2021 MLB thread

Valuist

EOG Master
The Feces Bet came in before the 5th inning. The Feces Bet, of course, is betting whatever starting pitcher is facing the Cubs to go over their strikeout prop. For Cease, it was 7 1/2. Thru 5 innings he already has 10.
 

Valuist

EOG Master
Before we heap too much praise on Tampa for scoring 31 runs over the 3 game series vs the Orioles, keep in mind that 22 of those runs were scored against a horrific dumpster fire of a bullpen for Baltimore. And the Giants took full advantage of the depleted Milwaukee pen the past 2 days. It was more opportunistic than an accomplishment.
 

John Kelly

Born Gambler
Staff member
Before we heap too much praise on Tampa for scoring 31 runs over the 3 game series vs the Orioles, keep in mind that 22 of those runs were scored against a horrific dumpster fire of a bullpen for Baltimore. And the Giants took full advantage of the depleted Milwaukee pen the past 2 days. It was more opportunistic than an accomplishment.


Opportunistic versus accomplishment, interesting distinction.
 

FairWarning

Bells Beer Connoisseur
The Feces Bet came in before the 5th inning. The Feces Bet, of course, is betting whatever starting pitcher is facing the Cubs to go over their strikeout prop. For Cease, it was 7 1/2. Thru 5 innings he already has 10.
Peralta has faced the Cubs 3 times this season, 8, 8, and 10 K's. Played 8+ -120 and 12+ +700.
 
Dodgers 4 games out of first place, yet still -225 to win division.

TB -125 last i checked at one out.

LAD now -175, SF +140

TB -200 w 4 game lead, Boston +300, NYY & Tor +750 ea 6 & 7 games out of first.

Oakland +500, yet only 2 back of Hou. Sea +4000 @ 7.5 games back.
 
I really like Texas 1st 5 at +175 today. I know the Rangers offense has been anemic but these pitchers are a toss up IMHO

I've got 18 wagers on MLB with a little over 40% of my bankroll in action so far today. Feels like a CFB Saturday.
 

Valuist

EOG Master
Sherwood likes Seattle -1.5 over Texas today. Writeup here:


Another home team favorite laying a run and a half bites the dust. I guess it could've been worse. Seattle could've won by 1 which would've really screwed him over. I guess he saved a little juice. But yeah, unless a game is in Colorado with a giant total, generally not wise to be laying a run and a half with a team not guaranteed 9 innings of at bats.
 
Sherwood likes Seattle -1.5 over Texas today. Writeup here:

Another home team favorite laying a run and a half bites the dust. I guess it could've been worse. Seattle could've won by 1 which would've really screwed him over. I guess he saved a little juice. But yeah, unless a game is in Colorado with a giant total, generally not wise to be laying a run and a half with a team not guaranteed 9 innings of at bats.
Yeah if I wanted to follow someone dumb enough to take a huge home favorite on the RL with a low total I'd just tail Jimmy.
 

Valuist

EOG Master
Years ago, when my daughter was just a toddler, she liked watching Barney. When it was over, she would say "Barney Ober". I had forgotten all about that until the Twins brought up prospect Bailey Ober. Immediately I thought of "Barney Ober". I've cashed several strikeout props with this guy. Over a strikeout per inning/ under 3 walks. Only negative is he's susceptible to the HR. But with 12 starts already, he's facing the White Sox for the 5th time, along with the Astros twice, so he has faced decent competition. In their 5th look at Ober, the White Sox have been shut out thru 5 1/3, striking out 6 times vs 1 walk. Ober is 6'9", and these ultra tall pitchers sometimes create more deception.
 
Another home team favorite laying a run and a half bites the dust.

So what. Plenty of home favs laying a run and a half win and cover.


I guess it could've been worse. Seattle could've won by 1 which would've really screwed him over. I guess he saved a little juice.

It would have made no difference if Seattle had won by 1. It would have been a loss on his -1.5 -101 bet either way.

A one run win doesn't save "a little juice" compared to an outright loss. The amount lost is exactly the same either way.


But yeah, unless a game is in Colorado with a giant total, generally not wise to be laying a run and a half with a team not guaranteed 9 innings of at bats.

General rules always have exceptions. Evidently, based on his writeup analysis, he considered it a plus EV bet.

