Stock Market "straddle" meets MLB betting

**thebestthereis** · 07-03-10, 06:25 AM

that won't work unless you get lucky.

**suicidekings** · 07-03-10, 06:30 AM

If it were that easy, the available odds would not be offered such that you could profit over the long term like that. The books know what they're doing, and they're not in the business of handing out free money...

More that 1/3 of games end by a margin of 1 run.

**arpeggiomeister** · 07-03-10, 06:52 AM

Originally posted by suicidekings

If it were that easy, the available odds would not be offered such that you could profit over the long term like that. The books know what they're doing, and they're not in the business of handing out free money...

More that 1/3 of games end by a margin of 1 run.

People took advantage of the market makers in the 70s for posting similar mistakes with stock options. One poor soul I read about lost $50,000,000 in less than an hour for posting an option that was out of balance with the market. I do not deny that bookmakers are good at there job, but they are used to dealing with gamblers, not stock traders. It's a different mindset. Most gamblers are looking for the big kill, I am looking for cash flow opportunities. Those are almost opposite philosiphies.

Just the same, I assumed the same thing which is why I only bet $5 on each side of the game. My bet is real. I posted before game time so that nobody can say I am full of it.

I signed up for Scott Farrell's picks and BETUS started jacking my lines by 10 points. At somebody's suggestion i started playing the dogs. I think that may have something to do with the indiscrepancies

**Grits n' Gravy** · 07-03-10, 07:15 AM

Kind of a reverse middle. People have tried this before and gotten buried. Good luck, but in the long run it is a bad idea. The math looks good on paper, but reality sets in and it isn't.

**thebestthereis** · 07-03-10, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by arpeggiomeister

People took advantage of the market makers in the 70s for posting similar mistakes with stock options. One poor sole I read about lost $50,000,000 in less than an hour for posting an option that was out of balance with the market. I do not deny that bookmakers are good at there job, but they are used to dealing with gamblers, not stock traders. It's a different mindset. Most gamblers are looking for the big kill, I am looking for cash flow opportunities. Those are almost opposite philosiphies.

Just the same, I assumed the same thing which is why I only bet $5 on each side of the game. My bet is real. I posted before game time so that nobody can say I am full of it.

I signed up for Scott Farrell's picks and BETUS started jacking my lines by 10 points. At somebody's suggestion i started playing the dogs. I think that may have something to do with the indiscrepancies

your point on being a gambler vs a "trader" is very valid. you can win trading sports (fact) if you don't gamble or know how to control your risk. doing it the way you are stating just isn't going to work. maybe you can pick your spots and use it once in a while, but the risk (2 units) is not worth the reward (1/2 unit). good luck!

**suicidekings** · 07-03-10, 07:27 AM

Originally posted by arpeggiomeister

People took advantage of the market makers in the 70s for posting similar mistakes. I do not deny that bookmakers are good at there job, but they are used to dealing with gamblers, not stock traders.

This statement suggests to me that you know very little about how professional gambling works. Those that treat sports betting like a business function like stock traders in many ways, operating in an efficient market, and very aware of the value associated with changes in the market price on spreads & totals. Straddles (or arbs) definitely exist in the sports market, but the one you're describing is not profitable over the long term.

I'm not trying to discourage or be a dick about it, but more research before you start laying money (even $5) will make a big difference to your bottom line and your long term profitability.

**cala56** · 07-03-10, 07:33 AM

Nice post, i will check it

**arpeggiomeister** · 07-03-10, 07:50 AM

Originally posted by suicidekings

This statement suggests to me that you know very little about how professional gambling works. Those that treat sports betting like a business function like stock traders in many ways, operating in an efficient market, and very aware of the value associated with changes in the market price on spreads & totals. Straddles (or arbs) definitely exist in the sports market, but the one you're describing is not profitable over the long term.

I'm not trying to discourage or be a dick about it, but more research before you start laying money (even $5) will make a big difference to your bottom line and your long term profitability.

I would not deny that statement. I have been gambling for 3 years and have learned a lot but still have much more to learn.

I would have to disagree that I am wrong though. Maybe it is naive but I have hedged both sides of the bet. If the underdog wins I win. If the favorite wins by 2 points I win. The only way I lose is if the favorite wins by 1. Bookies are good, but they would have to have a crystal ball to predict a game by just 1 point.

Believe me when I tell you I am not cocky or brash as I have seen a lot of newbies act on this site. I approach this with curiuosity and enthusiasm mixed with a slight bit of fearlessnes. I have toned it down quite a bit since I started. My first year I bet $3,000 on a 3 team and a 5 team parlay in the NFL. I made $18,000 in a single day. Thought I was pretty good until I started skidding off into the abyss I pulled out with $12,500. I was so proud of that accomplishment but have come to realize it was all balls and no brains.

