you will probably get some conflicting views on this.
i have a spreadsheet that uses each team's first inning performance (% scored and allowed) as well as the career 1st inning ERA of the starting pitchers. i also factor in if the teams are following a "YES" or "NO" in the previous game.
personally, i prefer "YES's" to "NO's" but will play a "NO" if my data points me that way.
the juice makes these tough. i'm told it used to be easier when you could shop lines with netteller.
good luck
lazzonya
i have a spreadsheet that uses each team's first inning performance (% scored and allowed) as well as the career 1st inning ERA of the starting pitchers. i also factor in if the teams are following a "YES" or "NO" in the previous game.
personally, i prefer "YES's" to "NO's" but will play a "NO" if my data points me that way.
the juice makes these tough. i'm told it used to be easier when you could shop lines with netteller.
good luck
lazzonya
Here's the quick and dirty answer as to why 'NO' gets burned alot...
It takes most pitchers an inning or two to "find a groove". Both teams are sending their best hitters (1-2-3, and possibly 4-5 hitters) up to the dish in the 1st inning.
Check out guys like Hudson or Zambrano... even when they pitch gems, the runs they do give up come early in the game rather than late.
It takes most pitchers an inning or two to "find a groove". Both teams are sending their best hitters (1-2-3, and possibly 4-5 hitters) up to the dish in the 1st inning.
Check out guys like Hudson or Zambrano... even when they pitch gems, the runs they do give up come early in the game rather than late.
Crunch and his stylish self-portrait avatar are right on. The YES hits historically at 53%, and that's over 10s of thousands of games. The books offer this prop and shade their lines to gouge the NO bettors, preying on the huge misconception that it's easy for pitchers to get these 6 outs before giving up a run. The hard data proves that that simply isn't the case yet people fall for it and the books clean-up off of the misinformation.
Additionally, people try to use team and pitcher specific data to cap this prop when the vast majority of the time, any differences found are simply random variation and they throw hard earned dollars chasing these random variation ghosts and then wonder why their capping isn't getting them anywhere, because of the small sample sizes. The ONLY variable that has shown to be correlated to the outcomes of this prop is the game's O/U. Quite frankily, anything else is simply noise.
The other key to success with this prop is understanding that a run in the first in an O/U 7.5 game is less likely than a run in the first in an O/U 11 game. Creating your own lines using historical outcomes and stratifying them by the game's O/U is imperative.
VEGAS, you will lose your shirt betting the NO. Over 99% of the time, the NO is a negative expectation bet. I'll use your 2 wagers for today as an example:
NYM/Was NO -130. Historically, the true NO ML for O/Us of 8.5 is +103. The books have sucked you into thinking that the -130 NO is a solid play when in actuality, you are playing a -7.2% expectation play. Meaning, in the long-run, for every $100 you wager, you will lose a net of $7.20.
NYY/TB NO -125. Same thing here, except that it's -6.29%. Don't even get me started on the disaster that is parlaying, much less parlaying two brutal negative expecation plays.
Additionally, people try to use team and pitcher specific data to cap this prop when the vast majority of the time, any differences found are simply random variation and they throw hard earned dollars chasing these random variation ghosts and then wonder why their capping isn't getting them anywhere, because of the small sample sizes. The ONLY variable that has shown to be correlated to the outcomes of this prop is the game's O/U. Quite frankily, anything else is simply noise.
The other key to success with this prop is understanding that a run in the first in an O/U 7.5 game is less likely than a run in the first in an O/U 11 game. Creating your own lines using historical outcomes and stratifying them by the game's O/U is imperative.
VEGAS, you will lose your shirt betting the NO. Over 99% of the time, the NO is a negative expectation bet. I'll use your 2 wagers for today as an example:
NYM/Was NO -130. Historically, the true NO ML for O/Us of 8.5 is +103. The books have sucked you into thinking that the -130 NO is a solid play when in actuality, you are playing a -7.2% expectation play. Meaning, in the long-run, for every $100 you wager, you will lose a net of $7.20.
NYY/TB NO -125. Same thing here, except that it's -6.29%. Don't even get me started on the disaster that is parlaying, much less parlaying two brutal negative expecation plays.
