Wednesday 4/8 - PM

My initial thought about flat betting when VW pointed it out to me was that you are likely slightly increasing your EV and slightly decreasing your variance. The main drawback, in my mind, was not getting paid off for your big dogs coming in. It took some thought, but I realized I'm still getting paid off for the dogs, just in a different way.

When you flat bet, it's like betting all of the games at the average juice of the wagers. So, you are still getting paid off for the longshots by making the average juice more lucrative. It's just not quite as intuitive to see it. Of course, I could just be worried about trivial things that other people already figured out.

705p Baltimore +143 2x
810p Seattle +147 2x
811p Kansas City +103 2x
815p Pittsburgh +156 2x
1005p Oakland -102 2x

Kansas City isn't the most anti-pub team ever, but Greinke vs. Floyd is the type of match up that was profitable last year for contrarians. Otherwise, there is nothing out of the ordinary here.

135p Tampa Bay (Garza) +145 @ Boston (Matsuzaka)
135p Baltimore (Simon) +150 vs. Yankees (Burnett)
140p Pittsburgh (Ohlendorf) +172 @ St. Louis (Carpenter)
205p Kansas City (Davies) +137 @ White Sox (Danks)

The Matsuzaka fade is the most obvious play on the early board tomorrow. The Royals aren't contrarian yet, but that line still seems short.

Streak for the Cash
730p Detroit @ New York (NBA)
1005p Oakland @ Angels
Current Streak: 6

Boston is a better overall look, but I'd like to double down on the A's later, and the baseball game would have to go off extremely fast to be able to play Oakland later.

Good luck tonight.


rexfordbuzzsaw said...

"Kansas City isn't the most anti-pub team ever"

Only getting 32% on a basically EVEN line is pretty anti-public. It may not be as low percentage-wise as some of the other wagerline numbers, but the other lower % are on much bigger dogs, so that is to be somewhat expected.

am19psu said...

My baseball inexperience is vast.