Betting Talk

Fucking destroying MLB Market right now

homerplayerhomerplayer Senior Member
edited September 2014 in Sports Betting
27-3-3

on CLV that is.

that doesn't really help my 10-17 record. still trying to talk my book into counting those for something. not going for it as of yet.
«1

Comments

  • BigKahunaBigKahuna Banned
    edited May 2014
    I'm with you. Got -CLV on the basketball game tonite but my team up by 27, can't figure out whether to be happy or sad! Lmao
  • underwrapsunderwraps Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    27-3-3

    on CLV that is.



    that doesn't really help my 10-17 record. still trying to talk my book into counting those for something. not going for it as of yet.

    You mean you haven't tried redeeming them yet at your local grocery store? it has to be worth something. :)
  • BeardedTacoBeardedTaco Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    no offense but even a baseball newbie like myself can beat the mlb market using 5d ovnt reduced lines
  • homerplayerhomerplayer Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    no offense but even a baseball newbie like myself can beat the mlb market using 5d ovnt reduced lines

    So your assertion here, just to be clear, is that you can beat the market based on overnight lines (key point here) regardless of which side you take?
  • underwrapsunderwraps Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    Homer, are you getting larger than 10c moves on your plays? If so try the arbs and take that money and play free TIE Bets
  • homerplayerhomerplayer Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    underwraps wrote: »
    Homer, are you getting larger than 10c moves on your plays? If so try the arbs and take that money and play free TIE Bets

    Some yes and some no. Some of the moves are so large I want to Arb, like Mets yesterday. Bought them at 140. Red Sox today, bought at (129).

    I thought of potential ways to exploit those rare ones, but I feel I need to stick to one consistent approach. Now I view these large ones as getting an implied XX% bet at a much better implied XX%. Think an Astros game last week had an implied winning percentage of 46% but my bet was paying out on a 42.5%. When I view the discount in those terms, it makes sense, to me and maybe only me, to let those ride.

    Although your approach is tempting, if I understand it correctly.
  • underwrapsunderwraps Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    Homer, I started doing it last year when heritage first started the 3 way betting that included the Tie bet. I usually play 50% of the arb profit on the Tie. If the arb is small like a couple pennies then I put it all on the tie. In my eyes its all Risk free and I play this way in certain accounts that I have.

    Nice catch on the redsox -129.
  • homerplayerhomerplayer Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    Wraps, you keeping detailed results of the approach? This is the first year my focus has shifted solely to beating the Market and putting zero effort into the handicapping side (which, if the Market is efficient, I have 1,000s of people doing it for me). So I could see where your approach may provide benefit in the future after I collect enough data on what I am doing now. Just the long term ROI I expect to be under 4% (and hopefully positive!!) with my approach any deviation will erode my EG.

    Thanks for Sox compliment, but honestly, I catch those flyers once in a while. Certainly not any special skill or ability on my part.
  • duritodurito Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    27-3-3

    I see people keeping stats like this but I wish it'd stop as it means nothing. I could find 100 plays right now that would go 80-20 like this but be all -ev.

    If you aren't handicapping what are you doing? I'd want to see bets closing as arbs if you are steam chasing/playing off #'s and expect profit
  • underwrapsunderwraps Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    Wraps, you keeping detailed results of the approach?

    In a nut shell No, but last year my ROI was 4.6% the ties helped. Now don't get me wrong, sometimes you will encounter a couple pennies loss on an arb it comes with the territory.
  • homerplayerhomerplayer Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    durito wrote: »
    I see people keeping stats like this but I wish it'd stop as it means nothing. I could find 100 plays right now that would go 80-20 like this but be all -ev.

    If you aren't handicapping what are you doing? I'd want to see bets closing as arbs if you are steam chasing/playing off #'s and expect profit

    YES!! A chance to learn and grow. I am aware something is lacking in my current approach, and need help for the next step. Your suggestion is what, Arbable against the closer or the no vig closer? Remember to go slow and use small words if possible.

    I am confused on the 20-80 potentially being -EV. Sounds like you are stating you don't fully trust the market to be efficient, which is the cornerstone of what I am trying to build. Which ties into why I spend zero time handicapping matchups, pitchers, weather, HFA, etc.. All of that shit is already in there and accounted for. I'm trying to prove AntiFragile wrong and predict where the Market is going to take a number.

