Chasing every team, every series?

I think this works, someone check my math.

Using Sportsdatabase data, here is the record for series games since 2004:

Series Game 1: 4240-4240
Series Game 2 (lost game 1): 2027-2153 (omits 60 games for some reason)
Series Game 3 (lost game 2 and 3): 944-1017 (omits 182 games for some reason - not counting the 10 teams going for sweeps tomorrow)

The average lines for game 1 is -106, game 2 is -101, and game 3 is +108. That means in chasing, you would lay $106 for game 1, $101 and $106 for game 2, and $101 and $106 and $100 for game 3. If you lose, you're down $615.

This happens 1017/8480 times, or 12%. That's 1017*-$615=-$625,455. However, 7211 times, or 88%, you're up $100. That's 7463*$100=$721,100.

Profit is $95,645 since 2004.

The omitted games change a lot of things.

Lets say the 60 omitted games in game 2 are added at the same winning percentage of the rest of the games (48.5%). That adds 29 winners and 31 losers.

Now we add the 182 omitted games in game 3, at a winning percentage of 48.1%. That's 88 winners and 94 losers.

Our new records would be:

Series Game 1: 4240-4240
Series Game 2: 2056-2184
Series Game 3: 1032-1111

That changes the net profit to $49,535 since 2004. We lose nearly half of the profit.

What if they're all losers that are omitted (unlikely, but possible)?

The net profit would be changed to -$16,285 since 2004.

Do you use sportsdatabase.com regularly?

Just calculate ROI since 2004 for ths 95k$, and one can consider it is better/safer to lie the $ in bank.

Also I can understand how average line is +108, but taking standart as 50/50 games, it should not be over -110. So you can add some extra juice for the calculation.

I did more research and incorporated spreads for the first two games, since this is known before the start of game 1.

I'll save you guys the number reading and just say it works better if you eliminate teams who are dogs in the first two games of the series. Those teams aren't profitable.

Teams that are favorites in the first two games of the series are the most profitable. Those teams don't get swept 92.3% of the time. This is far and away the most profitable trend, accounting for 3/4 of total system profits.

Teams favored in game 1 but not game 2 don't get swept 88.9% of the time. Teams favored in game 2 but not game 1 don't get swept 87.5% of the time. These two trends account for 1/4 of the total system profits.

Teams favored in neither game 1 or 2 don't get swept 80.2% of the time. This is not a profitable trend.

Which team are you choosing to chase starting in game 1? The favorite?

TheJackal said:

Which team are you choosing to chase starting in game 1? The favorite?

Click to expand...

I tracked chasing for 4 scenarios using 2 factors, whether they were a dog or a favorite, and whether it was game 1 or 2. FF=Favored in both, FD= Favored in first, dog in 2nd... etc.

I also changed my results to reflect the data that is erroneously missing by the database. Estimating winning percentage for the missing games by taking the average, here's what I got.

<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 493px; height: 43px;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><col style="width: 19pt;" width="25"> <col style="width: 47pt;" width="63"> <col style="width: 42pt;" width="56"> <col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <col style="width: 50pt;" width="67"> <col style="width: 65pt;" width="86"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt; width: 19pt;" width="25" align="left" height="20">
</td> <td style="width: 47pt;" width="63" align="left">SERIES W</td> <td style="width: 42pt;" width="56" align="left">SERIES L</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" width="64" align="left">AVG WIN</td> <td style="width: 50pt;" width="67" align="left">AVG LOSS</td> <td style="width: 65pt;" width="86" align="left">NET PROFIT</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">FF</td> <td align="left">2784</td> <td align="left">232</td> <td class="xl66" align="left">100</td> <td align="left">-906</td> <td class="xl67" align="left"> $ 68,208.00 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">FD</td> <td align="left">798</td> <td align="left">99</td> <td class="xl65" align="left">104.37</td> <td align="left">-704</td> <td class="xl67" align="left"> $ 13,593.97 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">DF</td> <td align="left">793</td> <td align="left">113</td> <td class="xl65" align="left">111.10</td> <td align="left">-666</td> <td class="xl67" align="left"> $ 12,842.48 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">DD</td> <td align="left">2414</td> <td align="left">593</td> <td class="xl65" align="left">140.48</td> <td align="left">-600</td> <td class="xl67" align="left"> $ (16,682.97)</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
In a perfect world, the total FF games would equal the DD games and the FD games would equal the DF games, but the database is missing games when I enter in the queries.

