[woodg8]

I won about 3 games last night on the +1.5 run line. The only one that didn't come through was Detroit scoring bottom 8th and Twins lost 4-2.

Moral of the story is, +1.5 comes through more often than moneyline.

[LoveTheNBA23]

When you lose by the runline it seems to hurt a lot more. I had The Brewers and the Red Sox yesterday and those were my only two plays. Both lost by 1, Sox gave up the only run on the second last play of the game.

[RogueJuror]

Originally Posted by LoveTheNBA23

When you lose by the runline it seems to hurt a lot more.

But that's a psycological factor, and it's something you should work on overcoming.

[Dazzez]

Originally Posted by woodg8

Moral of the story is, +1.5 comes through more often than moneyline.

Hmm, I wonder how one might extend this logic to +2.5 run lines?

[LT Profits]

Originally Posted by woodg8

I won about 3 games last night on the +1.5 run line. The only one that didn't come through was Detroit scoring bottom 8th and Twins lost 4-2.

Moral of the story is, +1.5 comes through more often than moneyline.

Yes but the Money Line is more profitable in the long run because of the high odds you are laying on the +1.5, where you are oftentimes turning an underdog (i.e., +150) into a favorite (around +1.5 -140 if on road).

[Tsoprano]

Lot of "easy runline plays" have choked in the last inning lately, only coming through for a 1 run, moneyline bet.

[hackattack]

I equate the 1.5 run line to a touchdown in football.
We all know how difficult it is in the NFL to pick heavy chalks on a consistent basis.

I prefer the moneyline.

[chipski]

Originally Posted by Brady2Moss

I think people get suckered into runlines when the favorite is laying -200 ML and only -110 RL, its very tempting and people think "its only 1 more run"

Vegas would not offer runlines if they were profit machines, lol well maybe for them it is....

what plays do you like to make exactly ? lol
you seem lost and out of touch with reality .
last night you were knocking people on the mets ..
keep trying you will get one

no offense

[gordon gekko]

Stick to money lines.

[woodg8]

Originally Posted by LT Profits

Yes but the Money Line is more profitable in the long run because of the high odds you are laying on the +1.5, where you are oftentimes turning an underdog (i.e., +150) into a favorite (around +1.5 -140 if on road).

Given that I've lost more moneylines than runlines, I think it's fair to say runlines have been much more profitable for me. the odds will be slightly shorter, but there's a greater chance of it happening.

3 losses by 1 happened to me one night. I won them all because of the +1.5, whereas I would have lost every single one on the moneyline, and I've never gone back to moneyline since (unless it's red sox at fenway)

[Dazzez]

Originally Posted by chipski

the real breakdown would be to provide #s .. but the #s would not truly tell how a particular individual or the smaller % of guys overall could in fact excel in streaks .. and do okay

it would be smart to wager $50 on a -1.5 with the potential to make $60 than to wager $150 with the fav on the ml when the fav loses straight up . you saved $100

the times you wager $150 - $200 on the ml to make a measly $100 on the fav to win straight up and were saved because your fav won by a run would most likely not be the smart way to go overall ..

it all depends on who you are and which teams you WAGERED MORE TO MAKE LESS ON ..
if we looked at 500 games wagered like this , meaning on the ml wagering MORE TO MAKE LESS most would come out on the losing end ..
this is the 1 - 3 top reason why the books are successful , they want you to wager more to make less and hit a 0 - 4 streak , etc . then the ALL IN bs ..
THEY DO NOT WANT PEOPLE TO WAGER LESS TO MAKE MORE AS A WHOLE ..

top 3 reasons sportsbooks make $$
1 > casinos
2 > parlays
3 > wagering big on the ml , wagering more to make less
(who in their right mind would not profit overall going head up against people wagering $1000 to make $500 .. )

You don't think the prevalence of degenerate know-it-all mental midgets such as yourself factors in just a little to their bottom line? Maybe just very, very slightly? Hmm?

