Pitching and Lines
The lines come out way before the line ups so I have a few pitchers on each team I either bet for or against. I like to limit my bet per day so the lines often determine which ones I go for or against. For Instance tommorrow Halladay at +105 is good value a play on Halladay or the under is a reasonable possibility.
The lines come out way before the line ups so I have a few pitchers on each team I either bet for or against. I like to limit my bet per day so the lines often determine which ones I go for or against. For Instance tommorrow Halladay at +105 is good value a play on Halladay or the under is a reasonable possibility.
I attempt to approach all sports capping from an actuarial basis, but none more so than baseball.
While there's no certainty how each team will do over the course of six months, there is imo, reasonable forecasting possible within established ranges.
We start with knowing that with maybe a couple exceptions, the best a team will do is about .600 (97 wins) and the worst a team will do is about .400 (61 wins)
9-6 of course breaks down to just 3-2
This is unlike basketball (and to a bit lesser degree, hockey) where the top teams will play over .700 (57 wins).
So, while I don't neccesarily endorse TECH1515's wording, he's not far off from how I start my review.
While there's no certainty how each team will do over the course of six months, there is imo, reasonable forecasting possible within established ranges.
We start with knowing that with maybe a couple exceptions, the best a team will do is about .600 (97 wins) and the worst a team will do is about .400 (61 wins)
9-6 of course breaks down to just 3-2
This is unlike basketball (and to a bit lesser degree, hockey) where the top teams will play over .700 (57 wins).
So, while I don't neccesarily endorse TECH1515's wording, he's not far off from how I start my review.
Since MLB is primarily a moneyline sport (even the 1.5 spread is simply a variation) we're confronted not with just "picking the winner". We must also evaluate if the perceived odds of winning are more or less than the betting price offered.
That's why I personally put a bit less emphasis on "starting pitcher" as do many other cappers.
Sure, Zona looks to win two out of every three games started by Brandon Webb (for a simple example), but if the price is -200 or higher, we're back to "even" and must now move on to other variables.
IMO, most starting pitchers are accurately priced since after all, that is likely what the average bettor first reviews. Further, I'd submit that as a season progresses, the better starters are overpriced and the weaker starters are underpriced.
That's why I personally put a bit less emphasis on "starting pitcher" as do many other cappers.
Sure, Zona looks to win two out of every three games started by Brandon Webb (for a simple example), but if the price is -200 or higher, we're back to "even" and must now move on to other variables.
IMO, most starting pitchers are accurately priced since after all, that is likely what the average bettor first reviews. Further, I'd submit that as a season progresses, the better starters are overpriced and the weaker starters are underpriced.
*Higher strikeout ratios most often are reflected in lower scores.
*I like looking at HRs Allowed when evaluating Totals
*Even the best teams battle to play .500 on the road. Therefore laying chalk on the road should always be reviewed very carefully.
*A corrolary to that is watching for teams who have won 3 or more in a row on the road. My cursory review indicates that for most teams, that actually only happens a few times each season. So when I see a team in that role, I like to put it on my short list.
A recent example was SanFran winning three in a row in Arizona.
Their next game was at home and they were favored at -150
So we've got a below average team coming off three road wins AND they have to beat 3/2 odds.
Of course this anecdotal example had a Happy Ending, but that's the basis which I used to play San Diego.
*I like looking at HRs Allowed when evaluating Totals
*Even the best teams battle to play .500 on the road. Therefore laying chalk on the road should always be reviewed very carefully.
*A corrolary to that is watching for teams who have won 3 or more in a row on the road. My cursory review indicates that for most teams, that actually only happens a few times each season. So when I see a team in that role, I like to put it on my short list.
A recent example was SanFran winning three in a row in Arizona.
Their next game was at home and they were favored at -150
So we've got a below average team coming off three road wins AND they have to beat 3/2 odds.
Of course this anecdotal example had a Happy Ending, but that's the basis which I used to play San Diego.
It's certainly a component of each night's forecast.
I was tweaking you a bit earlier from my hindsight seat as we reviewed the .500 NYY (who I happen to believe will battle to top 86 wins) laying -150 versus a club that not only has played well at home this season, but has a fairly consistent recent history.
Now I look smart there for a moment, but I've muddled them myself in other games....check me out in San Diego at this very moment thinking I might cover the +1.5
It's certainly a bit different from the notion of Red/Black on the roulette wheel where each spin is unique, though there's a false perception that if Red hits six times, black is "due".
