Baseball: Playing vs. Scalping

Waz · Apr 19, 2006

Let's say you were able to take leads and were ahead of the line movements about 75-80% of the time, and had little movement 10-15% of the time, and the rest of the time the lines moved against you sligthly. Would you rather ride the games out, or lock in a profit by scalping the games. If you could scalp and make roughly $200 a day would you do that? Or would you rather ride it out, where you would PROBABLY make more money, but have 100% risk involved? And remember, we are talking longterm.....all season.

I have a feeling what most people would say on this, but let's open it up for debate.

WVU · Apr 19, 2006

scalp as it only helps fulfill playthrough requirements. Bonuses make you money in this business, not capping. By the time you guys figure this out, prohibition will be upon us

royalfan · Apr 19, 2006

WVU said:
scalp as it only helps fulfill playthrough requirements. Bonuses make you money in this business, not capping. By the time you guys figure this out, prohibition will be upon us

This is poor information. He should be advised to keep the positive expected value wagers that he creates by beating the line move 80 percent of the time. Will win much more this way than going through the bonus whoring tactics.

WVU · Apr 19, 2006

you are so wrong. If you are playing bonuses efficiently, then you are trying to completely lose your bankroll at one side of your scalp. You can get back on your high horse again as you are above playing for bonuses anyway.

Fishhead · Apr 19, 2006

WVU said:
scalp as it only helps fulfill playthrough requirements. Bonuses make you money in this business, not capping. By the time you guys figure this out, prohibition will be upon us

:lolBIG: :lolBIG:

Woody0 · Apr 19, 2006

Waz said:
If you could scalp and make roughly $200 a day would you do that? Or would you rather ride it out, where you would PROBABLY make more money, but have 100% risk involved? And remember, we are talking longterm.....all season.

Translation: "Would you rather play risk-free for a modest return or play with a high risk for a likely greater return."

Frankly I like the risk free stuff.

Hitman26 · Apr 20, 2006

What do you do the 10-15% of the time when the line doesn't move or moves against you?

Santo · Apr 20, 2006

In baseball it wouldn't cost you much to get out, if lines move against you 2 cents (+118/-120) you'll lose less than you make on your (-112/+116) bet...

And with no +/- numbers involved you can't get polished.

Fishhead · Apr 20, 2006

Handicapping and actual wagering a side has accounted for no more than 10% of my total volume wagering over the past 12+ years.

As a modest lifetime 53-55% handicapper, that is the approximate percentage I have deemed to risk on a monthly/yearly in and out basis.

Be it right or wrong, that is the financial strategy that works best and has served me well over the years.

docdekay · Apr 20, 2006

Fishhead said:
Handicapping and actual wagering a side has accounted for no more than 10% of my total volume wagering over the past 12+ years.

As a modest lifetime 54-55% handicapper, that is the approximate percentage I have deemed to risk on a monthly/yearly in and out basis.

Be it right or wrong, that is the financial strategy that works best and has served me well over the years.

A lifetime 54-55% handicapper is not modest and should be making a mint.

A lifetime 53% handicapper against -105 would make a mint.

Santo · Apr 20, 2006

Mine's pretty similar, though I like a lot of action during baseball (my favourite sport to watch), but don't need to wager big to get it.. probably about 0.2% of bankroll is my average play.

winbet · Apr 20, 2006

Santo said:
Mine's pretty similar, though I like a lot of action during baseball (my favourite sport to watch), but don't need to wager big to get it.. probably about 0.2% of bankroll is my average play.

Come on santo, surely you have more than £2 on a game!!!!! :drink:

Fishhead · Apr 20, 2006

docdekay said:
A lifetime 54-55% handicapper is not modest and should be making a mint.

A lifetime 53% handicapper against -105 would make a mint.

One has to take money management/standard deviation/swings and other factors into account.

As I have stated MANY times in this forum, gambling is not a weekly, monthly, or even yearly business........it is a lifetime committment.

Put it this way, not interested/motivated in breaking all-time home run records or even reaching HOF status..........but rather having a very nice and steady injury free career that when its all said and done can look back and say that was a very nice career, and one that was consistant over the years.