I'd respond to this post if I thought there even the slightest chance in hell that your reply would be anything other than a semiliterate "DUH". Not only that but I've already seen similar nonsense addressed and put to bed by the likes of Ganch, DonJuan, and, juuso. I doubt I could do any better.

My honest advice: post less, read more, and don't have babies. The world will ultimately thank you.

I will ultimately thank you.


Your Friend in Christ,
Dazzez

[woodg8]

Originally Posted by Dazzez

You don't think the prevalence of degenerate know-it-all mental midgets such as yourself factors in just a little to their bottom line? Maybe just very, very slightly? Hmm?

I'd respond to this post if I thought there even the slightest chance in hell that your reply would be anything other than a semiliterate "DUH". Not only that but I've already seen similar nonsense addressed and put to bed by the likes of Ganch, DonJuan, and, juuso. I doubt I could do any better.

My honest advice: post less, read more, and don't have babies. The world will ultimately thank you.

I will ultimately thank you.


Your Friend in Christ,
Dazzez

You from Nigeria? How much money you want me to send this time?

[chipski]

Originally Posted by Dazzez

You don't think the prevalence of degenerate know-it-all mental midgets such as yourself factors in just a little to their bottom line? Maybe just very, very slightly? Hmm?

I'd respond to this post if I thought there even the slightest chance in hell that your reply would be anything other than a semiliterate "DUH". Not only that but I've already seen similar nonsense addressed and put to bed by the likes of Ganch, DonJuan, and, juuso. I doubt I could do any better.

My honest advice: post less, read more, and don't have babies. The world will ultimately thank you.

I will ultimately thank you.


Your Friend in Christ,
Dazzez

wow ! now that was good useful feedback !

[chipski]

Originally Posted by Dazzez

Not only that but I've already seen similar nonsense addressed and put to bed by the likes of Ganch, DonJuan, and, juuso. I doubt I could do any better.

My honest advice: post less, read more, and don't have babies. The world will ultimately thank you.

I will ultimately thank you.


Your Friend in Christ,
Dazzez

odds on who this rude sack of shi! is
no odds , chalk it up as a loss all the way around

whoever you are you are one insecure piece of work .
seek therapy !
you dont want none of me , i dont care how many names you have on here .. or who is just as silly as you are that will attack me to make your punk ass feel better .
i try to help people learn something , you must be threatened ..

always remember this if you never listen to anything else , those that try and curb the truth and keep people in the dark will surely reap no real reward . $$ aint no thing

[Dazzez]

I'm sorry, chipski.

You're right, I was being rude and unhelpful.

[chipski]

Originally Posted by Dazzez

You don't think the prevalence of degenerate know-it-all mental midgets such as yourself factors in just a little to their bottom line? Maybe just very, very slightly? Hmm?

I
Dazzez

one way i play is i deal with 2 bookies and i have an average of around 60%
overall in the last xxx years on -110 odds and under on single tickets .
i started picking games when i was 6 or 7 years old .
what i knew then compared to now would in fact fit into your mental midgit category . no way i could be a mental midgit now even if i wanted too ..
if you live this mess day after day and year after year surely you progress in what you know ..
is no way around it really . it just is .
the more you are involved in anything in life the more you learn and grow and can actually see things happening before they happen ..

[donjuan]

When Chipski posts in English, I will respond to his retarded "logic".

[smitch124]

Originally Posted by chipski

the real breakdown would be to provide #s .. but the #s would not truly tell how a particular individual or the smaller % of guys overall could in fact excel in streaks .. and do okay

it would be smart to wager $50 on a -1.5 with the potential to make $60 than to wager $150 with the fav on the ml when the fav loses straight up . you saved $100

the times you wager $150 - $200 on the ml to make a measly $100 on the fav to win straight up and were saved because your fav won by a run would most likely not be the smart way to go overall ..

it all depends on who you are and which teams you WAGERED MORE TO MAKE LESS ON ..
if we looked at 500 games wagered like this , meaning on the ml wagering MORE TO MAKE LESS most would come out on the losing end ..
this is the 1 - 3 top reason why the books are successful , they want you to wager more to make less and hit a 0 - 4 streak , etc . then the ALL IN bs ..
THEY DO NOT WANT PEOPLE TO WAGER LESS TO MAKE MORE AS A WHOLE ..

