LTA's MLB Plays

[Love The Action]

It's no big deal guys, I enjoy the banter.

[JR007]

LTA, respect you for putting yourself out there and posting your plays...most in these forums, "cannot spell" cat" let alone class, appreciate the time and effort, you put in ....I have learned much here

seeing some correlations, in the preseason,ie( pricepoints)

[Love The Action]

make a simple rule: never bet what everyone else is betting or what side you think everyone else is betting. never bet unders when halladay is pitching or the yankees at home or monster favorites or overs on teams where both pitchers have high ERAs, those are just some examples. that will save you alot of money

the simple explanation is that sports betting is just like any other market. when the majority of the participants crowd into the same trade, there's no value left and likely to be negative value

the bottom line is that if you don't have a thoroughly back-tested model or a sophisticated method for anticipating line movement, you will lose to the vig over the long run. you can minimize your losses by being disciplined and staying away from the big public sides of games and totals

That is way too simplistic. Unimpressive to say the least.

[Love The Action]

If by margin of safety you are referring to, for some people, the defined gap that has to be present above the book's offering line in order to pull the trigger then yes it has to do with variance. for example, some people might not bet without at least a 1% difference between the books offering probability and their own modeled probability. that would be to further assure they are making a profitable bet as no model is perfect and the closer you get to a 0% difference in model and the book line, obviously the more variance and less dependable your edge would be. This is what you are referring to I assume?

Let's assume team A beats B 70% of the time on average. If team A will always win 7 times in a row and lose 3 times in a row, your variance will be high but return will be the same. As the return would be the same but variance lower if the winning and losing was more "spread out". In the end the ROI of the bet and thus expected outcome does not change

I would say on general, a one run variance between your model and the books' opening line is standard for anyone. However, it depends on how your model is set up and what you use as the base factors and filters. For example, I don't blindly depend solely on my model. I use that as the starting point to establish which plays have value and which way the line is likely to go. However, there are further steps that I employ. I would suspect most people do not depend solely on the variance between their model and the line.

[Love The Action]

LTA, respect you for putting yourself out there and posting your plays...most in these forums, "cannot spell" cat" let alone class, appreciate the time and effort, you put in ....I have learned much here

seeing some correlations, in the preseason,ie( pricepoints)

Good luck with your preseason plays. Interested to hearing about the new research

[Love The Action]

Looks like we lost another ninth inning play with the Giants scoring in the bottom of the 9th. Still a good play as I got it at even money and it closed at -125. With a one run cushion in the 9th, that was another +EV play. As long as I keep spotting the value, I will be fine and we will continue to profit long term.

Going to sit down for dinner now with the family. No leans on the late plays. Good luck to everyone on their late plays

[blackeyeshamus]

Going to sit down for dinner now with the family. No leans on the late plays. Good luck to everyone on their late plays

[vietphatty]

lta you steadily beating the closer.

[Jago2008]

Wow tough plays on the Reds and Giants. I had both aswell. Extra innings... and points in the 9th, especially with the Giants game that was 1-0 until the bottom of the 7th...

I think I speak for many people when I say thank you for taking the time to post some plays.

However I have a bit of disdain for people coming here to criticize, it is much easier to criticize than offer solutions. Seriously get a life.

[freshguy222]

That is a ridiculous, absurd comment. Ofcourse I and my model take "batting" into account and I mention that on a daily basis in my writeups.

Second, my plays are about 50/50 public v non-public plays when it comes to totals and over 70% dogs when it comes to ML plays and the other 30% are cheap favorites in the -120 range. Therefore, your comments could not be more wrong. Please do not be ignorant, it makes you look bad. Thanks.

LTA,
i absolutely disagree with you because many of your plays look for value and i respect that but i think sometimes you directly fall into traps set up by the books
an example would be some days ago when lilly pitched against rodgers, a red-hot dodgers team against colorado
you had the over 7.5 and the score was 6-1 but as the game played out, a 3-1 game or so would have been way more probable
what i wanna say by that is that sometimes when your model offers you such a good value there might be someting we cannot know or hardly know because the line the way it was set up at 7.5 made no sense at all but by that you got value with your model and of course more than 90% of the bets were on the over

[Love The Action]

LTA,
i absolutely disagree with you because many of your plays look for value and i respect that but i think sometimes you directly fall into traps set up by the books
an example would be some days ago when lilly pitched against rodgers, a red-hot dodgers team against colorado
you had the over 7.5 and the score was 6-1 but as the game played out, a 3-1 game or so would have been way more probable
what i wanna say by that is that sometimes when your model offers you such a good value there might be someting we cannot know or hardly know because the line the way it was set up at 7.5 made no sense at all but by that you got value with your model and of course more than 90% of the bets were on the over

