SS
Yes, I am in profit in both types of "offset" plays ((-1.5)/(alt-1.5) and (-1.5)/dog ML.) It is an unusual play, and of course very high capital-to-profit ratio even when it wins, so while you might see one or two of those plays from me almost daily, bear in mind that is out of the whole MLB card and there is not always an opportunity.
Some of the reasoning involved in these plays:
In the (-1.5)/alt(-1.5) plays for example, if the dog is priced under the favourite on the ALT run line that is a big consideration -- in the Minnesota-Chisox game the Chisox is the favourite, yet CWS (-1.5) is +200 vs. Minny (-1.5) being +170. That indicates (to me) perceived weakness of CWS' pitcher or bullpen in their ability to hold down the competition and/or put up points for the team. Nonetheless, they are the favoured team in the game, so those two contradictory factors -- CWS being the favourite and the apparent perceived weakness of CWS pitching or bullpen -- leads me to believe that a play on both sides is the way to go.
Because of the price of failure on a pick like that I always look for situations where both sides of the equation pay at least +140 -- otherwise the potential profit simply does not warrant the risk.
In the (-1.5)/dog plays the reasoning is a lot more simple -- one or both of the teams invovled has a tendency to play iffy ball. In the case today it's the Rangers, who are MLB's money leader by a wide margin and a team on which I have made a good bit of money this year (13-9 +15.02 units when playing Texas as a "money leader" play.) However, even bearing that in mind, Texas does tend to run hot and cold -- you just never know when they're going to take a night off, even if they have a game scheduled. Add to that Anaheim's overall strength as a team, especially at home, and that again signifies to me a play on which I should be running both sides.
The (-1.5)/dog plays are slightly less risky than the (-1.5)/alt(-1.5) plays, so I look for a minimum of +120 on each side rather than +140 as in the latter case.
Regarding playing at MegaSB, I realise that there are cheaper lines out there, but honestly I do not play with so much money or with such seriousness that becoming a line shopper is really worth the trouble. MSB also has a butt-ugly user interface, one of the worst I've seen. That said, I play with them for four reasons: service, service, service and e-gold.
MegaSB has no call centre and relies on e-mail for service, and as such there is never any wrangling with some semi-literate tool who barely speaks English when it's ten minutes until kickoff. If I ever have a question, comment or problem, I get a quick, clear and courteous response to my e-mailed inquiry. I placed my first wager with MegaSB at the start of 2003 MLB and have never had a problem go unresolved, never had a dispute over a line movement or result, never had a slow credit to or withdrawal from my account, etc. I prefer that kind of thing to half points and $ 0.10 on a line. I would say that it would probably be a fair assesment that pro gamblers who bet large amounts of money and large volumes of action may not be satisfied with MegaSB because of the prices, but for me service goes a long way.
Additionally, MegaSB is the only sportsbook of any meaningful repute that accepts
e-gold for deposits. As a refugee from the banking system I need alternatives like e-gold, which unlike Neteller, Firepay etc. are not linked into the banking system and therefore are a lot more user-friendly to people like me. I always look into other books that accept e-gold or possibly
WebMoney but so far MSB has been my choice for the last year and change.
Phaedrus
