37% baseball betting method

[Bostongambler]

Baseball is right around the corner so just thought I would bring this to light. It’s been a constant method for advanced baseball betters for some time now.

Even the worst teams in the league win roughly 37% of the time. 60-102 is a terrible season but they are still winning at this 37% clip. Now take into account that in most of those games they will be underdogs not to mention big underdogs.

A lighter scale of a martingale might be the play for some on the lower teams this baseball season. Best of luck everyone, BG

[Sam Odom]

BG


Sammy's bump of a 15yo thread this morning inspired this one

Thanks for the insight

[eaglesfan371]

Can someone backtrack past 5 years and simple analysis tell us how dogs +170 or higher (ex +200) have performed?

Seems like a simple understanding that would be profitable in some cases.

[Bostongambler]

BG


Sammy's bump of a 15yo thread this morning inspired this one

Thanks for the insight

Yes sir Sammy!!! Plus I can smell spring in the air. Along with stale beer & hot dogs.

[Sam Odom]

Yes sir Sammy!!! Plus I can smell spring in the air. Along with stale beer & hot dogs.

If Sammy could... he would be getting a woodie

[Bostongambler]

Can someone backtrack past 5 years and simple analysis tell us how dogs +170 or higher (ex +200) have performed?

Seems like a simple understanding that would be profitable in some cases.

Another system that I would like to see data on , some swear by it. And that is the 3 game trend. Where as soon as a team wins 3 games in a row then start betting them and some say it more than not goes to 6-7 games or more. And also the other way where as soon as a team losers 3 in a row bet against them as well. The thinking is they will keep the losing streak going.

[Sam Odom]

Trends

always follow a trend

[danshan11]

323-940 (-2.23, 25.6%) avg line: 234.2 / -273.0 on / against: -$18,760 / +$6,138 ROI: -14.9% / +1.8% 418-590 (-0.86, 41.5%) avg line: 115.2 / -129.0 on / against: -$11,240 / +$5,340 ROI: -11.1% / +4.1% 623-583-56 (0.61, 51.7%) avg total: 8.5 over / under: -$1,271 / -$9,788 ROI: -0.9% / -7.0%

[danshan11]

1887-4068 (-1.67, 31.7%) avg line: 190.6 / -216.6 on / against: -$53,070 / +$5,792 ROI: -8.9% / +0.4% 2284-2421 (-0.25, 48.5%) avg line: -108.0 / -104.9 on / against: -$33,279 / +$5,205 ROI: -6.3% / +1.0% 2830-2820-295 (0.51, 50.1%) avg total: 8.5 over / under: -$23,796 / -$29,435 ROI: -3.7% / -4.5%

[danshan11]

5028-4647 (0.21, 52.0%) avg line: -120.1 / 107.2 on / against: -$30,594 / -$18,652 ROI: -2.4% / -1.6% 3699-3965 (-0.10, 48.3%) avg line: -101.9 / -112.4 on / against: -$36,480 / -$7,246 ROI: -3.8% / -0.7% 4519-4665-466 (0.42, 49.2%) avg total: 8.6 over / under: -$56,617 / -$30,800

[danshan11]

4498-5074 (-0.28, 47.0%) avg line: 108.7 / -121.6 on / against: -$35,259 / -$12,951 ROI: -3.2% / -1.0% 3880-3689 (0.06, 51.3%) avg line: -112.1 / -102.1 on / against: -$16,652 / -$28,372 ROI: -1.7% / -3.0% 4521-4569-451 (0.46, 49.7%) avg total: 8.6 over / under: -$46,328 / -$41,049 ROI: -4.4% / -3.9%

[Bluehorseshoe]

Baseball is right around the corner so just thought I would bring this to light. It’s been a constant method for advanced baseball betters for some time now.

Even the worst teams in the league win roughly 37% of the time. 60-102 is a terrible season but they are still winning at this 37% clip. Now take into account that in most of those games they will be underdogs not to mention big underdogs.

A lighter scale of a martingale might be the play for some on the lower teams this baseball season. Best of luck everyone, BG

I would never martingale a bad team. A bad team could reel off 13 losses in a row.