Nobody has demonstrated anything wrong with said analysis.

Though a couple of guys are here critiquing a bet only after it lost. Would the same have been posted had it won.



Yeah if I wanted to follow someone dumb enough to take a huge home favorite on the RL with a low total I'd just tail Jimmy.

8 is a low total? Today Houston as a huge -260 ML home fav covered -1.5 -135 with a 5-1 win. Total was only 1 run more, at 9.

Nobody asked anyone "to follow". I didn't even follow myself. My post was just a FYI.

Who's Jimmy. Does he post writeups with his picks. Is he a long term winner like Sherwood.
 
Last edited:

Valuist

EOG Master
So what. Plenty of home favs laying a run and a half win and cover.




It would have made no difference if Seattle had won by 1. It would have been a loss on his -1.5 -101 bet either way.

A one run win doesn't save "a little juice" compared to an outright loss. The amount lost is exactly the same either way.




General rules always have exceptions. Evidently, based on his writeup analysis, he considered it a plus EV bet.

Nobody has demonstrated anything wrong with said analysis.

Though a couple of guys are here critiquing a bet only after it lost. Would the same have been posted had it won.





8 is a low total? Today Houston as a huge -260 ML home fav covered -1.5 -135 with a 5-1 win. Total was only 1 run more, at 9.

Nobody asked anyone "to follow". I didn't even follow myself. My post was just a FYI.

Who's Jimmy. Does he post writeups with his picks. Is he a long term winner like Sherwood.

Jesus do I really need to explain this?

Plenty of home favorites also end up winning by 1 run.

And yes, psychologically, it would be a tough loss laying a run and a half with the winning team, only to see them win by 1....esp if the visitor narrowed the gap in the top of the 9th.

I know this one was directed to Ruca, but 8 is a relatively low total. You said the "total was only 1 more, at 9". That's a HUGE difference. 9 is a key number; 8 isn't.
 
Jesus do I really need to explain this?

If you can.

As for the rest of your post, it has little if any relevance to my comments & is mostly just stating the obvious.

I certainly welcome critiques, but don't dish it out if you can't take it in return.
 

FairWarning

Bells Beer Connoisseur
If you can.

As for the rest of your post, it has little if any relevance to my comments & is mostly just stating the obvious.

I certainly welcome critiques, but don't dish it out if you can't take it in return.
I’m jumping into this late, just got my power back. I know the price is factored into the home team -1.5. It’s just harder to win those when you get 8 innings of AB’s vs the road team’s 9. How many teams will trade a run for the out in the 9th? Personally if I play them, it’s never the home team laying 1.5.
 
SF rolled tonight to an easy RL cover (7-2 final) as a huge home fav of -281 ML (opened about -250) & -1.5 -133 RL (opened about a pk) & an opening total of 7.5 (Pinnacle, closed at 8).

If i like SF in this spot, as evidently many did from the line movement, I'd far rather not lay 2.5 to 1 or almost 3 to 1 on the ML, but instead take my chances with a pk or close to it on the RL.
 
I’m jumping into this late, just got my power back. I know the price is factored into the home team -1.5. It’s just harder to win those when you get 8 innings of AB’s vs the road team’s 9. How many teams will trade a run for the out in the 9th? Personally if I play them, it’s never the home team laying 1.5.

OTOH when you're at home you have home advantage & the opposing team has away disadvantage. Generally speaking, though of course some teams are better than others at home or on the road. Likewise with hitters and pitchers.
 

Valuist

EOG Master
SF rolled tonight to an easy RL cover (7-2 final) as a huge home fav of -281 ML (opened about -250) & -1.5 -133 RL (opened about a pk) & an opening total of 7.5 (Pinnacle, closed at 8).

If i like SF in this spot, as evidently many did from the line movement, I'd far rather not lay 2.5 to 1 or almost 3 to 1 on the ML, but instead take my chances with a pk or close to it on the RL.

So you are going to cite one game as an example? Who cares? Go to covers and go thru every team. Go back 10 years. Not every game is a rocking chair win for the heavy chalk.

And what Fair Warning said is correct. Teams will often be willing to trade a run in the 9th for an out. Their objective is to win. Not by margin.
 
SF rolled tonight to an easy RL cover (7-2 final) as a huge home fav of -281 ML (opened about -250) & -1.5 -133 RL (opened about a pk) & an opening total of 7.5 (Pinnacle, closed at 8).