I actually found a couple more and laid down on them. I am not scared of losing $30. I am not scared of blowing up my account. What I am scared of is the day I come across an idea and I am too scared to try it. I will post the other plays so you can track them too. Maybe by tonight you'll be telling me I told you so, but paper trading is no substute for doing the real thing. I have found it very easy to lie to yourself and say "Oh it wouldn't really do that if I had done this" Woulda, coulda, shoulda. My money is where my mouth is. I believe this will work. Only time will tell.

I do respect your opinion. I have learned a lot from this site

**thebestthereis** · 07-03-10, 07:59 AM

now i know exactly why you bring this possibility up, you have no idea how baseball is played. it was a dead give away when you call runs points. you can make millions betting football but it doesn't mean you can do the same in baseball, it is a different approach completely. baseball outcomes are determined by runs and all team need to do is win by 1 run and that is the incremental scoring. games are determined by 1 run quite often because that is how the game is played and that is how the rules are stated when invented. bookies have no crystal ball and likely don't know more about baseball than the average fan. what they do know are numbers and probability when it comes to the betting public. learn the game of baseball and how it is wagered and you'll know not to bet the way you are suggesting if you want to make a profit. i wish it were that easy.

**JR007** · 07-03-10, 08:07 AM

Good post...I read though....I have to research... that most games fall on 1 run difference 25 or 30% of the time

**arpeggiomeister** · 07-03-10, 08:07 AM

Here are two more:
Here are two more

Padres - 1 1/2 +125 to win $6.25
Astros money line +150 to win $7.50

Nationals -1 1/2 +120 to win $6.00
Mets +150 to win $7.50

**suicidekings** · 07-03-10, 08:08 AM

Originally posted by arpeggiomeister

The best part about this is there is absolutely no handicapping involved. It is purely mathematical. That is good for a guy like me because I am a terrible capper.

The implied probabilities for each option in your example are:

ML (+145): 44.44%
RL (+125): 40.82%
Middle: 14.74%

From there, if you optimize the combination as much as possible you would be laying 47.87% of your stake at (+145) and 52.13% of your stake at (+125) for an expected return of $17.28 per $100 wagered for each successful bet. Now, if you look at how often games end by a margin of 1 run, and how often the dog/fave wins, you'll find that games end by a margin of 1 run about 34% of the time, and the favourite wins about 60% of the time (not an exact number, but it's close).

Combining these gives you an estimated 20.5% of games ending with the favourite winning by exactly 1 run (and 79.5% of games ending otherwise = a win for you). Do the math to calculate the expected value of the proposition and you get:

EV = 0.795*($17.28) - 0.205*($100) = -$6.76

So you would expect to lose over the long term wagering in this manner unless you can win (on average) 6 out of every 7 bets you make.

**clonecat** · 07-03-10, 08:12 AM

Good luck with this, but is a bad idea.

**gshock1** · 07-03-10, 08:15 AM

If you would have actually played the Marlins - Braves last night as suggested in your model you would have lost both bets as Atlanta won by 1 run. Not a good strategy - IMO.

**JR007** · 07-03-10, 08:18 AM

Thanks SK...I was trying to find that info on one run games

**arpeggiomeister** · 07-03-10, 08:19 AM

Originally posted by JR007

Good post...I read though....I have to research... that most games fall on 1 run difference 25 or 30% of the time

Thanks for that piece of info. It is far more useful than someone barking "you don't know this, you don't know that". What is this guy so upset about? I had an idea, I brought it to the table. If it's a bad idea I'll scrap it and move on to the next one. The key is to innovate. I don't care whether you call them runs, points, boogers, etc. This is a numbers game.

If the games are determine by one run 33% of the time than you should win such a bet 66% of the time. (Of course the real kicker is out of that 33% how many times is it the favorite, and how many tkimes is it the underdog? If the underdog wins by a run I hit paydirt) I would have to do the math but given that amount of data I should be able to figure out a resonable risk/reward ratio.

**arpeggiomeister** · 07-03-10, 08:24 AM

Originally posted by suicidekings

The implied probabilities for each option in your example are:

ML (+145): 44.44%
RL (+125): 40.82%
Middle: 14.74%

From there, if you optimize the combination as much as possible you would be laying 47.87% of your stake at (+145) and 52.13% of your stake at (+125) for an expected return of $17.28 per $100 wagered for each successful bet. Now, if you look at how often games end by a margin of 1 run, and how often the dog/fave wins, you'll find that games end by a margin of 1 run about 34% of the time, and the favourite wins about 60% of the time (not an exact number, but it's close).

