taking ML Dogs of +4 and under profitable?

[dynamite140]

When people play 2 games , chances are most likely they will go 1-1 and lose the juice. Tonight i was looking at the night games and saw Nevada and Stanford were 3.5 point underdogs. I then checked the ML and they were +155 and +145 on the ML.

I dont know nothign about these teams but i know that since the line is 3.5, both games were pretty much a close game and close to a coinflip. I was thinking why not bet both the underdogs on the ML and if either 1 team wins the game, you show a .45 unit profit or .55 unit profit. Of course you could lose both games by more than 4 but I notice games that are -4 and under... underdogs win a good amount of the time.

I feel that if you play both games +3.5 on the spread and pay -110 juice, the spread won't mean crap to you. I mean only way the 3.5 means anything is if both your underdogs lose by 3 and under or one loses by 3 and the other wins/losses then the points MEAN something.

I didnt bet on these games but right now i see both are winning straightup which should not be that surprising b/c the spread is low which mean its pretty much a tossup.

Also, if you take both underdogs on the spread and both get beaten, most will probably lose by at least 4 so at least you save juice. Most likely scenario is the dog loses by 4+ and the other one wins straight up .... just from what i have been seeing. And if this happens, you would lose the juice. But if you take ML dogs.... all you have to do to hope 1 of the 2 teams win straightup.

I only think this is a good idea if you bet 2 games or 4. Because going 1-1 or 2-2 shows a profit and dogs of 4 and less who cover the spread usually WIN the game.

Thoughts?

 

[bigbookie]

this is a very good strategy in my opinion-ML dogs are way more profitable then taking the spread on small dogs of 3 or less

 

[dynamite140]

do any of your clients do that bigbookie? I feel like if i bet on these 2 games, i either take both underdog ML and if i hit 1/2 i show profit. If i take both favorites, then obviously spread. If i do one favorite and one underdog, I will take the underdog ML.


Last week i took a team Iowa +2 and like an idiot i took the spread. They lost by 3 but they were never suppose to make a comeback. They were down by 21+ and made a comeback only to lose by 3 and of course the 2 points meant nothing to me.


I also don't know why many people like taking teams +3 and have to lay the -125. Are they hoping that if they lose the game they lose by exactly 3 so you breakeven? Starting today i will take ML Dog anytime its 3 and under.

 

[dynamite140]

Stanford is winning by 14 with 2 minutes left and Nevada is up 22 with 8 minutes left. Both are 3.5 underdogs. I think if anyone bet both these games and took both spread +3.5, they are just asking to lose the juice.

 

[barman]

D140, I'd estimate that in past three years I've progressively increased my use of the moneyline for dogs to the level where they're now about 1/3 of my dog plays.

And that's not just for small point spreads. I've little trouble trying ML on dogs up to 10 pts.

Today used two with NCAR (+8 ats/+250 ml) and UCLA (+7.5/+260ml). With the split, I garnered +1.6 units

 

[dynamite140]

do you play each for same amount of units?

I had oregon state +26, Ole Miss +23, NCAR + 8, Houston +11 the last few days. I wished i took some ML.

 

[barman]

Most all of my wagers are for "one unit" per se, in that they range from (for example) $5-10 with the average being about $8

Another way to involve dog MLs is to make them for a smaller exposure than your normal wager

For example, if your average exposure is about $20 break it down like this:

NCAR +8 (-110) $14
NCAR ml +250 $6

 

[bigbookie]

do any of your clients do that bigbookie? quote]
the smarter ones do