top 3 reasons sportsbooks make $$
1 > casinos
2 > parlays
3 > wagering big on the ml , wagering more to make less
(who in their right mind would not profit overall going head up against people wagering $1000 to make $500 .. )

4. Beer
5. Free Beer

[chipski]

Originally Posted by warriorfan707

It would take some research, but I believe that if we took run lines EVERY GAME, instead of money lines, that we would make more money in the long run.

Think about it, so 1 of the games ends up a 1 run victory, the rest of the ones were all +110 or whatever...

so this poses a very real question?

Are we all ridiculous for not betting the run line every game no matter what? (favorites only)

i would say you are correct warrior !

the less a person risks the better off he is overall and in the long run .
many bad scenarios never happen with this approach . like having a big $ losing day and putting yourself in the position to get buried . next day you wager comes and if it does not go well you might get in trouble .. (wagering on big minus odds mls)

advantages to getting + odds giving up the 1.5 in mlb
A.the times your fav wins by only 1 run and you lose the wager , the good part is you didn't wager alot .. so is not so bad .
B.the times your fav loses straight up , again you saved $ in how much you lost . if you wagered on the ml you would have lost alot more $$ ..
C. the times your fav wins by more than a run you wagered with + odds so you make more $ than you actually risked and you are looking very nice .
D . being able to pick your spots when you give up the 1.5 with the fav is an automatic advantage and always exists .
is not like you are only given 5 games to choose from ..
you have total control in which fav you get the + odds on minus the run and a half .
this may sound like a duh but really it's not .

note: it is a fact that the +1.5 wins out in the count more than not . but that's because the dogs ats category RAW includes both the fav winning straight up and the dog losing by 1 run ..
this is how i track it anyway ..

but taking the dogs +1.5 is pretty much the same as taking the favs on the ml because of the bad minus odds you get ..
people like LT know all about WAGRING LESS TO MAKE MORE .. HE IS CORRECT AS WELL .. no matter how he goes about it on a given day .. it is better in the long run to wager less $ on each individual play to make more $ than you risked on each play ..

and as always , there will be days/weeks/months where one way will look better than the other way .. but if you really look at it overall/big picture ---> then that would be the wise way to be and stay out of the ooh i just lost alot of $$ the other night cat ..

really you should never put yourself in that position unless you have alot of $$ then it doesn't really matter either way ..

[donjuan]

This makes me want to stab my eyes out so I don't have to endure any more verbal diarrhea.

[chipski]

yeah is hard to say but he risked his life is proper english as well as how it is applied above .. if not ooh well , is not relevant .
everything that sounds funny is not improper english .
that will be your lesson for the day

[donjuan]

It's not related to grammar, but rather the content.

[chipski]

Originally Posted by donjuan

It's not related to grammar, but rather the content.

do you even wager real $$ ?
if so what has the last year looked like ?
what were your plays ?
you wager +1.5 at minus odds ?
is life really that bad for you ?
wtf is wrong with you ?

[chipski]

Originally Posted by donjuan

When Chipski posts in English, I will respond to his retarded "logic".

just so you know , i wont be tracking on here like i was .
no stormin .. will keep it to myself .
trying to help people on here is obviously mute .
i think some already learned something though so was not all in vain ..

this forum allows people like you to live outside of reality and type illogical , hate feedback .
the feedback on this thread does not even offer an argument of why anyone disagrees with my take ..
just hate .

you can track yourself . i gave you guys some ideas . not so sure you or the forum as a whole would want to help people grow or make $$ but .. anyway

rest easy .

go make some more names . STORMIN IS A GREAT ONE .

what i do is work , no different than the process used by the most successful cappers .. i created it though , no copycat action . my office is a sanctuary <>
i'm out ..

