I've been very busy with work lately and havn't been able to post or research picks much. I had a quick question for more of the "math-oriented" bettors out there that specialize in systems and such.
Why aren't "double-up" or "chasing" systems used more often? For example, take a team that will most likely be a .500 team with poor starting pitching so their lines are never inflated. For example, the Marlins would be a poor choice because you pay heavy juice on their starters. Rather, a team like Baltimore who is roughly .500 with poor starting pitching, so no inflated juice.
And just bet them, if they lose double-up, if they lose triple up.
It's safe to say a team like Baltimore will never go on a 10 game losing streak, and if you have enough to cover them for a 10 game losing streak, why won't it work to keep doubling up until they win. Hypothetically, a 1-4 record could = a profit. For that matter a 1-9 record = a profit.
Is this just no fun? Too easy? Does the cap of maximum betting amount factor in eventually?
I'm sure this has been discussed before, just curious.
Why aren't "double-up" or "chasing" systems used more often? For example, take a team that will most likely be a .500 team with poor starting pitching so their lines are never inflated. For example, the Marlins would be a poor choice because you pay heavy juice on their starters. Rather, a team like Baltimore who is roughly .500 with poor starting pitching, so no inflated juice.
And just bet them, if they lose double-up, if they lose triple up.
It's safe to say a team like Baltimore will never go on a 10 game losing streak, and if you have enough to cover them for a 10 game losing streak, why won't it work to keep doubling up until they win. Hypothetically, a 1-4 record could = a profit. For that matter a 1-9 record = a profit.
Is this just no fun? Too easy? Does the cap of maximum betting amount factor in eventually?
I'm sure this has been discussed before, just curious.