[ebbearsfb1]

When you bet the

-1.5 runline then also bet the under dog?



as long as both are plus money?


read something about it but was wondering if its profitable or a dud

[doublej95]

I will give you an example and let you decide. Braves/Nats game today -1.5@+112 , Nats@+142

Bet 1 risk $100 on -1.5
Bet 2 risk $87.60 on Nats +1.42

Total Bet $187.60
Profit if either bet wins $24.40

So you are risking $187.60 for a return of $24 but run the risk of losing $187 if the Braves win by one run. It is a risky option, but with some research there is some teams you can make some money on if you don't mind the high risk. Yankees last year went on a amazing streak of cashing the -1.5.

[ebbearsfb1]

Yeah that's what I figured... if u risk x on both. The profit would only be 12 bucks..... it could be something worth checking out

[as99]

Based on the above example you are basically betting -768 line - SO THE ANSWER IS NO. Think about the success rate you need.

[doublej95]

Yeah that's what I figured... if u risk x on both. The profit would only be 12 bucks..... it could be something worth checking out

If you risk x ($100) on both you would be up $12 on the Braves -1.5 or up $42 on the Nats ML or down $200. You have got to use a arbitrage calculator to come up with the best Risk/Reward.

In the example I gave you would be basically laying the equivalent of a -800 ml.

[ngates815]

For instance today....

Bet :

San Fran ML -105..... 128 to win 122
Dodgers -1........100 to win 153

San Fran wins, you're up 22
Dodgers win you're up 25


Probably not worth it.

[doublej95]

Based on the above example you are basically betting -768 line - SO THE ANSWER IS NO. Think about the success rate you need.

[daimoshokage]

not worth the stress..

[gryfyn1]

When you bet the

-1.5 runline then also bet the under dog?

as long as both are plus money?

read something about it but was wondering if its profitable or a dud

It would not be --

About 25-30% of games end up being decided by 1 run; advanced metric show that one run games have a high degree of luck involves so say the favorite win by 1 run 13% of the time.

it the numbers for the ATL/WSH game your basically laying 187 to win 24, with those numbers which leaves you at about a -3-4% ROI...

[Salmon Steak]

Anything easy usually doesn't work

[8ArIvd5]

Very profitable. Teams never win by 1.

[cigar]

try something else

[WvGambler]

Waaaaay too many games are 1 run in MLB...not only would this not be profitable, I think you would lose your ass badly.

[tdog152]

seems to risky

[ebbearsfb1]

simply asking i dont think nearly as many games end in run 1 as in hockey...

would be interesting to see over the course of the year

[ngates815]

Very profitable. Teams never win by 1.

What's more profitable..."betting" "4,250" on the lakers ML @ -425, then crying in a thread that they are playing badly, or betting like this?

[DrStale]

Yeah, it's that easy, cuz Vegas is stupid.

[INVEGA MAN]

very interesting because i was thinking the same thing but i will pass

[newguy]

Someone said it right earlier. There are some teams that will cash this more often than others

[Prop Bet Master]

If it was that easy to make money, bookmakers would be out of business. The run lines are pretty much accurate, relative to the moneyline, despite what some people say.

[ebbearsfb1]

it would be an idea to pick and choose, then again you could just take both on the -1.5 and hope its not a close game that would increase profit but lower odds

[ebbearsfb1]

Also. U guys r saying its minus 800. But don't u need to factor in the likely hood of the game ending in the favorite winning by 1

[WvGambler]

Like 30% games end in one run, and the favored team wins those games more than they lose.

[kellen2811]

interesting concept to consider

[doublej95]

Also. U guys r saying its minus 800. But don't u need to factor in the likely hood of the game ending in the favorite winning by 1

Give me sometime and I will tell you how it would have worked out on the yankees. they won 75 games last year by 2 or more runs. Just by looking at it with out running the numbers it does not look like a good idea.


And not every game they won by two or more runs was they the favorite.

[doublej95]

I just finished April 2010 for the Yankees. It was a good month 18-0 for the Yankees covering the -1.5 runline as a favorite or the underdog winning the game out right, there was no 1 run win by the Yankees when they was -1.5 +odds. Using SBRODDS data and SBR Arbitrage Calculator for the best results based on $100 plays.

18-0 +383.92 won. Risked $3408.04

[WvGambler]

And when you get that first loss....it pretty much wipes out your profit

[doublej95]

And when you get that first loss....it pretty much wipes out your profit

yep, In May it went 23-2, I will run the numbers and see how it turned out.

[Sauz]

I think it be way to risky to try that....you never no what each team is going to do...you best odds are just betting on one team and hoping you win

[doublej95]

May 2010 for the Yankees.

23-2 +$184.45. Risked $4631.38.

Total for April and May

41-2 +$568.37 Risked $8039.42

Thats a lot of risk so far for the return.

[onetrickpony]

dont nickel and dime like this, just pick winners save urself the headache

[ebbearsfb1]

From ur findings looks like just take yankees minus 1.5.. maybe red sox... also I may look into both of them

[doublej95]

From ur findings looks like just take yankees minus 1.5.. maybe red sox... also I may look into both of them

the yankees last year was a scoring machine when they won. you could look into spot betting both sides like you talked about one match ups versus very poor teams.

[ebbearsfb1]

Yeah thinking about labby lining both of them only need to hit 33% to show a profit... and could do all the games at 1.5

[8ArIvd5]

What's more profitable..."betting" "4,250" on the lakers ML @ -425, then crying in a thread that they are playing badly, or betting like this?

I guess crying in a thread that the lakers are playing badly is way more profitable because I WON! Now get off my case before I give you the Razor's Edge.

BTW, I didn't "bet" "4,250". If you were paying attention you would have noticed I specified I was not trying to win anywhere near 1k.