This is about as bad as a line can get.
You have perhaps the best pitcher in baseball at home against the worst team in baseballs worst starter.
On paper I can't imagine a single matchup in all of baseball that could produce a higher line.
If you asked me 2 weeks ago what matchup in MLB would create the largest line in baseball .
I would have told you Kershaw vs Norris and the Braves.
I don't think it's possible for any other matchup to be -430 this season besides this one.
So this will go down as the most chalky line of the entire season .
You have perhaps the best pitcher in baseball at home against the worst team in baseballs worst starter.
On paper I can't imagine a single matchup in all of baseball that could produce a higher line.
If you asked me 2 weeks ago what matchup in MLB would create the largest line in baseball .
I would have told you Kershaw vs Norris and the Braves.
I don't think it's possible for any other matchup to be -430 this season besides this one.
So this will go down as the most chalky line of the entire season .
It'd been even worse, -455 maybe, were it not for Seager singlehandedly beating The ATL in last night's game...
-1.5 is still -181.
Dodgers Over 4 runs is -130....LAD TT OV is usually as stress-filled affair, asking them to score 5 Runs?
<tbody>
</tbody>
<tbody>
</tbody>
<tbody>
</tbody>
-1.5 is still -181.
Dodgers Over 4 runs is -130....LAD TT OV is usually as stress-filled affair, asking them to score 5 Runs?
| <cite>B.Norris & C.Kershaw must start for action</cite> | |||||||
| Sat 6/4 | 5911 ATL F.Freeman total bases | <input id="radiox" value="M1_65" name="radiox" type="radio">+115 | |||||
| 10:05PM | 5912 LOS A.Gonzalez total bases | <input id="radiox" value="M2_65" name="radiox" type="radio">-145 |
<tbody>
</tbody>
| <cite>B.Norris & C.Kershaw must start for action</cite> | |||||||
| Sat 6/4 | 2911 ATL/LOS score 1st inn yes | <input id="radiox" value="M1_20" name="radiox" type="radio">+125 | |||||
| 10:05PM | 2912 ATL/LOS no score 1st inn | <input id="radiox" value="M2_20" name="radiox" type="radio">-145 |
<tbody>
</tbody>
| <cite>B.Norris & C.Kershaw must start for action</cite> | |||||||
| Sat 6/4 | 1911 ATL scores first | <input id="radiox" value="M1_5" name="radiox" type="radio">+155 | |||||
| 10:05PM | 1912 LOS scores first | <input id="radiox" value="M2_5" name="radiox" type="radio">-175 |
<tbody>
</tbody>
!/
A lot of these Arrieta lines have been in the -250 range, which seems ridiculous at face, but if you have bet it the last 24 times you are 23-1. That means if the line averages -250 and you bet to win 100 each time you are +2050.
The true line should be closer to -500 in some cases, as proven by the results. There are Arrieta games where I truly feel the Cubs would win 9 of 10 of them. If that is the true win probability in my mind and the posted line is -300, why not?
I know a lot of people who won't bet big faves cause they refuse to pay the juice. To me that is shortsighted, you're passing up half of the value spectrum. Value is value is value - discrepancy between posted line and true win probability. Whether that comes in the form of a big fave or a dog is irrelevant.
The true line should be closer to -500 in some cases, as proven by the results. There are Arrieta games where I truly feel the Cubs would win 9 of 10 of them. If that is the true win probability in my mind and the posted line is -300, why not?
I know a lot of people who won't bet big faves cause they refuse to pay the juice. To me that is shortsighted, you're passing up half of the value spectrum. Value is value is value - discrepancy between posted line and true win probability. Whether that comes in the form of a big fave or a dog is irrelevant.