You pointed out one play out of over 600 plays that I have posted this season (albeit one that I wish I could take back and agree was a "bad" play in hindsight). I could go back over the last week alone and point out 10 plays that illustrate you are wrong but that would be a waste of our time (just look at yesterday though and you can see I didn't have a play more expensive than -115 and I beat the closer on every play except the SD/AZ under). In your last post, you alleged that my plays are all "public" and "expensive." However, I track both price and public betting percentages in relation to my plays and know that you are wrong. I'll tell you what. Keep track of my next 50 plays or go back through my last 50 plays and examine: (1) my price compared to the closer and (2) whether my plays are in the 70% or higher bracket with respect to public bets. You will find that (1) I generally get the best price and beat the closer more often than not on all my plays, (2) most of my ML plays are public fades as either dogs or cheap favorites in the -120 range and (3) my totals plays are about 50/50 public v. non-public plays.

I am one of the few cappers on here that never takes a -200 favorite or makes a 10x bailout/desperation play. My average juice when combining all my plays is around -110. All of my plays are reasonably priced and rarely exceed -120 whether on the ML or on a total. To say otherwise is just wrong. But you can always keep track and see for yourself. If you do, you will find that I am right.

With that said, I am always willing to learn from anyone and have only been doing this full time for a year now (but I did more than double my bankroll in that time). I don't pretend to know everything. If you or anyone else wants to start posting some winners for us or can improve our knowledge, I would be glad to sit back, tail and listen to your thoughts.

Thanks for your contribution and good luck on your plays today. Feel free to post some winners for us or some of your insight on plays. Good luck on all your plays today

[Love The Action]

MLB Recap 8/29/11

3 - 3 = -2.5x

MLB Season 2011

365 - 335 = +21.16x

All three of our 2x under plays that lost, did so in the ninth inning with at least a one run cushion. I will take a one run cushion in the 9th inning every day of the week as our chances of cashing are very high. It just didn't work out. The Giants under was a big loss as that was the difference between a 4-2 day and 3-3 day.

Off to work...plays will be posted late. Good luck today.

[Donnie Brasco]

U too LTA! Sorry about yesterday's comment. MLB has gotten the best of me last few weeks. Keep up the good work!

[JR007]

[Donnie Brasco]

Looks like pinny has taken a position on the LAD game total juicing the over 5.5 @-125. Guess we'll see a 6

[Love The Action]

Had a strong lean on the under in the oakland/indian game but missed the move down to 8 from 8.5. No play now. That's what I get for not capping the games overnight like I usually do.

[God1]

That is way too simplistic. Unimpressive to say the least.

It's not at all way too simplistic. If he refrained from betting all of those games the guy would save alot of money. The guy is not modeling, the best thing for him to do is pick games where is getting least beaten by the vig which would be the opposite of all i listed

[God1]

LTA,
i absolutely disagree with you because many of your plays look for value and i respect that but i think sometimes you directly fall into traps set up by the books
an example would be some days ago when lilly pitched against rodgers, a red-hot dodgers team against colorado
you had the over 7.5 and the score was 6-1 but as the game played out, a 3-1 game or so would have been way more probable
what i wanna say by that is that sometimes when your model offers you such a good value there might be someting we cannot know or hardly know because the line the way it was set up at 7.5 made no sense at all but by that you got value with your model and of course more than 90% of the bets were on the over

you are absolutely clueless and have zero comprehension of how sports betting works

[shocktopme]

.

LTA.....you are a class guy but you dont need to apoligize to anyone here!!!!!!!They dont have to follow your picks.....Good luck my friend!!!Get us some wins

[italianbandit]

you are absolutely clueless and have zero comprehension of how sports betting works

freshguy, you have to be able to take some more time to write better if you plan on criticizing someone like LTA who takes lots of time to share his opinions. I barely understood you.

[italianbandit]

That is way too simplistic. Unimpressive to say the least.

It was simplistic but advise that 90% of the posters here would benefit from understanding. I don't think you obviously fall into that category LTA, G1's criteria for investing is very different than yours. I think the complexity of baseball allows for different styles of handicapping that can be profitable.

[Love The Action]

Sorry guys...no plays so far. I leaned to both the indians under and the marlins ml in the second game. Unfortunately, I missed out on the line movements in those plays because I was busy at work. I took the night off last night instead of capping todays card. Otherwise, I would have locked both of those plays in by 6am this morning. I won't play those games now at their current prices because no value remains. I have one more lean for the late games with the Dodgers under. However, I have that one at 5.6, so there is not much value there either. There's no need to force anything, so we might just take tonight off and start looking at tomorrows card. I'll post if I play anything though. Good luck tonight!

