[do5000]

maybce consider playing -1.5 on both teams?

[pats3peat]

So knowing about 28% of games end in 1-run decisions, what should our strategy be

[tomcowley]

Ok, EV on bets is additive. You're betting every RL -1.5 and alt-RL -1.5. So the sum of the EV of your bets is the sum of the EV of every RL bet + the sum of the EV of every alt-RL bet. Since you want the sum to be positive, one of those two numbers needs to be positive. So.. ask yourself:

Is laying fav -1.5 blind on every game +EV?
Is laying dog -1.5 blind on every game +EV?

The answer to 1 is obviously **** no, and I see no reason to think that the answer to question 2 is different- and even if it somehow were, you'd have to be ******* retarded to add the known -EV fav -1.5 bets to make a polish-middle system like the OP suggests.

[Data]

Ok, EV on bets is additive. You're betting every RL -1.5 and alt-RL -1.5. So the sum of the EV of your bets is the sum of the EV of every RL bet + the sum of the EV of every alt-RL bet. Since you want the sum to be positive, one of those two numbers needs to be positive. So.. ask yourself:

Is laying fav -1.5 blind on every game +EV?
Is laying dog -1.5 blind on every game +EV?

The answer to 1 is obviously **** no, and I see no reason to think that the answer to question 2 is different- and even if it somehow were, you'd have to be ******* retarded to add the known -EV fav -1.5 bets to make a polish-middle system like the OP suggests.

Agree, but I think the following must be said.

Q: Under what circumstances either
laying fav -1.5 +EV
or
laying dog -1.5 +EV
or both?

A: When and ONLY when we think that the game will go Over.

There are less juice-wise expensive ways to play the Over. That is why this "strategy" does not make sense

[wrongturn]

Assuming percentage of 1-run games is exactly 28%, then you need profit percentage at least 38.9% to be even. If you do find such bets, the game probably has a low total which implies greater 1-run probability than 28% average.

[LegitBet]

so would you say it's a smart move to lay 1.5 runs on both teams in the same game if the ROI is 40% or more, and the over/under total is 8.5 or more?
thanks

[CaptNumbers]

After doing more thorough analysis on my initial idea, I did not find anything that I felt was worthwhile pursuing. There may be a chance that if you are getting a high enough ROI, it will overcome the 28% of games that end in 1 run. However, there is no way for me to evaluate this on games that give an ROI such as you stated, therefore my results would be inconclusive. Finally, I would think that logically, the lower the total, the better the chance the game will end in a 1 run decision which is exactly what you don't want. That's just my two cents.

[wrongturn]

so would you say it's a smart move to lay 1.5 runs on both teams in the same game if the ROI is 40% or more, and the over/under total is 8.5 or more?
thanks

I would guess it is very rare for a game with total 8.5 or higher to give you 40+% ROI on run lines, because that means one or both runlines are too valuable.

[LegitBet]

but that doesnt answer my question, wrongturn...with all respect...if I DO find ROI's >40% with totals >8.5 should i bet both sides? or more complicated which i don;t know how to do is take the more valuable side?
thanks

[CaptNumbers]

but that doesnt answer my question, wrongturn...with all respect...if I DO find ROI's >40% with totals >8.5 should i bet both sides? or more complicated which i don;t know how to do is take the more valuable side?
thanks

Legit,
The problem is that even if you do find ROI's with >40% and the totals you listed, there is still no data to backup the fact that these games will fall into the 28% category for 1 run decisions. If these games fall into a higher percentage for 1 run decisions, it would still be a bad bet. Overall, I think the best thing to do is stay away from the original idea completely and move on to something else. All the best!
-CN

[wrongturn]

but that doesnt answer my question, wrongturn...with all respect...if I DO find ROI's >40% with totals >8.5 should i bet both sides? or more complicated which i don;t know how to do is take the more valuable side?
thanks

I would think the answer is yes. But I don't think you can find them in the same book. Multiple books, maybe, but in that case, you should see the straight arb on the runlines as well. That is just my guess.

[Kevy]

Excellent thread.

[ashteroid25]

I have a question.

Bet every favorite money line.
Bet every underdog alternate line -1.5.

The only way to lose is for the underdog to win by 1.

Can someone do the math on how often that occurs against how often the underdog wins by 2 runs?

They typical underdog -1.5 is at +220. Obviously odds are that the favorite wins and you break even. If the underdog wins by 2 or more you win on average 1.2 units

what do you think???

[135steward]

That one I tried, ashteroid25. One of my early failed experiments. I seem to recall another poster, too, that THOUGHT it was a good idea. I found that you'll win a lot of small bets before the big losses make you s**t blood.

[Pancho sanza]

I have a question.

Bet every favorite money line.
Bet every underdog alternate line -1.5.

The only way to lose is for the underdog to win by 1.

Can someone do the math on how often that occurs against how often the underdog wins by 2 runs?

They typical underdog -1.5 is at +220. Obviously odds are that the favorite wins and you break even. If the underdog wins by 2 or more you win on average 1.2 units

what do you think???

About what, making 2 bets that are both negative ev?

You really need an answer here?

[vyomguy]

About 35% of the MLB games end in more than 1 run difference for home teams. Road team RLs cover about 43% of times. Thats why the prices for road team RLs are cheaper.