[maritime]

It seems like at least every other thread there is a poster talking about "value" this and "value" that. It seems to me that the only "valuable" bet is the one that wins, whether it means laying chalk or taking the dog. Here are some of the ways I think it is being used so far on this forum:

1. I have decided to bet on team A, and I am a really good capper, so therefore there must be a lot of "value" with team A.
2. The so-called public (another term for another day) is all over team A, so therefore team B must have value, and thus I will bet on them.
3. Team A is a really big underdog, so therefore Team A has value and I will bet on them.
4. Team A is not as big of a favorite as I thought they would be, so therefore Team A must have value, and I will bet on them.

Just tired of seeing this word thrown around like it is the end-all, be-all of sports wagering.

[Kingctb27]

Originally Posted by maritime

It seems like at least every other thread there is a poster talking about "value" this and "value" that. It seems to me that the only "valuable" bet is the one that wins, whether it means laying chalk or taking the dog. Here are some of the ways I think it is being used so far on this forum:

1. I have decided to bet on team A, and I am a really good capper, so therefore there must be a lot of "value" with team A.
2. The so-called public (another term for another day) is all over team A, so therefore team B must have value, and thus I will bet on them.
3. Team A is a really big underdog, so therefore Team A has value and I will bet on them.
4. Team A is not as big of a favorite as I thought they would be, so therefore Team A must have value, and I will bet on them.

Just tired of seeing this word thrown around like it is the end-all, be-all of sports wagering.

Agreed.

I "Value" any bet that is a winner.

[HeeeHAWWWW]

Value simply means chance of winning multiplied by odds. If you bet on negative value, you will clearly always lose money on the long run.

[Sinister Cat]

Well, expected value sort of is the end-all, be-all of sports wagering. In the long-term, what matters is if you are making +ev bets, and the results of an individual play don't really matter. You aren't going to get them all right. I'd rather see people say "there's probably some value here" than "this game is a lock" (which it never is), even if their reasons for saying so are dubious... just my opinion..

[Ringo]

Originally Posted by maritime

It seems like at least every other thread there is a poster talking about "value" this and "value" that. It seems to me that the only "valuable" bet is the one that wins, whether it means laying chalk or taking the dog. Here are some of the ways I think it is being used so far on this forum:

1. I have decided to bet on team A, and I am a really good capper, so therefore there must be a lot of "value" with team A.
2. The so-called public (another term for another day) is all over team A, so therefore team B must have value, and thus I will bet on them.
3. Team A is a really big underdog, so therefore Team A has value and I will bet on them.
4. Team A is not as big of a favorite as I thought they would be, so therefore Team A must have value, and I will bet on them.

Just tired of seeing this word thrown around like it is the end-all, be-all of sports wagering.

Well said.

[Brady2Moss]

This is the dumbest thread Ive ever read.

[Kingctb27]

Originally Posted by Brady2Moss

This is the dumbest thread Ive ever read.

Nothing to do with you throwing around "value" in most of your threads, right?

[ShowMeDaMoney]

Have to admit, tons of value in this thread...

[rake922]

lol

[Sactown]

Originally Posted by ShowMeDaMoney

Have to admit, tons of value in this thread...

[maritime]

Originally Posted by Kingctb27

Nothing to do with you throwing around "value" in most of your threads, right?

[LT Profits]

VALUE is all that matters in betting. If you consistently bet overpriced favorites, you will lose in the long run, it's as simple as that.

If you handicap a play to win 40% of the time, and the odds on the team are +160, then it is +EV in the long run. Sure the odds are 40/60 against you on THAT DAY, but if you are correct in the same play going say 40-60 over 100 plays, you will win money at +160.

Beting heavy chalk because it is the best bet that day is simlply short-term thinking. This is a marathon, not a sprint.

[Brady2Moss]

Originally Posted by LT Profits

VALUE is all that matters in betting. If you consistently bet overpriced favorites, you will lose in the long run, it's as simple as that.

If you handicap a play to win 40% of the time, and the odds on the team are +160, then it is +EV in the long run. Sure the odds are 40/60 against you on THAT DAY, but if you are correct in the same play going say 40-60 over 100 plays, you will win money at +160.

Beting heavy chalk because it is the best bet that day is simlply short-term thinking. This is a marathon, not a sprint.

Why dont you rookies do yourself a favor and listen to this man

[LT Profits]

The check is in the mail Brady.

[fifawcs]

Betting on value is the only way to win in sports betting. If you buy undervalued securities or undervalued lines, you will make money. If you don't know what value is, then maybe you ought to pick up a dictionary.

[Wilforth]

It's about picking bets that give you the greatest profit in the long run. It's not that you just pick a bet because of the "+" sign!
If you're betting favorites of -200 for instance, at 70% you only turn in a 5% profit, whereas winning 50% of +120 picks will give you 20% profit.
In soccer, for instance, if you train yourself very well to pick draws, you only need to win 40% to turn in a profit as the odds for a draw hover around +220.
If you pick your bets such that you need 70% to turn in a profit, then you'd hardly make it in the long run.
In summary, value play is being able to maintain a positive balance with the lowest winning percentage.