[Sam Odom]

danshan11

[danshan11]

599-1510 (-2.02, 28.4%) avg line: 195.9 / -217.4 on / against: -$36,465 / +$24,448 ROI: -17.3% / +5.3% 960-1145 (-0.52, 45.6%) avg line: -105.6 / -109.3 on / against: -$25,920 / +$11,770 ROI: -11.0% / +4.9% 1010-994-102 (0.63, 50.4%) avg total: 8.3 over / under: -$7,261 / -$10,825 ROI: -3.1% / -4.7%

[danshan11]

the thing you got to remember is these trend results are just NOISE, yes it has 1000s of results and looks simple just bet against the big dog and you will win at a 4% roi seems simple enough, but every game is independent of each other. think of this in the same idea of betting black after 3 blacks in roulette, those previous game results have zero impact on the current game. you could argue they are losing so many in a row so they could possibly just keep losing but if you add another L or take away one loss the stats change because of randomness not because a certain number of games they lost.

[Sam Odom]

...but every game is independent of each other. think of this in the same idea of betting black after 3 blacks in roulette, those previous game results have zero impact on the current game...

a little misleading

there are real reasons why a sports team is losing unlike a Table Game

of course the spread tries to adjust for those reasons

[danshan11]

a little misleading

there are real reasons why a sports team is losing unlike a Table Game

of course the spread tries to adjust for those reasons

the line adjustment does exactly that, it accounts for team performance especially recently. is it possible that from those results, the line is not discounting them enough? I could see that as a reasonable possibility.

think of an example of
Broncos play Raiders and the line is -8
and broncs blow out the raiders
now next week same players and same teams same stadium and now the line is 8.5
some could argue that the line has not adjusted enough for the last game result, I think that could be feasible but not likely

[Bostongambler]

I would never martingale a bad team. A bad team could reel off 13 losses in a row.

I absolutely wouldn’t either. Remember the year the orioles lost like 22 straight to start the season. It’s more of a way of thinking that even the bottom dwellers win 60 games.

[jjgold]

martingale will empty your bankroll

[Booya711]

37% is my lifetime winning percentage

[Bostongambler]

37% is my lifetime winning percentage

Lol..,

[Bostongambler]

Nah, Booya. Every time I ask you for a play you hit it.

[Bluehorseshoe]

I absolutely wouldn’t either. Remember the year the orioles lost like 22 straight to start the season. It’s more of a way of thinking that even the bottom dwellers win 60 games.

I forget who cleaned me out to start a season. Might have been Joe Torre's Atlanta Braves. Didn't they have a crazy losing streak?

[Bostongambler]

I forget who cleaned me out to start a season. Might have been Joe Torre's Atlanta Braves. Didn't they have a crazy losing streak?

They might of as well, Blue. But I do know the Orioles did.

Braves were terrible in the 80’s even though they had 3 time mvp dale MURPHY

[clockwise1965]

martingale will empty your bankroll

^^^^^ Yep. For sure.

[sweethook]

stay away from the NBA and just bet MLB youl be set for life

[bettingman6]

Baseball is right around the corner so just thought I would bring this to light. It’s been a constant method for advanced baseball betters for some time now.

Even the worst teams in the league win roughly 37% of the time. 60-102 is a terrible season but they are still winning at this 37% clip. Now take into account that in most of those games they will be underdogs not to mention big underdogs.

A lighter scale of a martingale might be the play for some on the lower teams this baseball season. Best of luck everyone, BG

Allegedly there is a tendency for bad teams to do better early in the year, but do worse as the year goes on. It might be good to bet on these teams in April, although not later on.

[bettingman6]

Another system that I would like to see data on , some swear by it. And that is the 3 game trend. Where as soon as a team wins 3 games in a row then start betting them and some say it more than not goes to 6-7 games or more. And also the other way where as soon as a team losers 3 in a row bet against them as well. The thinking is they will keep the losing streak going.

You’re dead wrong. In any sport, it’s a good idea to bet against teams on hot streaks and bet for teams on cold streaks. Since square bettors will overvalue teams on a hot streak and look disproportionately at the last 3-5 games rather than the product as a whole, it usually drives the spread/moneylines up more than it should for the “hot” team and down more than it should for the “cold” team.

The only exception to this rule is if a team is doing worse over the last few games because of injuries, or if they’ve been doing better over the last few games because they’ve got players coming back from injuries. Then there would be a real tangible reason why a team’s improving or slumping other than the simple variance of a season.

[danshan11]

I dont see any data to support any streak being indicative of any edge by previous wins and or losses. this is a fallacy lots of bettors fall into. Each game is independent of each other and the lines are still efficient after 10 straight wins or 10 straight losses.

