LB thread for MLB plays 2010

**t-wizzle** · 10-07-10, 01:24 PM

Money coming in on Rangers RL

**Pride** · 10-07-10, 01:24 PM

late money on both sides

**memo99** · 10-07-10, 01:26 PM

i think TB scores 8 runs today

**Pauulzcappin** · 10-07-10, 01:26 PM

Gl with Tampa LB. I took Rangers RRL.

**memo99** · 10-07-10, 01:27 PM

good luck with your picks LB i am also on atl TT u3

**ROFLcopter** · 10-07-10, 01:27 PM

Tons of money coming in on the Mets as well

**martinmobley** · 10-07-10, 01:28 PM

Originally posted by sapidoc

That is a valid point. But I don't think they rely so much on value betters to even their books. If the public takes -220 today, they'll have no problem taking -220 tomorrow and -220 the next day. Unless they sweep all three days the books are going to make some coin.

It's more going for value for value's sake than it is anything to do with the public. The public just happens to provide value to dog lines most of the time.

This is the key question: Would you take the reds yesterday for +2000 if the public was pounding PHI at -3000 or pass on all bets?

Ummmmm... at +2000... i would place a $50 bet on the reds which would yield me $1,000 on that bet... who wouldn't take that. if it was at +200 which would yield $100 on my $50 bet i wouldn't bet on the reds... not sure i follow buddy.

**paco** · 10-07-10, 01:30 PM

Originally posted by ROFLcopter

Tons of money coming in on the Mets as well

Lmao.

**sapidoc** · 10-07-10, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by martinmobley

Ummmmm... at +2000... i would place a $50 bet on the reds which would yield me $1,000 on that bet... who wouldn't take that. if it was at +200 which would yield $100 on my $50 bet i wouldn't bet on the reds... not sure i follow buddy.

Keep following me...

So good. You are willing to take the dogs at +2000 since you are getting a great price. Your gut says PHI wins, so does your instinct, and even the public thinks PHI wins, but +2000 you are ok with the bet! (and so you should be). Even tho PHI wins here let's say 80% of the time and will therefore win tonight most likely! +2000 is still worth your money.

In fact at +1000 you would prob do it too right? $50 to return $500 ? Has to be the right bet. (At some point you wouldn't bet +900, +800, +700, etc, etc and I get that).

You've made your point that at +200 ($50 to win $100) you would not bet. This is because you believe that there is not enough value in +200. (FYI an aside: 33% is the implied probability of a +200 line. So by not accepting at +200 you are basically saying that the reds win LESS than 33% of the time. If they were to win more frequently than this, then +200 would have value and be +EV).

So all I'm pointing out, is that LB looked at +200 and with the same expression you looked at +2000 with, said "f*ck yea!" and put $100 on that +200 line. Because he figures Reds win in this spot like 40% of the time and so this bet is +EV, tons of value, etc, etc.

He bet +200 for the same reason you bet +2000.

Your edge on +2000 is maybe like 80%, His edge on +200 is maybe like 8%, but there is an edge on both bets. (Or at least LB believes there is an edge, hence his wager).

**mister bee** · 10-07-10, 01:52 PM

Originally posted by sapidoc

Keep following me...

So good. You are willing to take the dogs at +2000 since you are getting a great price. Your gut says PHI wins, so does your instinct, and even the public thinks PHI wins, but +2000 you are ok with the bet! (and so you should be). Even tho PHI wins here let's say 80% of the time and will therefore win tonight most likely! +2000 is still worth your money.

In fact at +1000 you would prob do it too right? $50 to return $500 ? Has to be the right bet. (At some point you wouldn't bet +900, +800, +700, etc, etc and I get that).

You've made your point that at +200 ($50 to win $100) you would not bet. This is because you believe that there is not enough value in +200. (FYI an aside: 33% is the implied probability of a +200 line. So by not accepting at +200 you are basically saying that the reds win LESS than 33% of the time. If they were to win more frequently than this, then +200 would have value and be +EV).

So all I'm pointing out, is that LB looked at +200 and with the same expression you looked at +2000 with, said "f*ck yea!" and put $100 on that +200 line. Because he figures Reds win in this spot like 40% of the time and so this bet is +EV, tons of value, etc, etc.

He bet +200 for the same reason you bet +2000.

Your edge on +2000 is maybe like 80%, His edge on +200 is maybe like 8%, but there is an edge on both bets. (Or at least LB believes there is an edge, hence his wager).

Great post.

**TylerDurden** · 10-07-10, 01:53 PM

Originally posted by sapidoc

Keep following me...

So good. You are willing to take the dogs at +2000 since you are getting a great price. Your gut says PHI wins, so does your instinct, and even the public thinks PHI wins, but +2000 you are ok with the bet! (and so you should be). Even tho PHI wins here let's say 80% of the time and will therefore win tonight most likely! +2000 is still worth your money.

In fact at +1000 you would prob do it too right? $50 to return $500 ? Has to be the right bet. (At some point you wouldn't bet +900, +800, +700, etc, etc and I get that).

You've made your point that at +200 ($50 to win $100) you would not bet. This is because you believe that there is not enough value in +200. (FYI an aside: 33% is the implied probability of a +200 line. So by not accepting at +200 you are basically saying that the reds win LESS than 33% of the time. If they were to win more frequently than this, then +200 would have value and be +EV).

So all I'm pointing out, is that LB looked at +200 and with the same expression you looked at +2000 with, said "f*ck yea!" and put $100 on that +200 line. Because he figures Reds win in this spot like 40% of the time and so this bet is +EV, tons of value, etc, etc.

