MLB Regressing vs. Increasing Odds System

[barryt]

Wow impressive record keeping TT.
heres mine pailing in comparison
Yesterday April 9Bet BOS,BAL,CWX,NYM all $10 on ml and -1.5 RL. Didn't play HOU as a) wasn't sure it qualified, b) odds were too low Results ml2-2 RL2-2 net profit $3.10 . BR $253.10

PS think you have HOU ml and RL +/- reversed

[Kenny King]

Would it work to just post the prospective picks a day early and give the target ML. Example: tomorrow's plays would be TOR if it's over -107, NYY if it's under -107, etc...

[TechnicalTrader]

Would it work to just post the prospective picks a day early and give the target ML. Example: tomorrow's plays would be TOR if it's over -107, NYY if it's under -107, etc...

We could do that, but everyone would need to check killersports.com (covers lines) and I can imagine the confusion which might be caused. Designating a few people to do that would make things a lot easier...

Btw, as of now I do not see any picks for today.

[barryt]

As far as posting the picks is concerned, posting the unofficial picks a few hours before game time would be sufficient for my purposes. If you could add the lines that need to be achieved( by both teams) then you wouldn't have to repost at all.
E.g BOS < +105; DET > -115
People following this thread should accept the responsibility to ensure those odds are achieved at "game time" prior to wagering.

you could also post the results table from the previous day at the same time and relax the rest of the day...LOL

[Kenny King]

If you provide the teams and target line I will volunteer to post the plays after the games start that are official if that helps.

[NLChad11]

Barryt said it best and I agree with that post.

KK I've been around longer than my join date says as well...and if you read my first post completely you would've seen that I mentioned that. I wasn't trying to attack you, I guess this is just the Internet and different people read context differently. I was just saying people can go back and read past posts and answer their questions themselves... Everyone, not just you. It keeps the thread cleaner. Anyway, thanks for your offering to help post official plays, it helps everyone in here...and that's what really matters. GL all.

[TechnicalTrader]

OK, I think I have a very simple solution but need to talk to jlani first. She usually gets back to me around noon EST so we should have set guidelines up very soon.

As for now, the only "could be play" is the Mets, but their line needs to close under -185 (yesterday's line). Right now I am seeing -148 so I doubt they will qualify.

I am also going to look in to teams which loss and see if a possible one game (non martingale) chase would make sense. FOr example, do we play Baltimore and the White Sox after the lost yesterday? I'll get back to you guys with that info later....

[TechnicalTrader]

OK, I think I have a very simple solution but need to talk to jlani first. She usually gets back to me around noon EST so we should have set guidelines up very soon.

As for now, the only "could be play" is the Mets, but their line needs to close under -185 (yesterday's line). Right now I am seeing -148 so I doubt they will qualify.

I am also going to look in to teams which loss and see if a possible one game (non martingale) chase would make sense. FOr example, do we play Baltimore and the White Sox after the lost yesterday? I'll get back to you guys with that info later....

Nope, forget the chase! I looked at the Angels and didn't recognize a clear trend which would indicate chasing. They went 10-8, dating back to 2013 on the games they lost SU. Not worth it, if those numbers were around +70% I'd take a look but that's just simply not worth my time.

[jlani93]

4/10 Update (trying something new)

After discussing this with TT, we are going to try something new.

• I will post the “possible plays” w/the current lines in the AM.
• I’ll include the links needed so that you can simply click on teams and check lines for yourselves.
• AFTER games start (or the next day) I’ll confirm the plays.

Hopefully this will work out better for us.


Lets start with today...we have (1) possible play. I’ll be back to confirm the play after the game starts.

1) Possible play today — NY Mets -140, (line would be <-185 to qualify).


Check the METS lines here:


Simply click on the team to check the lines yourself.

[ognj3n]

Hi, first time poster, but I am a SDQL veteran, sort of.
First and foremost thanks to Technical Trader for sharing the idea , I love it
I will see if I can contribute in a helpful way.

My first question is, why are You omitting dogs?
Try Your query with the "D and" condition instead of "F and" and You will see it performs even better there.
I would just omit the "F and" and use it for both faves and dogs. Seriously, have a look.

