Stats mean nothing in baseball, absolutely nothing!

[patsfan2727]

Yes, of course. It's because there's less time to adjust the line to even out the wagering if they get hammered on one side. It's about minimizing risk, isn't it?

so the books RAISE the limits when they have less time to even out the action? you might want to think that out and rephrase...

[coldhardfacts]

Yes, sorry, I misread, and assumed you were referring to small locals.

For the bigger books (and especially those that take large layoffs) the limits are raised because the closer to gametime, the less line movement there is going to be. This is because they've already pretty much established what the "optimal" line is - that is, the line at which they will attract bets which will ensure optimal profit. Generally - but not always - this is the line at which both sides are attracting approximately 50% - and certainly less than 52.5% (assuming a 5 cent line) of the total money bet.

[yahoonino]

In predicting an individual game, it all comes down to one of the batters squaring one pitch out of the park for 2 or 3 runs, key errors (puts men on base, usually advances runner(s) and essentially gives them extra outs) or getting lucky and hitting some pitches down the line, you can average out the number of times that happens but never even close to accurate enough to be able to determine which side is the right side to take, if anyone makes money consistently betting on MLB year after year I'd like to meet them, the only system that even makes any sense is blindly taking all the underdogs but over time not even sure that works

i agree onehundred percent

[Dark Horse]

Baseball is all numbers. Unless numbers and stats are different, they lead the way. There is no question that there are players here who know how to use the numbers, but this think tank has its own code of silence. And that is probably as it should be; with an underlying idea that is true for everything else in life: if you really want it, you'll find a way. And if you didn't find a way, you didn't really want it.

Yes, it goes against the spirit of a think tank. At other sites there may be a better climate for sharing. SBR attracts a sharper slice of the public, and it results in a relative unwillingness to share.

[bettilimbroke999]

If all there was to bet on is baseball there would be no sports gambling, it is the least fun sport to watch on TV with virtually no physical contact and guy just standing there waiting for pitch all day hoping to hit one through a gap, theres not even an accurate standard of measurement for good or bad its all relative to luck, you catch the line you just hit double that drove in any base runners, u miss the line u just got a strike, liner to the shortstop is an out, liner an inch out of reach of the shortstop is a single, are you tellin me that that 1 inch is skill, also if he jumped a split second earlier and stabbed it for an out did the shortstop's skill overcome the batters 1 inch judgement? It is also the most unpredictable sport on earth RELATIVE TO THE ODDS, now dont ask me is it unpredictable that NYY will beat the Nats bc theyll prolly be -300 when they play, the ones who bet on it continuously would be broke everyone else would bet on it, throwup and never bet again

No doubt activity at books drops to nothing during the baseball only season

[Dark Horse]

And yet it could be the easiest sport to beat, if you know what you're doing. I understand where you're coming from, because I could have worded it the same way a few years ago. I've been learning from a guy who is up a documented 140 units on his RL plays for the season. Math-based approach. Just know that it can be done. You just haven't looked hard enough.

[G's pks]

All I use is stats... I now very rarely try to pick a game.... I let my system be right or wrong.... What does my system use? You guessed it stats... If you think stats do not work, take a look in my baseball thread and record... GL G.

[bettilimbroke999]

Guys if you enjoy betting baseball more power to ya, I'm tellin ya there is no math-based approach that's going to tell ya how many hits a hitters going to put down the line or through the gaps tonight, how many errors a team is going to have, how much worse or better a pitcher's going to throw tonight than normal.

But enjoy your bets I hope you win, I have bet baseball for 5 years believe me I know the score, everybody during baseball tries to come up with some fukin system, the truth is the only system you need is save your money for football season.

[Dark Horse]

The other side of the coin, without which there would be no coin.

[G's pks]

Guys if you enjoy betting baseball more power to ya, I'm tellin ya there is no math-based approach that's going to tell ya how many hits a hitters going to put down the line or through the gaps tonight, how many errors a team is going to have, how much worse or better a pitcher's going to throw tonight than normal.

But enjoy your bets I hope you win, I have bet baseball for 5 years believe me I know the score, everybody during baseball tries to come up with some fukin system, the truth is the only system you need is save your money for football season.

there are actually many winning systems... Just the lack of discipline in betting approach and not following the system/systems properly...

Also believing no one is winning you are fooling yourself. Take a look in the baseball forum several are doing well with systems and others just with their capping skills.

