So, I was looking at Chad Millman's ESPN Insider blog post from a week ago. The blog is dedicated to sports betting. In this post, he is talking about who have been the best and worst pitchers to bet on so far this season (he recognizes that it is a small sample size and isn't necessarily predictive, but still interesting nonetheless).
Teamed up with a guy from TeamRankings.com, he breaks down which pitchers would have made you the most money if you bet on them every game, but this obviously depends on your bet-sizing methods. There are 3 methods listed - the first two which are common sense, and the third which I can't wrap my head around!
Method 1, Constant Bet Size: This means you risk the same amount (say $100) for every bet you make. So, every time you take Jo-Jo Reyes +200, you are risking $100 to win $200. Every time you take Halladay -200, you are risking $100 to win $50. Self-explanatory if you have the slightest clue about sports wagering.
For the record, here are the top 5 and bottom 5 pitchers using this method (as of 6/14). Best 5 are listed from most profitable to 5th-most profitable. Worst 5 are listed from most costly to 5th-most costly.
* Best 5 = Marquis (+$936), Correia, D. Gee, Harang, Drabek (+$620)
* Worst 5 = Danks (-$836), Maholm, Jimenez, Livan H., C. Richard (-$666)
Method 2, Constant Profit: This means you wager so that your winnings are the same each time (say $100 again). If you take Jo-Jo +200, you are risking $50 to win $100. If you take Halladay -200, you are risking $200 to win $100. Easy stuff.
And once again, in order...
* Best 5 = D. Gee (+$800), Marquis, Halladay, K. McClellan, Harang (+$560)
* Worst 5 = Jimenez (-$1096!!), Carpenter, Danks, Bumgarner, Maholm (-$656)
Method 3, Constant Wager + Profit: "Here, your bets are sized so that the sum of your wager and profit are equal for each game. This means that every game is equally important to your bottom line -- it doesn't matter which games you win, only how many. The top profits by this method come from the following pitchers (assuming wager+profit=$100) …"
Any help is appreciated; not that I'm going to put much stock into it as far as betting habits, but the idea has been bugging me ever since I read it. I'll post the best and worst pitchers for this method if someone can explain this. Will also give some easier-to-follow stats regarding over/under picks. Thanks
Teamed up with a guy from TeamRankings.com, he breaks down which pitchers would have made you the most money if you bet on them every game, but this obviously depends on your bet-sizing methods. There are 3 methods listed - the first two which are common sense, and the third which I can't wrap my head around!
Method 1, Constant Bet Size: This means you risk the same amount (say $100) for every bet you make. So, every time you take Jo-Jo Reyes +200, you are risking $100 to win $200. Every time you take Halladay -200, you are risking $100 to win $50. Self-explanatory if you have the slightest clue about sports wagering.
For the record, here are the top 5 and bottom 5 pitchers using this method (as of 6/14). Best 5 are listed from most profitable to 5th-most profitable. Worst 5 are listed from most costly to 5th-most costly.
* Best 5 = Marquis (+$936), Correia, D. Gee, Harang, Drabek (+$620)
* Worst 5 = Danks (-$836), Maholm, Jimenez, Livan H., C. Richard (-$666)
Method 2, Constant Profit: This means you wager so that your winnings are the same each time (say $100 again). If you take Jo-Jo +200, you are risking $50 to win $100. If you take Halladay -200, you are risking $200 to win $100. Easy stuff.
And once again, in order...
* Best 5 = D. Gee (+$800), Marquis, Halladay, K. McClellan, Harang (+$560)
* Worst 5 = Jimenez (-$1096!!), Carpenter, Danks, Bumgarner, Maholm (-$656)
NOW HERE IS WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND!
I know you're not supposed to copy and paste from premium sites, but it's 3 sentences from a blog post. This is how it is explained:
I know you're not supposed to copy and paste from premium sites, but it's 3 sentences from a blog post. This is how it is explained:
Method 3, Constant Wager + Profit: "Here, your bets are sized so that the sum of your wager and profit are equal for each game. This means that every game is equally important to your bottom line -- it doesn't matter which games you win, only how many. The top profits by this method come from the following pitchers (assuming wager+profit=$100) …"
^^^ How exactly is this possible? ^^^
Unless every game was even money, how could your wager and profit both be equal? How could I take Jo-Jo +200 and Halladay -200, but they both carry the same weight? What am I missing here folks?? I'm sure it's something simple..Any help is appreciated; not that I'm going to put much stock into it as far as betting habits, but the idea has been bugging me ever since I read it. I'll post the best and worst pitchers for this method if someone can explain this. Will also give some easier-to-follow stats regarding over/under picks. Thanks