My second observation: if You dissect it, you will notice it performs noticeably better with Faves in the first game of a series
( against a new opponent ) and with Away Dogs in the 3rd game of a series ( where all the conditions are linked to the same opposing team ).
I would increase my unit size slightly by 33%-ish in those two highlighted spots, it is not a requirement tho.

Lastly for tracking purposes I would suggest creating the query :
date=2017XXXX and previous previous line greater than previous line and opponent's previous line greater than opponents previous previous line and team and previous line minus line and opponents line minus opponents previous line

It gives us teams, that fulfill the conditions that are set in stone already on the left side, the potential play on team,
and on the right side You will get the two numbers that have to be positive for a play to be active.
It makes it easier to track which plays are close and by how much exactly. Just enter the right date and refresh (F5).

I tried to send the link to the tracking query to Technical Trader in a private message, but I need 40 posts ...
If You have trouble creating the tracking query or the sub-queries, feel free to ask/contact in the sdb google group.
I hope I did not give away to much for Technical Trader's taste at the moment,
on the other hand I will follow this thread and try to help wherever I can.

BOL everyone

[Slanina]

After discussing this with TT, we are going to try something new.

• I will post the “possible plays” w/the current lines in the AM.
• I’ll include the links needed so that you can simply click on teams and check lines for yourselves.
• AFTER games start (or the next day) I’ll confirm the plays.

Hopefully this will work out better for us.


Lets start with today...we have (1) possible play. I’ll be back to confirm the play after the game starts.

1) Possible play today — NY Mets -140, (line would be <-185 to qualify).


Check the METS lines here:


Simply click on the team to check the lines yourself.

Nice! This seems way more efficient. I work nights so unfortunately my time is limited and unable to read multiple posts about what play qualifies.

[Kenny King]

1) Possible play today — NY Mets -140, (line would be <-185 to qualify

I want to make sure I'm on the same page here moving forward. Wouldn't the Mets have needed to be greater than -185 to be a play and not less than? Meaning -186 or greater?

[Sir-Ater]

1) Possible play today — NY Mets -140, (line would be <-185 to qualify

I want to make sure I'm on the same page here moving forward. Wouldn't the Mets have needed to be greater than -185 to be a play and not less than? Meaning -186 or greater?

I believe they are referring to decimal odds.

-140 is 1.7143
-180 is 1.540

So less than 1.540.

But for us Americans, yes greater than -185.

[TechnicalTrader]

Hi, first time poster, but I am a SDQL veteran, sort of.
First and foremost thanks to Technical Trader for sharing the idea , I love it
I will see if I can contribute in a helpful way.

My first question is, why are You omitting dogs?
Try Your query with the "D and" condition instead of "F and" and You will see it performs even better there.
I would just omit the "F and" and use it for both faves and dogs. Seriously, have a look.

My second observation: if You dissect it, you will notice it performs noticeably better with Faves in the first game of a series
( against a new opponent ) and with Away Dogs in the 3rd game of a series ( where all the conditions are linked to the same opposing team ).
I would increase my unit size slightly by 33%-ish in those two highlighted spots, it is not a requirement tho.

Lastly for tracking purposes I would suggest creating the query :
date=2017XXXX and previous previous line greater than previous line and opponent's previous line greater than opponents previous previous line and team and previous line minus line and opponents line minus opponents previous line

It gives us teams, that fulfill the conditions that are set in stone already on the left side, the potential play on team,
and on the right side You will get the two numbers that have to be positive for a play to be active.
It makes it easier to track which plays are close and by how much exactly. Just enter the right date and refresh (F5).

I tried to send the link to the tracking query to Technical Trader in a private message, but I need 40 posts ...
If You have trouble creating the tracking query or the sub-queries, feel free to ask/contact in the sdb google group.
I hope I did not give away to much for Technical Trader's taste at the moment,
on the other hand I will follow this thread and try to help wherever I can.

