MLB Regressing vs. Increasing Odds System

**Kenny King** · 04-19-17, 11:32 AM

The ROIF is hitting 71% ML. The ROIF4 is hitting 88% ML. We are aren't really playing ML. We are playing everything at -1 since we are splitting the bets, which has held us back due to the number of 1 run wins that have happened. On the ROIF we have 10 wins, 7 losses, and 7 ties. So the reality is we have won 3 and picked up some change from the ties. We have lost some juice in the losses. On the ROIF4 we haven't played it but for about a week so we missed the wins from before it was posted.

My point is, for the 71% and 88% to come back within range, ML losses will have to occur and they will. The percentages over the last 4 years say so.

Because of the odd number of 1 run wins we haven't been able to pad our bankroll enough to absorb the correction that should be coming. I realize over the long season it should work out, but in the immediate we should expect it to get worse before it gets better because the percentages say so.

**sos41** · 04-19-17, 11:33 AM

I want to verify I am using the data correctly. I show LAD and Col both plays. Col as underdogs the line is getting smaller and LAD their line is increasing.

**jlani93** · 04-19-17, 12:24 PM

Originally posted by sos41

I want to verify I am using the data correctly. I show LAD and Col both plays. Col as underdogs the line is getting smaller and LAD their line is increasing.

(I usually leave it for TT to answer questions so I don't confuse you more).

So here goes ...

For the system I am tracking for TT, what you're seeing is what we want to see for a 'play on' faves to qualify. The fave becoming more of a fave (-270, -170, -155), while the dog becoming more of a dog (+230, +160, +120). Assuming the lines don't change, (or stay within the target line), we play LAD ML and RL.

SaveSave
SaveSave

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-19-17, 02:10 PM

Originally posted by sos41

I want to verify I am using the data correctly. I show LAD and Col both plays. Col as underdogs the line is getting smaller and LAD their line is increasing.

Here we go:

LAD is a play, their line went from (April 17th) -155 to -170 and is currently -260 and the Rockies line went from +120 to +160 an dis now sitting at +230.

NYY's line went from -165 to -180 to -210 (positive signal) and their opponents (CWS) went from +155 to +170 to +190.

I am basically saying the same thing jlani posted above.

BTW; LAD is also a RIOF4 play!

In 2016 this system played 20 games where fav's lines were lower (numeric as in -231 to -999) than -230, the ML dropped -4.47 units going 15-16 and SU went 24-7 adding +4.8 units to the systems total performance. Four of those plays were Kershaw starts, SU was 4-0, RL was 1-3. I recommend to only play it straight up.

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-19-17, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by Kenny King

The ROIF is hitting 71% ML. The ROIF4 is hitting 88% ML. We are aren't really playing ML. We are playing everything at -1 since we are splitting the bets, which has held us back due to the number of 1 run wins that have happened. On the ROIF we have 10 wins, 7 losses, and 7 ties. So the reality is we have won 3 and picked up some change from the ties. We have lost some juice in the losses. On the ROIF4 we haven't played it but for about a week so we missed the wins from before it was posted.

My point is, for the 71% and 88% to come back within range, ML losses will have to occur and they will. The percentages over the last 4 years say so.

Because of the odd number of 1 run wins we haven't been able to pad our bankroll enough to absorb the correction that should be coming. I realize over the long season it should work out, but in the immediate we should expect it to get worse before it gets better because the percentages say so.

Here's some more data for you. I hope this helps:

RIOF4:
SU:
2013; 169-79, +47.31 68%
2014; 156-88, +22.22 64%
2015; 185-89, +54.54 68%
2016; 175-89, +27.77 66%
2017; 14-3, +10.15 82.3%

Too tired to post the RL stats, they should be in this thread somewhere.

WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PROCEED WITH AN 82.3% performance. BUT,....... BUT, that does not necessarily mean the system will go 2-10 over the next 12 picks.