I also estimated if we were to ignore the games, and if we were to count them all as losses. Here's those results (although the above table is likely the most accurate results).

MISSING GAMES IGNORED:

<table style="border-collapse: collapse;" width="499" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="100"><col style="width: 19pt;" width="25"> <col style="width: 47pt;" width="63"> <col style="width: 42pt;" width="56"> <col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <col style="width: 50pt;" width="67"> <col style="width: 65pt;" width="86"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt; width: 19pt;" width="25" height="20">
</td> <td style="width: 47pt;" width="63">SERIES W</td> <td style="width: 42pt;" width="56">SERIES L</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" width="64">AVG WIN</td> <td style="width: 50pt;" width="67">AVG LOSS</td> <td style="width: 65pt;" width="86">NET PROFIT</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">FF</td> <td align="right">2748</td> <td align="right">210</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">100</td> <td align="right">-906</td> <td class="xl67"> $ 84,540.00 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">FD</td> <td align="right">782</td> <td align="right">91</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">104.37</td> <td align="right">-704</td> <td class="xl67"> $ 17,556.00 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">DF</td> <td align="right">778</td> <td align="right">101</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">111.10</td> <td align="right">-666</td> <td class="xl67"> $ 19,168.01 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">DD</td> <td align="right">2372</td> <td align="right">546</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">140.48</td> <td align="right">-600</td> <td class="xl67"> $ 5,616.90 </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
I don't really have a reason as to why these numbers aren't identical to the numbers posted in post #1. The query is the same, yet it's punching out different results.

MISSING GAMES COUNTED AS LOSSES:

<table style="border-collapse: collapse;" width="507" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="63"><col style="width: 19pt;" width="25"> <col style="width: 47pt;" width="63"> <col style="width: 42pt;" width="56"> <col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <col style="width: 50pt;" width="67"> <col style="width: 65pt;" width="86"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt; width: 19pt;" width="25" height="20">
</td> <td style="width: 47pt;" width="63">SERIES W</td> <td style="width: 42pt;" width="56">SERIES L</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" width="64">AVG WIN</td> <td style="width: 50pt;" width="67">AVG LOSS</td> <td style="width: 65pt;" width="86">NET PROFIT</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">FF</td> <td align="right">2748</td> <td align="right">261</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">100</td> <td align="right">-906</td> <td class="xl67"> $ 38,334.00 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">FD</td> <td align="right">782</td> <td align="right">108</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">104.37</td> <td align="right">-704</td> <td class="xl67"> $ 5,588.00 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">DF</td> <td align="right">778</td> <td align="right">137</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">111.10</td> <td align="right">-666</td> <td class="xl67"> $ (4,807.99)</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">DD</td> <td align="right">2372</td> <td align="right">628</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">140.48</td> <td align="right">-600</td> <td class="xl67"> $ (43,583.10)</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

Yearly Results for FF chase

GAME 1

<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 192pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="256"><col style="width: 48pt;" span="4" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt; width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64" height="20">2009</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64">93</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64">66</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64">-146</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2008</td> <td align="left">318</td> <td align="left">265</td> <td align="left">-149</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2007</td> <td align="left">327</td> <td align="left">240</td> <td align="left">-152</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2006</td> <td align="left">317</td> <td align="left">231</td> <td align="left">-153</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2005</td> <td align="left">316</td> <td align="left">254</td> <td align="left">-155</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2004</td> <td align="left">346</td> <td align="left">248</td> <td align="left">-161</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
GAME 2

