[thebestthereis]

The weather will be perfect here

[khaden]

Hey guys here is sample of what we are looking at for the month of April. I did just for the American League East Teams becasue they have 5 of our teams Top 3 and Bottom 2.

RED SOX--

Yankees A bet 4/4 B bet 4/6 C bet 4/7
Tampa Bay A bet 4/16 B bet 4/17 c bet 4/18 D bet 4/19
Texas A bet 4/20 B bet 4/21 C 4/22
Baltimore A bet 4/23 B bet 4/24 C bet 4/25

YANKEES--

Angels A bet 4/13 B bet 4/14 C bet 4/15
Texas A bet 4/16 B bet 4/17 C bet 4/17

TAMPA BAY-

Baltimore A bet 4/6 B bet 4/7 C bet 4/8
Yankees A bet 4/9 B bet 4/10 C bet 4/11
Toronto A bet 4/23 B bet 4/24 C bet 4/25


BLUE JAYS

@Texas A bet 4/5 B bet 4/7 C bet 4/8
@Baltimore A bet 4/9 B bet 4/10 C bet 4/11
@Tampa Bay A bet 4/23 B bet 4/24 C 4/25

BALTIMORE

@Tampa Bay A bet 4/6 B bet 4/7 C bet 4/8
@Oakland A bet 4/15 B bet 4/16 c bet 4/17 D bet 4/18
@Sea A bet 4/19 B bet 4/20 C bet 4/21
@Boston A bet 4/23 B bet 4/24 C bet 4/25

[PhatBaztard]

I would like to see how this system comes together. However, when I read the first post in the original thread, it appears to be an easy system, cut and dry. Now, everyone has chimed in, altered things, put in filters etc...it's hard to even know what the hell to do. Why don't someone determine the teams, and set the rules for the system, with a sample betting system (say $10/unit for simplicity). That's what I would like to read, not the other 30 pages of BS.

[Sawyer]

Can't wait for the baseball!

GL Stingy!

Baseball is the third most popular of the Major 4 US Sports but for the bookie, it can be the most dangerous

[thebestthereis]

Note for KC: I am betting they have no sweeps home OR away as long as Greinke isn't pitching that series. I will also play against them home and away (series play) even if he pitches depending on who they play. My reasoning is this. First of all if you look back two years it wouldn't matter, they swept two road series two years ago. Anyway by taking them at home (against) you get much better line value and their ballpark has next to no home field advantage. It is as plain as it gets, more like a neutral field. My friend who pitches in the majors said it was his favorite place to play, I kid you not...and he never pitched for KC.

[stingyrivers]

good angle on KC, they generally dont sweep home and especially away...

for those looking for the cut and dry system as mentioned....

it is pretty simple... between opening day and sept. 1 of last year

Bos, Nyy, TB, CWS, LAA, LAD... did not get swept at home

Hou, KC, Wash, SD, Hou... did not sweep an away series...

if you bet against a sweep with the 3 game chase in all of those series, you were 214 - 0 on the year....

if you are comfortable with blanket betting those teams with an A, B, C chase every series, odds are you will show a profit....

any other angles and 'filters' are simply trying to avoid a sweep in the selections this year...

but the original concept is pretty cut and dry... bet for those 6 at home, and fade those 5 on the road

[RickyG033]

I'm full steam ahead on this guys. Thanks everyone for all the great insight.

I am wondering if anyone has an excel spreadsheet that they plan on using for this system, that they'd be willing to upload.

I have started on a spreadsheet, but am not too technologically savvy. Any help would be appreciated.

[khaden]

good angle on KC, they generally dont sweep home and especially away...

for those looking for the cut and dry system as mentioned....

it is pretty simple... between opening day and sept. 1 of last year

Bos, Nyy, TB, CWS, LAA, LAD... did not get swept at home

Hou, KC, Wash, SD, Hou... did not sweep an away series...

if you bet against a sweep with the 3 game chase in all of those series, you were 214 - 0 on the year....

if you are comfortable with blanket betting those teams with an A, B, C chase every series, odds are you will show a profit....

any other angles and 'filters' are simply trying to avoid a sweep in the selections this year...

but the original concept is pretty cut and dry... bet for those 6 at home, and fade those 5 on the road

So are these the OFFICIAL teams we are locked into playing?

