At what rate do +200 dogs in MLB hit?

[BuddyBear]

Anyone know off hand these numbers? Or any breakdown by say +200 - +220, +221 - +240, etc... Thanks...

[accuscoresucks]

this would be intresting

i know accuscore.com has it but i never renewed their service

[pico]

my estimate is 30%. blindly betting +200 and you'll lose in the long run.

[Ganchrow]

Anyone know off hand these numbers? Anyone know off hand these numbers? Or any breakdown by say +200 - +220, +221 - +240, etc... Thanks...

FWIW, from the 1999 season through May 20th, 2008 and using Covers.com data:

Dogs of +200 to +220 (N=941):
Win rate: 32.62%
Std. Err.: 1.53%
flat bet ROI: +0.68%
Std Err of ROI: 4.72%

Dogs of +221 to +240 (N=323):
Win rate: 30.34%
Std. Err.: 2.56%
flat bet ROI: +0.93%
Std Err of ROI: 8.52%

Dogs of +241 to +300 (N=362):
Win rate: 26.80%
Std. Err.: 2.33%
flat bet ROI: -1.20%
Std Err of ROI: 8.56%

Dogs of +301+ (N=83):
Win rate: 25.30%
Std. Err.: 4.77%
flat bet ROI: +9.04%
Std Err of ROI: 20.66%

All Dogs of +200+ (N=2,083):
Win rate: 30.56%
Std. Err.: 1.02%
flat bet ROI: +0.77%
Std Err of ROI: 4.72%

[dwaechte]

Wow. Pretty solid results.

[Munson15]

Playing all +200 or better would be much better than playing all faves -200 or worse, I'm pretty sure of that. Thanks for the figures, Ganch.

[pavyracer]

Old Chinese Proverb:

"It does not matter at what rate +200 dogs hit. What matters is at what rate you are hitting them."

Confucius 501 BC

[SBR Lou]

this would be intresting

i know accuscore.com has it but i never renewed their service

Judging your posting handle, I can't understand why.

[staf]

This bring up the question:
If 44% of dogs win, then how would we do flat betting all dogs of +130 or better?

[Peep]

This bring up the question:
If 44% of dogs win, then how would we do flat betting all dogs of +130 or better?

First off, I am no Ganchrow.

He can do stuff I can't even dream off.

But I do have a database with 3742 home dogs in it and 11240 road dogs, all at odds of +130 or better.

The HD won about 40% of their games (1483/3742), at at average price of approximately +154.

I have the road dogs winning 38% or their games (4323/11240) at an average price of +161.

I am just getting back into gambling, and am learning access 2007. I like it, can do things I didn't know how to do on my old 2000......

[xyz]

This bring up the question:
If 44% of dogs win, then how would we do flat betting all dogs of +130 or better?

You will always make money in this case. The average odds for all dogs of +130 or better has to be greater or equal to +130. Assume the average is +130, then we have

130*44% - 100*56% = 1.2

So for every $100 you wager, you expect to make $1.2 or more, since the average odd is likely to be greater than 130.

[LT Profits]

The problem is that the bulk of the 44% winning dogs are less than +130. As Peep pointed out above, all dogs of +130 or better win about 38% of the time, which is a losing proposition if bet blindly.

[harsh506]

ill take the +200's at 30% for the shortrun... baseball these days are seeing more teams play better. If the Rangers played the Red Sox at fenway and the line was at +210 for the rangers, ide take the shot on it.

[steelerfan]

they always hit when you didn't bet them and rarely when you do