BOL everyone

Thanks for joining and welcome to the thread. I've seen you before in the google group and admire your work, I'd even go out on a limb and claim you are a bit more than an SDQL vet! Your work is greatly appreciated and I'll admit I have used and tweaked some of your queries in the past.

As for replacing fav's with dog's, I've tried that and get a completely different number. 197-218 SU and 251-163 RL, both very flat and these numbers date back to 2013. Maybe you are using a different query... I've also used the FGS variable and funny enough that is one of my 11 systems that I also use! LMAO, my only issue there is sample size. If you were to play both dogs and favs on the first game of series, you'll only see an average of about 75 bets a season. That's just simply not enough for me over a 6 month span to be taken too seriously.

I will also look in to your other suggestions and get back to you later.

Now please post 39 more times so that we can chat.

Enjoy your day,
TT

[TechnicalTrader]

Here are today's unofficial plays, waiting for confirmation:

DET (-106)
COL (-178)
LAA (-125)

The lines above are yesterday's closing lines. If today's line is smaller (larger favorites), then we have a play. As of now it looks like DET will be the only play. I doubt the other two lines will move that far.


jlani, I suggest using a simple format like this in the future. Then just confirming the plays like this:

confirmed plays:
XXX
YYY
ZZZ

And just keep it simple. Hopefully we'll reduce a lot of the chit chat and get down to business in the future. now let's go make some money!!

[Scrivero]

I am enjoying the thread and the idea and the vibes here. I am very new to SDQL queries but already I love the possibilities it has brought me to test various possible systems tremendously fast. Thanks a lot TT and jlani and to others who are contributing together! I am also very new to MLB and betting MLB (as in started 1 week ago), I have been actively doing various NHL systems for the past 3 months and have been betting sports all my life, now again after having a many years long break in between.

I might tail this and the way I probably would do it is to:
- Make the play as soon as it becomes an unofficial play (as in if it is an unofficial play, if I have understood right, then it is basically sure that the supposedly losing team's odds are such that it qualifies the match and it is just waiting for the supposedly winning team's odds to reach the desired level. Thats what it looks like to me at least).

I would make the play as soon as it becomes an unofficial play because:
1. I am not gonna be awake (as I am in Europe) when the lines close/reach the desired level/games start (tonight I would miss 11/12 games).
2. The criteria of the "losing team" doesnt seem to be a problem, as in whenever a game does not quite become playable it is because of the "winning team"'s odds not reaching e.g. -170 when they are at -150 now. Hence the unofficial plays already are rather close to fulfilling the system requirements.
3. If the team reaches its desired -170 and Ive played it at -150, great, it was less juice when I played it. And if it doesnt reach -170 and I have still played it at -150, ok too, as I have gotten decent odds on a team/match that almost qualified in the system (granted, if it doesnt qualify the system fully, then its more likely to miss than a play that did qualify).

If that makes sense. Just how I see it possible to play the matches. I might do it like that even if I were in the US, because it just takes too much time (from my experience) to try to follow the lines close to game time multiple times a day. Plus its less juice when playing them early which covers (hopefully at least) the unavoidable wrong plays in matches where the lines do not reach the desired level by closing time and the game ends up being a loss. Of course some of those wrong plays end up a win as well.

Thanks again! I will try to contribute too, whenever I see that my contribution would bring some value for the thread and for the system and for the people following it.

[Scrivero]

So based on the post above, my bets for the day (to win 0,5 units per bet):
1. Detroit ML -145, to win 0,5 units. (Detroit goal was <-106. Minnesota is +134, so in 3 previous +134, +110, +108. Both fulfill the criteria.)
2. Detroit RL +143, to win 0,5 units.
3. Colorado ML -170, to win 0,5 units. (Colorado goal is <-178. San Diego is +156, so in 3 previous +156, +168, +145, so would not qualify yet for either team).
4. Colorado RL +111, to win 0,5 units.
5. LAA ML -112, to win 0,5 units. (LAA goal is <-125. Texas is +104, so in 3 previous +104, +100, -180. LAA does not fulfill the criteria yet, Texas fulfills the criteria already.
6. LAA RL +182, to win 0,5 units.