[johanek78]

If the plays are posted in another thread, could someone post a link, please.

Thanks a million

[stingyrivers]

even I am getting confused at this point....

I am working on what I think the plays should be... I have all the backtesting and posted it.... tomorrow night, I am starting another thread that will just be my plays according to this concept... so they can be tracked... tailed, faded, whichever anyone wants to do....

this thread basically is for discussion about what people should be included or not in terms of the potential series, and the overall concept...

there is more than one way to do this...

if you want a simple system:

play the 3 game chase on Boston, NYY, TB not to get swept at home

and fade Wash, Pitt, KC when they are on the road in a three game chase not to sweep the home team

last year doesnt necessarily give us the results for this year, which is kind of the point of this discussion thread....

tomorrow night I am going to start the picks thread which will be my real wagers on this concept....

good luck in any part you take from any of this

[stingyrivers]

I am working on a schedule that pretty much is all the better teams at home playing teams in the bottom of the league... it is looking like there will be upwards of 150 plays on the season...

first couple days of the season presents: (play in parenthesis)


sunday-

NYY at BOS (bos)



monday-

Sd at Ariz (Ariz)

Clev at CWS (Cws)

Mn at LAA (Laa)



tuesday-

Balt at TB (Tb)

to win one unit (bet A) on each of those games


those would be all the plays for the first three days, or at least the options to choose from....

I would also play on Philly at Wash, and St. L at Cinn... but that doesnt accord with the original concept, so I will just leave those off the list

[SparJMU]

Guys, I have no motivation to lie to you or to insult you. But I have to interject here and let you know that what you are doing WILL NOT WORK.

Do you really think you are the first group of people to try this? People have been trying systems EXACTLY like this for a long time. THEY DO NOT WORK.

I am not trying to condescend, I am not trying to ruin your fun. I commend you for brainstorming and putting your minds to work, but please try something else. I am simply trying to SAVE YOU MONEY.

[Kelloggs]

Some people say what if Yanks get swept at home by Orioles? What if Dodgers get swept at home by lowly Padres? Guys, C'mon! These kind of things happen once every 10 year! Maybe 20

It was pretty close in 2007

08/15/07 covers.com/pageLoader/pageLoader.aspx?page=/data/mlb/teams/team2959.html L covers.com/pageLoader/pageLoader.aspx?page=/data/mlb/results/2007/boxscore284163.html covers.com/pageLoader/pageLoader.aspx?page=/data/mlb/players/player41293.html (L) covers.com/pageLoader/pageLoader.aspx?page=/data/mlb/players/player42760.html (R) L -136 P 9
08/14/07 covers.com/pageLoader/pageLoader.aspx?page=/data/mlb/teams/team2959.html L covers.com/pageLoader/pageLoader.aspx?page=/data/mlb/results/2007/boxscore284150.html Daniel Cabrera (R) Jeff Karstens (R) L -165 O 11
08/13/07 covers.com/pageLoader/pageLoader.aspx?page=/data/mlb/teams/team2959.html W covers.com/pageLoader/pageLoader.aspx?page=/data/mlb/results/2007/boxscore284143.html covers.com/pageLoader/pageLoader.aspx?page=/data/mlb/players/player42195.html (R) covers.com/pageLoader/pageLoader.aspx?page=/data/mlb/players/player42341.html (R) W -215 O 10 -110

[sapidoc]

First, I like this thread.

For everyone saying that things are confusing / still don't know what we are doing: stingyrivers looks like he has this under control. He's already said he'll be making a new thread, detailing the picks and it will be reall easy to follow once the system kicks off.

That being said, I don't want to start adding conditions/rules to what looks to be an already solid system, but a few things that have come up from various people I'd like to comment on.