Combining these gives you an estimated 20.5% of games ending with the favourite winning by exactly 1 run (and 79.5% of games ending otherwise = a win for you). Do the math to calculate the expected value of the proposition and you get:

EV = 0.795*($17.28) - 0.205*($100) = -$6.76

So you would expect to lose over the long term wagering in this manner unless you can win (on average) 6 out of every 7 bets you make.

Thanks for that... ...very helpful.

**arpeggiomeister** · 07-03-10, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by Grits n' Gravy

Kind of a reverse middle. People have tried this before and gotten buried. Good luck, but in the long run it is a bad idea. The math looks good on paper, but reality sets in and it isn't.

Thanks for that, and thanks for being respectful. I may be eating humble pie for supper tonight and I am okay with that. This is about the process to me. Taking things I have learned from other areas and using that info in this.

I know all about getting buried. I've blown up my account more than once. I always get back up though. I never risk more than I am afraid to lose. If my account disappears tomorrow I'll be fine, maybe a bit grumpy, but fine.

**mp5070** · 07-03-10, 09:01 AM

This system is already being used by a company!

**arpeggiomeister** · 07-03-10, 10:23 AM

Originally posted by mp5070

This system is already being used by a company!

Really???? That makes me proud. I am really good at reinventing the wheel.

hahahaha

**JR007** · 07-03-10, 11:03 AM

Good idea.......I guess it would matter how much "long-term" you are willing to play.....I might try this.....14% middle opportunity sounds intriging

**thebestthereis** · 07-03-10, 11:28 AM

Originally posted by gshock1

If you would have actually played the Marlins - Braves last night as suggested in your model you would have lost both bets as Atlanta won by 1 run. Not a good strategy - IMO.

he would have won that bet, atlanta was the dog so it was a winner.

**boeing power** · 07-03-10, 12:12 PM

if you're so smart then do the research and prove it, the tools are available at this site to check this system over several years, i will save you hours of work , it will lose

**$Burm$** · 07-03-10, 12:39 PM

the bad thing about this is is that you have the marlins win (which they will today i might add haha) so you win that $2.25 and then u win 3 more similar games like that so now your up $10....the next game u have a 1 run game and nowww your back to 0.....its really kind of like chasing, eventually youll get burnt, but if you really kno the sport and get lucky you can have sum success with this just like chasing ML's, you just have to know how to pick the right spots which is something very hard 2 do

**BernardMadoff** · 07-03-10, 12:43 PM

Anything based on eye tests are not gonna work in the long run, any novice would be able to look at baseball lines and "think" such a thing would work, books are too smart for that and have been in this business for decades. Its like in basketball or football when a new bettor comes along and think they will score easy by parlaying huge favorites, they find themselves hitting the first couples times, then suddendly lose and wonder what went wrong. Best just to pick your spots, study, and get as much info as you can.

**JR007** · 07-03-10, 04:18 PM

ONLY LAY 1.5 RUNS IN
TRUE BLOWOUT SITUATIONS
There's been a lot of talk amongst squares this week about laying 1.5 runs in Major League Baseball. This if often a popular strategy for people who aren't very familiar with baseball betting. It can work if you're VERY picky. Most bettors tend to lose a lot more than they win with the approach.
Here's why it's become such a hot topic:
*The Yankees had a GREAT run this year of winning games by more than one run. Sunday's tight decision at Toronto has been the exception (only the fourth one-run win for the Yanks all year out of 35 victories). Squares love betting on the Yankees. Those who were doing this saw it WORK for a few weeks, and couldn't shut up about it.
*Baltimore had gotten so bad that they were getting blown out on a daily basis. Squares love betting against horrible teams...and this approach was working as well. Only 10 of Baltimore's 41 losses through the weekend have been by one run.
*We've reached the point of the season when lines start to get steep all over the card. Contenders in both leagues are often -200 or more at home against opponents who have been losing for two months. Whenever lines get that high, squares start trying to come up with ways to bet the powers without having to lay high prices.
*Temperatures started rising across America. Hot weather often leads to high scoring games...which means fewer of those pitcher's duels that end 2-1 or 3-2. It's easier to 'get away' with laying 1.5 runs in higher scoring environments.
Now, I'm not one to dissuade anybody from a winning approach right while it's working. Just be careful with this. Remember why the minus 1.5 run lines were instituted in sportsbooks in the first place.
*Sportsbooks want action...and want to make sure bettors take the worst of it. We didn't used to have -1.5 run lines. Now we do. They were installed because they make money for sportsbooks not for bettors!
*They make money for sportsbooks because bettors don't realize how common close games are in baseball. They don't have to happen that often to make this a losing bet for you. Games are priced to take advantage of this public ignorance.

