Obviously, the risk involved is losing both bets if the margin is one run. However, you are guaranteed to win if the margin is more the one. Probably not the smartest of strategies, but what are your thoughts?
How about this? Don't bet on teams that are still -100 or worse when they are given -1.5? Just bet on the run line (-1.5) when you can get both teams at +100 or better. Here is how games finished when both teams were +100 or better at -1.5, so that you are guaranteed a win unless the margin is exactly one run.
Sept. 13: 8-2 - Only 2 of the 10 games where each team at -1.5 was +100 or better had the exactly finish of one run.
Sept. 12: 6-4 - Not great
Sept. 11: 4-1
Sept. 10: 9-0
Sept. 9: 7-3
Sept. 8: 8-2
Today I tried it out for the first time on a few games.
Bet $15 on the Cubs (-1.5) -110 to win $13.
Also bet the Mets (-1.5) +300 to win $15
Cubs won big, so I ended +$8. If the Mets would have won by more than a run, then I break even. If the game is a one run margin, I would have lost $20.
Also bet $10 on the Phillies (-1.5) at +155 to win $15 and $6 on the Marlins (-1.5) at +185 to win $11.
Phillies won big. Ended up +$9.
ive been fooling a little with this type strategy in bases and in foots
but in bases ive been moving the line to minus 3 on games that are pick- ish
same on foots moving to minus 3 to 6
Probably a losing strategy unless you can find games where those prices are undervalued, ie Colorado games or games with high totals and heavy road favorites
Its the old saying you cant turn two -EV wagers into a positive one without some correlation
Thats not the case here, the only way to win is if you find an edge on either or both of the runlines, which is possible since they are smaller markets and are subject to more volatility.
Imagine if the books offered lines (will game be decided by 1 run) which some do but its a rare prop. Same thing but you are trying to out think yourself here. Keep it simple and look for value on one side or another