You are insane if you lay -385 on an MLB game

LolsMcwinsey · 07-10-10, 04:06 PM

-2.5 ez money

Footballtime · 07-10-10, 04:10 PM

Anyone have Lee's pitching numbers gaainst baltimore this year? not even sure if he has faced them yet, TY FBT

gryfyn1 · 07-10-10, 04:27 PM

Originally posted by Footballtime

Anyone have Lee's pitching numbers gaainst baltimore this year? not even sure if he has faced them yet, TY FBT

One game @ Balt 7.1IP 1 R 8H, 2K;

Flight · 07-10-10, 05:17 PM

I am definitely insane.

-335 Texas Rangers ML

Probably won't watch the game. More interested in the Philadelphia/Cincinnati game tonight.

Sunde91 · 07-10-10, 09:13 PM

Snowball · 07-10-10, 09:20 PM

Texas = parlay KILLERS

F TEXAS FROM NOW ON

THEY OVERACHIEVED

NOT A FIRST CLASS UNIT FOR THIS TO HAPPEN

LordVodka · 07-10-10, 09:23 PM

Originally posted by Cappinpicks

Some people lay -4000 on a random tennis match, I would gladly lay the -385 on this sure thing

Since when is anything a sure thing on MLB? HAHAHAHAHA! You are only one of the many suckers who fell for this trap.

Rich Boy · 07-10-10, 11:55 PM

Texas got smoked tonight... Anyone know what 5dimes was giving Bal -2.5?

Slim · 07-11-10, 12:45 AM

DeluxeLiner · 07-11-10, 12:57 AM

slim where is the yogafrog i don't see it lol

thebestthereis · 07-11-10, 01:06 AM

texas will not lose this game, impossible

zafzaf · 07-11-10, 03:27 AM

wow bookies got lots of money man

stealthyburrito · 07-11-10, 03:30 AM

unreal the juice here, congrats to those that backed the o's.

dakota_nyg · 07-11-10, 03:57 AM

I'm so glad I didn't play this game.

redore33 · 07-11-10, 04:19 AM

NO You'll Lose $816

Originally posted by mrbets

I bet Texas at -247 game 1, -219 game 2, and I bet Texas -350 for game 3. I will still make money.

The reason "squares" lose @ MLB is taking these insane #'s w/chalk. 1 or 2 losses takes a wk to make up. There were all sorts of reasons to think twice about this game. Did I play the O's? No, just laid off it. Also you better go back to basic math if you think laying 350 yesterday would have made you $$. @ $100 a U, you were behind $466 going in, winning a buck wasn't going to help much. That's what I meant when I said playing huge chalk in MLB is a sure rd to disaster!! And trying to justify a stupid play by saying "juice doesn't matter" is moronic. Repeat after me "Juice ALWAYS matters" it's the life blood of gaming, the "EDGE" the house holds and what seperates the ultimate winners from the losers. In the long run in almost any sport you can't keep laying large neg. #'s and win. Just ain't gonna happen.

vitalogist · 07-11-10, 04:37 AM

Yep. No juice when you win, right??????

Killer_Demo · 07-11-10, 04:42 AM

i consider myself an recreational better but damn thats way too much juice

blackf1re · 07-11-10, 05:41 AM

This debate is so stupid. There's no such thing as 'too much juice'. There's only +EV and -EV. A +500 bet can be bad while even a -300 bet can be profitable if the Team wins >75%. Who knows maybe the true probability of a Rangers win was 80% and yesterday's result was one of the other 20%. That would mean betting on the Rangers was still right thing to do. But don't say that these bets must be bad ignoring the win probablities.

If team A @ -300 would be as retarded as some of you say it would also mean that team B would be a huge valuebet. Do you think the books would offer you huge valuebets?

rkelly110 · 07-11-10, 06:36 AM

So who's got Texas today for a D bet? ( I'm a dumb ass for betting the 1st 3 only 'cause I tailed
someone from the forum ) He better not bet them again, I might have to give him a
"5 Finger Death Punch".

Baltimore's gonna sweep Texas @ home so they can be the laughing stock of the whole league!
If this was a 3 game, they've already been swept.

I'm taking advice from above, no matter who picks anything over -190, I'm staying away.

Fishhead · 07-11-10, 06:41 AM

Originally posted by blackf1re

This debate is so stupid. There's no such thing as 'too much juice'. There's only +EV and -EV. A +500 bet can be bad while even a -300 bet can be profitable if the Team wins >75%. Who knows maybe the true probability of a Rangers win was 80% and yesterday's result was one of the other 20%. That would mean betting on the Rangers was still right thing to do. But don't say that these bets must be bad ignoring the win probablities.

If team A @ -300 would be as retarded as some of you say it would also mean that team B would be a huge valuebet. Do you think the books would offer you huge valuebets?

Many here will never understand this concept.

One could lay -4900 or more and have a +EV wager

jjgold · 07-11-10, 06:51 AM

I pounded Texas today on the RL
Lets use the cannot sweep system that Grandfather invented at majorwager and put him into fukkin bankruptcy