#1) I don't want to lose a chase and lose tons of $. How can we reduce what we lose if it happens

#2) Let's wait for a loss and then start the chase.

Its already been stated that waiting for a loss greatly reduces the number of games/series you can play. We want to avoid this.

So I started thinking of how we can accomplish both of these things but (for lack of data and time) will not calculate a new 'rule'. I simply want to share a thought and if stingyrivers cares to comment it would be appreciated.

First, my understanding of the current system (assuming $100 units, 3x chase, and -150 odds)

$150.00 to win $100.00 GAME1
$375.00 to win $100.00 GAME2 (chase)
$712.50 to win $100.00 GAME3 (chase)

Sweep Loss: -$1237.50

Therefore (assuming constant units throughout the season) we could have a loss for every 13 series we win and show a profit.

My idea stems from the question: Of the chases we will be attempting how many of them will we win in game 1? what about by game 2?

Assuming -150, would it be a bad idea to employ the following:

$150.00 to win $100.00 GAME1
$225.00 to win $000.00 GAME2 (chase)
$487.50 to win $100.00 GAME3 (chase)

Sweep Loss: -$862.50

In this case, you could have a loss for every 9 chase wins and show a profit, but you would have less wins since you are breaking even/stopping after a Game2 'win'.

OR

$150.00 to win $100.00 GAME1
$375.00 to win $100.00 GAME2 (chase)
$562.50 to win $000.00 GAME3 (chase)

Sweep Loss: -$1087.50

Again, you could sustain a loss every 11 series you win, but of the series that you need to get to Game3 for, you breakeven so you would have less series 'wins'.

In both of these methods, you are basically reducing your loss if it occurs, but also reducing you wins if it lands on your breakeven game.

I want to say that it may very well be better expected value to just stick with the original series chase system than what I have outlined. But if the game 1 wins or game 2 wins are high enough %-likely then it is actually possible to have a better risk/reward using these.

To simplify, the only fear is really having a team come and sweep the NYY's this year (for example).

If the Jays show up in Yankee stadium and win their first two games, how pumped are they going to be to try and sweep with a win on that last game? Would they be less likely after winning the first two or more? What will the odds on that last game suggest/dictate? Could a team that has won two games already make it a 1-run game in the 3rd of the series?

Anyway, just thought I would share my thoughts. I do like this thread and all the work stingyrivers has done up until now and I wanted to contribute some food for thought.

Any comments are appreciated.

[rkelly110]

Spar, what system do you suggest? What is your system? How did you do last year?
You keep saying no, what's your input?

[stingyrivers]

this approach definitely isnt for everybody...

but what the doubters cant answer is this....

how did this lose last year?

if you bet for NYY, Bos, TB, CWS, LAA, Lad

faded Wash, KC, Pitt, Hou and SD on the road

all with the three game chase we are talking about....

somebody explain to me how you went broke?

you went 214 - 0

please explain to me how you lost money going 214 - 0

thanks

[jolmscheid]

I agree with Sting here...it did not lose..not saying that it won't lose a series, but if we can come up with a wagering plan like sapidoc has said, then we can minimize our losses when we do lose...

To me, the MOST important thing to all of this is having a LOWER RISK wagering plan...I think that we can pick a ton of winners, but we NEED to have a wagering plan that will help us to absorb some losses!!

[stingyrivers]

I put up all the back testing on the original thread that got closed....

thanks for the good questions sapidoc...

the issue with waiting for a loss is... well over half the wins on the year come from game one.... I broke all the possibilities down in the original thread...

if you miss out on all those wins... yes the losses you would catch would be for a lot less, but your winnings would be a lot less as well, in a sense it balances itself out and makes it hard to show a profit...

the reality is, over 3/4 of the wins come in game one or two... it rarely goes to a third game... at least historically....

my attempt to reduce the risk has been in trying to determine how we can avoid losses, given there isnt much we can due to reduce the lay without messing with the net results...

