Debating on doing that all NBA season. I was wondering has anyone tried it and if so has it been less stressfull. I wonder why people don't just play ML on all sports and disregard all spread bets. It would cut down on bad beats,IMO. Your team would just have to win game. Though I never have done this I think people just can't relate ML to spread so they don't do it. Interested if I'm on to something in NBA or NFL.
that would be easier knowing your bet is actually trying to win the game and take alot of luck out of the equation. I think alot of people, myself include have a hard time with converting spreads into ML confidently. If anything I wonder if anyone has explored this it just seems to me to add a little more skill and a little less luck to capping games.hellah10 said:
Ice Man, welcome to the RX. I have enjoyed reading your post so far, you know what you are talking about. My respone to your question would be value. I never want to be any type of steriotypical player, only to play where I have the best of it. Depending on the numbers available to you should dictate which way you make your play. I personally have played many dog ML's that have lost and would have covered with the points and as you know that leaves a sh!t taste.
thanks lurked here for over 2 years before joining. feel like I already know alot of you. I too have played ML's in the past but I'm talking strictly, all plays. We mostly do it in bases and think nothing of it. It just seems to make alot more sense in hoops but I just don't have enough info on ML's to be sure. I guess I have such a hard time with how much luck is involved in the end of hoops and trying to find a way to lessen it.randyrohm said:
It can be profittable, and more so if you get the apex of the number more often than not. That doesn't mean you have a better shot to win, but if you constanly are betting +140 when you could have gotten +150 it all adds up. Only takes 10 of those to make a full bet up. So instead of collecting 1500 you get back 1400.
Makes a lot more difference than getting +4 versus plus 3. Because the line isn't paying you a full commision like a ML is. Meaning +4 at -107 still pays 100 per 107 bet, just the same at +3 will. As for when the best line wins and a "worse" line loses, hard to determine their value, but less than 5 cents overall for sure. Especially when the "worst" line is still usually a push, rather than a loss.
But getting the BEST ML is FAR more VALUABLE than getting the best SPREAD.
Makes a lot more difference than getting +4 versus plus 3. Because the line isn't paying you a full commision like a ML is. Meaning +4 at -107 still pays 100 per 107 bet, just the same at +3 will. As for when the best line wins and a "worse" line loses, hard to determine their value, but less than 5 cents overall for sure. Especially when the "worst" line is still usually a push, rather than a loss.
But getting the BEST ML is FAR more VALUABLE than getting the best SPREAD.
I feel odd giving "advise" on the NBA I quit betting the regular season a couple years ago. But that doesn't mean that getting angles on games is impossible, just have to know when and where to look.
Also NEVER watch a hoops game you have money on. That is the single most important thing I can tell you. Also if you lose by a point don't go read a play by play or watch sportscenter to see how you lost. Forget it and move on. The emotional highs and lows of basketball are 50 times worse than even the NFL.
One other thing I can say on it. Watch out for road dogs, and home favorites. Books will hedge a spread higher on a home team to deter exactly what you are talking about...taking the ML(on the fave). So sometimes there is more value on a road dog with the spread rather than the ML. But that is where it gets tricky, because the refs know this too, so you have to figure out or at least hope, you are on the same side they are on.
NBA is a tough gig, if it were all level then it wouldn't be nearly so hard, but with crooked refs, and teams that dont try half the time I just walked away from it. NCAA keeps me in more than enough action, and besides I start my poker season here pretty soon, so it all works out.
Also NEVER watch a hoops game you have money on. That is the single most important thing I can tell you. Also if you lose by a point don't go read a play by play or watch sportscenter to see how you lost. Forget it and move on. The emotional highs and lows of basketball are 50 times worse than even the NFL.
One other thing I can say on it. Watch out for road dogs, and home favorites. Books will hedge a spread higher on a home team to deter exactly what you are talking about...taking the ML(on the fave). So sometimes there is more value on a road dog with the spread rather than the ML. But that is where it gets tricky, because the refs know this too, so you have to figure out or at least hope, you are on the same side they are on.
NBA is a tough gig, if it were all level then it wouldn't be nearly so hard, but with crooked refs, and teams that dont try half the time I just walked away from it. NCAA keeps me in more than enough action, and besides I start my poker season here pretty soon, so it all works out.
HOFFA adds: I won't touch anything over -130 to -135 myself. Chalk is death...
SH: Nonsense. (with a friendly smile)
A strong NBA team will win 75% or more of their home games, so this presents possible value up to -250 or more.
RR, I use the ML in a lot of my basketball betting. I'll try to demonstrate it as we open up next week...
Let's hope my demonstration is in the Black....heh
SH: Nonsense. (with a friendly smile)
A strong NBA team will win 75% or more of their home games, so this presents possible value up to -250 or more.
RR, I use the ML in a lot of my basketball betting. I'll try to demonstrate it as we open up next week...
Let's hope my demonstration is in the Black....heh
SSI said:
Not if they (favs) are at home and the books have shaded the spread to make the ML a little higher. For example a team is 15-0 against a certain team at home, well insteadof posting that team -4/-5, they hedge them up to -6/-7 to get that extra juice on them. Most guys will bet those situational games like that one the ML. So the books force them to lay -300/-330 instead of "just" 240/260, seen it a lot, and the HT usually wins by 3-4, SU but not a cover.
There's an old adage, "odds on, no boots" which although meant more for Horseracing, like Jimmy H says, is the same in any sport. Betting M/Ls is not an exact science where certain figures dictate, like all betting, the Number one priority is being right in your initial capping and then making a judgement on whats on offer.
Case in point being last week, I made Denver a 3pt Fav at the Giants. The best I could get was +2.5@ -1.08, whereas I got +237 on the M/L and of course lost. So alot of feel has to go into all bets, and its that that makes the difference.
As I have said before, God didnt give you nuts just to hold sperm, its also an early warning system of impending doom. If they dissappear as you are contemplating a bet, beware.:drink:
Case in point being last week, I made Denver a 3pt Fav at the Giants. The best I could get was +2.5@ -1.08, whereas I got +237 on the M/L and of course lost. So alot of feel has to go into all bets, and its that that makes the difference.
As I have said before, God didnt give you nuts just to hold sperm, its also an early warning system of impending doom. If they dissappear as you are contemplating a bet, beware.:drink:
