[JMobile]

That's outrageous. Pitching at home vs the Mets.

[unde0087]

Mets win easy

[Shute]

Too much juice. Throw a little the other way or play RL

[unde0087]

It usually is a setup. Ace pitcher with huge juice seems like it loses more than it wins

[mdunlap3]

It usually is a setup. Ace pitcher with huge juice seems like it loses more than it wins

Could probably SDQL that one...maybe not "Ace pitcher", but certainly how teams do when their starter is a favorite greater than x. What number do you want to be min?

[unde0087]

Could probably SDQL that one...maybe not "Ace pitcher", but certainly how teams do when their starter is a favorite greater than x. What number do you want to be min?

It would be interesting to see the record on teams that were -200 or more this season

[mdunlap3]

You just want to see how teams perform this season when the line is -200 or lower? Correct?

[jjgold]

There's no value went to guys that have a chalk

[Fire in da hole]

he wants to see how teams did when they were greater than -200 fav. If its easy do -250 and -300 too please.

[Fire in da hole]

Im thinking that in baseball, its better to be the other side.

[mdunlap3]

Database Stats for "Favorites with a line of less than -200 in 2017"

SU: Favorite is 49-14 (78%) - 12% ROI, winning by about an average of 2 2/3 runs per game
RL: Favorite is 36-27 (57%) - 6% ROI
OU: 31-32 ( 31 overs, 32 unders)

[mdunlap3]

Database Stats for "Favorites with a line of less than -250 in 2017"

SU: Favorite is 10-1 (91%) - 24% ROI, winning by about an average of 3 1/3 runs per game
RL: Favorite is 9-2 (82%) - 42% ROI
OU: 5-6 ( 5 overs, 6 unders)

[mdunlap3]

Database Stats for "Favorites with a line of less than -300 in 2017"

SU: Favorite is 1-0 (100%) - 27% ROI, this one instance the favorite won by 11 runs
RL: Favorite is 1-0 (100%) - 73% ROI
OU: 1-0 ( 1 over) - 75% ROI

The one observation is based on a game by Clayton Kershaw.

[Fire in da hole]

wow, that is VERY interesting...

[Fire in da hole]

wonder if its due to smaller sample size? you have 2016 data?

[mdunlap3]

Yes, I have the 90s bro.

[krk1030]

why is this a shock? Kershaw at home against a bad team and bad pitcher. why wouldn't he be -300?

[The Giant]

I don't understand those stats. Why are there so few games?

[stevenash]

Too much juice. Throw a little the other way or play RL

Reduced juice -290/+279
Reduced juice run line -1 1/2 runs -135/+135

You know what I like to do in these situations?

Take the first five innings bet - bet the Mets + 1/2 run at +115
If the game is tied 1-1 at the end of five innings, you collect.
I love wagers where you win on a tie.
I make that bet often when a huge pitcher is favored, I bet the first five innings on the dog and grab the 1/2 run at + money.
One of my favorite tricks.

[stevenash]

Database Stats for "Favorites with a line of less than -200 in 2017"

SU: Favorite is 49-14 (78%) - 12% ROI, winning by about an average of 2 2/3 runs per game
RL: Favorite is 36-27 (57%) - 6% ROI
OU: 31-32 ( 31 overs, 32 unders)

I like to pride myself on my reading comprehension skills, and correct me if I am wrong if I am not reading this correctly.
It says favorites are 49 and 14 with favorites of as line less than -200

49 and 14 = 63 there have been a little over 1000 games played so far in this major league season.
You mean there have been only 63 games out of 1000 that have had a betting line of -200?

Something isn't right.

[stealthyburrito]

All in for game 4, Jmobile?

[Waterstpub87]

Fair line.

I get mets 28% vs 72% for dodgers.

[sweethook]

gotta go 80% at -300 to win a unit

[Hu$tle]

Pound it who cares will win

[mdunlap3]

I like to pride myself on my reading comprehension skills, and correct me if I am wrong if I am not reading this correctly.
It says favorites are 49 and 14 with favorites of as line less than -200

49 and 14 = 63 there have been a little over 1000 games played so far in this major league season.
You mean there have been only 63 games out of 1000 that have had a betting line of -200?

Something isn't right.

You're right. It's a little more, there were 82 so far this season.

[The Giant]

You're right. It's a little more, there were 82 so far this season.

82 what?

There would have to be hundreds of games where teams were smaller than -200 favorites this year. Practically every game is under -200, so this 82 makes no sense.

[unde0087]

why is this a shock? Kershaw at home against a bad team and bad pitcher. why wouldn't he be -300?

Kind of like Sale vs Phillies?

[shocka1212]

His last three starts have all been under -200 so this is understandable. Mets probably win, lol. That's MLB for ya. Wheeler just got hammered last start and pulled in less than two so it's not like theres some tired SP on the other side. Done fading Kershaw tho so BOL with that

[stevenash]

Pound it who cares will win

Probably will win.
I got the 300, I really don't need the 100.
I'd rather use the three hundred and make three separate 100 dollar bets, all on spot underdog plays.
If the Kershaw games does shit the bed, say the bullpen blows it in the 12th inning, I'm out 300.
If I used the 300 on 3 underdog plays, say +160, +180 and +200, and I go 2 out of three, I win the +180 game and the +160 game and lose the +200 game I collect 340 and lose 100 for a net +240, even if I win the +180 game and lose the +200 and the +160 I lose 200 on the 2 flats and pick up +160 for the winner for a net loss of a manageable -40.

I know some of you like to hammer 3 to 1 favorites and all, it just goes totally against my bankroll management principles.

[DrunkHorseplayer]

The Dodgers are 41-10 in Kershaw's last 51 starts, the Mets are nothing special and Kershaw is better at home. I won't touch it but gun to head, it's the Dodgers.

[mdunlap3]

82 what?

There would have to be hundreds of games where teams were smaller than -200 favorites this year. Practically every game is under -200, so this 82 makes no sense.

Under meaning less than in the context of the query language. I.e -201 is less than -200

[shocka1212]

Probably will win.
I got the 300, I really don't need the 100.
I'd rather use the three hundred and make three separate 100 dollar bets, all on spot underdog plays.
If the Kershaw games does shit the bed, say the bullpen blows it in the 12th inning, I'm out 300.
If I used the 300 on 3 underdog plays, say +160, +180 and +200, and I go 2 out of three, I win the +180 game and the +160 game and lose the +200 game I collect 340 and lose 100 for a net +240, even if I win the +180 game and lose the +200 and the +160 I lose 200 on the 2 flats and pick up +160 for the winner for a net loss of a manageable -40.

I know some of you like to hammer 3 to 1 favorites and all, it just goes totally against my bankroll management principles.

Like the astros tomorrow.. Oakland is trash. The sweep of the Yankees was more about New York being a classic young team on a west coast road trip

[Sam Odom]

you know what to do...

[shocka1212]

you know what to do...

yea, fade me....cant argue with you there

[krk1030]

Kind of like Sale vs Phillies?

Pretty similar situation.

Notice I gave no opinion on a play, simply stating the line makes total sense.