If i like SF in this spot, as evidently many did from the line movement, I'd far rather not lay 2.5 to 1 or almost 3 to 1 on the ML, but instead take my chances with a pk or close to it on the RL.

So you are going to cite one game as an example? Who cares?

Consider & meditate on that comment in light of a review & rereading of the whole conversation, especially what you said earlier:

Another home team favorite laying a run and a half bites the dust. I guess it could've been worse. Seattle could've won by 1 which would've really screwed him over. I guess he saved a little juice. But yeah,unless a game is in Colorado with a giant total, generally not wise to be laying a run and a half with a team not guaranteed 9 innings of at bats.
 

Valuist

EOG Master
Consider & meditate on that comment in light of a review & rereading of the whole conversation, especially what you said earlier:

"Generally not wise to be laying a run and a half with a (road team)." True when I said it, and true now.

Want to keep betting them? Go ahead. We'll see how that turns out.
 
"Generally not wise to be laying a run and a half with a (road team)." True when I said it, and true now.

Where did you ever say that before?

Road team? Or did you mean home team? Can you provide any evidence in support of your theory/theories quoted above & here:

Another home team favorite laying a run and a half bites the dust. I guess it could've been worse. Seattle could've won by 1 which would've really screwed him over. I guess he saved a little juice. But yeah, unless a game is in Colorado with a giant total, generally not wise to be laying a run and a half with a team not guaranteed 9 innings of at bats.

"Another home team favorite laying a run and a half" doesn't "bite the dust" but was victorious yesterday with a nice juicy +160 price:



Want to keep betting them? Go ahead. We'll see how that turns out.

I never said i'm betting them.
 
Last edited:

Valuist

EOG Master
Road team? Or did you mean home team? Can you provide any evidence in support of your theory quoted above & here:



"Another home team favorite laying a run and a half" doesn't "bite the dust" but was victorious yesterday with a nice juicy + 165 money price:





I never said i'm betting them.

Yes I was referring to home teams.

I'm not going to do the research for you. We all have to do it ourselves. We can make several hypothesis that are general information: heavy favorites tend to draw significant public money. Heavy favorites do not tend to be big money makers in units won, even with strong win percentages. And teams are not incentivized to win by margin, so a win by 1 run is as valuable in the standings as one by a bigger margin. Up by 2 runs in the 9th inning, nobody is going to bring their infield in for a play at the plate, Finally, knowingly giving away over 10% of potential at bats is a steep hole to overcome. Yes, there are instances when they win. But a lot of minus 1.5 runs bettors act as if all wins are by margin, when it definitely is not the case. And as for the earlier point about total size, its very germane to the point. If a game is at Wrigley in April or May and the wind is blowing in and the total is 6 1/2 or 7, runs are at a premium. Managers manage differently, playing for one run. The chance of a one run final is bigger. Compare that to a game at Coors with a total of 12 or 13 where there will be plenty of scoring; the chance of a one run win is less.
 
Yes I was referring to home teams.

I'm not going to do the research for you. We all have to do it ourselves. We can make several hypothesis that are general information: heavy favorites tend to draw significant public money. Heavy favorites do not tend to be big money makers in units won, even with strong win percentages. And teams are not incentivized to win by margin, so a win by 1 run is as valuable in the standings as one by a bigger margin. Up by 2 runs in the 9th inning, nobody is going to bring their infield in for a play at the plate, Finally, knowingly giving away over 10% of potential at bats is a steep hole to overcome. Yes, there are instances when they win. But a lot of minus 1.5 runs bettors act as if all wins are by margin, when it definitely is not the case. And as for the earlier point about total size, its very germane to the point. If a game is at Wrigley in April or May and the wind is blowing in and the total is 6 1/2 or 7, runs are at a premium. Managers manage differently, playing for one run. The chance of a one run final is bigger. Compare that to a game at Coors with a total of 12 or 13 where there will be plenty of scoring; the chance of a one run win is less.

Is that supposed to be a case in support of your notion stated here:

Another home team favorite laying a run and a half bites the dust. I guess it could've been worse. Seattle could've won by 1 which would've really screwed him over. I guess he saved a little juice. But yeah, unless a game is in Colorado with a giant total, generally not wise to be laying a run and a half with a team not guaranteed 9 innings of at bats.