Notions:
1. In the previous post I stated that the game qualifying seems to be mostly about the "winning team"'s line getting to the desired level. That still seems to stand but there are exceptions because the game can surely also be close with both teams' odds such as the Colorado-San Diego -game today.
2. The picks above are NOT the official system picks of TT and jlani. They are merely the unofficial picks posted by either of them which I then play already before they reach the right odds to become playable.

By the way, TT and jlani, is it ok if I follow this way of making the picks in this thread? I wont fill the thread with anymore analysis because no more is needed for just following doing the plays early. I will just follow how it goes in wins/losses and +-units. One post per day. I hope that is ok with you. I can stop anytime you wish, if it should cause any disturbance.

[TechnicalTrader]

Hi Sciverio and welcome,

I strongly recommend to not play unofficial games and here is why:

Plays where the opposing teams' current line did not meet the criteria:

2013 +11.2 units
2014 +13.3 units
2015 - 25.3 units
2016 +14 units

Plays where the favorite teams' current line did not meet the criteria:

2013 - 1.6 units
2014 +0.7 units
2015 + 0.8 units
2016 +18 units

Plays where both the favorite teams' current line and opposing teams' current line did not meet the criteria:

2013 - 12.8 units
2014 - 14.0 units
2015 - 7.8 units
2016 - 10.2 units

And this is the exact reason why I mentioned in post number 105 the following:

+Quote+

This is obviously the easiest option but I fear two things: 1) although the query is relatively simple and anyone with basic SDQL knowledge would be able to replicate it, the idea of the public and books having access to the query is giving me an anxious feeling. 2) The thread could (and most likely would) get flooded with variants of the SDQL. I see this happen all the time in FX forums (see forexfactory) and it is happening right now, in an SBR competitors forum. This would be a huge distraction and an easy way for someone (with bad intentions) to hijack the thread.

++End Quote++

That competitors forum is the other one you hang out in...

I also do not like the idea of having other systems or similar systems picks posted in here. It will only confuse people even more. Its challenging enough trying to explain this system as simple as possible for everyone and then tracking picks.

I hope you understand and there are no hard feelings.

Cheers,
TT

[Scrivero]

Hi Sciverio and welcome,

I strongly recommend to not play unofficial games and here is why:

Plays where the opposing teams' current line did not meet the criteria:

2013 +11.2 units
2014 +13.3 units
2015 - 25.3 units
2016 +14 units

Plays where the favorite teams' current line did not meet the criteria:

2013 - 1.6 units
2014 +0.7 units
2015 + 0.8 units
2016 +18 units

Plays where both the favorite teams' current line and opposing teams' current line did not meet the criteria:

2013 - 12.8 units
2014 - 14.0 units
2015 - 7.8 units
2016 - 10.2 units

And this is the exact reason why I mentioned in post number 105 the following:

+Quote+

This is obviously the easiest option but I fear two things: 1) although the query is relatively simple and anyone with basic SDQL knowledge would be able to replicate it, the idea of the public and books having access to the query is giving me an anxious feeling. 2) The thread could (and most likely would) get flooded with variants of the SDQL. I see this happen all the time in FX forums (see forexfactory) and it is happening right now, in an SBR competitors forum. This would be a huge distraction and an easy way for someone (with bad intentions) to hijack the thread.

++End Quote++

That competitors forum is the other one you hang out in...

I also do not like the idea of having other systems or similar systems picks posted in here. It will only confuse people even more. Its challenging enough trying to explain this system as simple as possible for everyone and then tracking picks.

I hope you understand and there are no hard feelings.

Cheers,
TT

First of all, huge thank you to you for bringing those stats to my attention. Sounds like its in no way viable or profitable to play the unofficial picks. Seems to be a huge variance between seasons too. (I will play them just for fun until the results go negative, just to see how high it could go this season).

Secondly, I will immediately stop posting the unofficial plays or its lines and how its doing. I totally agree that it certainly distracts and confuses people even more. In my opinion your system is very clear and understandable, but thats maybe because I joined in just now, and had the time to read all the stuff. Now that I read the first post again, its just very clear.

