What am I missing? (MLB writeup)

[Justin7]

Every once in awhile, you see a line you just CANNOT figure out! You see the line, and double check the injuries and lineups. Seeing no mistakes, you fire away.

Some of my pro players have a "lock board". It doesn't mean it's a guaranteed win, but in our best estimate, it has an EV of 10% or more, which is about a 57% clip at -110 lines.

Boston -115 (Beckett/Swarzak)

Boston has the better batters.
Boston has the better bullpen.
The reason this line is skewed: Swarzak had a very good first outting. In his first start, he pitched 7 innings with 5 hits, 3 KOs, 2 BBs and no earned runs. Is he a great pitcher? No, and I call bullshit.

Bill James doesn't even rate him as a pitcher. Baseball prospectus projects that he'll have a whip of 1.61.

Will he have a forward Whip of 1.2? or 1.6? If I project his Whip at 1.2 against an average offense, Boston is still a very strong play. But I don't think he's the smack, and Boston at -115 is a steal.

Warning though - I lose almost half my bets. I am personally risking 2% on this (in my old age, I rarely risk more than 1% on an NFL, NBA or MLB play).

[onthewhat]

GL ace

[Fiasco]

Good luck

[AMBlai01]

Line is already starting to move....its -120 some places...

[RogueScholar]

Very nice information, presented concisely and entertainingly. You're a credit to everything you do, Justin. I'm seriously in awe of you, your knowledge, your accomplishments, and the way you live your life.

[Pecos Bill]

Every once in awhile, you see a line you just CANNOT figure out! You see the line, and double check the injuries and lineups. Seeing no mistakes, you fire away.

Some of my pro players have a "lock board". It doesn't mean it's a guaranteed win, but in our best estimate, it has an EV of 10% or more, which is about a 57% clip at -110 lines.

Boston -115 (Beckett/Swarzak)

Boston has the better batters.
Boston has the better bullpen.
The reason this line is skewed: Swarzak had a very good first outting. In his first start, he pitched 7 innings with 5 hits, 3 KOs, 2 BBs and no earned runs. Is he a great pitcher? No, and I call bullshit.

Bill James doesn't even rate him as a pitcher. Baseball prospectus projects that he'll have a whip of 1.61.

Will he have a forward Whip of 1.2? or 1.6? If I project his Whip at 1.2 against an average offense, Boston is still a very strong play. But I don't think he's the smack, and Boston at -115 is a steal.

Warning though - I lose almost half my bets. I am personally risking 2% on this (in my old age, I rarely risk more than 1% on an NFL, NBA or MLB play).

like your analysis, im on it.

[InTheHole]

05/28 Jason Bay: Status: Doubtful - Rest (not that this means anything)

[Nicky Santoro]

this happened before.. 4 weeks ago you were sure that tex was too high at +136 and it would go down for sure cause line was way off and you couldn't figure out why.. line went way up instead and closed at +149. it went the other way.

you can't jsut look at a line and assume it's off.. stats schmats mean shit.. there is more in making a line than #'s and stats.. there is about 3,494 things that make a line, not just pitcher's era, or pitchers previous starts.

you CANNOT figure a line is off by the naked eye.. computers usually find the mistake, not just looking at a # and saying it's off.. if you can do that, you'd be richer than Bill Gates.. no one can do this.. it cannot be done..

That's where the computer players come in.. These major line moves are all done by computers, not one guy saying a pitcher is not that good and therefore, line is off.

If you think you can predict line movement by just looking at a line, you will go broke.. you will be wrong as often as you'll be right..

[onthewhat]

[InTheHole]

[Justin7]

this happened before.. 4 weeks ago you were sure that tex was too high at +136 and it would go down for sure cause line was way off and you couldn't figure out why.. line went way up instead and closed at +149. it went the other way.

you can't jsut look at a line and assume it's off.. stats schmats mean shit.. there is more in making a line than #'s and stats.. there is about 3,494 things that make a line, not just pitcher's era, or pitchers previous starters.

you CANNOT figure a line is off by the naked eye.. computers usually find the mistake, not just looking at a # and saying it's off.. if you can do that, you'd be richer than Bill Gates.. no one can do this.. it cannot be done..

