MLB Triple Play Thursday (50-55, -1.33)

How ironic that on a day like Wednesday when the Bullpen System went 3-2, I only put up the two losers and go 0-2 personally, putting me slightly in the red for the year!

Well at least the system successfully avoided the red ink, meaning it has been a wire-to-wire winner so far. BPS is now 31-30, +3.06 YTD. I have 3 plays for Thursday, although only 2 of them are BPS plays:


ALL Lines from 5 Dimes

Athletics +138 *BPS*
Blue Jays -117
Marlins +103 *BPS*

YTD: 50-55, 47.6%, -1.33

good luck lt!

i like it

why don't you play all the BPS plays LT?

Originally Posted by FreeFall

why don't you play all the BPS plays LT?

Because I am a stubborn mule that still handicaps games, not believing that winning could be as easy as just playing this system!

With the Florida rainout, BPS is done for today with a profitable 1-1 split, picking up 0.20 units thanks to Dodgers.

Originally Posted by LT Profits

With the Florida rainout, BPS is done for today with a profitable 1-1 split, picking up 0.20 units thanks to Dodgers.

where did you play the Dodgers? or i guess i should ask, are your plays on here different than what your subscribers get?

As I've said several times, this thread is for my best plays of the day, whether they are BPS or not, although BPS plays are disignated as such. Thus, there will be some plays here that are not BPS (Blue Jays) and there will be some BPS plays not here (Dodgers) if I find something I don't like about them.

You don't really need me to list all the BPS plays each day, as it is a very easy procedure. All you do is play any top 10 bullpen ERA team as an underdog of any price or as a favorite of less than -130 vs. a non-top 10 bullpen ERA team. It takes mere secomds to spot the plays. I use covers as my source for pen ERA, and remember to look at all tied teams if there is a tie for 10th.

Just a quick question LT. Does your BPS take into account inherited runs allowed?
Just wondering with my example being Okajima. He has a 0.93 ERA, yet has allowed something like 9 out of 11 inherited runners to score. It may not be that exact number, but its a staggering percentage.

Originally Posted by Dashwood Clipper

Just a quick question LT. Does your BPS take into account inherited runs allowed?
Just wondering with my example being Okajima. He has a 0.93 ERA, yet has allowed something like 9 out of 11 inherited runners to score. It may not be that exact number, but its a staggering percentage.

No Dash, it is purely ERA. Why tinker with something that has produced an average of +97 units the last three years, going over 100 in two of them.

I can't believe this BPS system thing has made on average 97 units in three years. LT, why not just use those plays, bet a dime a game and be up like 100 dimes for the season?

treece,

Because like I said in my original article on this subject, I think the books are FINALLY starting to factor the pens into the lines more. Look at the last three years:


2005: +104.70
2006: +112.08
2007: +76.24

Now 76 units is nice, but it was a disappointment after the previous two years. If the system returns to the 100-unit level this season, then I MIGHT consider playing it exclusively after May 1 next year. But I am more inclined to think the glory days may be over, and besides, the cynic in me keeps saying it just can't be that easy.

Originally Posted by LT Profits

treece,

Because like I said in my original article on this subject, I think the books are FINALLY starting to factor the pens into the lines more. Look at the last three years:


2005: +104.70
2006: +112.08
2007: +76.24

Now 76 units is nice, but it was a disappointment after the previous two years. If the system returns to the 100-unit level this season, then I MIGHT consider playing it exclusively after May 1 next year. But I am more inclined to think the glory days may be over, and besides, the cynic in me keeps saying it just can't be that easy.

Too easy/simple a system to work.

Instead, try this system the books haven't caught on too just quite yet: Play on any pitcher in an away night game who has a Hispanic surname that begins with a non-vowel when facing a team that struck out 11+ times in their previous game if two of their batters in the starting lineup have more bunt basehits than homeruns for the season

One of the strongest systems out there.....

LOL BB,

But I gotta say, I never saw a simple system produce as well as the BPS did the last three years, and the logic behind it is sound. Plus, it hasn't been in the red yet this year, so let's just see what happens.

Generally, for a system to work there should be strong theory to back it up. While the fictitious system I presented may actually work (someone would need to do more research on that) the reality is that there is no explanation as to why it would other than random luck. If I did find that it worked, I wouldn't pop open a bottle of champagne instead I would need to have some sort of explanation as to how it is this system works.

However, when you consider the BPS, there is solid theory backing you IMO. To begin, if the objective is winning then you must consider that bullpens are an intregal part of any sort of winning in baseball. Because bullpens are often relevant to the outcome of the game (either in securing a lead or factoring directly into the decision such as coming into a tie game) it makes theoretical sense then that a system that selects the better of the two bullpens should produce highly desirable results. Moreover, the trend in baseball has been shifting such that starters are simply 5/6 inning guys now a days. That's not always the case but increasingly bullpens are figuring more and more prominently into games. I am not saying that bullpens are the only source of variance in who wins a baseball game as surely there are other factors (i.e. starting pitching, hitting, defense, matchups, etc...) but undoubtedly bullpens are important and should be treated as such.

So, yes this is a simple model and I can see how that might cause some concern, but I think it is legit and it appears to be somewhat time tested as 3 straight years of successful results provide adequate evidence to support the BPS.