spirit which they are intended (i.e., don't think that you're trying to be an ass at all). Truth be told, since May 1st, the only edge for me is making no plays at all. While the last two weeks of April weren't good, i simply gave back what I was up from Week Two, so I still had my Week One profit. I'm on like a 10-30 run right now since May 1st.

In response to your shrewd constructive criticism, I have a question: How do I narrow down my plays properly? My model shows relative value of plays, but it also yields a lot of potential plays. I'm narrowing it down as it is to keep things to 4-6 plays per card. For example, the model liked Rockies/Reds under as much as Dbacks/White Sox over. One was a very good play, one was a bad play. How do I decide? This is an essentially rhetorical and borderline existential question. I've been wrestling with it on a regular basis, so I don't expect you to be able to answer it properly for me, but i ask it to illustrate my present conundrum. If i could answer it, i'd be a lot better at this.

Oh well. Onward and upward.

This is an outstanding post, both in the question about narrowing down plays and finding the discipline to do so. You've already determined when/if there are times to take breaks, which is a good start. But if you can decide how to isolate your plays in a more efficient manner, let me know your secret I am the same way -- my system sees value that is often there on paper, but the results are mixed (as is typically the case with gambling, because we're betting on humans, not machines). So do we just keep grinding away at a higher volume, or attempt to "narrow" each day's card, even if there is no concrete way to do so?

[upscope]

It's all one big session

[thunderous]

Thank you very much for your thoughts. I appreciate your taking the time to share them and appreciate them in the spirit which they are intended (i.e., don't think that you're trying to be an ass at all). Truth be told, since May 1st, the only edge for me is making no plays at all. While the last two weeks of April weren't good, i simply gave back what I was up from Week Two, so I still had my Week One profit. I'm on like a 10-30 run right now since May 1st.

In response to your shrewd constructive criticism, I have a question: How do I narrow down my plays properly? My model shows relative value of plays, but it also yields a lot of potential plays. I'm narrowing it down as it is to keep things to 4-6 plays per card. For example, the model liked Rockies/Reds under as much as Dbacks/White Sox over. One was a very good play, one was a bad play. How do I decide? This is an essentially rhetorical and borderline existential question. I've been wrestling with it on a regular basis, so I don't expect you to be able to answer it properly for me, but i ask it to illustrate my present conundrum. If i could answer it, i'd be a lot better at this.

Oh well. Onward and upward.

[BiffTFinancial]

Monday leans

Mets and under 8' (probably like Mets FF ML +132 best)
Tigers ML
Angels and under 9
Rangers and under 9 (probably like Rangers -1 RL +100 best; roof closed)
Cubs and under 7' (Cubs FF ML +132 looks like best option there)
Nats and over 8 (Nats -1 RL +111 or over - roof open)
CWS/A's over 7'
Marlins and over 7
Braves and under 7

and there you have my problem - time to narrow it down

[blackjack13]

CWS/A's Over