MLB 4/27 Plays

buffettgambler · Apr 27, 2010

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w

ontVertAlignCellWithSp/> <w

ontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/> <w

ontVertAlignInTxbx/> <w:Word11KerningPairs/> <w:CachedColBalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-charset:1; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-format

ther; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:0 0 0 0 0 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} .MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:10.0pt; line-height:115%;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> May add later
Large
Dodgers Game 1 +129
As mentioned yesterday, I like Karuda and think he is being undervalued by the marketplace. He has faced some solid lineups and has put forth impressive outings against them. The Mets lineup is struggling at the plate right now, making them heavily dependent on their starting pitchers success to win games. I was bearish on Santana from the start of the season. But so was the marketplace, which resulted in me actually backing him in a couple of starts. However, now that he has put forth some solid outings out of the gate, he has lured the market back into thinking he is in for another typical Santana season. I don’t think he is, and a couple of solid outings is not going to change my mind. His flyball rate is currently sitting at a career high. This may come back to haunt him.
<o

> </o

>
Padres +125
Now that the Padres have lost a couple in a row, the market wants nothing to do with them. That’s just how I like it. They have been my biggest money maker so far this season, and are once again coming with a generous price tag. Garland has been hard to score against. His crafty style has allowed him to get out of some jams. The Marlins are a young, aggressive lineup that matches up better against power pitchers. They will not face this today, as Garland uses finesse to get the upper hand against his opposition. It is to no surprise that he has had past success against the Marlins. If he puts forth six strong, the Marlins will have trouble scoring, as he is backed by arguably the best bullpen in the NL. Sanchez is a hit or miss pitcher whose success is predicated on his form and not the quality lineup he is facing. This makes him a much better candidate to back as an underdog and facing a quality lineup. Today he is a favorite facing one of the most anemic lineups in the league.
<o

> </o

>
Upper Medium
Cubs -158
I have been a net seller on the Cubs this season. Now that they are playing well and the market is getting a little bit more brave in backing them, it is surprising that I am actually finding value on them. But I think the market is still overvaluing the Nats and their expectations of this team has surpassed their true worth. Hernandez has looked dominant on the mound so far. But he has not had a good season since 2005, and now in his upper 30’s and with nearly 3000 innings on his arm, its hard to imagine he has suddenly turned a corner. Gorezalanny’s stuff is working right now. Opponents are hitting under .200 against him and his walk total is under control. The Cubs have really improved their bullpen by adding Zambrano. Yesterday was a perfect example of their increased leverage they have with him in the backend. This bodes well, as Gorzelanny is not an innings eater.
<o

> </o

>
Giants +116
I have been preaching from day one to bet against Wellemeyer. But now it appears the market has caught on and are now overcompensating for their miss diagnosis of him. This might be a make or break start for him, so expect a determined pitcher on the mound tonight. The Giants will have a tight leash on him if it gets ugly fast. Their front end of their bullpen is better than the Phillies. Moyer is also a question mark and not an ideal candidate to back as a road favorite. Home field advantage is magnified in this one. The ball wont travel well tonight and the size of the park takes away the Phillies power. Eddings is not a complementary umpire for a Phillies lineup that is patient and like to draw walks.
<o

> </o

>
Tigers -106
The Tigers have one of my higher net short ratios out of any team. I rarely find value on them. But with the way Verlander is pitching, coupled with the way the Twins have been playing and Liriano has looked on the mound, I am not surprised I am find value on them today. I have to see a little bit more out f Liriano before declaring him back. The market is willing to claim he is back now. But his fastball looks like a watered down version of what he had before his injury, his slider not providing the same value either, and he has a high FIP/ERA disparity. I have no problem backing Verlander when he is out of favor. He has been known for horrific Aprils and then being dominant in May. This may be the start where he turns the corner.