Surely you realize that oddsmakers are aware of the weather reports re games, the size of totals at Coors field & everything else you mentioned. And much more. And that is all baked into the price/odds. So, based on that, and until you know the price/odds on a game, how can anyone justify "unless a game is in Colorado with a giant total, generally not wise to be laying a run and a half with a team not guaranteed 9 innings of at bats.". I'd say, instead, until you know the price/odds and whether or not any price is +EV, it is generally not wise to make a serious bet of any kind. So how would you know that there aren't many home team run lines throughout a MLB season that are +EV bets, including many outside of Colorado?

Moreover, as i mentioned before, home teams have the home field advantage, whereas road teams have the away field disadvantage. Home teams generally win a lot more at home than away, while road teams usually lose more away than at home. So the chance of winning by 2 or more runs is increased at home relative to being on the road because of the greater chance of winning the game.
 
Last edited:
Is that supposed to be a case in support of your notion stated here:



Surely you realize that oddsmakers are aware of the weather reports re games, the size of totals at Coors field & everything else you mentioned. And much more. And that is all baked into the price/odds. So, based on that, and until you know the price/odds on a game, how can anyone justify "unless a game is in Colorado with a giant total, generally not wise to be laying a run and a half with a team not guaranteed 9 innings of at bats.". I'd say, instead, until you know the price/odds and whether or not any price is +EV, it is generally not wise to make a serious bet of any kind. So how would you know that there aren't many home team run lines throughout a MLB season that are +EV bets, including many outside of Colorado?

BTW, one advantage home teams laying -1.5 runs are getting this season is the runner on second rule in the bottom of the 10th. In the past in a tie game if the first batter homers the -1.5 run bet loses. But now it wins.

Moreover, as i mentioned before, home teams have the home field advantage, whereas road teams have the away field disadvantage. Home teams generally win a lot more at home than away, while road teams usually lose more away than at home. So the chance of winning by 2 or more runs is increased at home relative to being on the road because of the greater chance of winning the game.
BTW, one advantage home teams laying -1.5 runs are getting this season is the runner on second rule in the bottom of the 10th. In the past in a tie game if the first batter homers the -1.5 run bet loses. But now it wins.

Seriously how dumb do you have to be to think this is an "advantage"? In the same scenario a base hit now wins the game (and loses the bet). 🤣😂

Can't make this shit up.
 
Last edited:
BTW, one advantage home teams laying -1.5 runs are getting this season is the runner on second rule in the bottom of the 10th. In the past in a tie game if the first batter homers the -1.5 run bet loses. But now it wins.

Seriously how dumb do you have to be to think this is an "advantage". In the same scenario a base hit now wins the game. 🤣😂

Can't make this shit up.

Actually a base hit in that scenario need not win the game. It would stand a very good chance of just putting another runner on base without winning the game. Or the runner on second could be thrown out at home, etc, so the game isn't won that way, either, with a base hit.

But - overall - the runner on 2nd rule may not be of any advantage to home teams laying -1.5 runs. The jury is still out on that. (Though certainly it is in the scenario where a homer is hit as i described it.) So i'll retract & delete my earlier statement.

OTOH with the runner on 2nd rule in the 10th, 11th, etc, i wonder if this may be an overall advantage to home teams laying -1.5 runs. The runner on 2nd means more runs will be scored. So the totals will be higher than without the rule. And if the theory that more runs scored/higher totals favors the -1.5 laying team is true, then might this new rule be favorable to home teams laying 1.5? I wonder how the results this year compare with previous years.

Could the crackdown on sticky stuff be another factor that favors home teams laying -1.5 runs?
 
Last edited:

FairWarning

Bells Beer Connoisseur
Actually a base hit in that scenario need not win the game. It would stand a very good chance of just putting another runner on base without winning the game. Or the runner on second could be thrown out at home, etc, so the game isn't won that way, either, with a base hit.

But - overall - the runner on 2nd rule may not be of any advantage to home teams laying -1.5 runs. The jury is still out on that. (Though certainly it is in the scenario where a homer is hit as i described it.) So i'll retract & delete my earlier statement.