[bettilimbroke999]

I'd won at NFL the 3 previous years before last year, it took me losing last year to realize the 3 previous years were better results than they should've been bc of luck, but I enjoy watching football and betting on it even if I win a little, lose a little or breakeven in the long run I'll have gotten entertainment out of it, watching some idiot stand there for 3 hours and then finally hear its down the line oh thats a fair ball thats a fair ball (in complete shock bc there was no way of even telling it was fair til the 3rd base ump ruled it) two run double, Braves win

[Hirtcha]

as for Poker

[roasthawg]

Stats are huge in baseball betting as they are in any sport. The problem lies in the fact that the bookies have bigger databases with more stats making for better models. Whatever predictive stat you can come up with it's probably safe to say the bookies already have it in their model if it truly is predictive. They have more experience, funds, and collective brain power then anyone trying to conjure up an advantage with his or her own little regression model based on an easily acquired database of standard statistics.

[reno cool]

but such models can be successful. Which implies:
1.the bookie is geared toward winning the most off the public as a whole,(as in shading the line) and that entails loosing to some sharps.
2. And/or, the bookies model isn't as sophisticated as a top gamblers.
I'd guess both are true.

[Nickelicious]

I've always thought baseball was generally considered the easiest sport to beat. I'm sure that is due to a variety of factors. A 162-game season would tend to make you believe that statistics would play a bigger role in predicting outcomes, especially after a couple months into the season. The NFL has 16 critical games in 17 short weeks (and even less in college) and basketball has a 7- or 8-man rotation, producing a hotbed of critical analyses that must be performed from game to game. With baseball, the season stretches on and on through 6 months and verifiable trends can be identified through statistical analysis.

The NFL will always be the king of sports gambling, but for the math geeks out there, baseball will provide more opportunities to leverage their skill to generate dollars in their bank.

[donjuan]

Please share your poker thoughts on poker tournaments when possible.

[CashMoney]

How do stats mean nothing when betting baseball when the entire game is based off of statistics. Statistic are used in virtually every aspect of the game. That's why you'll see a hitter who is hitting .220 for the season hitting against a lights out reliever. Why? It's because the hitter is hitting .390 against that particular pitcher and took him deep twice.

You cannot be successful betting on baseball solely based on stats but stats allow me to arrive at an educated guess as to what side I should be on. It's understanding the stats you are seeing which will allows me to be successful more often then not.

For example, if I'm looking at a game and see that a pitcher has a high ERA but has been lights out posting an ERA of 2.50 over his last 4 starts I want to see what teams he posted that ERA against. His may have been lights out because he was pitching against teams with a weak offense. I want to see how he has pitched against that particular teams and teams that are similar to the quality of the team he is now set to face.

You cannot bet solely on stats but to say stats are not important is absolutely insane. It's about stats, trends and matchups.

[Zelda]

Reading through all the...stuff...on here, i get the feeling that most of you guys change your opinion on a daily basis. One day i see you writing "You cannot beat Pinny long term blah blah", the next day Justin (just an example, sorry pal...) writes that he just needs to spend 1-2h more on a game to pick off Pinny openers (LOL).
Because they mean nothing. That´s why you can bet 5k a pop on an early mlb line, right, i got that.

Most of you "sharps" here do what i do: you pick off weak lines if books are too slow.
Watch line services. Wank off if you get a $200 scalp.
That´s cool, you are like me. But you might want to stop acting like Pinny-Beaters and super sharks. Thanks.

[durito]

thanks for the insight Zelda

[durito]

.

[Zelda]

Trying to raise your post count, Durito? Np you r welcome

[roasthawg]

but such models can be successful. Which implies:
1.the bookie is geared toward winning the most off the public as a whole,(as in shading the line) and that entails loosing to some sharps.
2. And/or, the bookies model isn't as sophisticated as a top gamblers.
I'd guess both are true.

Assumption #2 is where you're off base imo... bookies models are surely more sophisticated than 99.9% of "top gamblers" since their databases are better. A model is only as good as it's inputs... the trick is in having more/better inputs than the bookies and imo this is not likely. Odds are they have all of the predictive stats you are using plus a whole bunch more rendering their models "sharper" than yours. You might be able to cherry pick games that look to be +ev and turn a profit short term but long term you are going to lose money based upon the simple fact that your "+ev" is based upon an inferior model's evaluation of a game as compared to a much sharper model.

[durito]

so why do books move their lines then?

and why is the closing line more efficient than the opener?

