[Cannon]

The juice must barrel you in.

[MJFtheGenius]

Cannon nobody here understands the game

80% of the poeple here collect shopping carts from 9 to 5

[moneyline]

Just like the name suggests -- bet the ML on select games ...

[5 star bomb]

not everyone is laying -110. Lot of players at matchbook, 5 dimes, etc...

[diogee]

I would think that if you pick a decent % of winners that you can profit at -110, no?

[AgainstAllOdds]

"There is no juice if you win the bet" - Hank Webber

[treece]

Originally Posted by AgainstAllOdds

"There is no juice if you win the bet" - Hank Webber

words of wisdom.

[Cannon]

that is why he has to borrow money from his 90 year old aunt to pay the bookie 20K.

[icemantbi]

I think the best way to beat this game is to play dogs. Bet for +money all the time. When you do this, you can have a losing record and still make $$$. Take a look at the NHL playoffs, for example. I'm noticing a trend that favs and dogs are hitting at close to 50%. So if you are playing dogs, you would be up quite a bit. a 1-1 day betting on 2 dogs is a profitable day. 1-1 betting 2 faves, you are down for the day.

Another thing I've learned is to embrace the parlay. Lets say you really like 2 faves, both are laying -150. It's not a good idea to bet those games straight, you go 1-1, you would lose money. So, what I do now is parlay them and risk less on the parlay. You need both to hit to make money anyways, might as well risk less and parlay them.

EDIT: I just want to add that the focus here shouldn't be about winning, but about minimizing risks at the same time as trying to maximize reward.

[onlooker]

98% of my bets are underdog money lines. So there is really no -110's in my betting anymore.

[SBR Lou]

Originally Posted by onlòóker

98% of my bets are underdog money lines. So there is really no -110's in my betting anymore.

[pimike]

Originally Posted by icemantbi

I think the best way to beat this game is to play dogs. Bet for +money all the time. When you do this, you can have a losing record and still make $$$. Take a look at the NHL playoffs, for example. I'm noticing a trend that favs and dogs are hitting at close to 50%. So if you are playing dogs, you would be up quite a bit. a 1-1 day betting on 2 dogs is a profitable day. 1-1 betting 2 faves, you are down for the day.

Another thing I've learned is to embrace the parlay. Lets say you really like 2 faves, both are laying -150. It's not a good idea to bet those games straight, you go 1-1, you would lose money. So, what I do now is parlay them and risk less on the parlay. You need both to hit to make money anyways, might as well risk less and parlay them.

EDIT: I just want to add that the focus here shouldn't be about winning, but about minimizing risks at the same time as trying to maximize reward.

Well articualed

[mathdotcom]

These posts are so wrong it's sad. Obviously if you can pick a certain % of winners you can beat juice.

There is still juice on underdogs, pal. Just because you can have a losing record and still make money doesn't mean you're avoiding juice.

[bettilimbroke999]

Not sure but I paid off my house with last month's gambling winnings. Bought my home on eBay:


http://cgi.ebay.com/House-in-Downtow...ayphotohosting

Jealous nuff motherfukers, only prob is the annual taxes cost more than the home

[Cannon]

Would make a hell of a time share.

[Francis Sollozzo]

good value in many -135 or less baseball fav

[pimike]

Originally Posted by mathdotcom

These posts are so wrong it's sad. Obviously if you can pick a certain % of winners you can beat juice.

There is still juice on underdogs, pal. Just because you can have a losing record and still make money doesn't mean you're avoiding juice.

juice on a dog, need an explanation here.

The juice is on the fav for the house

[topgame85]

if you pick over 52.8% at -110 you turn a profit not easy but not too hard if you know what your doing and I do agree that moneyline underdogs is the way to go a lot of the time

[ipickwinners]

Originally Posted by Francis Sollozzo

good value in many -135 or less baseball fav

how do u figure? ur in the hands of the house

[icemantbi]

Originally Posted by mathdotcom

These posts are so wrong it's sad. Obviously if you can pick a certain % of winners you can beat juice.

There is still juice on underdogs, pal. Just because you can have a losing record and still make money doesn't mean you're avoiding juice.

Sorry, not sure I follow you here. I agree that sometimes a dog line doesn't have enough value to warrant a bet, but I equate juice with - money.

[Francis Sollozzo]

Originally Posted by ipickwinners

how do u figure? ur in the hands of the house

Say I were have a boxing match with with Ali in his prime and he was a -500 fav. Would there be value in laying -500?

[topgame85]

vegas admits that o/u is the best bet a player can make particularly in college hoops but also just in general my personal favorite play is MLB over plays, pick a game that should go over and sit back and watch the bats swing away could be collecting within 30 minutes ex. COL/LAD game yesterday over the total in 1st inning

[pimike]

Originally Posted by topgame85

if you pick over 52.8% at -110 you turn a profit not easy but not too hard if you know what your doing and I do agree that moneyline underdogs is the way to go a lot of the time

maybe in football or baskets, not baseball my friend. Very rarely do u see this line in baseball

[topgame85]

you don't see it on sides no but on o/u its almost always -110, I rather bet the over in a game than a side anyday anyway, only time I bet a side in baseball is if i see a team even money or ml dog that I think is a good value

[onlooker]

Originally Posted by Francis Sollozzo

Say I were have a boxing match with with Ali in his prime and he was a -500 fav. Would there be value in laying -500?

I just don't see the reward verses the risk. Not worth it for me.

What about when Buster beat Tyson? That had to be one of the biggest upsets.

[ipickwinners]

Originally Posted by Francis Sollozzo

Say I were have a boxing match with with Ali in his prime and he was a -500 fav. Would there be value in laying -500?

u mean just like how everyone was laying the huge number patriots -2000 ML or w.e it was in this past superbowl.... sure u can lay huge chalk all u want, but all u need is one or two losses and thats all it takes, so my answer to that question is no if ur trying to win in the long run

[SBR Lou]

Onlooker didn't say he never laid chalk just primarily doesn't.

I know for a fact he wouldn't be opposed to betting on somebody like Money May. That brother is always worth eating some chalk.

[Francis Sollozzo]

Each Fav has to be looked at or capped on a case by case basis. If you dont think there is value in some favorites like in some -130 baseball favs then thats OK I just disagree with you.

[ipickwinners]

do u even know what value means?

[Francis Sollozzo]

Originally Posted by ipickwinners

do u even know what value means?

Yes, About 50% of the time

[ipickwinners]

im thinking this is one of the 50% of the times that u do NOT know what it means

[Francis Sollozzo]

Originally Posted by ipickwinners

im thinking this is one of the 50% of the times that u do NOT know what it means

If you dont think there is 'value' in some favorites then you havent been around long. Dont mean that in a smartass way either.

[topgame85]

I see your point but in baseball favorites may come through for you but I can tell you straight up the people who only play favorites are at a disadvantage, just play a free mlb capping contest and look at the picks of the people on the leaderboard everyday, ml dogs all over, if a team is over +140 these guys take them wether they think they will win or not just because they have value

[ipickwinners]

Originally Posted by Francis Sollozzo

If you dont think there is 'value' in some favorites then you havent been around long. Dont mean that in a smartass way either.

play favorites at -130 for 100 times and i guarentee u that u will come out on the losing side everytime, therefore i dont see any value in that

[treece]

Originally Posted by crazyl

Onlooker didn't say he never laid chalk just primarily doesn't.

I know for a fact he wouldn't be opposed to betting on somebody like Money May. That brother is always worth eating some chalk.

that guy never loses. getting him for -200 is a bargain.