Instead, we have a setup where we have a good sense Red will hit 90 times in 162. So therefore, if Black comes up four or five times, then in fact Red is "due" and is worthy of some tilt to our forecast.
Instead, we have a setup where we have a good sense Red will hit 90 times in 162. So therefore, if Black comes up four or five times, then in fact Red is "due" and is worthy of some tilt to our forecast.
Florida/Atlanta over 10
I use that same theory with how many picks I can possibly pick right. I could make 2 0ut of 3 freethrows before I could make 6 out of 9. And our feelings after wins or losses often rush to a quick judgement either to over play or under play a game. You get the feeling you are on a roll and can't go wrong or lack confidence in deciding after a couple of losses. Tonight all of my planning could not have predicted how the OVer in the atlanta was to come out but once I won that it gave me the confidence to go w/ my gut on San Fran.
I use that same theory with how many picks I can possibly pick right. I could make 2 0ut of 3 freethrows before I could make 6 out of 9. And our feelings after wins or losses often rush to a quick judgement either to over play or under play a game. You get the feeling you are on a roll and can't go wrong or lack confidence in deciding after a couple of losses. Tonight all of my planning could not have predicted how the OVer in the atlanta was to come out but once I won that it gave me the confidence to go w/ my gut on San Fran.
*I like to identify "soft spots" for teams and the bigger a Sample I can get, the better.
If TeamA is 5-10 in their past 15 Whatever, that's a pretty small sample.
If TeamA is 30-50 in their past 80 Whatever, that's of course much better. So if we see TeamA in the Whatever role and they're priced at -130, it's worth a strong look .
Best I've got working in that area at the moment is BOSTON Away vs Teams with Winning Records.
I need to update it since they went out to Oakland (and got swept) this past week, but the most recent sample going back to late 2006 has them playing under .300 ball
Quite simply, the past 250+ Red Sox games have been built upon winning in Fenway at 70%, winning Away vs losing teams at about 55% and winning Away vs winning teams at about 30%.
But the betting lines almost consistently reflect Boston as a Road Fave or a tiny dog when playing a winning team.
If TeamA is 5-10 in their past 15 Whatever, that's a pretty small sample.
If TeamA is 30-50 in their past 80 Whatever, that's of course much better. So if we see TeamA in the Whatever role and they're priced at -130, it's worth a strong look .
Best I've got working in that area at the moment is BOSTON Away vs Teams with Winning Records.
I need to update it since they went out to Oakland (and got swept) this past week, but the most recent sample going back to late 2006 has them playing under .300 ball
Quite simply, the past 250+ Red Sox games have been built upon winning in Fenway at 70%, winning Away vs losing teams at about 55% and winning Away vs winning teams at about 30%.
But the betting lines almost consistently reflect Boston as a Road Fave or a tiny dog when playing a winning team.
DETROIT is another interesting team to review.
I like having teams that have shown fairly consistent results for 2+ seasons because then we've got a Sample of over 300 games from which to evaluate.
Tigers vs AL Central going back to second half of 2006 are barely .500
Which then tells us that versus the rest of MLB they are about a .650 team.
So I see them tonight in Oakland at +150 and that sure looks to be an overlay. (2-2 at the moment...we'll see how smart I am in about 30 minutes).
Meanwhile, when they next face an AL Central team at Home and each game is -170 for Detroit, it's worthy of taking a real hard look at the opponent.
I like having teams that have shown fairly consistent results for 2+ seasons because then we've got a Sample of over 300 games from which to evaluate.
Tigers vs AL Central going back to second half of 2006 are barely .500
Which then tells us that versus the rest of MLB they are about a .650 team.
So I see them tonight in Oakland at +150 and that sure looks to be an overlay. (2-2 at the moment...we'll see how smart I am in about 30 minutes).
Meanwhile, when they next face an AL Central team at Home and each game is -170 for Detroit, it's worthy of taking a real hard look at the opponent.
I've no particular argument with any of the above, save for your "decent percentages" closer.
Such a cite calls for a bit more depth and you'd be doing both yourself and the rest of us a favor to give it some, or else back up a bit and consider rephrasing with, "I've had decent success with this".
Though even then, you do yourself a real favor to try and quantify the Theory as soon as possible (and yes, I know it's not always easy to grind out those numbers) so that you're proceeding from a solid base rather than more of a "feeling" that this has worked well.