OTOH with the runner on 2nd rule in the 10th, 11th, etc, i wonder if this may be an overall advantage to home teams laying -1.5 runs. The runner on 2nd means more runs will be scored. So the totals will be higher than without the rule. And if the theory that more runs scored/higher totals favors the -1.5 laying team is true, then might this new rule be favorable to home teams laying 1.5? I wonder how the results this year compare with previous years.

Could the crackdown on sticky stuff be another factor that favors home teams laying -1.5 runs?

There is no more of an advantage to the home team -1.5 in extra innings than in previous years. You can only win on a 2+ run HR.

I don’t think there is any thing to the sticky stuff and home team pricing either. What if thr home team had the pitcher who was cheating? The biggest factors in the RL pricing is road vs home, and the total. A RL bet on a 7 total is different than a total of 10.
 
Wow lots of "debate" over a bunch of stuff that was settled long ago. About 15 years ago there were some mathematically advantageous ways to attack the RL and some of it included laying the -1.5 with home teams as the books odds were overadjusted. But that was a time of a lot more scoring than today's game. Not to say there are no pricing mistakes out there, but I think these days there are fewer of them as the books have gotten smart enough to at least hire a few data guys who can price this stuff out extremely well.

I personally think for bankroll management its not a bad idea to lay the -1.5 if you really like the team, but yeah you are going to be disappointed with one run wins every now and then. For many bettors who lack good bet sizing and overall bankroll management skills, a loss backing a -200+ team is going to send them into tilt a bit so maybe to avoid that don't lay the big numbers or keep them in parlays. Not calling this efficient or edge-creating, just recognizing how most non-pros have some real gaps in their game dealing with baseball.
 
I know the Blue Jays are a sexy team to bet right now, I mean what team with a lot of offense isn't? But man this line today seems way out of line. I'm locked in on some Seattle +152 and will take more if the line goes up further.
 

MrTop

EOG Master
I know the Blue Jays are a sexy team to bet right now, I mean what team with a lot of offense isn't? But man this line today seems way out of line. I'm locked in on some Seattle +152 and will take more if the line goes up further.




big revenge for flexen... back on june 29th Ray won -240 final in toronto 9-3
 

Valuist

EOG Master
Just a quick look of the last week of home teams and 1 run wins:

August 12: Mets, Phillies and White Sox
August 11: Twins, Mets and Seattle
August 10: Mets, Atlanta, Minnesota, San Fran, San Diego
August 9: zero but only 4 games were played
August 8: Toronto, Cincy and Atlanta
August 7: NYY, Toronto
August 6: NYY, Milwaukee

17 instances in the last week where the home team won by exactly one run. Not exactly a rare occurrence.

And road teams had a number of one run wins; not nearly as many, but again, not a rarity:

Aug 12: St. Louis (road favorite)
Aug 10: Oakland (road fave) Texas
Aug 8: San Fran and KC
Aug 7: Wash, Boston and Detroit
Aug 6: Minn and LAA

I0 one run wins by road teams.
 
Last edited:

Valuist

EOG Master
Is that supposed to be a case in support of your notion stated here:



Surely you realize that oddsmakers are aware of the weather reports re games, the size of totals at Coors field & everything else you mentioned. And much more. And that is all baked into the price/odds. So, based on that, and until you know the price/odds on a game, how can anyone justify "unless a game is in Colorado with a giant total, generally not wise to be laying a run and a half with a team not guaranteed 9 innings of at bats.". I'd say, instead, until you know the price/odds and whether or not any price is +EV, it is generally not wise to make a serious bet of any kind. So how would you know that there aren't many home team run lines throughout a MLB season that are +EV bets, including many outside of Colorado?

Moreover, as i mentioned before, home teams have the home field advantage, whereas road teams have the away field disadvantage. Home teams generally win a lot more at home than away, while road teams usually lose more away than at home. So the chance of winning by 2 or more runs is increased at home relative to being on the road because of the greater chance of winning the game.

Of course we are all well aware the linemaker has the weather factored in. Nobody knows that more than me. In the early 2000s I was blindly betting overs in games with a game time temp of 85 or more and it worked for a number of years. Then, gradually, it started to fade. It would work until mid Aug. Then eventually it could no longer be blindly bet.

Are you saying games with high totals are as likely to end with a margin of 1 than low totals? That's crazy. The range of possible outcomes is completely different.

Enough is enough.
 
Top