<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 192pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="256"><col style="width: 48pt;" span="4" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt; width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64" height="20">2009</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64">37</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64">29</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64">-141</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2008</td> <td align="left">147</td> <td align="left">118</td> <td align="left">-152</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2007</td> <td align="left">144</td> <td align="left">96</td> <td align="left">-153</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2006</td> <td align="left">128</td> <td align="left">103</td> <td align="left">-151</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2005</td> <td align="left">154</td> <td align="left">100</td> <td align="left">-153</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2004</td> <td align="left">155</td> <td align="left">93</td> <td align="left">-159</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
GAME 3

<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 257px; height: 120px;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><col style="width: 48pt;" span="4" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt; width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64" height="20">2009</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64">18</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64">11</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64">-120</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2008</td> <td align="left">69</td> <td align="left">49</td> <td align="left">-140</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2007</td> <td align="left">54</td> <td align="left">42</td> <td align="left">-137</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2006</td> <td align="left">59</td> <td align="left">44</td> <td align="left">-139</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2005</td> <td align="left">56</td> <td align="left">44</td> <td align="left">-135</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2004</td> <td align="left">49</td> <td align="left">44</td> <td align="left">-144</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
TOTAL SERIES RECORD

<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 403px; height: 41px;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><col style="width: 48pt;" span="3" width="64"> <col style="width: 61pt;" width="81"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt; width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64" height="20">2009</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64">148</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="left" width="64">11</td> <td class="xl65" style="width: 61pt;" align="left" width="81"> $ 5,560.00 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2008</td> <td align="left">534</td> <td align="left">49</td> <td class="xl65" align="left"> $ 10,721.00 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2007</td> <td align="left">525</td> <td align="left">42</td> <td class="xl65" align="left"> $ 14,742.00 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2006</td> <td align="left">504</td> <td align="left">44</td> <td class="xl65" align="left"> $ 10,800.00 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2005</td> <td align="left">526</td> <td align="left">44</td> <td class="xl65" align="left"> $ 12,736.00 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">2004</td> <td align="left">550</td> <td align="left">44</td> <td class="xl65" align="left"> $ 13,420.00 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" align="left" height="20">
</td> <td align="left">2787</td> <td align="left">234</td> <td class="xl65" align="left"> $ 67,979.00 </td> </tr> </tbody></table>

In case anyone finds this thread, I did my math wrong, structuring my bets far too low.

For the FF chase, you are laying on average -152 game 1, -151 game 2, -135 game 3.

That would make your game 2 bet to win $252 at -151, risking 380.52. Lose that and you're down 380.52+152=532.52

Your game 3 bet would be to win $632.52 at -135. That's risking $853.90. Lose that and you're down 853.90+380.52+152= $1386.42. I previously calculated the average loss at $906.

For it to be profitable under the new data, it would need to hit at 92.788%. Because of the unreliability of the data, we know it hits between 91.3 (missing games counted as a loss) and 93%, which means the missing games give us a high probability that the system is unprofitable.

it is a better deal to chase every home game in every series to win 1 game, ive been doing that the last 3 years to much success.

profit each year since '03 is right at 400 units per year.

last year's numbers


Series 1 thru 56 complete. Series 58 + 59 complete


Series 57 - 13 teams. Started 7/21. Pending , Seat -3 St Loius-3 , Houston -3


Series 60 - 11 teams. Starts 7/25... Pending Boston -2 , Oak -2 , Balt-1, Cinn -1 , Mil -1, San Fran -1, Det -1


NL +269 - 9

AL +233- 9

wow, +400 Units?
if you using the worst MLB team right now as an example, Nationals are 5W2L in series chasing this year.......i dont have the figures, but I think you will lose money chase it for sure.....

