[mathdotcom]

Would be rewarded nicely

[Dark Horse]

There is no consensus. For instance, on April 27th this season Bet-Online had 140, Betphoenix had 142, and Heritage had 139.5. Simultaneously.

I use 9 runs per game, which is pretty close to the Salami average; 135 for 15 games. (works for me, with high scoring angles that give >10 runs per game, and low scoring that produce < 8 runs per game.) The real average is probably slightly higher than 9. You could add up all the totals for the day, then add 5 or 6 runs, which should get you close (for a 15 game day). Or look closer and come up with a more precise formula. It's not rocket science.

[mathdotcom]

There is no consensus. For instance, on April 27th this season Bet-Online had 140, Betphoenix had 142, and Heritage had 139.5. Simultaneously.

I use 9 runs per game, which is pretty close to the Salami average; 135 for 15 games. (works for me, with high scoring angles that give >10 runs per game, and low scoring that produce < 8 runs per game.) The real average is probably slightly higher than 9. You could add up all the totals for the day, then add 5 or 6 runs, which should get you close (for a 15 game day). Or look closer and come up with a more precise formula. It's not rocket science.

And I am looking to compare it to a line history to look for bias.

[PRC]

It's not on the DonBest screen?

[Arilou]

Some books get their numbers up on Don Best, some don't. It's a rotation number issue.

[Dark Horse]

15 games today, GS: 135.5. ("9 runs per game average, or slightly higher") = on target.
sum of posted totals: 128.5. ("add 5 or 6 runs per 15 games") = on target.
Maybe adding half a run per game is closer.


You don't need a history for this. Keep a record for a month and you should have the key.

[mathdotcom]

Dark Horse I am looking for something more precise