**Kenny King** · 04-19-17, 03:17 PM

Thx for your work TT. I'm glad you didn't take that the wrong way.

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-19-17, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by Kenny King

Thx for your work TT. I'm glad you didn't take that the wrong way.

NP. It's clear that you are one step ahead of what I am posting and that is a good thing. I respect you Kenny and am pretty sure you're a vet sports bettor... You know what you're doing.

**snider** · 04-19-17, 05:25 PM

this might be helpful for the ><

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6Efzu2slaI

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-20-17, 01:48 AM

Decent little rebound yesterday. Both the RIOF and RIOF4 hit all of their plays. NYY won both on the RL and SU and so did LAD.

Updated stats:

RIOF:
SU: 19-9, +5.12 units
RL: 12-16, -0.27 units

RIOF4:
SU: 15-3, +11.50 units
RL: 9-9, +2.99 units

I expect the RIOF's RL's to pickup a bit but there is no way the RIOF4's SU picks will be able to maintain this pace. Expect a slight pull back there, as mentioned above. The RIOF4 RL's are performing in line with expectations.

As of now, only BOS looks like it will qualify, both as an RIOF and RIOF4 play for today.

**GoodBadUgly** · 04-20-17, 02:50 AM

TechnicalTrader, "SU" means taking the moneyline on the favorite, yes? Thanks.

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-20-17, 03:08 AM

Yes. SU =Straight Up.

And yes, we are only playing fav's in here.

**barryt** · 04-20-17, 09:14 AM

Note REDSOX BLUEJAYS is a DAY game and starts at 12:30
and is a Play as TT said

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-20-17, 10:01 AM

In deed. It would take a major move like Sale not starting for the play to not qualify.

**Kenny King** · 04-20-17, 10:08 AM

I like to play $100/play per each system. I took my own advice and laid off last night and cost myself $300. Should have just followed the plan. Now I feel like I HAVE to lay off today after missing a 3-0 night. I hate and love the psychology of gambling. Haha

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-20-17, 10:19 AM

Don't gamble. Make educated guesses...

**Kenny King** · 04-20-17, 10:49 AM

Funny, that's what I called myself doing!, but you're right. My terminology should be different regarding gambling/investing. I actually do this with an investing mind. That's why I love your threads. We take the same approach which is very comfortable for me to follow with confidence.

**barryt** · 04-20-17, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by Kenny King

I like to play $100/play per each system. I took my own advice and laid off last night and cost myself $300. Should have just followed the plan. Now I feel like I HAVE to lay off today after missing a 3-0 night. I hate and love the psychology of gambling. Haha

Just remember that the RIOF ml only wins 65%, so betting games at odds of -200 or less will yield a negative ROi in the long run.

**teecee** · 04-20-17, 07:26 PM

Anything less than -190 will have a negative return on investment.

**teecee** · 04-20-17, 07:30 PM

But maybe without the -190 or lower plays, you wouldn't have your 65% overall win rate, soooo...

**ognj3n** · 04-21-17, 01:25 AM

Originally posted by teecee

Anything less than -190 will have a negative return on investment.

If the total is 7 or lower, plays -190 or less aren't that bad in the last 7 years :
SU: 244-80 (2.08, 75.3%) avg line: -231.8 / 202.8 on / against: +$6,276 / -$8,545 ROI: +8.4% / -26.4%
RL: 170-154 (0.58, 52.5%) avg line: 101.2 / -107.6 on / against: +$1,449 / -$2,932 ROI: +4.2% / -8.1%

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-21-17, 02:01 AM

7.4% RoI SU and 7.7% on the RL dating back to the start of the 2013 season on plays with fav's of -190 and stronger.

I highly recommend to play all plays...

Not a bad day yesterday hitting both bets. I'll update numbers later. Jlani, could you please an eye on the plays?

Thanks

**barryt** · 04-21-17, 11:15 AM

Originally posted by teecee

But maybe without the -190 or lower plays, you wouldn't have your 65% overall win rate, soooo...