[Dark Horse]

Books don't need to have pinpoint accuracy. They already have a huge edge in juice. Their soft spot is that they have to put up lines for every game. Players who do work with pinpoint accuracy will beat the books in select games. Why should the books even care? They can always kick such players out.

[roasthawg]

so why do books move their lines then?

and why is the closing line more efficient than the opener?

They move the lines to balance the money and due to a change in situations prior to game-time. New information regarding injuries, weather, player dnp's, etc. all come out the closer you get to game-time. Assuming the books have very, very sharp models they would obviously take all of these factors into account meaning the more up to date information they have the sharper their lines will be. It's not my opinion that money sharpens lines, I think the books sharpen their own lines as they receive more information.

I'm not claiming to know any of this for a fact... it's just the conclusion I've come to after attempting to exploit the book's lines w/statistical modeling myself. I've attacked it from many, many different angles with progressively more advanced databases w/out much luck long-term. Sure I can give you a hundred different models that are big winners in the past but going forward they are nothing better than a coin flip proposition (long-term). It's just my experience though... if anyone's found a model that is truly +ev then more power to them.

[roasthawg]

Books don't need to have pinpoint accuracy. They already have a huge edge in juice. Their soft spot is that they have to put up lines for every game. Players who do work with pinpoint accuracy will beat the books in select games. Why should the books even care? They can always kick such players out.

The problem with this is that even if you are cherry picking only a select few games you are still working under the assumption that on said game your model is better than the books. I doubt that is ever actually the case.

[durito]

The problem with this is that even if you are cherry picking only a select few games you are still working under the assumption that on said game your model is better than the books. I doubt that is ever actually the case.

Then answer my questions.

[roasthawg]

Then answer my questions.

Already did... see the post before the one you quoted.

[Dark Horse]

I doubt that is ever actually the case.

You wouldn't be the first to translate a personal experience into an absolute statement.

[roasthawg]

You wouldn't be the first to translate a personal experience into an absolute statement.

This is definitely all just my opinion based on my experience... I'm not meaning to come off as knowing any of this for a fact. I do however strongly believe that my opinion in this matter is accurate.

[durito]

Sorry didn't see your post.

And don't want to argue about it, but there are certainly individuals/groups out there with profitable models in every sport. And the books move their lines when they bet.

[donjuan]

They move the lines to balance the money and due to a change in situations prior to game-time. New information regarding injuries, weather, player dnp's, etc. all come out the closer you get to game-time. Assuming the books have very, very sharp models they would obviously take all of these factors into account meaning the more up to date information they have the sharper their lines will be. It's not my opinion that money sharpens lines, I think the books sharpen their own lines as they receive more information.

I'm not claiming to know any of this for a fact... it's just the conclusion I've come to after attempting to exploit the book's lines w/statistical modeling myself. I've attacked it from many, many different angles with progressively more advanced databases w/out much luck long-term. Sure I can give you a hundred different models that are big winners in the past but going forward they are nothing better than a coin flip proposition (long-term). It's just my experience though... if anyone's found a model that is truly +ev then more power to them.

Yikes.

[Scorpion]

In predicting an individual game, it all comes down to one of the batters squaring one pitch out of the park for 2 or 3 runs, key errors (puts men on base, usually advances runner(s) and essentially gives them extra outs) or getting lucky and hitting some pitches down the line, you can average out the number of times that happens but never even close to accurate enough to be able to determine which side is the right side to take, if anyone makes money consistently betting on MLB year after year I'd like to meet them, the only system that even makes any sense is blindly taking all the underdogs but over time not even sure that works

You can win in MLB and NHL but its not enough for 6+ months of work
I dont understand why more books dont offer dime lines

[durito]

what's not enough?

[Dark Horse]

This is definitely all just my opinion based on my experience... I'm not meaning to come off as knowing any of this for a fact. I do however strongly believe that my opinion in this matter is accurate.

In that case you may want to examine your belief more closely.
Why, after all, would you voluntarily allow a strong belief to take the place of an unknown fact?

Beliefs take on different shapes and forms. There is the self-hypnosis that has no value. There is the hypothesis, the initial belief in a possibility in order to examine it. There is dogma, the inflexible group hypnosis that shuts out all questioning.

Beliefs are irrelevant unless you're willing to destroy them. If a belief withstands every attempt at its total annihilation, it can no longer be considered a belief. A problem is that most people tend to protect their beliefs, rather than test and destroy them.