[dodif]

I have always thought runlines are for suckers. Anyone else?

well at least -1.5
i have never played +1.5

[bigboydan]

I don't like RL's either bud. However, I would play them "IF" i can find a nice scalp.

[BuddyBear]

agreed....over 1/4 of baseball games are decided by one run. Just not worth it....it's also not worth taking +1.5 (-170) on a regular basis.

Even so, it's an empirical question so Ganchrow should have an answer for us about this question.

[bigboydan]

Just last night the Tribe blew there RL win in the 9th inning, when they blew a 2 run lead with 2 outs.

[RickySteve]

Like anything, it depends on the line. Most books use standard conversion charts, so they can be vulnerable to mis-pricing in certain spots. After a line move you might find a stale RL which has more value than a sharp ML.

[LT Profits]

While I agree with RickySteve regarding isolated situations, in general I avoid Run Lines like the plague, as they are a long term losing proposition, at either + at big juice or - at a deceptively big price.

[The HG]

Of course there can be value with run lines, if you know what you are looking for and have a reason to see value with a RL. Aside from small pricing inefficiencies that sometimes exist caused by auto line-making or contradictory line movements, there can be good value with run lines when factoring in the volatility of a pitcher or team.

Run lines aren't any more of a "long-term losing proposition" than any other kind of bet with the same juice is.

[doc]

I don't know the math, I know Ganch is the man when it comes to that but I never lay vig the first half fo the season.

If I like a favorite I bet the RL or I bet -1 line that gets me positive vig. So far in 20 bets this year I have lost 3 and pushed 1 but in the 10 I have lost I have saved a fortune in not laying the vig on -130 to -150 faves that lost out right.

I don't think you can rule them out and call them square but I will admit most cappers I see having success just pick winners against the ML and no one is dealing half juice RL's.

My 2 cents.

[moses millsap]

I like to play the -2.5's. They are fun.

[austintx05]

You have to know who to play them on. To say 1/4 or mroe of MLB games are decided...well do you have any statistical data to back that up?

How about this....

NYY 97/73 75%
Toronto 87/68 78%
Boston 86/56 65%

What you are seeing is in the left hand column are the wins and the right hand column are the wins by 2+ runs...as you can see when these teams when it is in your benefit to play the RL and since you are getting +125 - +130 on avg price, I would say it is a smart decision to play the RL on these teams.

Tonight the Yanks lost to the Twins, but at least on the RL you didn't eat the chalk.

[Razz]

Originally Posted by austintx05

You have to know who to play them on. To say 1/4 or mroe of MLB games are decided...well do you have any statistical data to back that up?

How about this....

NYY 97/73 75%
Toronto 87/68 78%
Boston 86/56 65%

What you are seeing is in the left hand column are the wins and the right hand column are the wins by 2+ runs...as you can see when these teams when it is in your benefit to play the RL and since you are getting +125 - +130 on avg price, I would say it is a smart decision to play the RL on these teams.

Tonight the Yanks lost to the Twins, but at least on the RL you didn't eat the chalk.

That's about how I see it. The teams that I consider playing the -1.5 runlines are the Mets, Phillies, Yankees, Blue Jays, and Rangers.

[doc]

Originally Posted by austintx05

Tonight the Yanks lost to the Twins, but at least on the RL you didn't eat the chalk.

awesome post man. dead on about the chalk.

[BuddyBear]

Originally Posted by austintx05

You have to know who to play them on. To say 1/4 or mroe of MLB games are decided...well do you have any statistical data to back that up?

No i just made it up

[LT Profits]

Originally Posted by BuddyBear

No i just made it up

BuddyBear,

I am not sure if that last post is sarcastic or not, but I remember when I analyzed this a few years ago, the actual amount of one-run games was only around 15%. Thing is I haven't revisited this since though, so maybe I will do a full analysis of the 2006 season when I get a chance and post the results.

[BuddyBear]

It's sarcastic....i am almost positive it is approximately 25%. I'll look for the details but i am remember reading it in a covers article somewhere.

[Wheell]

I think a little more than 25% of all games are 1 run games.

[moses millsap]

I thought it was 18-19%

[Halo]

Originally Posted by OWNED

I thought it was 18-19%

I think your right Taco I thought its in the high teens. I heard something like 17.4 but obviously the statistics are going to vary depending on 2 variables. (1) How far your sample goes back and (2) How current the statistical data is.