    Any advice you could lend Durito is greatly appreciated and welcomed. Assuming it does not reveal knowledge you don't want on a public forum. Like feel free to tell me the what (as in What I want my play to be Arbable against X Books closer) while leaving out the how.
  • underwrapsunderwraps Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    Durito go see the cat. I send you something
  • homerplayerhomerplayer Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    durito wrote: »
    If you aren't handicapping what are you doing? I'd want to see bets closing as arbs if you are steam chasing/playing off #'s and expect profit

    Oh, read that part again , thus the disconnect. I don't have time to sit around screen watching to chase numbers all day. Got 4 simple things I check for at about 6 or 7 am EST, before I leave for work. All bets placed by 7:45 am daily. I am well beyond the point of slavishly chasing changes in Market. At this point I am beating the Market to its destination about 66% of the time.

    Considered introducing optionality into my approach but each event carries limited upside so it doesn't quite fit. However, at season end I will have a better idea if it provides a feasible avenue, but my initial guess would be no.
  • newcombenewcombe Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    You have time to posts these line crushing plays vs just talking about it?
  • homerplayerhomerplayer Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    New - of course I have time to, but I fail to see any benefit for me. Also see it posing potential detrimental effect on the BT family. Played 9 games earlier. All moved in my favor early, 3 kept running and the others have come back some. My record in flat finishes is fucking horrid.

    But you might be missing the point if you are focused on the specific plays rather than the concept.
    Back tested optionality on April results, promising results.
  • underwrapsunderwraps Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    homer, yesterday BG released 2 plays both moved enough to arb and both went to extra innings for 2 tie payouts, so it helped my other account where I play his picks straight up.
  • RonbetsRonbets Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    New - of course I have time to, but I fail to see any benefit for me.

    "Please help me". Those 3 words seem to be attached to you. I know it's not your nature to consider maybe helping someone else?
  • underwrapsunderwraps Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    Yeah Homer, help us out we need movers. For me I just want the arbs and free half tie bets. I could care less what side wins.
    So when you wake up at 6am and put your plays in, just post them here.
  • golfer1000golfer1000 Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    New - of course I have time to, but I fail to see any benefit for me. Also see it posing potential detrimental effect on the BT family. Played 9 games earlier. All moved in my favor early, 3 kept running and the others have come back some. My record in flat finishes is fucking horrid.

    But you might be missing the point if you are focused on the specific plays rather than the concept.
    Back tested optionality on April results, promising results.

    How do you benefit from starting this thread either? Happy for you that you are crushing closers, but it's pretty unreal to start this thread then say "no" to posting plays cause it doesn't benefit you.
  • golfer1000golfer1000 Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    FYI - I bet the royals yesterday at -150, and it closed -185/-190. I lost 9-2
  • underwrapsunderwraps Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    golfer1000 wrote: »
    FYI - I bet the royals yesterday at -150, and it closed -185/-190. I lost 9-2

    LOL , Well at least we all have something in common. We all accumulated CLV points and still lost money :)
    Now if we can only find a place where we can redeem them.
  • Dr. HDr. H Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    I suspect that the reason he won't post has a lot to do with the fact that it's a lot easier to say you crush closers than it is to actually do it. HP seems to be a lot more bark than bite.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0Y7brwz6fA
  • homerplayerhomerplayer Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    Ronbets wrote: »
    "Please help me". Those 3 words seem to be attached to you. I know it's not your nature to consider maybe helping someone else?

    This thread is to benefit the board. Guys still missing the big picture. And I have done plenty of giving back to the board over the years, to many posters. Which further illustrates you are missing the point. Believe me, as I have stated on many occasions, I owe more to this board for my growth as a bettor than I can ever repay, but I do what I can. But I do appreciate your post as it displays once again the double standard that sometimes cripples BT, concerning certain posters that release plays and the timing and whatnot. You chose to ignore the part where I said I fear posting 9 or 10 plays a day could prove determintal to the board. That benefits BT.

    Back to the point of this thread. Shift your focus. So narrow minded on this board sometimes. You guys spout shit about long term results and variance but still can't see beyond a days/weeks/months worth of games. What am I building here? How many times can use the word optionality, coupled with limited upside of payout on independent events before it clicks? I referenced the esteemed BG a few times here. Not that I am anywhere near what he does, nor do I want to be.