That's where the computer players come in.. These major line moves are all done by computers, not one guy saying a pitcher is not that good and therefore, line is off.

If you think you can predict line movement by just looking at a line, you will go broke.. you will be wrong as often as you'll be right..

You raise some good points, Nicky.

I don't use naked eye. I have a spreadsheet that I spent about 100 hours developing, and spend an hour a day updating rosters. The main factors in it are the likely lineups, starting pitchers, and bullpens.

If I think a line is WAY off (not just 20 cents, but more), it usually means I had a typo, or missed a major injury or two, or blew it somehow. When I see these lines, I double check rosters, and ask other cappers what they think. In this case, I found no errors, and I was validated by others' analysis.

The 2% cap is respect to "market terror".

[SlickFazzer]

interesting discussion.

[Nicky Santoro]

i have seen over 25,000 times in my life where 2 great pitchers that have been pitching great, both with era's around 1.74, one is 7-1, the other is 8-0.. you see the total is 9, and you wonder why it's not 6.5 un -145... you bet the under 9 and you are laughing thinking it'll end up 1-0...

final score..........9-7..

and this shit happens so freakin often, it's not funny.. every time i see a line that makes me think.. wtf is this? the game is not even close.

there were so many NHL games this year with both teams being highest scoring and worst defensive team facing each other.. you'd think total would be 7.. it was 5.5... wow, you pound the over... final score...2-1...


linesmakers know a lot of things that the bettors don't know.. trust me.. they are way way way ahead of the bettors.. it's not funny.. they know something, which is why they make it 5.5.. they are enticing the avg bettor to pound the over..

do NOT go by stats.. they mean shit.. the more you know, the less successful you will be..

Computers control this game, not handicapping this shit.. no one can predict this shit..

[Fiasco]

How do you determine fair value and get the best number without stats Nicky

I understand if you have sources you can do it without stats, but for the average individual I just can't see it.

[VegasDave]

i have seen over 25,000 times in my life where 2 great pitchers that have been pitching great, both with era's around 1.74, one is 7-1, the other is 8-0.. you see the total is 9, and you wonder why it's not 6.5 un -145... you bet the under 9 and you are laughing thinking it'll end up 1-0...

final score..........9-7..

and this shit happens so freakin often, it's not funny.. every time i see a line that makes me think.. wtf is this? the game is not even close.

there were so many NHL games this year with both teams being highest scoring and worst defensive team facing each other.. you'd think total would be 7.. it was 5.5... wow, you pound the over... final score...2-1...


linesmakers know a lot of things that the bettors don't know.. trust me.. they are way way way ahead of the bettors.. it's not funny.. they know something, which is why they make it 5.5.. they are enticing the avg bettor to pound the over..

do NOT go by stats.. they mean shit.. the more you know, the less successful you will be..

Computers control this game, not handicapping this shit.. no one can predict this shit..

So when you see a line that looks way off, such as the examples you gave with two cy young-looking pitchers with an O/U at 9 or two all offense no defense teams with an O/U of 5, shouldn't you bet the side that looks "way wrong"? This is the logic behind my philosophy picks and I've done well with it.

[OtherSide]

Dont mess with Miny

[smitch124]

People always overlook the 30,000 times that the results are just like the stats predicted...

[AMBlai01]

Betting is a coinflip in the end anyway....isn't that the truth?

[Nicky Santoro]

How do you determine fair value and get the best number without stats Nicky

I understand if you have sources you can do it without stats, but for the average individual I just can't see it.

it's already applied into the line.. when you see a 2 high scoring teams playing each other in the NFL, you see their stats, you see they both can put up points on the board and both have no D... so now you love the over.. but wait a sec... total is 53.5.. now what??

you see 2 very defensive teams, both cant' score, and both have amazing D.. you love the under.. oh, wait a sec,, total is only 32.5.. now what?

stats mean shit cause it's already applied into the line, so you have no advantage. you cant fool these linesamakers.. unless you are getting computer plays from a source, you have no chance..

if you think you see a line that is off by you jsut assumign a line is off,, good luck.. you will go broke, i promise..