Stabler12 · Apr 27, 2010

I'm concerned that the Dodgers may be flat coming out for a doubleheader after hanging around the clubhouse and hotel for 24 hours straight. I hear you on the flyball ratio, but would you allow that Santana is pitching in a park where he can get away with a lot of flyballs, or do you figure Citi Field is too new to have a firm grasp on? The only game I really liked before I read your post was SF, so it'll probably be a great card for you. @)

Thanks and GL as always, BG. Love the early start to the day, thanks for that, too.:toast:

rickdee · Apr 27, 2010

Good read Buffett- Good luck today

IrishTim · Apr 27, 2010

Nothing better than when my model agrees with Buffett on 4 out of 5 plays. Here's to a big day.

buffettgambler · Apr 27, 2010

IrishTim said:
Nothing better than when my model agrees with Buffett on 4 out of 5 plays. Here's to a big day.

Which one do we differ on?

buffettgambler · Apr 27, 2010

Stabler12 said:
I'm concerned that the Dodgers may be flat coming out for a doubleheader after hanging around the clubhouse and hotel for 24 hours straight. I hear you on the flyball ratio, but would you allow that Santana is pitching in a park where he can get away with a lot of flyballs, or do you figure Citi Field is too new to have a firm grasp on? The only game I really liked before I read your post was SF, so it'll probably be a great card for you. @)Thanks and GL as always, BG. Love the early start to the day, thanks for that, too.:toast:

Thanks Munson. Yes, his increased flyball propensity should be less of a liability in Citi and with today's weather. What I am looking for is something from Santana that deviates from years past. He has pitches well so far, and my valuation projects regression this year. So I am looking for secondary numbers that do not coincide with his surface numbers that suggest he is more or less the same pitcher as years past. But with his increased flyball rate, a fastball that is clocking in at 89.5 (93 in 2006), and a slider 3 mph off from 3 years ago, I see enough signs that suggest we are not dealing with the same pitcher.

BOL today.

Stabler12 · Apr 27, 2010

buffettgambler said:
Which one do we differ on?

I'd like to know that, too. Tim has a lot of good statistical info. I'm guessing it's the Padres.

Stabler12 · Apr 27, 2010

buffettgambler said:
Thanks Munson. Yes, his increased flyball propensity should be less of a liability in Citi and with today's weather. What I am looking for is something from Santana that deviates from years past. He has pitches well so far, and my valuation projects regression this year. So I am looking for secondary numbers that do not coincide with his surface numbers that suggest he is more or less the same pitcher as years past. But with his increased flyball rate, a fastball that is clocking in at 89.5 (93 in 2006), and a slider 3 mph off from 3 years ago, I see enough signs that suggest we are not dealing with the same pitcher.

BOL today.

He's probably fortunate he got out of the AL when he did with that loss of velocity. Thanks for the details.:toast:

Stabler12 · Apr 27, 2010

BG, since I have you here (I think) a basic question on bet sizing. If I consider a 'large' bet to be $125 in my books (I use Kelly and am up a bit) and $100 a 'upper medium' would you recommend I play the Cubs $148/$100 or simply put $100 up as my stake? I know you don't like telling someone how much to bet, so I guess a better way to phrase the question would be, if YOU were betting $100 on the Cubs, would it be 'risk' or 'to win'? Thanks, we may have touched on this in another season, but I lost some of my notes when my computer crashed this winter.

buffettgambler · Apr 27, 2010

Stabler12 said:
BG, since I have you here (I think) a basic question on bet sizing. If I consider a 'large' bet to be $125 in my books (I use Kelly and am up a bit) and $100 a 'upper medium' would you recommend I play the Cubs $148/$100 or simply put $100 up as my stake? I know you don't like telling someone how much to bet, so I guess a better way to phrase the question would be, if YOU were betting $100 on the Cubs, would it be 'risk' or 'to win'? Thanks, we may have touched on this in another season, but I lost some of my notes when my computer crashed this winter.

Yes, 148/100 would be the correct wager. Sorry to hear about your computer. What a pain.