He bet +200 for the same reason you bet +2000.

Your edge on +2000 is maybe like 80%, His edge on +200 is maybe like 8%, but there is an edge on both bets. (Or at least LB believes there is an edge, hence his wager).

It's just like poker...the only way you really make money long-term is to get your money in with implied odds (sometimes that's the best hand at the time, but quite often it's not). Same logic though. In the investment world if someone has an 8% edge, that is very solid, same goes for sportbetting.

**martinmobley** · 10-07-10, 01:53 PM

Originally posted by sapidoc

Keep following me...

So good. You are willing to take the dogs at +2000 since you are getting a great price. Your gut says PHI wins, so does your instinct, and even the public thinks PHI wins, but +2000 you are ok with the bet! (and so you should be). Even tho PHI wins here let's say 80% of the time and will therefore win tonight most likely! +2000 is still worth your money.

In fact at +1000 you would prob do it too right? $50 to return $500 ? Has to be the right bet. (At some point you wouldn't bet +900, +800, +700, etc, etc and I get that).

You've made your point that at +200 ($50 to win $100) you would not bet. This is because you believe that there is not enough value in +200. (FYI an aside: 33% is the implied probability of a +200 line. So by not accepting at +200 you are basically saying that the reds win LESS than 33% of the time. If they were to win more frequently than this, then +200 would have value and be +EV).

So all I'm pointing out, is that LB looked at +200 and with the same expression you looked at +2000 with, said "f*ck yea!" and put $100 on that +200 line. Because he figures Reds win in this spot like 40% of the time and so this bet is +EV, tons of value, etc, etc.

He bet +200 for the same reason you bet +2000.

Your edge on +2000 is maybe like 80%, His edge on +200 is maybe like 8%, but there is an edge on both bets. (Or at least LB believes there is an edge, hence his wager).

I get your point... my point is that Reds DON'T win 40% of the time in that situation, more like 15%.

**sapidoc** · 10-07-10, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by martinmobley

I get your point... my point is that Reds DON'T win 40% of the time in that situation, more like 15%.

And therefore you should not bet.

You original complaint against LB was that you thought he shouldn't take Reds just to fade the public. I was pointing out that LB didn't take them to fade the public, he took them because he believes they win more than 33.33% and therefore +200 is value. I guarantee you that LB made this bet thinking Reds are > 33.33% chance to win. In fact, I'm not sure where he posted it but I think he made a comment about how they are a near 0.5 road team and therefore the +odds he was getting were great value.

If you disagree with his estimation that they win more than 33.33% of the time, then don't bet. But he's been doing this a while and doing very well.

Oh, and lol @ 15% chance Reds win.

**LBDT168** · 10-07-10, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by lakerboy

Rays TT over 4 -115 (1x)
Rays ML -120 (2x)
Rays/Rangers under 8 +108 (2x)
Braves TT under 3-110 (2x)
Giants / Braves over 6.5 -118 (2x)
Giants TT over 3.5 -110 (2x)
Yanks / Twins under 9 -120 (3x)

bump

**memo99** · 10-07-10, 02:59 PM

what has happened to the rays offense

**ManBearPig** · 10-07-10, 03:02 PM

...so are the Rays getting back at their fans for not showing up ever??? This is embarrassing. Least the under looks good.

**mister bee** · 10-07-10, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by memo99

what has happened to the rays offense

Been wondering the same thing.

**superjeff24** · 10-07-10, 03:07 PM

Wait till full 9 innings to cry about rays please

**ManBearPig** · 10-07-10, 03:10 PM

5-0 don't need to wait

...next

**azplaya** · 10-07-10, 03:11 PM

Wow...that hurt

**KJ90** · 10-07-10, 03:11 PM

rays are done they cant play inder pressure

**msj0001** · 10-07-10, 03:12 PM

The rays fvcking suck

**KJ90** · 10-07-10, 03:13 PM

rays are done they cant play under pressure

**Malcolm** · 10-07-10, 03:17 PM

0-3 to start the day. which book you working for lb?

**azplaya** · 10-07-10, 03:40 PM

Only hope off not losing my ass on this game is if under 8.5 still hits

**anthonyc023** · 10-07-10, 03:48 PM

longoria wasnt even running that lazy fvck

**kmarinouofm** · 10-07-10, 03:52 PM

liking kansas +11 and under 48.5 tonight boys..

**borednaz** · 10-07-10, 03:53 PM

Why worry about playing so bad, there is no one there watching to complain.

**borednaz** · 10-07-10, 03:54 PM

Texas is going to crush the over just by themselves it seems..

**Shifty107** · 10-07-10, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by kmarinouofm

liking kansas +11 and under 48.5 tonight boys..

I actually like Nebraska tonight but the line movement scares me. I think they run the ball like crazy tonight against a poor rush defence. The under sounds like the right play since I see a lot of clock ticking away due to the run game but I realy can't see Kansas keeping this close. Even in Manhatten.

**msj0001** · 10-07-10, 04:40 PM

I'm liking the yanks again tonight...twins have lost 10 straight post-season games, hard to bet on a team with that streak

**azplaya** · 10-07-10, 04:49 PM

Unders looking good boys!

**ayuntalo** · 10-07-10, 04:53 PM

Rays.....pathethic

**sportcap** · 10-07-10, 04:55 PM

shitty game but no biggie with the under hitting, lot of over bettors pissed lol. probably thought it was going to be an easy over. Same thing will happen in the next gme under9!

**msj0001** · 10-07-10, 05:03 PM

Just threw down Yanks ML (3X)...rolling with the post-season monster in Pettite