[pimike]

First off, I see Beckett not what he used to be. Now he has a 5.00 ERA this year, yes he pitched well last outing, however he is worse this year on the road. He is beatable.

He has given up more hits than innings pitched on the road.

Now for the Twins 23 year old, Anthony Swarzak he is not anything great, but Boston has not seen him yet and this is an advantage to the young guy at home.

Also twins have a good record at home where Boston has a losing record on the road. The twins are hitting the ball with runners in scoring position.


Boston may win, but I see Beckett having a bad game again in this one.
I don't see the line to far off.

Good Luck and love your insights

[OtherSide]

Betting is a coinflip in the end anyway....isn't that the truth?

Not on baseball.

Betting on games with spreads is suicide!

[Nicky Santoro]

So when you see a line that looks way off, such as the examples you gave with two cy young-looking pitchers with an O/U at 9 or two all offense no defense teams with an O/U of 5, shouldn't you bet the side that looks "way wrong"? This is the logic behind my philosophy picks and I've done well with it.

believe it or not.. i swear to GOD, i do this so often, and you know what, i win more than i lose.. when a line looks toooooooooooo good to be true and tooooooo easy, the book knows something....

like when you see lakers a dog by 6 pts.. you wonder why.. the whole world bet lakers thinking it's free money.. that the books are way off on this one and they missed this one.. and lakers lose by 19..

if you do this alot, you will win more than you will lose.. i know this cause i do this alot.. and i swaer to god, i win much more often than i lose..

[VegasDave]

believe it or not.. i swear to GOD, i do this so often, and you know what, i win more than i lose.. when a line looks toooooooooooo good to be true and tooooooo easy, the book knows something....

like when you see lakers a dog by 6 pts.. you wonder why.. the whole world bet lakers thinking it's free money.. that the books are way off on this one and they missed this one.. and lakers lose by 19..

if you do this alot, you will win more than you will lose.. i know this cause i do this alot.. and i swaer to god, i win much more often than i lose..

I believe you!! Last four years NFL I've hit around 60% on plays like this. And you know how much I love my stats... but when I throw them the hell out the window that is the only time I can win.

[jellobiafra]

FWIW, I was just looking over that game myself. I posted in another thread that I'm leery of backing Beckett tomorrow. I believe - be it perception or reality - that Beckett is inconsistent and while the line did make me do a double take upon first glance, it only reinforced my initial feeling that this was perhaps too good to be true. It's a little too inviting, and Beckett has struggled against the Twins (albeit a limited and somewhat dated sample), during the daytime this year (again limited) and on turf (ditto and not sure of the weight I'd assign that for a picher anyway). The Twins are so strong at home and BOS is facing a guy (who you pointed out was pretty good his first time out) that they've never laid eyes on except in a filmroom. All those things considered, I decided to back the under in this one.

Good luck to you.

[Nicky Santoro]

How many times have we seen 2 big time scoring NFL teams playing monday night and you see both teams avg 28 pts per game and both allow 24 pts per game.. so you think, my GOD, this total will be around 55..

you look at the total and it's 44.. lol.. you are now laughing.. you want to put 10k on it.. it's too easy.. you bet over 44....

final score.

13-3.


how many times have you seen that? as for me, maybe 297 times in my life.. Linesmakers know way way way way way more than any bettor.. by making it 44, they know the squares will pound the over

[Justin7]

Nicky,

You know I used to be a linesmaker right? Opening lines don't mean shit. There are $20 bettors that spend more time than books do on openers. This is why I spend so much time on openers - it's much easier to outsmart Gomer Pyle than Warren Buffet, and Gomer is in charge of openers.

The next 1000 plays I make against openers will win. While this one might lose, I think I have the best of it. I just wish the market would confirm my belief like it does on MLB totals.

[Shortstop]

I was ready to place a wager on Minnesota before seeing this thread. I'm still placing a wager on Minnesota.

Anytime you can get the Twins at home as a dog, I would recommend jumping on it.