[Love The Action]

Mlb 8/29/11

Play #1

Padres/Dodgers under (6)(-115) 1x (Locked)

Got a good price. Pinny never moved to 6 and both pitchers fare well against these lineups. Good luck!

[SilverTongueFox]

LTA - sent you a PM. Hit me back when you get a chance.

[Love The Action]

LTA - sent you a PM. Hit me back when you get a chance.

[Love The Action]

That Loney homer hurt. Going to need some luck on the under. Luckily I was stuck driving home from work and couldn't post with enough time for anyone to tail.

I was also considering that Cubs under, but I didn't like the line movement in the Cubs game where the line steadily moved toward the over, but in the Dodgers game, neither Pinny, Greek or MB moved to 6 despite getting a lot of money on the over at 5.5 and juicing it heavy. That indicated a solid under lean to me.

I really like the Cubs and Garza tomorrow over Vogelsong and the Giants. There's no way that one should be at +135 right now when you consider the Cubs have the better offense, a better starting pitcher and the Giants bullpen is struggling. I have that one at Cubs +121. I almost certain that line gets to the +120 range by close tomorrow.

[No coincidences]

I really like the Cubs and Garza tomorrow over Vogelsong and the Giants. There's no way that one should be at +135 right now when you consider the Cubs have the better offense, a better starting pitcher and the Giants bullpen is struggling. I have that one at Cubs +121. I almost certain that line gets to the +120 range by close tomorrow.

I was planning on pounding that LTA. Was hoping the Cubs lost tonight, though.

Still, I think the Giants are done.

[Love The Action]

I was planning on pounding that LTA. Was hoping the Cubs lost tonight, though.

Still, I think the Giants are done.

My sentiments exactly. I was hoping they got slammed by 10. I am still probably going to play them though. I just have a little more homework to do.

I just wonder why the Giants opened up at -145, which was the same as Greek and MB. Usually, Pinny's favorites are cheaper. That's a little weird to me.

[Love The Action]

It's not at all way too simplistic. If he refrained from betting all of those games the guy would save alot of money. The guy is not modeling, the best thing for him to do is pick games where is getting least beaten by the vig which would be the opposite of all i listed

I don't know. Based on what you wrote, it can be construed as typical hamburger "fade the public" type stuff. As you know, to a great extent it's all about price. I don't mind being on the same side as the rest of the market, as long as I bought in EARLY and snatched up all the value. In that case, I am on the side with the most desirable trade, but I am one of the few who have the best price. That gives me the advantage. Whoever bought in after me at a worse price made a bad play.

For example, say a game opens up at 7.5 (-105) with the majority of all bets on the under. I immediately put in a wager in on the under at the open and not too long after the price drops to 7 (-115) on the under. Then, let's say the line stays steady at that price throughout the day with money continuing to come in the under, closing at 7 (-130) on the under at Pinny and 6.5 (-120) on the over other outlets. In the this case, I really don't care that I am on a public play because I killed the closer by a full run at some outlets.

That is why I think what you wrote is too simplistic. I am sick of all the whole "sharp" "square" "fade the public" crap. That was great for the 1960's during the time of Lem Banker, but is no longer applicable. The market is so far and away advanced now, that you can't just "fade the public" to find success. If you want to be successful long term in today's market, it's all about getting the most value at the best price, play in and play out. The only thing we can control in this business is beating closers. If you can do that consistently, you will end up beating the market over the long term.

[ParlayKing]

Almost another 9th iming disaster in the sd/lad game, phew! Cheers on the winner.

[Love The Action]

Almost another 9th iming disaster in the sd/lad game, phew! Cheers on the winner.

Yeah, finally a little luck went our way.

Now we only need "payback" on like 12 more games like that

Just kidding, I'll take all the luck I can get right now

[Love The Action]

MLB Recap 8/29/11

1 - 0 = +1x

MLB Season 2011

366 - 335 = +22.16x

Baby steps...for now.