    So we come back to the point of this thread.
    Is the Market efficient? Yes.
    Why? Because there is an extremely severe punishment for investors that get their vote wrong.
    What does EMT suggest? 100% of knowable info on an independent event is known and is in the price, with the understanding this increases as vehicle matures.
    Leading us finally to:
    CLV and the point of this thread.

    Yes, I believe the Market is efficient, meaning you can not beat it. Some cappers might drunkards walk their way through a winning season or two or even 10+, this should be an expected result. Handicapping independent events is a waste of time. Handicapping the Market, which is effieicent over 1,000s of events, provides the best avenue for success in my mind.

    Read that and digest it for now. Can't wait for the 8 word replies to fly in.
  • BuckyBadgerBuckyBadger Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    You certainly come off as being very smug. (Notice, the 8 word reply)
  • RonbetsRonbets Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    Very nice that you've come to a reasonable conclusion on your own. Now my focus point:

    I owned a restaurant that offerred free mints for departures. If you were on the guest list and the large bowl was suddenly emptied.......you'd be a person of interest.
  • duritodurito Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    Yes, I believe the Market is efficient, meaning you can not beat it. Some cappers might drunkards walk their way through a winning season or two or even 10+, this should be an expected result. Handicapping independent events is a waste of time. Handicapping the Market, which is effieicent over 1,000s of events, provides the best avenue for success in my mind.

    Read that and digest it for now. Can't wait for the 8 word replies to fly in.

    So why do lines move? And how to do you get clv.
  • underwrapsunderwraps Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    Homer, You know I like to bust balls just to keep things evenly on par here. You state that you will handicap the market instead of the individual teams, but yet your opening line in this thread clearly shows that you crushed openers and still LOST money by doing so. But last year during football season in your picks thread you brought up an argument that if you could calculate future YARDS of any NFL football game that it would make you a high % winner, and If I recall correctly, Doc and I both told you don't bother because it won't work and now here you are totally contradicting your earlier beliefs about handicapping vs front running the market with no handicapping. Pick 1 not 2 :)
  • homerplayerhomerplayer Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    NY 115
    Atl (126)
    Chc 151
    Cin 112
    Min 135
    TB (122)
    Hou 112
    Det 101
    Tex 158
    SD (117)
  • homerplayerhomerplayer Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    durito wrote: »
    So why do lines move? And how to do you get clv.

    Sorry, missed a fee days here. This has been something I have been thinking about on/off for a month. Assumption:

    1. Openers are not nearly as efficient as closers.
    But why would that be? Why would books that have an infinite BR compared to their clientele lack the resources to hire the best? This thought process was running congruent with a thought wondering why books just don't pay RAS to go away in college hoops (can't believe no one challenged my markets can't be beat with them. Obviously represents an inefficient market, for one guy at least). So I reached the conclusion, which I submit for consideration, the books need action. What happens if openers are so sharp action suffers? But the RAS answer I would think is that 98% of the people winning will lose it back at some point, 4.54% for reason, yeah? And it ties into

    2. I'm not moving lines. But when you (collective) suggest that handicapping games is the way to go, you are telling me to take on people far smarter than me with much deeper pockets. (Check out Google and intellectual humility) no fucking way I am ever going to go against the best modelers in the world. But I will happily go on with my bottom feeder life recognizing the tendencies of the Market (aka the aforementioned modelers). Which brings us to

    3. That goes back to 1 and completes our journey along this circular route to form a point. CLV? I get to where I think the sharps will end up. Not giving away the obvious advantage translational smarts will afford anyone. So if I, former college dropout bottom feeder that I am, knows where a line is heading 66% of the time (current % over 250 plays or so) why don't the books. See 1. above.
  • Dr. HDr. H Senior Member
    edited May 2014
    NY 115
    Atl (126)
    Chc 151
    Cin 112
    Min 135
    TB (122)
    Hou 112
    Det 101
    Tex 158
    SD (117)

    So this is where we submit BS lines to "prove" that we're beating the market? At time of post, Atl was -137, Cubs were 145, Cin 105, Min 122, and then I just stopped looking because these are ridiculous.
Sign In or Register to comment.