Stabler12 · Apr 27, 2010

I guess I have too much time on my hands at the moment, but another thought occurs to me, and maybe Tim can weigh in on this one. I see our Tigers/Twins line at Matchbook sitting at +100, and the Twins +1.5 runs is -200. I know the % of one run games, etc., but how do you not come out ahead when there is a full dollar's worth of disparity in the ML and RL? Seems to be too much, even considering home/road.

Stabler12 · Apr 27, 2010

buffettgambler said:
Yes, 148/100 would be the correct wager. Sorry to hear about your computer. What a pain.

Thanks, I've always been a dog bettor and it is counterintuitive to me to place a bet for an 'odd' number of dollars. I never liked odd lots when I bought stocks, either.@)

The deal on the computer is a cautionary tale, I kept getting offers for anti-spyware, and it turns out that the come-ons WERE the actual VIRUS.^<<^

TheSaint · Apr 27, 2010

agreed on the cubs, good write-ups..good luck my friend

buffettgambler · Apr 27, 2010

Stabler12 said:
I guess I have too much time on my hands at the moment, but another thought occurs to me, and maybe Tim can weigh in on this one. I see our Tigers/Twins line at Matchbook sitting at +100, and the Twins +1.5 runs is -200. I know the % of one run games, etc., but how do you not come out ahead when there is a full dollar's worth of disparity in the ML and RL? Seems to be too much, even considering home/road.

All that disparity suggest is that there is a 16.67% chance of the Twins losing by a run. There is nothing inherently off with this RL.

Before delving into run-lines, one should state what their strategy of including would be. If it is to reduce vig, typically when the money lines are closer to even money, you are reducing the vig when moving to the run line. The opposite holds true when dealing with large ML favorites.

If you are trying to exploit mis-pricing from the standard run line conversion chart that some books offer, or are trying to exploit a slow to move RL off a ML move, then that's another story. You should then incorporate the totals and volatility of both the starting pitchers performance and hitters performance into your analysis.

IrishTim · Apr 27, 2010

buffettgambler said:
Which one do we differ on?

San Francisco. I'm not on the other side, but it's a no play for me. My model isn't as "precise" or as close to the market price as yours. I usually look for 10 to 15 cent differences and SF fell within that margin.

Chicago is my strongest play of the day.

Stabler12 · Apr 27, 2010

I would think that a total over 9 runs would be conducive to playing runlines and that if I saw the same numbers as today's min/DET on such a total, I could create an advantageous position. Thanks for being so generous with your time.

IrishTim · Apr 27, 2010

Buffett, is there a nicer guy on the forums than Munson?

As for your second question, I'm with BG - the RL price isn't really off according to my conversions. That said, my strategy with these is the second one that he mentioned: looking to exploit mispricing using logistic regression analysis of the total and ML (I haven't ever considered pitcher volatility but would love to hear you expound more on that if you got the chance).

I would obviously get different results if I inputted my expected win% vs. the market no-vig win%.

Chackiee · Apr 27, 2010

Buffett, is there a nicer guy on the forums than Munson?

No

Stabler12 · Apr 27, 2010

Thanks, Tim. Guys like you and BG are so willing to share information that is helpful that I can't help but want to at least be polite in return. (<)<I experimented with betting -1.5 on the runline with underdogs simultaneously 2 years ago and was on the + side of things, but decided that I was merely lucky, rather than onto a winning formula. Still, I can't help but think that if I could stick to high total games which are less likely to land on one run by the fave, I could make something out of it. :think2:

Stabler12 · Apr 27, 2010

Chackiee said:
Buffett, is there a nicer guy on the forums than Munson?

No

:toast:How are the horses treating you, Chackiee?

MLB 4/27 Plays

New member

Snake

New member

New member

New member

New member

Snake

Snake

Snake

New member

Snake

Snake

New member

New member

New member

Snake

New member

Member

Snake

Snake

Forum statistics

Share this page