*Squares also don't realize how much additional action hurts them. Imagine a game that's priced at -240 on the regular moneyline. Some squares will make the bet. But most will pass the game. Make it -1.5 runs at a cheaper moneyline, and a bunch of extra guys will come in to take a shot. Let's say the favorite loses outright. In the past, sportsbooks would make a little bit from the small number of bettors who got involved. Now, they make A LOT because MORE bettors are involved. You'll hear squares saying 'Well, I saved myself some money by betting on the run line because I didn't have to lose the -240.' That's true...but you probably just lost a game you weren't going to bet before. That wasn't smart it was dumb! Increasing your action when you're taking the worst of it isn't smart at all. Sportsbooks learned that installing the minus 1.5 run lines encouraged squares to make more bad bets.
Here's how sharps generally play the runlines in Vegas and Reno:
*They TAKE the 1.5 runs rather than laying them, knowing that the prices take advantage of public ignorance. Sharps love fading the public. One of the few times you'll see sharps lay odds is with a +1.5 run line in a pitcher's park. They'll lay -160 or -180 when getting +1.5 runs because the odds favor a tight game. Advantage players have an edge there.
*They focus on TAKING the 1.5 runs in PITCHER'S parks where run production is going to be lower. If the game Over/Under is 7 runs...you're looking at a lot of tight finishes. It typically takes TWO decent pitchers for a total to be that low. A 4-3 finish is the best expectation.
*If they're going to lay 1.5 runs, they'll do it with UNDERDOG payoffs in high scoring environments. Many of you think about moving a -220 favorite down to something more affordable. Sharps think about taking a team that was -130 on the regular line and going for the underdog payoff if the win by more than 1.5 runs. There are so many blowouts in hitter's parks like Texas, Colorado, etc...that you can grind out a profit this way. Remember, you only have to go 50/50 on your picks to win money with underdog payoffs in play.
*Occasionally you'll see a sharp move a big favorite down to something more affordable. They'll only do this though, with a top notch offense in their corner...and a very weak pitcher on the opponent.
I encourage you to look for value with these baseball propositions. Just don't fall into the square trap of thinking you're 'saving money' by laying -1.5 runs. That one run is more valuable than you think. And, you don't want to be betting games you shouldn't be touching with a 10-foot pole anyway!

**JR007** · 07-03-10, 04:31 PM

Follow Paco and Laker Boy.....SK as well....they know money line movement very well

**DeluxeLiner** · 07-03-10, 06:05 PM

Mr. Trader, make a MLB computer model and use Kelly. Find value on lines. Beat the closing number for an efficient market (Pinnacle) or... Join a bet trading site like Matchbook/Betfair to buy or sell both sides to/from other bettors. Game starts and you have zero exposure with a for sure profit if you can anticipate line movement.

**soxwin** · 07-03-10, 06:16 PM

Originally posted by DeluxeLiner

Join a bet trading site like Matchbook/Betfair to buy or sell both sides to/from other bettors. Game starts and you have zero exposure with a for sure profit if you can anticipate line movement.

bingo!!! that is how you do it. With your experience, it should be easy. The only knowledge you need is how to anticipate line movement.

**arpeggiomeister** · 07-03-10, 07:07 PM

Nationals pulled it out in the end. Thought the Mets had it but they couldn't hang on. Thanks to all for posting. I learned a lot from some good people. I won with the Braves and the Padres haven't played yet. This will be my last post on this thread. It was a fun experiment and worth $30. I have other ideas for this, but will devlop them in private.

Thanks again and best of luck to all

**pats3peat** · 07-03-10, 07:35 PM

Originally posted by arpeggiomeister

Thanks for that, and thanks for being respectful. I may be eating humble pie for supper tonight and I am okay with that. This is about the process to me. Taking things I have learned from other areas and using that info in this.

I know all about getting buried. I've blown up my account more than once. I always get back up though. I never risk more than I am afraid to lose. If my account disappears tomorrow I'll be fine, maybe a bit grumpy, but fine.

welcome to the board, we need thinking heads.. thats great, keep making threads when you get ideas is my suggestion, we can all learn from each other

**wrongturn** · 07-03-10, 11:19 PM

I wonder why books still offer run lines after so many years leaking money to this "profitable" polish middle system.

**JR007** · 07-04-10, 10:11 AM

Ignore the idiots ......I like what you have to offer....please pm me if you do not wish to post in the forum

**$Burm$** · 07-04-10, 10:16 AM

if ur still going with this idea i would limit the amount of times you take the home team on the RL for the reasons y people took the Nats on the RL yesterday...the home team only needs 1 run when its tied up