Brewers Look Like Live Underdogs Wednesday Night

[LT Profits]

Liriano has great numbers overall for Pirates, but he has not been as consistent as he was early on with a couple of recent clunkers vs. Rockies and Giants. Yes, those were sandwiched between allowing a total of one run in three other starts, but which Liriano shows up today and, more importantly, do you want to pay this premium to find out? Remember that Milwaukee is hitting lefties well right now, batting .274 and averaging a whopping 6.48 runs per game against them the last 10.

Peralta has gotten better as the season has gone on for Brewers, and he has allowed three runs or less in 11 of his last 13 starts. Pirates may be winning, but they are still only batting .239 vs. righties overall and this will be their first time ever facing Peralta.

[Smoke]

I would not bet against liriano

Brewers might get shut out today

Pirates rl or no play

[Louisvillekid1]

I took Brewers +146 last night...

My only play tonight

Pirates celebrating too much after winning #81

[LT Profits]

I would not bet against liriano

Brewers might get shut out today

Pirates rl or no play

The "good" Liriano yeah, but he has been hit or miss all of a sudden and Brew Crew is hitting lefties. Worth the pop at price methinnks.

[LT Profits]

Pirates celebrating too much after winning #81

And I didn't even mention this!

[Smoke]

The "good" Liriano yeah, but he has been hit or miss all of a sudden and Brew Crew is hitting lefties. Worth the pop at price methinnks.

Value wise yes but theres no value if it doesnt win

[tblues2005]

I think that they could get caught looking ahead here tonight. Milwaukee could easily win tonight.

[BIGDAY]

Profiter might be onto something.

[LT Profits]

no value if it doesnt win

Not true at all and don't get me started on why

[Smoke]

Not true at all and don't get me started on why

I would like to hear

[Louisvillekid1]

Value wise yes but theres no value if it doesnt win

I'm lost here as well

[Louisvillekid1]

I would like to hear

Common Smoke,

Google expected value...

[EXhoosier10]

What's with the discussion all of the sudden, LT?

[Smoke]

Common Smoke,

Google expected value...

Im saying for instance if someone bets $100 risk on marlins instead of $100 risk on pirates and pirates win how was that value?

[pimike]

Big L is a stopper

[LT Profits]

I would like to hear

In simplest terms, let us say you are reasonably accurate at assigning expected percentage of a team winning. Then lets say you give a team a 40% chance of winning and the odds are +200. That is mad +EV on the dog, even though the odds are still less than 50% of winning that ONE game.

[LT Profits]

What's with the discussion all of the sudden, LT?

Fulfilling my new snazzy title.

[Smoke]

In simplest terms, let us say you are reasonably accurate at assigning expected percentage of a team winning. Then lets say you give a team a 40% chance of winning and the odds are +200. That is mad +EV on the dog, even though the odds are still less than 50% of winning that ONE game.

yes but if you lose....you lose your money and win nothing so wheres the value? Yes theres value before the game starts and if you win but if you lose wheres the value

[goduke]

brewers have lost 5 in a row, they consistently strand runners, they got swept by the angels. And some have said theyve been the play for the last 5 games...all losses. No way i would touch this team

[LT Profits]

yes but if you lose....you lose your money and win nothing so wheres the value? Yes theres value before the game starts and if you win but if you lose wheres the value

Because if your estimations are close to accurate and you make those same bets over and over, you win in the long run which is all that matters.

[RavensFan2k3]

In simplest terms, let us say you are reasonably accurate at assigning expected percentage of a team winning. Then lets say you give a team a 40% chance of winning and the odds are +200. That is mad +EV on the dog, even though the odds are still less than 50% of winning that ONE game.

I agree with smoke here. I only consider the dog to have value if I see them winning atleast 50% of the time, and even 50% is extremely low, so more lime 65% of the time. Id never put money on a team that I feel will only win 40% or less of the time, dog or not. To me there is no value because they're likely to lose

[No coincidences]

Value wise yes but theres no value if it doesnt win

I'm now fully convinced that you and Ice are the same person.

[No coincidences]

yes but if you lose....you lose your money and win nothing so wheres the value? Yes theres value before the game starts and if you win but if you lose wheres the value

Im saying for instance if someone bets $100 risk on marlins instead of $100 risk on pirates and pirates win how was that value?

You have no business gambling. Period. Get out now while you still can (who am I kidding -- as if you aren't out of the game already).

[Smoke]

I'm now fully convinced that you and Ice are the same person.

Thanks guey that means im better looking than you

[Smoke]

You have no business gambling. Period. Get out now while you still can (who am I kidding -- as if you aren't out of the game already).

This coming from a guey who stares at line movements 12 hours a day

[Smoke]

I agree with smoke here. I only consider the dog to have value if I see them winning atleast 50% of the time, and even 50% is extremely low, so more lime 65% of the time. Id never put money on a team that I feel will only win 40% or less of the time, dog or not. To me there is no value because they're likely to lose

[Louisvillekid1]

Smoke

I have 3 apples (2 Red & 1 Green)

Put them each in a different brown bag (can't see in)

I offer you even money to pick a Red Apple

You agree and Pick the Green one

Would you not like to play again?

[gauchojake]

Hey smoke, how do you like them apples? Boom.

[Gradius]

LT: The concept of probability seems to be lost, here.

[LT Profits]

I agree with smoke here. I only consider the dog to have value if I see them winning atleast 50% of the time, and even 50% is extremely low, so more lime 65% of the time. Id never put money on a team that I feel will only win 40% or less of the time, dog or not. To me there is no value because they're likely to lose

You guys are too hung up on winning percentage when the ultimate goal should be to make money. Who cares if you have a winning percentage of 40% if your average price is, let's say, +165? If I could do that, I'd gladly take that over winning 60% but losing money because average price was -155.

[RavensFan2k3]

Smoke

I have 3 apples (2 Red & 1 Green)

Put them each in a different brown bag (can't see in)

I offer you even money to pick a Red Apple

You agree and Pick the Green one

Would you not like to play again?

But thats 67%...much greater than 40%

[Louisvillekid1]

But thats 67%...much greater than 40%

Just simplifying it

Can use any #'s that provide +ev

[Smoke]

Smoke

I have 3 apples (2 Red & 1 Green)

Put them each in a different brown bag (can't see in)

I offer you even money to pick a Red Apple

You agree and Pick the Green one

Would you not like to play again?

no because I just lost. No value

[Smoke]

But thats 67%...much greater than 40%

Lkid buried

[Louisvillekid1]

Yupp,

You guys got me...