[woodg8]

Originally Posted by chipski

just so you know , i wont be tracking on here like i was .
no stormin .. will keep it to myself .
trying to help people on here is obviously mute .
i think some already learned something though so was not all in vain ..
this forum allows people like you to live outside of reality and talk bs to me .. you can track yourself , i gave you guys the ideas . not so sure you would want to help people grow though , or do well .. anyway

rest easy asshole .

go make some more names . STORMIN IS A GREAT ONE .

what i do is work , no different than the process used by the most successful cappers ..
but i created the shi! mf . my brain by living it . i'm out ..

You speak out of arse so much, it's untrue. It's like, everything you say should be right, anything anyone else says is wrong.

See ya, noone wants to read your barely coherent shit in here anyway.

[donjuan]

do you even wager real $$ ?

Yes.

if so what has the last year looked like ?

I've run pretty hot this year. ~10% ROI/$ bet.

what were your plays ?

They were on a wide variety of sports and a wide variety of odds.

you wager +1.5 at minus odds ?

When there is value, yes.

is life really that bad for you ?

No, my life is pretty good.

wtf is wrong with you ?

Nothing.

[chipski]

Originally Posted by woodg8

You speak out of arse so much, it's untrue. It's like, everything you say should be right, anything anyone else says is wrong.

See ya, noone wants to read your barely coherent shit in here anyway.

good deal

[Mariner]

I do not have the stats handy, but if you bet on the runline you will win at least 70% of the time. Example: If the favorite wins it will win by more than 1 run 70% of the time. I am pretty sure it works the same for dogs. So if you can do a reverse run line with your book than it will be beneficial. One way to test it out is for 1 week follow all the games and see what teams won by more than 1 run. You will be amazed. We just remember when we lose because we say, " Shit, I should of took them straight up."

[LT Profits]

Originally Posted by Mariner

I do not have the stats handy, but if you bet on the runline you will win at least 70% of the time.

You mean you would win 70% of the time that your team wins, not 70% of all bets. If the latter was true, I would hire you.

[wolfwright]

[mikeyvplays]

I have been very very successful in betting run lines over money lines. You will be amazed how many games end in one run. Let's just say that I make around $2000 a week on just betting to win $150 a game using run lines.

[EagesBets]

What about taking team -1.5 then on bookmaker alt. lines the other team -1.5 (only on +150 or better)... You'd prob end up on top most of the time... How many one run games are there a night? not many

[mikeyvplays]

I take the alt run line on most of my baseball games and it is very profitable. I have studied this for 3 years and finally figured it out. I had mysportsbook.com and sbgglobal both basically cut off my limits to basically nothing because I was killing them. Never tried your methodology eagesbet, but it sounds like it would work. Thanks for the input

[EagesBets]

as long as its not a one run game you're a winner...

[Ammo812]

Originally Posted by EagesBets

as long as its not a one run game you're a winner...

I think this is a great discussion and one that isn't talked about much. The RL seems to be the step-child, and I really don't mind.

I agree that taking the (-1.5), or even (-2.5) on the RL is the way to go....mainly because of this seemingly obvious fact:

If you handicap it as a close game, you shouldn't be betting on it...

But...we all know the gut wrenching feeling when you have the HOME team -1.5, and it's a 1-run game in the 8th...or even the 7th innings...not good.

Here are some other things my experiences have taught me about taking RL FAVS:
Call it my 2¢, and you can take it or leave it...

It's hard to get good value on the RL favorite on the road. Sometimes, you have to use common sense when the ML is too close to the RL to justify taking it. i.e. RL is +125 and the ML is -120.

Rain shortened games can be crushing. Know the weather/wind.

Prey on weak and struggling pitchers.

Find out who's going to be calling the balls/strikes.

Watch out for teams/parks that have more/less 1-run games than others....I haven't crunched the #'s but I'll go out on a limb and say there aren't too many 1-run games at Rangers Ballpark, Comiskey, Citizens Bank, or Coors field, while the west coast parks seem to have many, many 1-run games.

A DH also helps....scoring runs is what you need.