In comparison, sort of along the lines of a Phil Niekro/Tim Wakefield/Bert Blyleven career.............much better than having a Doc Gooden/John Rocker type career.

Santo · Apr 20, 2006

winbet said:
Come on santo, surely you have more than £2 on a game!!!!! :drink:

Where were you when they were doing their USA Superiority act the other day ;-)

docdekay · Apr 20, 2006

Fishhead said:
One has to take money management/standard deviation/swings and other factors into account.

As I have stated MANY times in this forum, gambling is not a weekly, monthly, or even yearly business........it is a lifetime committment.

Put it this way, not interested/motivated in breaking all-time home run records or even reaching HOF status..........but rather having a very nice and steady injury free career that when its all said and done can look back and say that was a very nice career, and one that was consistant over the years.

In comparison, sort of along the lines of a Phil Niekro/Tim Wakefield/Bert Blyleven career.............much better than having a Doc Gooden/John Rocker type career.

Look, I'm not trying to get into discussion over what's better.

All i'm saying is that if you have a coin that you can make land on heads 53% of the time you should be making a mint in today's offshore world.

You said 53-55% is modest. I'm saying its remarkable.

Fishhead · Apr 20, 2006

docdekay said:
Look, I'm not trying to get into discussion over what's better.

All i'm saying is that if you have a coin that you can make land on heads 53% of the time you should be making a mint in today's offshore world.

You said 53-55% is modest. I'm saying its remarkable.

Understand completey what you are saying and its all good.

I do ok for myself handicapping.

Question for you, one has a $100,000 bankroll offshore, how much per game do you expect a person that has a 53% win rate over the past 10,000+ games to wager PER GAME?

WorldNumberOne · Apr 20, 2006

i'll take a stab at that :

between 700 and 900

docdekay · Apr 20, 2006

Fishhead said:
Understand completey what you are saying and its all good.

I do ok for myself handicapping.

Question for you, one has a $100,000 bankroll offshore, how much per game do you expect a person that has a 53% win rate over the past 10,000+ games to wager PER GAME?

Approx 1.3% stake per game against -110

In any event, I'm not trying to pass judgement on you. I'm simply trying to illustrate that if one is truly playing with an edge they are firing away at 53% bets day in and day out.

Factor in the climate of today's offshore world with reduced juice and all the experts would be rich.

I understand there are a million ways to skin a cat and make a go at this. I dont throw out my business on the table and am fully aware of what's out there. All i'm saying is that if everyone who claimed to be able to hit 54% did ..... you get my point.

I'm a bettor, not a handicapper. I never was and I never will be.

I was simply addressing the 53-55% "modest" statement.

royalfan · Apr 20, 2006

WVU said:
you are so wrong. If you are playing bonuses efficiently, then you are trying to completely lose your bankroll at one side of your scalp. You can get back on your high horse again as you are above playing for bonuses anyway.

I take all kinds of bonus money to try out books. That is the intended purpose. And I will surely take reup bonus money also. Who wouldn't? This is quite different than the online casino bonus whoring without intent going in of ever playing again that I referred to in Bigbets thread.

Fishhead · Apr 20, 2006

royalfan said:
I take all kinds of bonus money to try out books. That is the intended purpose. And I will surely take reup bonus money also. Who wouldn't? This is quite different than the online casino bonus whoring without intent going in of ever playing again that I referred to in Bigbets thread.

So SONIC BURGER runs a special for two weeks for 19 cent hamburgers and a person eats there 5-6 days a week for this special and never returns again for the $1.99 burgers, he or she is being unethical?

Sorry, in agreement with Bigbet in that thread, and trully have no idea where you are coming from with this moralistic/ethical thinking in regards to this.

To take it one step further, if I were to open an offshore shop and offered a 10% bonus with a 4x rollover and the customer plays through the rollover and leaves, I would be unhappy if they never returned, but I would hold nothing against the individual in anyway, shape, or form............and the morals and ethics of the person would be the furthest thing from my mind.