[Love The Action]

MLB 8/30/11

Play #1

Cubs ML (+134) 1.25x (Locked)

If I was not slumping right now, I would take this for at least 2x. I really like the Cubs in this spot as they have the better offense and starting pitcher, with a bullpen that is equal to or better than the current state of the Giants bullpen. Let's face it, the Giants' bullpen is shell of its former self. I respect that the Giants are a top 10 defense, and much better than the Cubs, but the Cubs are playing just a bit better right now. Plus, the edge in starting pitching this matchup is pronounced. Garza has a 3.8 WAR compared to Vogelsong's to 2.1 and Garza has the advantage by almost a full run with respect to FIP, xFIP, tERA and SIERA with Garza's numbers in the low 3's while Vogelsong is in the low 4's or 3.9's. Garza is a much better strikeout pitcher that has been the victim of piss poor defense, much of it his own doing like last game versus the Braves where his first inning error cost him 3 unearned runs. Nevertheless, Garza is far and away the better pitcher in this matchup. If you go up and down the projected lineups right now, the Giants don't have anyone that can compare to elite hitters like the Cubs' Castro and Rodriguez. Plus, the second tier hitters on the Cubs are better than those types of hitters on the Giants. Finally, as sad as it is to say, I would rather have the Marshall/Wood to Marmol relief combination than relying on what the Giants are putting out there right now. I really wish the Cubs would have gotten killed on Monday night, so as to generate some more Giants support, but I have to play the Cubs here. I have the Cubs at +121 in this, so we are getting 13 cents in value here. I think it's definitely fishy that the Giants opened as -145 at Pinny, which was the same at Greek and MB, because Pinny usually posts cheaper favorites. Nevertheless, I am very confident this one gets down to the +120 range by game time and we beat the closer on this one. Good luck.

[No coincidences]

I beat the closer with the Reds, Rockies and Twins tonight. None of them won.

I've lost 8 of my last 11 games where I've beaten the closing number. I have a feeling I will have done so for tomorrow with the Cubs and Red Sox, but sadly, I've lost almost all confidence in doing so.

I don't know if it's just a cold streak or what, but I haven't really gotten anywhere for a while now beating the closer (at least not like I have when I do so in football and basketball).

[Love The Action]

MLB 8/30/11

Play #1

Cubs ML (+134) 1.25x (Locked)

If I was not slumping right now, I would take this for at least 2x. I really like the Cubs in this spot as they have the better offense and starting pitcher, with a bullpen that is equal to or better than the current state of the Giants bullpen. Let's face it, the Giants' bullpen is shell of its former self. I respect that the Giants are a top 10 defense, and much better than the Cubs, but the Cubs are playing just a bit better right now. Plus, the edge in starting pitching this matchup is pronounced. Garza has a 3.8 WAR compared to Vogelsong's to 2.1 and Garza has the advantage by almost a full run with respect to FIP, xFIP, tERA and SIERA with Garza's numbers in the low 3's while Vogelsong is in the low 4's or 3.9's. Garza is a much better strikeout pitcher that has been the victim of piss poor defense, much of it his own doing like last game versus the Braves where his first inning error cost him 3 unearned runs. Nevertheless, Garza is far and away the better pitcher in this matchup. If you go up and down the projected lineups right now, the Giants don't have anyone that can compare to elite hitters like the Cubs' Castro and Rodriguez. Plus, the second tier hitters on the Cubs are better than those types of hitters on the Giants. Finally, as sad as it is to say, I would rather have the Marshall/Wood to Marmol relief combination than relying on what the Giants are putting out there right now. I really wish the Cubs would have gotten killed on Monday night, so as to generate some more Giants support, but I have to play the Cubs here. I have the Cubs at +121 in this, so we are getting 13 cents in value here. I think it's definitely fishy that the Giants opened as -145 at Pinny, which was the same at Greek and MB, because Pinny usually posts cheaper favorites. Nevertheless, I am very confident this one gets down to the +120 range by game time and we beat the closer on this one. Good luck.

Play #2

Padres/Dodgers under (6.5)(+100) 1x (Locked)

I have this one at 5.6, almost a full run off the total and I expect a closing price that has the under juiced at -115 or more so we should save ourselves about 15 cents from buying this one early. I have backed Stauffer quite a bit this season, not always successful, but more often than not. Although he has regressed and seen his WAR rating slide down to 1.1, he remains a successful guy because of his consistency. Out of his 27 starts this season, he has only given up more than 3 earned runs seven times. That's pretty consistent. It's the same way with Kuroda, who only had five games of giving up more than 3 earned runs in his 25+ starts this season. Plus, as we all know, Kuroda would have a much better record if he received a bit more run support. Both pitchers are in the 3.5 to 3.9 range for FIP, xFIP, tERA and SIERA but the key to this play is both pitchers ability to get both strikeouts and ground balls outs. Both of these pitchers have that rare ability as evidenced by K%'s over 16% and his GB/FB's from 1.3 to 1.8. Iassogna is the ump and he is going on his second year of having an under lean after pretty even o/u results for the earlier part of his career. His strike percentage comes in at about 62.5%, so it could be a bit better, but his runs/game/avg is pretty solid for under players at 7.9. I am going to take the under in this series two game in a row and roll with the under here for 1x. Good luck.