[Chi_archie]

Nicky,

You know I used to be a linesmaker right? Opening lines don't mean shit. There are $20 bettors that spend more time than books do on openers. This is why I spend so much time on openers - it's much easier to outsmart Gomer Pyle than Warren Buffet, and Gomer is in charge of openers.

The next 1000 plays I make against openers will win. While this one might lose, I think I have the best of it. I just wish the market would confirm my belief like it does on MLB totals.

good stuff

[thebestthereis]

reality is minny is a dominant home team an thrive as home dogs. if you bet them at home all year you will win; they still get zero respect at home. the red sox are a below average road team as well as beckett being inconsistent. line is about right. talk about missing something...why were the rockies favored in every game vs the dodgers the past three days? win, lose or draw that was a joke. talk about reality and perception at +130 in every game. made zero sense.

[MonkeyF0cker]

If the books got everything right, the lines would NEVER move, and Nicky wouldn't have any steam to follow. The books get the lines wrong in nearly EVERY game. If they didn't, no sharps would be betting into them. After all, it's the sharps that shape the lines - not the public.

[fearless]

Nicky,

You know I used to be a linesmaker right? Opening lines don't mean shit. There are $20 bettors that spend more time than books do on openers. This is why I spend so much time on openers - it's much easier to outsmart Gomer Pyle than Warren Buffet, and Gomer is in charge of openers.

The next 1000 plays I make against openers will win. While this one might lose, I think I have the best of it. I just wish the market would confirm my belief like it does on MLB totals.

The sharpest of the sharp make the openers:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=2795259&sportCat=ncb

[waiverwire]

Interesting thread. Some really good stuff and some really weak stuff in here.

It's pretty clear that Justin IS one of the guys that use computers. I am too, although I focus on daily fantasy contests rather than picking teams, because the market in them is so much less efficient. My computer (spreadsheet, actually) says the same thing as Justin's - Boston is extremely likely to win the game today!

I think the real question here is whether there's some data (an injury, a day off, whatever) that our computers don't have access to.

And the more general question of interest is whether there are patterns in the opening lines that you can use to identify when your statistical model is missing a key piece of information.

Swarzak is obviously no good...I have trouble believing that one good game is fooling the oddsmakers into ignoring his whole minor league track record.

More likely, Beckett's performance this year is concerning people. His walk rate has been higher than in past years, and there is some discussion of differences in his pitch quality. I suspect that it's overblown.

[MonkeyF0cker]

The sharpest of the sharp make the openers:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/colum...9&sportCat=ncb

Wrong...

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2004/Sep-10-Fri-2004/sports/24739276.html

[MonkeyF0cker]

Interesting thread. Some really good stuff and some really weak stuff in here.

It's pretty clear that Justin IS one of the guys that use computers. I am too, although I focus on daily fantasy contests rather than picking teams, because the market in them is so much less efficient. My computer (spreadsheet, actually) says the same thing as Justin's - Boston is extremely likely to win the game today!

I think the real question here is whether there's some data (an injury, a day off, whatever) that our computers don't have access to.

And the more general question of interest is whether there are patterns in the opening lines that you can use to identify when your statistical model is missing a key piece of information.

Swarzak is obviously no good...I have trouble believing that one good game is fooling the oddsmakers into ignoring his whole minor league track record.

More likely, Beckett's performance this year is concerning people. His walk rate has been higher than in past years, and there is some discussion of differences in his pitch quality. I suspect that it's overblown.

Exactly. The misnomer that nobody should look at stats is absolutely ludicrous. Its how the lines are derived! You should almost never take Nicky's advice. The only thing he knows is how to chase steam which makes his entire commentary rather ironic, since the steam is created from sharps who find value against those very same openers.

[Chi_archie]

I'm fading Beckett here due to his inconsistent arm slot and release point data from last game despite his "good" outing. His pitch count has been elevated well above his normal 3, 5, 8 game avg's over his career

he never threw over 115 pitches last year, he has gone over that in each of his last 3 starts... 117, 120, 118... he is losing velocity resulting in alot more groundballs..... groundballs on the turf today in Minnesota= alot of singles.

Minn current roster hits beckett to the tune of .333 with a .989 ops over their career