Baseball lines.... Interesting theory?

[Bushwick]

I don't do too much baseball betting, but am not against it. I have heard that the way to make money is on the money line and to stay away from the run line....... I have a friend that is trying out this theory though.....

on a line like this

Pittsburgh Pirates
Mark Redman (L)
+1½ (-160)
+165
Chicago Cubs
Greg Maddux (R)
-1½ (+140)
-185

take the Pirates ML for 1 unit +165 and then take the Cubs Run Line -11/2 +140
As long as the Cubs don't win by 1 you make money.

What do you guys think?

[CanadianGuy]

I've heard of this happening. I actually think I read an article about it by the president of bodog about it. If you did it for every game I believe you would indeed slowly make money. The stats from last season show that only 30% of the games end up in one run games. That means doing your theory would win 70% of the time. The kicker is that to make sure you're playing the full percentages you'd have to do this with every game, everyday. Because if you only do it for select games then you're not guaranteed to win 70% of the time. And not all dogs will pay out +100 or more and not all -1.5 run lines will pay out +100 or more (although most of the time they will).



Really it's probably a strategy worth trying. There's really no way for the books to stop it unless they payout less on the run lines and to the dogs but that will never happen over a few people out there doing this strategy.


I'd say test it out for a week and see what would have happened to your bankroll if you would have done it. If you end up way ahead then it's probably worth playing.


And actually the other thing to think about is 30% of games end up in one run games....that includes games where the dog wins by one run. So your win percentage might actually be higher than that. But on the other hand if it's that easy then why has nobody thought of it before? I may test it out with you without actually laying any cash on it and see what happens. The key though is making sure the run line pays out more than +100 while the dog pays out +100 or more. Even if the dog only payed out say -105 you could still end up ahead since that small amount of juice would almost be worth the risk of winning the runline.

[CanadianGuy]

And actually just thinking about it even more think of it this way. The average dog pays out about +130 right? Most runlines pay out about +150

To do the strategy say you're using unit sizes of 100. That means for each game you need to risk 200. If the dog wins you'd payout 230 (the 100 you wagered plus the 130 win), if the runline wins you payout 250. An average win of about 40 per game lets say (230+250=480/2=240-200 used for the two bets=profit of 40). You'd need to know the exact percentage of favorites only winning by one run. If you're risking 200 per game to win 40 then you'd want to be winning more than 80% of the time (at least I think it's 80%) to make a profit. I think in the end you would slowly start to make money, and I believe the bodog prez said the same thing in the article I was reading by him.

[ZORRO]

I'm as simple as it gets....I never play exotic bets. That includes the race track.

Money line....win only.
Now, lets use logic. If the books and casinos knew that a money line would win all year round on favorites DO YOU THINK THEY WOULD BOOK THEM???

Do you think they haven't run the numbers when this is their only business?????

Casino's booking millions a week are giving you an edge that beats them?
On what planet? Not this one.

[CanadianGuy]

He's not saying use the money line on all favorites. He's saying bet the ML on the underdog, and take the run line on the favorite, which would normally both pay out more than +110, and the only way you could lose is if the favorite won by one run. The problem with this though is that if the favorite won by 1 run you'd lose 200 bucks, and if you won you'd win around 40 each time. But the percentage of times that the favorite wins by one run is around 15%. Even the president of bodog admitted you could slowly make money this way. But the amount you'd win each day I don't think would be worth the risk. But your win % would be around 80 to 85 percent. You'd just have to decide if this is worth it:


Bet 5 games lets say, and one of the 5 will most likely always lose based on the percentages. You'd lose 200 on that one game. On the 4 games you win on you'd be winning around 40 on each....40X4=160, so you wouldnt really be ahead. You'd have to make the criteria of only betting on games that are +150 for the dog and +150 on the RL which would rarely happen.

So probably not a good strategy in the end but it was a good idea.

[Bushwick]

Well I found 7 games today that i am going to try.

(979) Oakland Athletics +118
(980) Anaheim Angels -1½ (+165)


(970) New York Yankees -1½ (+105)
(969) Texas Rangers +170

(961) Philadelphia Phillies +151
(962) Atlanta Braves -1½ (+130)

(957) Milwaukee Brewers +112
(958) San Francisco Giants -1½ (+170)

(955) Pittsburgh Pirates +160
(956) Chicago Cubs -1½ (+130)

(953) Houston Astros +122
(954) St. Louis Cardinals -1½ (+170)

(951) Washington Nationals +131
(952) New York Mets -1½ (+150)



I am thinking that you probably shouldn't include the brewers, oakland, or yankees game because like CG was saying its not good enough on both sides.

So I have 14 units.... on these games... I will report tomorrow... how I ended up.

[cmack82]

I like the idea in theory. Yes it probably would in the long run make some slow money, but say you start doing it. In the first night you've played all 14 games at 2U each. So you have 28U on the line. If anymore than 3 favorites win by 1, you lose. If 3 favorites win by 1 you push. If 2 or less win by 1 you have a winning night. For example yesterday if you would have done that system 2 favorites won by 1 run. StL and Detroit. So you would come out ahead. Based on what CG came up with you would have won .8U last night. I don't know about you but I'm not into that kind of risk-reward betting. Being a poker player first, I'm not going to put 60 dollars into a pot to win 2 dollars. If it does consistently work for you I congratulate you on your winnings. Just not my style of betting.

[CanadianGuy]

The thing is that the 80-85 win percentage only applies if all games are selected. And since all the games aren't paying out enough to select them all then the win percentage isn't accurate. I don't know, it'll be interesting to see how it does today.

[Bushwick]

I agree... I am not going to make a living doing this theory... it all started because I really don't care for baseball and don't follow it, so its an easy way to just look at numbers and have some action. I will probably try it for awhile, but the first time i lose.. I will probably stop.

[Bushwick]

Saturday I ended up +1.45 units.
I can see how this 1.45 units isn't worth risking 14units to get.

I lost both bets on 1 game the ST.Louis/Houston Game. So I made money on 6 out of 7 games. I think this is what the average is going to be. I will try again today. and post my plays and results.

[CanadianGuy]

That percentage sounds about right there Bushwick. 6/7=85% just like we had calculated. If you use a unit size of 100 bucks and you consistently could get 6/7 then you'd be up lets say an average of between 130 and 160 bucks per day...that's not too bad considering that could end up being a grand per week.

Need to do more testing on it though to make sure that it consistently will hit the 85% mark. Sounds like anything less than 85% would equal losses