john morrison mlb labouchere system

[edh1011]

sorry this is so late. had a rough day at work after the holiday.

line: x-5-5-x
A bet on pirates 8:05 ET
betting $10 on the moneyline (+134)

i'm trying to bet on more underdogs for less risk and bigger payoffs using the jm system plays. if the pirates lose by 1 though, i will not chase.

[edh1011]

hey ed.. been kinda watchin what you been doing for a few weeks... do you by any chance have an easy explanation of how the labby system works? It is completely new to me.. thanks!

it's just safer money management. the objective is not to win $ on every series. and it doesn't end on a C bet. it goes on and on. basically you take a % of your bank and divide by 4. and those will be the numbers on your line. so if 5% of your bank is $100, your line will look like this

25-25-25-25

and your 1st bet will always be the first and last #'s on the line. so your starting bet here would be $50. if it loses, you add the loss to the line

25-25-25-25-50

and your next bet would be $75. if that wins you cross out the 2 end #'s

x-25-25-25-x

and you're next bet would be $50 again. but if it lost again you would add the amount lost again to the end of the line

25-25-25-25-50-75

and your next bet would be $100. this way you're not doubling up on every loss

[edh1011]

i know this isn't part of the jm system. but if anyone's interested i am also putting $ on the rangers RL
(-120). i just can't see the damn indians performing another sweep on a heavy hitting team like texas. if the rangers lose tonight i will chase their game tomorrow. if they win by 1 though, i will move on.

[edh1011]

well the pirates were horrible from the beginning. not too surprising. luckily though the rangers dominated to keep my bank in check.

bank: -$12.11

record: 12-11

line: x-5-5-x

the line will stay the same because of the rangers win

the pirates lost for jm too. so there will be a B bet tomorrow.

[edh1011]

line: x-5-5-x
B bet on pirates 8:05 ET
betting $10 on the moneyline (+111)

[edh1011]

the pirates lost for me again. and they also lost again for jm on that +1.5 RL with odds higher than -200. this is why i don't mess with all that juice.

bank: -2.21 units

record: 12-12

line1: x-5-5-x-10

i think i will pass on the C bet tomorrow. just not worth it to me. there will be other plays with much better teams.

[edh1011]

line: x-5-5-x-10
A bet on cardinals 8:05 ET
betting $15 on the runline (-110)

remember if the cards only win by 1 run, the series is over

[edh1011]

cardinals easily cover tonight.

bank: -0.84 units

record: 13-12

line: x-5-x-x-x

that will be it until after the all star break.

[nivekk1400]

thast is extremly cool info u wont make alot of profit

[edh1011]

line: 6-6-6-6

A bet on cardinals 8:15 ET

betting $12 on the moneyline (-124)

[dlunc3]

hey ed... what % of your roll do you recommend using for this money management? Also, how often do you increase that amount?

[WlliamWlliam]

Ed, thanks for this thread it's great information. I was looking into this system so it's great to see it in action. Just a question on when to take moneyline or runline with this system. Do you decide to play the -1 runline when odds are -150 or higher eg with the giants today is this when you would split moneyline/runline to make -1 line. I'm unsure at what odds to play straight out runline or when to split moneyline/runline. I have read the whole thread but would appreciate any feedback. Thanks again

[edh1011]

hey ed... what % of your roll do you recommend using for this money management? Also, how often do you increase that amount?

i personally only bet 5% of my bankroll per line. so let's say your bank was $2,000. you would divide that by 5% and get 100. then you divide that by 4 and you have your line.

25 25 25 25

i don't find a need to start off higher than 5% because remember i will be increasing anyway every time i clear a line.

[edh1011]

Ed, thanks for this thread it's great information. I was looking into this system so it's great to see it in action. Just a question on when to take moneyline or runline with this system. Do you decide to play the -1 runline when odds are -150 or higher eg with the giants today is this when you would split moneyline/runline to make -1 line. I'm unsure at what odds to play straight out runline or when to split moneyline/runline. I have read the whole thread but would appreciate any feedback. Thanks again

no problem man. always glad to help others who have been bit by the ABC chase.

as for deciding the ML/RL, you're right. if the odds are higher than -150, i look for a cheaper line to bet on. this is because i am betting to risk and not to win. so with higher odds, i wouldn't profit enough to clear the line. i will lose more often when a team only wins by 1, but i doesn't matter because the system goes on and on, rather than just getting 3 chances.

at the start of this thread i was combining the 2 sometimes to where i would break even in those 1 run games.

now i am trying to bet more aggressive on the bigger payoffs. it all depends on your betting style. last week the cards played the astros. since houston is pretty bad, i took my chances on the -1.5. tonight though, they have a much more worthy opponent in the dodgers, so since the odds were reasonable -134, i just took the moneyline. i usually just go by my own judgement too

[edh1011]

cards win again to put me out of the negative.

bank: +0.12 units

record: 14-12

line: x-6-6-x

[edh1011]

by the way i've started tracking this system with units rather than $, since i realize people are betting more than 10 bucks on these jm plays.

so just for this thread. 1 unit = $10

[WlliamWlliam]

Thanks for the feedback edh1011, appreciate it. Will follow with interest.