[Ganchrow]

Based on 19,681 games worth of Covers data from the 1999-2006 seasons, 27.6% ended with a MOV of exactly 1 run and 15.16% ended with a money line favorite MOV (or home team MOV if neither team was favored) of exactly 1 run.

[RickySteve]

Originally Posted by Ganchrow

Based on 39,362 games worth of Covers data from the 1999-2006 seasons, 27.6% ended with a MOV of exactly 1 run and 15.16% ended with a favorite MOV (or home team MOV if neither team was favored) of exactly 1 run.

There were only 19440 regular season games in that time period.

[BuddyBear]

Originally Posted by RickySteve

There were only 19440 regular season games in that time period.

I am pretty sure that there are about 2300 games in a single MLB regular season not counting playoff. Over 7 years the number of 39,000+ seems a bit high.......

[tacomax]

Originally Posted by Halo

I think your right Taco

[bigboydan]

Damn you owned.

That Taco avatar your using is starting to confuse people

[Ganchrow]

Originally Posted by BuddyBear

I am pretty sure that there are well over 5,000 games in a single MLB regular season not counting playoff. Over 7 years the number of 39,000+ seems about right....

I double counted. Divide by two.

2,430 regular season games per year.

[dodif]

runlines are for suckers

[Ganchrow]

If you 're using a book such as Pinnacle, which deals dime run lines, then you'll typically see a reduction in vig when moving away from a money line between relatively evenly matched teams and an increase in vig when moving away from a money line with one team a relatively large favorite.

For example, look at tomorrow's Houston/Phillie game. Philly's a -111 to +103 favorite on the money line, for 1.833% vig. On the run line Philly's -169 to +159 for 1.415% vig.

Conversely, look at tomorrow's Tampa Bay at Minnesota game, where the Twins are -201 to +185 faves on the money line for 1.831% vig. and -1½ +101 faves to -111 on the run line for 2.304% vig.

Another issue is that run line dogs are offered at shorter odds than the same side on the money line, and run line faves at longer odds than the same side on the money line. Hence, from the perspective of expected growth, were the +EV (same) sides of money lines and run lines sufficiently closely valued, there would then be incentive to both to betting the +1½ in preference to the money line, and to betting the money line in preference to the -1½.

Of course this latter argument will hold little weight for those that subscribe to the lottery mentality of sports betting, but for advantage bettors (whom we'd generally expect to avoid such ultimately detrimental staking strategies) it's clearly the superior option from the perspective of growth maximization and risk minimization.

Now this isn't to say that other factors won't be involved in determining whether to bet the money or the run line (factors such as those indicated by RickySteve and The HG), but rather that clearly lacking these other factors the decision can be made easier by the above.

So a couple of examples to summarize. All else being equal,

Florida -104 -1½ +155
Atlanta -104 +1½ -165

if you like Atlanta, then based on the above you should clearly go with the +1½ -165.

And all else being equal,

Washington +174 +1½ -120
N.Y. Mets -182 -1½ +110

if you like the Mets you should clearly go with the -182.

[DrunkenLullaby]

Ganchrow, you seem to have the world of sports handicapping data at your fingertips, so I've got a question.

Do you know where I might find a frequency distribution for the percentage of the time an MLB team scores exactly X runs in a game?

E.g. P(exactly 0 runs)= X.XX%
P(exactly 1 run)= y.yy%
etc.
etc.

A sample space encompassing at least one full season would be ideal. I would expect the mode would be either 4 or 5 runs.

Any help is GREATLY APPRECIATED!

[Ganchrow]

Originally Posted by DrunkenLullaby

Ganchrow, you seem to have the world of sports handicapping data at your fingertips, so I've got a question.

Do you know where I might find a frequency distribution for the percentage of the time an MLB team scores exactly X runs in a game?

E.g. P(exactly 0 runs)= X.XX%
P(exactly 1 run)= y.yy%
etc.
etc.

A sample space encompassing at least one full season would be ideal. I would expect the mode would be either 4 or 5 runs.

Any help is GREATLY APPRECIATED!

Your best bet is probably to just pull the data from either Covers or Don Best and create your own histogram.

Covers has data going back to 1999, while Don Best has data going back to 2001. Covers data is given per team per year while Don Best data is given per day. Don Best has lines for a few different book and includes run lines, while Covers only gives you a consolidated money line and total.

[DrunkenLullaby]

Thanks. I found what I needed.