Then you have to have to do the analysis , but for lazy people , or those with not enough spare time, like me, just do some inspection and it quickly becomes clear that -200( maybe -190 too, nit picker) is not a magic number that has much better results.
MAybe TT can run his query at different odds levels starting with above and below -190.
PS OOPS TT already did it

**barryt** · 04-21-17, 11:23 AM

Originally posted by ognj3n

If the total is 7 or lower, plays -190 or less aren't that bad in the last 7 years :
SU: 244-80 (2.08, 75.3%) avg line: -231.8 / 202.8 on / against: +$6,276 / -$8,545 ROI: +8.4% / -26.4%
RL: 170-154 (0.58, 52.5%) avg line: 101.2 / -107.6 on / against: +$1,449 / -$2,932 ROI: +4.2% / -8.1%

And with TOTAL at 7, one would expect that the RL would not do as well as the ml and the stats bear that out.

**barryt** · 04-21-17, 11:25 AM

All NIGHT games today

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-21-17, 11:55 AM

Originally posted by barryt

Then you have to have to do the analysis , but for lazy people , or those with not enough spare time, like me, just do some inspection and it quickly becomes clear that -200( maybe -190 too, nit picker) is not a magic number that has much better results.
MAybe TT can run his query at different odds levels starting with above and below -190.
PS OOPS TT already did it

I attempted to add filters to the original idea, like day/night games, high fav's low fav's, first,second, etc of series game and so on but quickly came to the conclusion that the original idea untouched worked the best. The only decent filter I could find was the bull pen pitchers filter which is the RIOF4 system.

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-21-17, 01:20 PM

Don't see any possible plays at the moment.

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-22-17, 05:09 AM

MIA and COL looking like plays. Will try to update later.

**AceofSP2107** · 04-22-17, 10:34 AM

TT are you still going to play a 1st score / and yes and no 1st ing plays in another thread, thanks for your time and dedication much appreciated

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-22-17, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by AceofSP2107

TT are you still going to play a 1st score / and yes and no 1st ing plays in another thread, thanks for your time and dedication much appreciated

Yes, should have the first plays in about a week or two.

**barryt** · 04-22-17, 11:12 AM

It's noon. MIA and COL games are at 8 pm EST
most books have MIA -135 and Definitely should be a play. COL is a slight Fav and will be a play as long as it remains Fav.
i have to bet now so I'm playing both, but would advise others to wait to make sure COL remains the Fav.
gl
barryt

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-22-17, 11:53 AM

MIA and COL would also both qualify as RIOF4 plays

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-23-17, 01:09 AM

Both plays won last night. Looking at BAL and WAS.

I'll be on the road the entire day today but will update the stats soon.

**TechnicalTrader** · 04-23-17, 07:55 AM

Updated Stats:

RIOF:
SU; 22-9, +18.12 units - avg odds: -158
RL; 15-16, +3.83 units - avg odds: +131.5

RIOF4:
SU; 18-3, +14.15 units - avg odds: -152.4
RL; 12-9, +7.09 units - avg odds: +135.5

Combines units risked: 104
Combined units won: 43.19
RoI: 42%

History says May will (or cold) be a down month so tread carefully then. These two systems perform the best in June, July and August so keep that in mind if you are tailing!

Unconfirmed plays today:

RIOF:
WAS: looking good
BAL: looking good

COL
ARZ
MIL
MIN

RIOF4:
will confirm later

**ognj3n** · 04-23-17, 11:28 AM

Minnesota if it stays a heavier favorite than -108 qualifies. It is trending the right way.

**barryt** · 04-23-17, 11:29 AM

Of the DAY games . Only Twins are a play right now.
COL ARZ and MILW are not favs at Killer at 12:15
Orioles ar Fav, but are not a play at Killer odds but are at my book.
Going to check back at 1pm or so.
Nationals are solid for tonight.
back about 115p