Anyone play with a personal rule of never betting over a 115 fav?

[PanchoSanza]

I lay between -200 and -300 all the time on Pinnacles Alt run lines.

Had the mariners +1.5 -270 and the dodgers +1.5 -260 yesterday.

Also got the mariners +1.5 -249 today.

I'm actually way ahead this year playing these.

If it wasn't for these I'd be in the poor house

becuase the moneyline and regular run line bets have not done well for me this year.

 

[valueman]

Agree with darryl parsons - its not how short the odds are its the difference between the real odds and the odds on offer that determines value. knowing the 'real" odds is a skill like any other and requires dedication, intelligence and constant reassessment. i would say however for horse racing there is an inherant risk that your horse has a bad one so I don't beleive in playing too short on the ponies.

 

[PatrickMcIrish]

To limit yourself based on not playing over a certain price is foolish. A bankroll concern is another matter, play for 1, 1.5 or 2% of your BR each play and never risk more than 8% in any one day. That will keep you in the game.

As far as value it does not come with a max price.

 

[krackman]

If I am pure gambling I will not lay more then 140 on a baseball side. However! In the old days there would be a lot of opportunities like the following. You bet 5k on a game -200 and then were able to take +210. Being there where no -200's available that was the strong side and I would leave an extra dime on the -200 side giving me a more then 2-1 fav at a -160. Man, do I miss the pokers hitting the screen.

 

[randyrohm]

The modern player handicaps the number, not the game.

 

[viggme]

Big difference between a newbie playing big ML favs playing 40 to 50 games a year at 4% to 10% even 100% of their bankroll, to a pro/semi-pro looking to make 9,000 bets over a 5 year span at 0.5% to 2% of bankroll.

 

[acw]

sick,

Assuming that you can get on unlimited with the books and there is no problem of moving your liquidity, which percentage of your bank-roll will you put on a -2000 that you think should be -4000?
And how much will you put on a -2000 that you think should be -20000?

 

[Muddy]

Lets say Anaheim is playing Phily, you get good value on Anaheim -130, the consensus is around -142, so you bet anaheim -130
Later you have a chance to take Phily +1.5 -144, the consensus is around -156, would you bet phily +1.5 -144 knowing the only way for you to make a profit is for the angels to win by one run?

 

[sickgambler]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by acw:
sick,

Assuming that you can get on unlimited with the books and there is no problem of moving your liquidity, which percentage of your bank-roll will you put on a -2000 that you think should be -4000?
And how much will you put on a -2000 that you think should be -20000?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No matter how good a price I'm getting, NO WAY will I risk that much on a -2000. I know that even though my odds are great that I will win that bet, anything can happen on that one specific game, cause it's ONLY 1 game.. Why risk losing 3 games in a row at -2200 and end your career by being greedy. No matter what you bet or how good a price is, you should NEVER risk more than your 1-1.5% of your bankroll..

Scorpion,,

Of course.. Play that middle and hope it lands on 1. If you got both prices at a good price, then play it.. You will end up a winner at the end if you do this.

 

[jjgold]

I will go up to about -150

 

[peskypup]

I make good money betting -200 shots, sometimes up to -400 but very rarely more than this.

My tips on this are:

1. You must be very confident on your pick the worse the odds you are getting. Perhaps obvious, but in practice this means that on a -400 shot evertyhing that could be in your favour is in your favour.

2. Bet them early, ideally on opening. Lines generally improve on the dogs as the squares come in to back the favs on prices they should not be taking. very often i will have taken -150 and the line closes at -200, I got decent value at -150 but would not have taken the bet at -200.

3. This in turn means you have to be quick out of the blocks with your capping on the favs, I always take the favs first. With my dog bets, i am much more easy going since I know the best price will probably be shortly before game time.

 

[DarrylParsons]

sick,

While I agree that one needs to be more careful about betting favs than dogs, the notion that you are putting more at risk is fallacious...to illustrate, consider the following two betting propositions:

A) bet $900 on a line of -900
B) bet $500 on an even money line

Assume both are fair propositions ie. that A) has a 90% chance of success and B) has a 50% chance. I say you are taking a greater risk if you choose B) than A), despite A) having the larger bet amount.

A well-known formula for the binomial distribution says that if you have n trials with a probability p of success, then the standard deviation is given by sqrt(n*p*(1-p))

So if you place the bet 100 times, the standard deviation of proposition A) is sqrt(100*.9*.1) = sqrt(9) = 3
And for B) the s.d. is sqrt(100*.5*.5) = sqrt (25) = 5

This means that after 100 plays, your 95% confidence limits for propostion A) (which is plus or minus 2 s.d.'s from the mean) is 84 to 96 wins, which translates to plus or minus $6,000. While for B) these are 40 to 60 wins, or plus or minus $10,000.

Therefore, you are taking a 1.667 times greater risk with B) than with A)

Another way to look at it is to see what happens if you have bad luck to the tune of a 1000:1 shot coming in against you in your first sequence of bets. With A) this translates to 3 losses in a row which will cost you 3 bets or $2,700. With B) this would be about 10 losses in a row (a 1024:1 shot which is not exactly 1000, but close enough) which would cost you $5,000

Of course if your chance of winning is not really 90% in the first case, the numbers change dramatically, so the idea of being careful with favs is still a valid one.

 

[TheGeneral+]

For the new bettor, there is no way I recommend a -200 play unless..

A. I know the outcome
B. Am paying him back if it loses

When I started betting offshore, i wish someone would have told me to stay away from the high vig.

Good feedback

 

[daringly]

For a new bettor, I'd say don't make any bets until you've researched, done your homework, and are no longer a new bettor

I wouldn't automatically pass on a play regardless of the odds... But at the more extreme odds, it becomes more difficult to get a reasonable return on your risk.

If "my" line has a team as a -300 favorite, that amounts to winning 75% of the time. If I'm looking for a line off by "5%", or winning 70% of the time, I need a line of -233.

Now if my fair line is for a +100 team, a fair line is winning 50% of the time. To make that play with the same edge, I'd need a line of about +112.

There are advantages to be had at the extremes, but you have to be careful... 20 cents off at +300 is not the same as 20 cents at +100.

 

[lakerfan]

I think Generals point for new bettors is extremely helpful.

If you are a good capper and have been playing for a while that is a different situation. But you already know that.

 

[dimeplayersonly]

never lay more than -150...........IMO


but then again i am not a gambler.................

 

[wilheim]

..