you can wait for a game one loss... or you can play it on the -1 RL to try to lay less... but it really all comes down to the same thing... avoiding sweeps to show a profit...

you are right though... the ratio is about 13 wins to 1 loss as the show a profit point... so the reality is as long as you only catch 2 sweeps tops on the year you wont lose money...

last year, between the timespan of the system, on those eleven teams you didnt catch a loss... the best approach this year is to select a group of teams, or cherry pick series week to week so a loss is avoided, and better yet, a 3 game chase is avoided...

no matter what we do right now, there is going to be some capping of series as they come along to determine the best plays

[Kelloggs]

The focus is a bit to much on last season which was perfect for this system, but what a wider perspective;

No doubt that looking at the season in 19xx will help, but have a look at fx. NYY, yes they where not swept last year BUT:

2008: Swept by DET, almost swept by BAL (-301 in the 3. game )
2007: Swept by LAA
2006: Swept by OAK

One of those seasons will cost you all the profit that you will gain from the wins of NYY.

[stingyrivers]

wow.... I had to go back and look at your scenarios again.... I really like option 2 a lot... you wouldnt sacrifice a ton of wins that way... and considerably reduce the cost of a loss... nice work sapidoc... I am going to back test using that method

[stingyrivers]

kellogs... for simplicity sake i have just been quoting last year... I backtested the past 4 years... it has made money every season of the four

[stingyrivers]

NYY the past 3 years using this approach are 59 -2

everyone seems to think if you get one sweep you go broke... if you lose once, you still show a good profit on the year

[Stealinhome]

Guys, I have no motivation to lie to you or to insult you. But I have to interject here and let you know that what you are doing WILL NOT WORK.

Do you really think you are the first group of people to try this? People have been trying systems EXACTLY like this for a long time. THEY DO NOT WORK.

I am not trying to condescend, I am not trying to ruin your fun. I commend you for brainstorming and putting your minds to work, but please try something else. I am simply trying to SAVE YOU MONEY.

[jolmscheid]

Way to go Sting and Sapidoc...I think this will be rock solid if we can have a good wagering plan!

[Kelloggs]

kellogs... for simplicity sake i have just been quoting last year... I backtested the past 4 years... it has made money every season of the four

It could be a bit misleading to make it that simple.

I know that one sweep will not make you go broke, but a loss for 3 games at -180 will not gain any profit for NYY for the season.

[stingyrivers]

the original thread had all the backtesting posted for the past 3 years, and even included about 6 or 7 more teams on top of those eleven... and had a record of 341 -13

the original poster stated betting a hundred a series netted 50 K over those three years with that record...

I am not trying to mislead... the original thread was 47 pages long with all the backtesting and research... I am just trying to pull together the most solid play before Monday

[TheBet]

Anyone doing a three game chase thinking about letting the team (NYY, BOS, PHI, etc) lose the first game to greatly reduce the cost of a chase system? In the end the effect would still be the same, you're banking on the team not getting swept at home. You'll only be playing a 2-3 game chase system instead of a 3-4 game chase system, but the effect would still be the same. You'll reduce your plays, but it'll greatly reduce any losses.

[stingyrivers]

you lose two thirds of your wins... and reduce your losses by two thirds... in terms of the net, it is about the same... I backtested it applying skipping game one...

it came up long ago when these discussions first started

[Sawyer]

play the 3 game chase on Boston, NYY, TB not to get swept at home

Stingy,

You won't chase Red Sox at home versus top teams like Angels and Yanks, right?

[DeHoyos]

[do5000]

Stingy,

You won't chase Red Sox at home versus top teams like Angels and Yanks, right?

those might be the best series to play as the odds will likely be as close to even money as we'll see.
you won't be paying -225 when the red sox host the yankees.

[fastpitch_45]

those might be the best series to play as the odds will likely be as close to even money as we'll see.
you won't be paying -225 when the red sox host the yankees.

i agree

[spud58]

i like this method

[daneault23]

First, I like this thread.

