Quick question for the forum: what percentage of games are decided by 1 run? I ask because I am trying to decide if I want to go with predominately ML or RL in this my first season as a serious MLB gambler. Or, better yet, someone could tell me if the RL or ML has been statistically superior since the end of the steroid era; I mention the the end of the steroid era because I assume the long ball era was a boon to the RL players. Thanks in advance my fellow gamblers. (<)<
I actually researched the other day, just a quick check from 2006-2008: the amount of games decided by 1 run was between 27.8% and 28.2% in each year. So 28% is a good base to assume. But of course, if the team getting +1.5 wins by 1 it makes no difference (so my assumption is that somehwere around 15% of games are actually affected by the RL).
What I've decided to do to start this year is compare the win percentage needed to break even on both the ML and RL for every team I'm going to bet. Comparing those 2 numbers and using the expected (approx.) 15% difference, I choose whichever one mathematically makes more sense.
Hope this helps but I'm interested in hearing from more experienced guys with some more hard facts/numbers than I could supply.
GL with whatever you decide
What I've decided to do to start this year is compare the win percentage needed to break even on both the ML and RL for every team I'm going to bet. Comparing those 2 numbers and using the expected (approx.) 15% difference, I choose whichever one mathematically makes more sense.
Hope this helps but I'm interested in hearing from more experienced guys with some more hard facts/numbers than I could supply.
GL with whatever you decide
I agree. I don't have numbers on that so I was taking that into account (somewhat subjectively) in situations where the RL or ML wasn't an obvious advantage over my predetermined 15%
If you have any extra info like that, that would be cool...or if anyone does for that matter. GL tonight guys
This may be of help Mike.
http://www.easybaseballbetting.com/run_line_analysis.html
This list compiled is good, but is a year or 2 old I believe. Also, the runline is greatly influenced by being a road favorite (this reason is addressed in the article) and also another factor this article doesn't go over, the RL is affected by the totals line for the game, although this has a more minimal impact than the first factor. A total set at 11 with a favorite has a greater shot of a total set at 7 to connect with a -1.5 RL for example.
Aptly noted in CURINATOR's post is that Away Faves have slightly better chance of beating -1.5 because
a) They're favored, so presumably slightly better chance to win overall
b) They're not batting in the bottom of the ninth when a tie breaking run would end the game with a one run margin. (Walkoff HRs with men on base the one exception to that)
a) They're favored, so presumably slightly better chance to win overall
b) They're not batting in the bottom of the ninth when a tie breaking run would end the game with a one run margin. (Walkoff HRs with men on base the one exception to that)
So, Curinator, given that these statistics are still applicable, we would see greater EV betting the RL when wagering on road favorites at -120 or higher. I wonder if betting the reverse rl on road dogs would also have a statistical advantage since the article claims that the road team is also significantly more likely to beat the 70% probability the books factor in when setting rl bets. In fact, given that these statisitics put forth in the article are still accurate, the quesion then becomes are the books still using that 70% probability to set their lines, or do they factor in the information presented in the article? I'm still learning all the relevant math in capping so insight here would be appreciated. This is great stuff, thanks fellas.