[Wilforth]

Originally Posted by fifawcs

Betting on value is the only way to win in sports betting. If you buy undervalued securities or undervalued lines, you will make money. If you don't know what value is, then maybe you ought to pick up a dictionary.

fifawcs,

Your record is an example of value play. You're at 55-57 (under 50%) and yet maintaining a positive balance.
There's no point being at 65% and yet having a negative record.

[Brady2Moss]

Wilforth, I have to disagree with you.

You dont have to bet dogs to be a value player. As long as the win probability is higher than is suggested by the posted line, you have value. Could be 90% to 95%, could be 10% to 15%.

[Ringo]

Not saying that i do not use value as a part of my strategy. Believe me I do, I just agree with the points meritime makes about the way some people make there decisions.

[maritime]

Originally Posted by LT Profits

VALUE is all that matters in betting. If you consistently bet overpriced favorites, you will lose in the long run, it's as simple as that.

If you handicap a play to win 40% of the time, and the odds on the team are +160, then it is +EV in the long run. Sure the odds are 40/60 against you on THAT DAY, but if you are correct in the same play going say 40-60 over 100 plays, you will win money at +160.

Beting heavy chalk because it is the best bet that day is simlply short-term thinking. This is a marathon, not a sprint.

I'm not saying it's not important LT. Of course it is. But it has to be combined with good, smart, disciplined handicapping. To determine the value you need to handicap (as accurately as possible) a team's chances of winning. I think this is being neglected by a lot of posters on here that throw this term around.

[VegasDave]

If maritime is saying "value" is a stupid concept, well, he is the stupid one.

If he is saying the term is overused here, he's absolutely right. Everybody says every bet they make has great value and many times it doesn't really make any sense.

[LT Profits]

Originally Posted by Brady2Moss

Wilforth, I have to disagree with you.

You dont have to bet dogs to be a value player. As long as the win probability is higher than is suggested by the posted line, you have value. Could be 90% to 95%, could be 10% to 15%.

Not true Brady, it is possible to find an edge with any bet, even favorites. I personally feel it is easier to find value with dogs, but there are many +EV chalk players on this board that disagree with me.

But that's fine as long as I keep winning.

[Ringo]

Originally Posted by usckingsfan31

If maritime is saying "value" is a stupid concept, well, he is the stupid one.

If he is saying the term is overused here, he's absolutely right. Everybody says every bet they make has great value and many times it doesn't really make any sense.

exactly

[LT Profits]

Originally Posted by maritime

I'm not saying it's not important LT. Of course it is. But it has to be combined with good, smart, disciplined handicapping. To determine the value you need to handicap (as accurately as possible) a team's chances of winning. I think this is being neglected by a lot of posters on here that throw this term around.

Actually, that's sort of what I said!

You use "good, smart disciplined handicapping" to determine if a team's true odds of winning are either, say, 40% or 58%. Then, if the former is +160 or the later is -115, you bet it not worrying about losing one game, knowing that it is +EV in the long run.

[maritime]

Originally Posted by LT Profits

Actually, that's sort of what I said!

You use "good, smart disciplined handicapping" to determine if a team's true odds of winning are either, say, 40% or 58%. Then, if the former is +160 or the later is -115, you bet it not worrying about losing one game, knowing that it is +EV in the long run.

LT this post really wasn't directed at you. I have no doubt you know what you're doing. It's directed at posters that are using the term "value" inappropriately, mainly based on my 4 points above. It's being watered down or oversimplified and tossed around too easily.

[Wilforth]

Originally Posted by LT Profits

Not true Brady, it is possible to find an edge with any bet, even favorites. I personally feel it is easier to find value with dogs, but there are many +EV chalk players on this board that disagree with me.

But that's fine as long as I keep winning.

You said it all.
Let's take the Cubs game, for instance. It's 2-2 at the bottom of the 7th. I'll be a much happier person if I played Marlins +170 than if I laid the horrendous chalk on the Cubs. As it stands now, both sides have equal chances of winning.

[Wilforth]

Originally Posted by maritime

LT this post really wasn't directed at you. I have no doubt you know what you're doing. It's directed at posters that are using the term "value" inappropriately, mainly based on my 4 points above. It's being watered down or oversimplified and tossed around too easily.

I agree with you though. But I think many of those who use the V word know what they're talking about. To some, it only means a bet with a "+" sign. To others, whatever wins has value. But it all boils down to the best compromise between winning percentage and win amount per bet that guarantees the highest possible profit in the long run.

[beaneaters]

There is a 72 per cent I value LTs opinion over most others, which means at -257 or better, following his advice would be a strong value play. Of course, 28 per cent of the time I lose value from my bankroll when I get stubborn and follow my own opinion.

[dmiles1021]

im with you maritime, this "value" stuff is whack

[clonecat]

I love extra value meals

[sickness]

Originally Posted by dmiles1021

im with you maritime, this "value" stuff is whack

i value your post.