Question

Search

UF. Champion U.
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Messages
12,281
Tokens
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.
 

Don Corleone's most prized retainer......
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
1,091
Tokens
Boxslayer32 said:
It's safe to say a team like Baltimore will never go on a 10 game losing streak

That sort of thinking absolutely crushed a buddy of mine a couple of years back. He would wait until a team lost 4 in a row and then start doubling up until they won.

I think it was the Reds, maybe the O's, that went on a 10 or 11 game skid that took him down 1-2-4-8-16-32-64 units at the end.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
14,280
Tokens
Let's say you want to win 100. You lose 8 in a row all at -110. Roughly:
lose 110
lose 230
lose 490
lose 1040
lose 2180
lose 4500
lose 9500
lose 21,000

So if you lose 8 in a row you're down around 40 grand, all trying to win a lousy 100 bucks. Better have a BIG bankroll and low expectations.
 

New member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
2,220
Tokens
San Diego were leading their division just recently and went on to lose 9 in a row.. on game 9 you would roughly have to risk 42,000 to win 100 dollars... for the most part this theory will work,, but all it takes is for one good team to go in the tank and it will cripple you for a long time... Same deal for the Yankees around -170 to -200 each game losing 5 games in a row as they did earlier this season..
 

SSI

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
14,040
Tokens
cant do it box, i love systems and math as much as the next guy but your suggesting a martingale..

however aspects of this can be worked into a system but not just double up until you win..

one way is to let a good team, lose the first game at home in a 3 game series, then simply bet them in game 2, if losing game 2, double up on game 3.. if they win either, you win your 1 unit... if they lose both games 2 and 3, you simply lose 3 units plus juice.. this can be applied to overs and unders and i am using a version of this currently.. but not endlessly..
 

Mighty Moe
Joined
Oct 8, 2004
Messages
463
Tokens
I was thinking about this the other day myself, so I'm glad that you brought it up. What if you were to do the same thing but instead of taking a team, you play only the over or the under the whole time? Are there any stats showing streaks of o/u? I would think that the odds makers would keep adjusting the numbers to reflect the streak and improve your chances? Just a thought.
 

New member
Joined
Mar 11, 2005
Messages
171
Tokens
I think Baltimore has only 1 of their last 13. Got swept by a shitty D Ray team. Only won one against the slumping Rangers and just got swept at home by the ChiSox. I understand what you are saying, but Baltimore would be a poor choice now. They don't look good and the Palmerio thing makes it much worse.
 

Rx Wizard
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,438
Tokens
LOL. I tried doing that at a $2 blackjack table once. I won about 4 hands, made $2 profit per hand. Then...the inevitable losing streak. I went to -2, -4, -8, -16, -32, -64, -128, you get the idea. I finally stopped when I hit -128 and bet around $20, my remaining bankroll. Everyone at the table thought I was nuts, shaking their heads. Sure enough, the next hand is a winner. I double up my $40 and promptly lose it.:sad3:
 

SSI

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
14,040
Tokens
far better with totals than sides.. still not a good idea....
 

in your heart, you know i'm right
Joined
Mar 21, 2002
Messages
14,785
Tokens
this sort of thinking will get you in the poor house quicker than just about anything.
 

Winnipeg Jets forever
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
7,638
Tokens
Florida had a run of 15 straight overs that ended on July 24, so one would still have to be careful with totals. Maybe start after 10 consecutive overs or unders.
 

New member
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Messages
98
Tokens
I took in in the ass recently when I tried something similar - taking the under on the Marlins. They went over 15 games in a row.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,108,276
Messages
13,450,128
Members
99,404
Latest member
byen17188
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com