[mofome]

I cant think of one.

[CrazyLou]

-185 fuck that.

I'd rather play small dogs or baby favorites, or totals.

[diogee]

Fadable Fish would

[5 star bomb]

Yes.... If I feel a game should be 250 or higher and the line is 185 I will at least consider playing it. I hate laying numbers like that and very very rarely will do it. But there are times where its more than acceptable imo

[LT Profits]

No, I never even lay -130...LOL

[onlòóker]

N.O Spells No.

I have a hard time betting over -130, but I would say 95% of my bets are underdogs.

[MrX]

I will gladly lay -185 and beyond when it is +EV.

And, yes, there are +EV opportunities at those prices.

[MadCapper]

Hell no!

Even the BEST teams lose 60+ games each year!

[durito]

Yes, absolutely.

[Joeyfitzclick]

Johan Santana at home V Pitt's fifth starter ?

Sure

[mathdotcom]

Yes. Any team that has JJ batting cleanup.

[Willie Bee]

Jake Peavy vs the Giants with Russ Ortiz or Woody Williams starting, I'd have to at least think about that one.

[durito]

Basically what someone is saying when they won't lay above -170 is that no team has a greater than 64.9% of winning the game.

If that is in fact the case, then the books and markets are mis pricing games with large favorites. If that's the case, every game at +190 or above would be profitable and we should all be raking in cash betting all of them.

[LT Profits]

Originally Posted by durito

Basically what someone is saying when they won't lay above -170 is that no team has a greater than 64.9% of winning the game.

If that is in fact the case, then the books and markets are mis pricing games with large favorites. If that's the case, every game at +190 or above would be profitable and we should all be raking in cash betting all of them.

The best team in baseball will only win about 62% of the time and the worst team will still win about 38%. So if my handicapping points me to a big favorite, I'd much rather pass the game than lay those odds. That is not the same thing as saying bet all big dogs blindly.

[pokernut9999]

When you have the top pitchers going against low level teams I will all the time.

Games like last Friday Astros/Oswalt and Saturday Cleveland/Carmona no because the teams they are playing were hot coming in and they are not in my opiniion reliable as neither was team playing well.

Give me Sheets, Peavy , Webb against crappy teams and yes.

[mofome]

Originally Posted by Willie Bee

Jake Peavy vs the Giants with Russ Ortiz or Woody Williams starting, I'd have to at least think about that one.

You can't make up teams Mr Bee. I would take peavy on the yankees with pap closing over the UGA bulldogs.

[mofome]

Originally Posted by pokernut9999

When you have the top pitchers going against low level teams I will all the time.

Games like last Friday Astros/Oswalt and Saturday Cleveland/Carmona no because the teams they are playing were hot coming in and they are not in my opiniion reliable as neither was team playing well.

Give me Sheets, Peavy , Webb against crappy teams and yes.

Sheets is under .500 in his career.

[pokernut9999]

Originally Posted by mofome

Sheets is under .500 in his career.

Did not say every game, talking in the present. The way those guys are pitching now if they came up -185 vs crap teams I would play them.

It is obvious you cant not lay -185+ every time a pitcher or good team plays. There are selective times a big line is worth it.

[buztah]

Sure if it's free money. When you win there's no juice.

[LT Profits]

Actually, BLINDLY playing all underdogs greater than +200 is 371-882, -1.51 units since 1999. It should not take much filtering to turn -1.51 into a nice profit.

[pokernut9999]

Originally Posted by LT Profits

Actually, BLINDLY playing all underdogs greater than +200 is 371-882, -1.51 units since 1999. It should not take much filtering to turn -1.51 into a nice profit.

Or vice versa

[thegreatdiatchi]

Only if i'm really confident on it but only 1/1000 plays.

[durito]

Originally Posted by buztah

Sure if it's free money. When you win there's no juice.

there's juice whenever you place a bet, win or lose (perhaps unless you were playing at no-juice sportsbook, which i believe was a deposit only operation)

[JEMFS]

It does not happen often, but if the statistics and trends take me in that direction I'll go with the heavy fav.

[pokernut9999]

Webb vs Zito Wednesday , book it.

[mofome]

Originally Posted by pokernut9999

Webb vs Zito Wednesday , book it.

[pat venditto]

When Its A Winner Theres No Juice.

[diogee]

Originally Posted by pokernut9999

Webb vs Zito Wednesday , book it.

Still can't do it but definitely a good parlay option for Hudson or Penny.

[JRS21386]

Yeah i agree with dio... Good parlay option but i wouldnt play it on singles..

[mofome]

Originally Posted by pat venditto

When Its A Winner Theres No Juice.

what about when its a loser?

[JRS21386]

I like underdogs myself...

[mofome]

Originally Posted by JRS21386

I like underdogs myself...

nats +190?
Cinci +185?

[pat venditto]

dont pick losers no problem

[Cannon]

AL east against the Texas Rangers.

[mofome]

Originally Posted by pat venditto

dont pick losers no problem

well we cant all be all in on an awful play and get bailed out with 11 runs in 3 innings.

my apologies.