[edh1011]

pretty boring this weekend. just unofficial so there may be some v3.0 plays tomorrow.

for those who are following this, what would you think about playing unofficial too, but fading (playing the team with the higher rpi)?

i remember what happened with toronto the other week, so maybe just bet on the A/B. if anyone's interested, i'm open to suggestions.

[Kev the Brit]

Ed, in your post #9 you compared the martingale system with labouchere, but I think you got it wrong by comparing the same risk amount with the same win amount.

Taking the Orioles series, you stated that the martingale A bet (-130 odds) would be $13 to win $10, which is not what a proper comparitive bet should be. You should have written that the martingale A bet would be $10 to win $7.70, which would have lost, leaving a martingale B bet to win $17.70.

The martingale B bet (at -125 odds) risk amount would be $22.12 to win $17.70.

The martingale C bet (at -125 odds) would be $49.78 to win $39.82.

The actual total loss by the martingale system if the c bet loses is $81.90 (compared with your calculation of $106.44) compared with the labouchere total loss of $45. But we have to note that after the 1st labouchere bet any later single win does not produce the same profit.

The point is that neither system, in arithmetical terms, is better than the other when using the same odds. The martingale series could have achieved $7.70 profit with either a B bet or C Bet win, but the labouchere 2nd bet would only produce $2 profit from the 1st 2 bets and it would need a 3rd bet (a 2nd successful bet, back to back), risking $7.12 to win $5.70, to equal the martingale profit at the same stage.

martingale: one win at any time in a series produces profit (targetted by the bettor), but lots of money required relative to the target.

labouchere: if the 1st bet doesn't win then more than 1 win might be required to produce a profit, and the system is more resilient to losing streaks, but less money is exposed and it can be a long haul to reach the same profits achieved by the same number of bets made with a martingale system.

IMHO its not a simple case of one system being better than the other.

Regards
Kev

[edh1011]

fading the unofficials last night would have gone 4-0.

[edh1011]

Ed, in your post #9 you compared the martingale system with labouchere, but I think you got it wrong by comparing the same risk amount with the same win amount.

Taking the Orioles series, you stated that the martingale A bet (-130 odds) would be $13 to win $10, which is not what a proper comparitive bet should be. You should have written that the martingale A bet would be $10 to win $7.70, which would have lost, leaving a martingale B bet to win $17.70.

The martingale B bet (at -125 odds) risk amount would be $22.12 to win $17.70.

The martingale C bet (at -125 odds) would be $49.78 to win $39.82.

The actual total loss by the martingale system if the c bet loses is $81.90 (compared with your calculation of $106.44) compared with the labouchere total loss of $45. But we have to note that after the 1st labouchere bet any later single win does not produce the same profit.

The point is that neither system, in arithmetical terms, is better than the other when using the same odds. The martingale series could have achieved $7.70 profit with either a B bet or C Bet win, but the labouchere 2nd bet would only produce $2 profit from the 1st 2 bets and it would need a 3rd bet (a 2nd successful bet, back to back), risking $7.12 to win $5.70, to equal the martingale profit at the same stage.

martingale: one win at any time in a series produces profit (targetted by the bettor), but lots of money required relative to the target.

labouchere: if the 1st bet doesn't win then more than 1 win might be required to produce a profit, and the system is more resilient to losing streaks, but less money is exposed and it can be a long haul to reach the same profits achieved by the same number of bets made with a martingale system.

IMHO its not a simple case of one system being better than the other.