for me, i only start to chase home teams under 3 scenarios.......
1st After a home sweep
2nd After an away sweep
3rd When the away team is at the final stop of a long road trip (road trip playing 3+ teams)

It is true that you dont get that much actions chasing like this........but so far this year, even the worse team nationals have a 5-0 record. If every team avg like 5 chases up to right now.....there are 130 chases already....now I am not sure if it is 130-0, since i didnt start the chase starting the beginning of the year.....but if there are 130 chases and no all games win on GAME 1, there are plenty of betting already, it just takes too much money to chase all teams all series......

no it doesnt take too much money, just lower your unit size.

if you are playing to win $100 (unit), 15 home teams, if half the team lose the first game, then 2nd game at the very min. you will be spending (let say 3 dogs & 5 favorite, since most home team are favorites) the dogs will be 3 * $210 = $630, the favorites at least 3X more, like $2000, that means you are spending $2500 on 2nd game, you probably spend slightly less amount on game 3....even if there are only like 2-3 games left....that will be another $1500 or so.....which means you need at least a $5000 bankroll to chase $100 per unit....50x your betting amount or so....again just estimating things here....I dont think alot of people including myself will do that...

bystander said:

if you are playing to win $100 (unit), 15 home teams, if half the team lose the first game, then 2nd game at the very min. you will be spending (let say 3 dogs & 5 favorite, since most home team are favorites) the dogs will be 3 * $210 = $630, the favorites at least 3X more, like $2000, that means you are spending $2500 on 2nd game, you probably spend slightly less amount on game 3....even if there are only like 2-3 games left....that will be another $1500 or so.....which means you need at least a $5000 bankroll to chase $100 per unit....50x your betting amount or so....again just estimating things here....I dont think alot of people including myself will do that...

Click to expand...

why is the unit size so high? You need atleast 10k to use that unit size and that is still tight.

You're right 1968.

Here's the numbers I got:

ALL HOME TEAMS

Game 1: 2282-1988 (average lay -129)
Game 2: 1061-900 (average lay -124)
Game 3: 447-359 (average lay -117)

Series record: 3790-359
Average loss -$862.19
Average win $100
Net profit $379,000 -$309526 = $69473.79

With an average lay of -862.19 per series, we need to hit above a 88.4% clip. This hits at well over 90%, making it a profitable trend.

There were 121 missing games when I pulled up this query. This inflates the results. If you estimate them here's the adjusted data:

ALL HOME TEAMS ADJUSTED

Game 1: 2282-1988 (average lay -129)
Game 2: 1076-912 (average lay -124)
Game 3: 506-460 (average lay -117)

Series record: 3864-406
Average loss -$862.19
Average win $100
Net profit $379,000 -$350049 = $36350.86

The net profit is since 2004. That's roughly $7,000/year, or +70 units per year.

HOME DOGS in the first two games went 646-106 +$21611 with 23 missing games. Even with those all counted as losses, the record is 646-128 and +12689.6. The average lay is -405.55.

HOME FAVORITES in the first two games went 2084-159 (adjusted) with an average lay of -1290.35, making around $3234 over 5 years, not really worth betting.

Wow this sounds good.. Wish I had some real coin, so I could try it out..

You need a lot of coin for something like this.

Yes, need to have a bankroll, which lies the problem with sports betting, full of a bunch of people who want to strike it rich (don't have money to begin with) as opposed to people who have money and view it as an investment. People aren't bad bettors, they're just bad at managing their money.

It could be something where you take out $10,000 and make it $17,000 after 1 year, $28,900 after 2 years, $49,130 after 3 years, $83,521 after 4 years, $141,985 after 5 years. It's a 70% ROI and the stock market simply isn't comparable. The problem is VERY few bettors have that patience. They want to turn their $50 into $5000 in 10 days.

I took money out of mutual funds a few months ago and haven't looked back. My financial adviser was losing money every year since I invested in 2001, this way if I lose money at least I'm in charge. And it's much more fun to do the work yourself.