Crunch and his stylish self-portrait avatar are right on. The YES hits historically at 53%, and that's over 10s of thousands of games. The books offer this prop and shade their lines to gouge the NO bettors, preying on the huge misconception that it's easy for pitchers to get these 6 outs before giving up a run. The hard data proves that that simply isn't the case yet people fall for it and the books clean-up off of the misinformation.
Additionally, people try to use team and pitcher specific data to cap this prop when the vast majority of the time, any differences found are simply random variation and they throw hard earned dollars chasing these random variation ghosts and then wonder why their capping isn't getting them anywhere, because of the small sample sizes. The ONLY variable that has shown to be correlated to the outcomes of this prop is the game's O/U. Quite frankily, anything else is simply noise.
The other key to success with this prop is understanding that a run in the first in an O/U 7.5 game is less likely than a run in the first in an O/U 11 game. Creating your own lines using historical outcomes and stratifying them by the game's O/U is imperative.
VEGAS, you will lose your shirt betting the NO. Over 99% of the time, the NO is a negative expectation bet. I'll use your 2 wagers for today as an example:
NYM/Was NO -130. Historically, the true NO ML for O/Us of 8.5 is +103. The books have sucked you into thinking that the -130 NO is a solid play when in actuality, you are playing a -7.2% expectation play. Meaning, in the long-run, for every $100 you wager, you will lose a net of $7.20.
NYY/TB NO -125. Same thing here, except that it's -6.29%. Don't even get me started on the disaster that is parlaying, much less parlaying two brutal negative expecation plays.