Regards
Kev

i agree that both systems have pros and cons against the other in certain situations. the reason i had more $ lost in the orioles series is because the regular jm system tells you to bet "to win" 1 unit. in this system i only bet "to risk." this means i don't win the whole unit if the A, B, or C bet wins. so in that case the martingle has the advantage.

but in the case of a C bet losing, i disagree because the martingle player (depending on the odds) will lose at least 10 units. then the jm system goes back to betting 1 unit again. so it would take at least 10 wins just to break even from that C loss. in this system you don't win it all back at once, but after 3 losses on the line, you continue to raise/lower the bet amount until the line is crossed off. this means you will always win back your $ faster.

of course a martingle player could also bet "to risk," and a labouchere player could also bet "to win." it all depends on the betting style. but i think the main problem people are having with the jm system is that after a couple C losses, there is no way to profit by season's end, because you spend the rest of it trying to recover.

and by this season's end i may not profit either. but i know there have been 2-3 C losses in the jm MLB system this year, and i am still + in my bank barely. i just feel that the martingle player would be down much more at this point. but again, i am not saying that this is a better system. it's just a test to see how it compares in the long run.

[edh1011]

i will give the unofficial fade a shot. and if it does more harm than good, i will stop. 1 official play, and 3 unofficial fades tonight.

line: x-6-6-x

12 on the rays RL (-105) 7:05 ET
12 on the brewers ML (-114) 7:05 ET
12 on the white sox ML (-115) 10:10 ET
12 on the giants ML (-102) 10:10 ET

[edh1011]

that couldn't have gone any better! a 4-0 sweep last night.

bank: 4.53 units

record: 18-12

new line: 7-7-7-7

[edh1011]

2 more plays tonight. 1 official, and 1 unofficial fade.

line: 7-7-7-7

14 on the dodgers RL (+115) 10:10 ET
14 on the giants ML (-128) 9:40 ET

[edh1011]

another great night going 2-0. i may have been lucky with the dodgers covering. another line has been crossed off.

bank: 7.23 units

record: 20-12

new line: 8-8-8-8

[edh1011]

playing 3 tonight.

line: 8-8-8-8

risking 16 on the blue jays RL (-115) 7:07 ET
risking 16 on the angels ML (-127) 10:05 ET
risking 16 on the marlins ML (+117) 10:15 ET

[SmokyMcPot]

you're doing a good job and I'm kind of a fan of labourchere but JM's system pretty much sucks due to the fact he doesn't really clear things up with the filters and the different versions of his system

[edh1011]

you're doing a good job and I'm kind of a fan of labourchere but JM's system pretty much sucks due to the fact he doesn't really clear things up with the filters and the different versions of his system

thanks man. yeah jm's system involves heavy risk/minimal gain. after i lost a C bet in the wnba last year, i've been searching for a more secure way to play his system. that C loss wiped out all of my profit and more from the mlb season in '09.

[edh1011]

won 2 out of 3 last night.

bank: 8.9 units

record: 22-13

line: x-8-8-x

on the line i went 2-1. that equals 1 win. so i will only cross off 2 numbers. and there is no need to add the 16 from the angels loss to the end of the line since my bank didn't go down. why chase when you made profit? so tonight i will risk the same amount on the angels B bet. remember that the object is not to win 1 unit on every series, but to simply get the line crossed off.

[edh1011]

these odds really suck. i thought about playing the RL, but decided to play it safe since it's a B bet.

line: x-8-8-x

risking 16 (1.6 units) on the angels ML (-151) 10:05 ET

[edh1011]

angels can't seem to get their act together. again, i think i will pass on the C bet. no point in risking more $ on a slumping team when most of these win on A or B.

bank: 7.3 units

record: 22-14

line: x-8-8-x-16

[edh1011]

well i'm glad i skipped out on that! that's like the 3rd official loss this season. jm will come up with some excuse. something about a pitching change before the game started. whatever. i think i will stick to my strategy of not playing C bets in the future. since most of these series win on A or B anyway.

[BRAVES1985]

awsome strategy and good money management and ya your right about he would have a lame excuse about the c bet loss with the angels. Keep up the good work

[edh1011]

3 plays tonight. now looking at the line the next wager amount would normally be 24 (2.4 units). but since there are 3 games, i would be betting that much and more anyway by betting 16 on each game. make sense?

line: x-8-8-x-16

risking 16 (1.6 units) on blue jays RL (even bet) 7:05 ET
risking 16 (1.6 units) on mets ML (-135) 7:10 ET
risking 16 (1.6 units) on marlins ML (+134) 10:05 ET

[edh1011]

awsome strategy and good money management and ya your right about he would have a lame excuse about the c bet loss with the angels. Keep up the good work

thanks for the positive feedback. a lot of people were bashing me earlier when i was in the negative. they'll be back when another slump hits lol. and sure enough jm called the angels series a push because of the void C bet. but people still lost $ on the A/B bets. so it's still a loss for his system in my book.