For everyone saying that things are confusing / still don't know what we are doing: stingyrivers looks like he has this under control. He's already said he'll be making a new thread, detailing the picks and it will be reall easy to follow once the system kicks off.

That being said, I don't want to start adding conditions/rules to what looks to be an already solid system, but a few things that have come up from various people I'd like to comment on.

#1) I don't want to lose a chase and lose tons of $. How can we reduce what we lose if it happens

#2) Let's wait for a loss and then start the chase.

Its already been stated that waiting for a loss greatly reduces the number of games/series you can play. We want to avoid this.

So I started thinking of how we can accomplish both of these things but (for lack of data and time) will not calculate a new 'rule'. I simply want to share a thought and if stingyrivers cares to comment it would be appreciated.

First, my understanding of the current system (assuming $100 units, 3x chase, and -150 odds)

$150.00 to win $100.00 GAME1
$375.00 to win $100.00 GAME2 (chase)
$712.50 to win $100.00 GAME3 (chase)

Sweep Loss: -$1237.50

Therefore (assuming constant units throughout the season) we could have a loss for every 13 series we win and show a profit.

My idea stems from the question: Of the chases we will be attempting how many of them will we win in game 1? what about by game 2?

Assuming -150, would it be a bad idea to employ the following:

$150.00 to win $100.00 GAME1
$225.00 to win $000.00 GAME2 (chase)
$487.50 to win $100.00 GAME3 (chase)

Sweep Loss: -$862.50

In this case, you could have a loss for every 9 chase wins and show a profit, but you would have less wins since you are breaking even/stopping after a Game2 'win'.

OR

$150.00 to win $100.00 GAME1
$375.00 to win $100.00 GAME2 (chase)
$562.50 to win $000.00 GAME3 (chase)

Sweep Loss: -$1087.50

Again, you could sustain a loss every 11 series you win, but of the series that you need to get to Game3 for, you breakeven so you would have less series 'wins'.

In both of these methods, you are basically reducing your loss if it occurs, but also reducing you wins if it lands on your breakeven game.

I want to say that it may very well be better expected value to just stick with the original series chase system than what I have outlined. But if the game 1 wins or game 2 wins are high enough %-likely then it is actually possible to have a better risk/reward using these.

To simplify, the only fear is really having a team come and sweep the NYY's this year (for example).

If the Jays show up in Yankee stadium and win their first two games, how pumped are they going to be to try and sweep with a win on that last game? Would they be less likely after winning the first two or more? What will the odds on that last game suggest/dictate? Could a team that has won two games already make it a 1-run game in the 3rd of the series?

Anyway, just thought I would share my thoughts. I do like this thread and all the work stingyrivers has done up until now and I wanted to contribute some food for thought.

Any comments are appreciated.

I like your approach, but I believe your numbers are wrong... Here is what I get.

Using 1st Approach (The Original Idea)

$150 to win $100 Game 1
$375 to win $100 Game 2 (Chase)
$937.50 to win $100 Game 3 (Chase)

Sweep Loss: -$1462.50

Therefore if you had one sweep loss with -150 average odds, it would take about 15 wins away.

Using 2nd Approach

$150 to win $100 Game 1
$225 to win $0 Game 2 (Chase)
$712.50 to win $100 Game 3 (Chase)

Sweep Loss: -$1087.50

This would take about 11 wins away, using $100 units.

Using 3rd Approach

$150 to win $100 Game 1
$375 to win $100 Game 2 (Chase)
$787.50 to win $0 Game 3 (Chase)

Sweep Loss: -$1312.50

This would take a lil over 13 wins away.

So in a nutshell, the first approach sweep takes away 15 wins, the second approach takes away 11 wins, and the third approach takes away 13 wins. I just re-worked the numbers, so that they are correct.

I just thought this would help out some.

BTW, thanks for everyone that has worked on this so far. I can't wait to start winning some moolah!!

[sapidoc]

Ah! I forgot to add the first $150 loss into the calculation of the 3rd game bet amount. Thanks for catching that!