Thirdly, no hard feelings at all. I love what you are doing and want to benefit from your findings. I also want to contribute in some way in the future if I can. If I find another angle I might ask about it but otherwise I will just try to do the small amount of plays I am able to to do because of the time difference.

Finally, I actually thought about myself and some others when I read your comment about the competitors forum I am probably one of the people who are a bit too into the awesomeness that SDQL offers as Ive never used it before. Sorry if I caused any harm in this thread, at least I did not (luckily) try to come up with SDQL queries about this system. And I wont.

To make it short, I and we all appreciate these types of systems and findings and giving them to us like this. Its basically free money in addition to free learning on various aspects of MLB betting.

BOL!

[TechnicalTrader]

No problem at all Scriv.

to everyone else:

BTW, today's DET game still looking good. The others still haven't qualified.

[barryt]

Ognj.. Just to point out that we had a play on Sunday with Boston as a dog!
i don't know SDQL so I wouldn't know how we got it.

[TechnicalTrader]

Ognj.. Just to point out that we had a play on Sunday with Boston as a dog!
i don't know SDQL so I wouldn't know how we got it.

Great pickup, I didnt even notice that. Killerspotts had them close at -108 and as a favorite. Very strange!

[TechnicalTrader]

Detroit's line is still looking good. COL and LAA not looking like plays.


I'll confirm if DET is/was official shortly after the first pitch

[TechnicalTrader]

Hi, first time poster, but I am a SDQL veteran, sort of.
First and foremost thanks to Technical Trader for sharing the idea , I love it
I will see if I can contribute in a helpful way.

My first question is, why are You omitting dogs?
Try Your query with the "D and" condition instead of "F and" and You will see it performs even better there.
I would just omit the "F and" and use it for both faves and dogs. Seriously, have a look.

My second observation: if You dissect it, you will notice it performs noticeably better with Faves in the first game of a series
( against a new opponent ) and with Away Dogs in the 3rd game of a series ( where all the conditions are linked to the same opposing team ).
I would increase my unit size slightly by 33%-ish in those two highlighted spots, it is not a requirement tho.

Lastly for tracking purposes I would suggest creating the query :
date=2017XXXX and previous previous line greater than previous line and opponent's previous line greater than opponents previous previous line and team and previous line minus line and opponents line minus opponents previous line

It gives us teams, that fulfill the conditions that are set in stone already on the left side, the potential play on team,
and on the right side You will get the two numbers that have to be positive for a play to be active.
It makes it easier to track which plays are close and by how much exactly. Just enter the right date and refresh (F5).

I tried to send the link to the tracking query to Technical Trader in a private message, but I need 40 posts ...
If You have trouble creating the tracking query or the sub-queries, feel free to ask/contact in the sdb google group.
I hope I did not give away to much for Technical Trader's taste at the moment,
on the other hand I will follow this thread and try to help wherever I can.

BOL everyone

check your inbox

[TechnicalTrader]

DET is official

[TechnicalTrader]

For those who are interested in playing dogs also. This should work:

same variables as in the OP, just one additional variable:

opposing team used more than 3 pitchers in previous game


Here are the numbers:

Note that 1 unit = $100.00, so 2016 won over 60 units, while 2015 performed the worst at +42 units:

games	SU	Avg Line	$ On	RL	Avg Run Line	$ RL On	SDQL
314	195-119 (1.20, 62.1%)	-144.7	+$3,735	161-152 (0.33, 51.4%)	110.3	+$2,930	season = 2013
320	197-123 (1.25, 61.6%)	-137.8	+$3,323	168-151 (0.41, 52.7%)	112.3	+$4,322	season = 2014
351	214-137 (0.75, 61.0%)	-142.4	+$4,205	166-185 (-0.14, 47.3%)	112.7	-$112	season = 2015
353	221-132 (0.84, 62.6%)	-146.3	+$4,087	180-172 (0.06, 51.1%)	106	+$2,093	season = 2016
10	9-1 (2.60, 90.0%)	-123.5	+$830	8-2 (1.40, 80.0%)	135.8	+$949	season = 2017

Today's plays would be:

DET and PHI


Again these are not official plays. If you guys are interested in these also, I might open a new thread. I am seriously considering dropping all of my systems and playing only these two along with my first inning system. If so, I'd have a lot more time for this.