111-99 (0.52, 52.9%) avg line: -141.6 / 126.7 on / against: -$1,338 / +$218 ROI: -4.2% / +0.9% 85-77 (0.22, 52.5%) avg line: -111.9 / -103.1 on / against: +$226 / -$1,075 ROI: +1.1% / -5.4% 91-114-4 (0.05, 44.4%) avg total: 8.6 over / under: -$3,445 / +$1,460 ROI: -14.9% / +6.4%

[danshan11]

106-137 (-0.59, 43.6%) avg line: 136.1 / -152.6 on / against: -$213 / -$1,112 ROI: -0.8% / -2.9% 104-69 (0.63, 60.1%) avg line: -112.5 / -101.1 on / against: +$3,187 / -$4,076 ROI: +14.4% / -19.5% 110-120-11 (0.28, 47.8%) avg total: 8.6 over / under: -$2,122 / $0 ROI: -8.0% / 0.0%

and any data you can bit and piece together that shows there is something to the streak is purely noise

[Chi_archie]

I dont see any data to support any streak being indicative of any edge by previous wins and or losses. this is a fallacy lots of bettors fall into. Each game is independent of each other and the lines are still efficient after 10 straight wins or 10 straight losses.

111-99 (0.52, 52.9%) avg line: -141.6 / 126.7 on / against: -$1,338 / +$218 ROI: -4.2% / +0.9% 85-77 (0.22, 52.5%) avg line: -111.9 / -103.1 on / against: +$226 / -$1,075 ROI: +1.1% / -5.4% 91-114-4 (0.05, 44.4%) avg total: 8.6 over / under: -$3,445 / +$1,460 ROI: -14.9% / +6.4%

yep

tons of gamblers are HUGE On the long win streak and losing streak. Brock Landers comes to mind as someone that brings it up many times a baseball season (that should tell you something)

its a lot of confirmation bias and selective memory. Most people got involved in betting on or against some streak at some point in their gambling life and the streak went crazy long. So they almost fetishize that streak and treat it as the rule rather than the exception.

[TheMoneyShot]

Baseball is right around the corner so just thought I would bring this to light. It’s been a constant method for advanced baseball betters for some time now.

Even the worst teams in the league win roughly 37% of the time. 60-102 is a terrible season but they are still winning at this 37% clip. Now take into account that in most of those games they will be underdogs not to mention big underdogs.

A lighter scale of a martingale might be the play for some on the lower teams this baseball season. Best of luck everyone, BG

I get what you're trying to say... but it's still hard to win. Too many variables on how a team wins at 37%. Furthermore... how many games every day? 15 or so? You could lose your bankroll in 2 days... just chasing.

I think out of all 4 sports.... MLB and NHL are very hard to cap.

[Chi_archie]

I get what you're trying to say... but it's still hard to win. Too many variables on how a team wins at 37%. Furthermore... how many games every day? 15 or so? You could lose your bankroll in 2 days... just chasing.

I think out of all 4 sports.... MLB and NHL are very hard to cap.

15 games a day?

I think he is talking about taking the 100 loss kind of teams only.

Baseball is prob the easiest pro sport to beat in gambling in terms of finding edge, beating lines, line shopping, ect.


its the volume, grind, and money management (variance tolerance) that prevent it from being more lucrative for more recreational gamblers.

in terms of having pure #'s to cap, there is nothing close to the wealth of info out there for baseball.

[TheMoneyShot]

15 games a day?

I think he is talking about taking the 100 loss kind of teams only.

Baseball is prob the easiest pro sport to beat in gambling in terms of finding edge, beating lines, line shopping, ect.


its the volume, grind, and money management (variance tolerance) that prevent it from being more lucrative for more recreational gamblers.

in terms of having pure #'s to cap, there is nothing close to the wealth of info out there for baseball.

I'll have to follow you Arch for a season. You know MLB more than most. I can't ever find rhythm or comfort zone.

[Chi_archie]

I'll have to follow you Arch for a season. You know MLB more than most. I can't ever find rhythm or comfort zone.

I haven't taken it serious or put time into it in 4-5 years.

I don't know 70% of the players on the rosters.

spent a few hours on fangraphs last weekend and started to get the itch back, maybe i'll start capping again for real and do a thread this season. seems daunting to re learn all that i've missed in terms of players on non AL/NL central teams over the past half decade though.