[Sir-Ater]

interested in the dog plays as well.

[TechnicalTrader]

Strictly playing dogs with this system will not be profitable. I just spent about 6 hours trying to find decent variables which would generate underdog winners. It's just not happening.

Honestly, the whole "I don't pay juice for favorites" is extremely overrated. Price is price, period.

I need to give this some serious thought, but I'm leaning towards playing only these two systems (along with the first inning system). I'd be playing about 3-8 games a day which is very manageable...

And by the way, the second system I just posted seems to work best after May.

[Notorious_Donk]

Just my two cents... depending on how many of your systems are actually profitable I would say take your absolute best 2 or 3 systems and focus all your attention on those. That will give you time to focus on the best systems and possibly even improve upon those systems. Either way I like what you do TT

[TechnicalTrader]

Just my two cents... depending on how many of your systems are actually profitable I would say take your absolute best 2 or 3 systems and focus all your attention on those. That will give you time to focus on the best systems and possibly even improve upon those systems. Either way I like what you do TT

Thanks for your kind advise. It's amazing how many people are willing to support me and trying to help. I've told a few of you in PM's this before; whenever my time comes, do me a huge favor and remain disciplined. The whole "put your house on this bet" and "oh well you just gambled your entire BR, comeback in the fall" attitude is what will keep losers from winning. I'm happy it's not in this thread!!!

Seeing so much of it on this forum is extremely suspicious, almost as if some of these posters are paid to express this type of attitude. Even some of the vets on here are extremely and I mean extremely toxic.

Do yourselves a favor and stay away from them. Also learn to not trail. I slowly "cut that habit" from trailing 3-4 guys a season down to none. Not even some of the people on here who I highly respect. It get's you nowhere. If you want to make money, you need to put in the time and work and figure it out yourself.

Well, I'm done for today and will make a decision tomorrow. One thing is for sure jlani will continue to help me out.

Thanks again everyone!

[Notorious_Donk]

Thanks for your kind advise. It's amazing how many people are willing to support me and trying to help. I've told a few of you in PM's this before; whenever my time comes, do me a huge favor and remain disciplined. The whole "put your house on this bet" and "oh well you just gambled your entire BR, comeback in the fall" attitude is what will keep losers from winning. I'm happy it's not in this thread!!!

Seeing so much of it on this forum is extremely suspicious, almost as if some of these posters are paid to express this type of attitude. Even some of the vets on here are extremely and I mean extremely toxic.

Do yourselves a favor and stay away from them. Also learn to not trail. I slowly "cut that habit" from trailing 3-4 guys a season down to none. Not even some of the people on here who I highly respect. It get's you nowhere. If you want to make money, you need to put in the time and work and figure it out yourself.

Well, I'm done for today and will make a decision tomorrow. One thing is for sure jlani will continue to help me out.

Thanks again everyone!

I'm glad we have the same mindset. If I wasn't spending so much time on my own systems I would gladly run one of yours but I just don't have the time right now. BOL on your wagers TT

[barryt]

I agree with all you said except" not to trail", cos that's what I'm doing here.
i call it 'tail by the way as short for ' riding your coat tails

[barryt]

Dam midweek afternoon games! Wasn't expecting that and I missed playing it( sorta BE miss as they won 2-1 winning ml losing RL)
can we add game starting times to preliminary plays?
(Surprised the SDQL doesn't list game times , I'm sure aft/ night figures are important to some people.) and most books have them in ROT order so it's easy to miss an early start.

[barryt]

The dog system
i didn't realize we were only on favs if the dog had descending odds and the Fav increasing odds I thought we played the dog. eg Boston on Sunday.
I wonder why you picked "using 3 pitchers" as a filter?

[barryt]

Another question ,TT.
i know the system doesn't care, but do you place your bets as action or starting pitchers!