sam1's Blog

WAGERING ON TOP TEAMS-PROFITABLE?

By sam1 | View all Posts
Posted Sunday, February 21, 2010 09:29 PM   19 comments
i was thinking for this year that if i pick the top 2 teams in each division and bet EVERY DAY on them, at the end of the season how much cash would i be up, im thinking like straight bets $10 a game consistantely same teams every day, i look at teams like the yanks, phills, cards, these teams win on average 20 to 35 times more a season then they lose, so if you hit them every day, even with the big minus's team accumalate towards the end of the season i should still be in the plus, think 25 wins up times 10 teams, that could be over 250 wins when the season is all over!! WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Report Abuse
 
19 comments
comment Post A Comment
thorpe says:
02/21/10 11:00PM
You are better off betting the worst two teams every day, IMO. 
depeche2 says:
02/21/10 11:20PM
The trick is that your picks at the beginning of the season for the top 2 teams in each division may not mirror the actual results of the top 2 teams at the end.  I think if you accurately predicted the top 2 teams in every division then you would make money, maybe, but highly doubtful you would even be able to do that.  Some of those teams are going to disappoint you.
Sharp__Action says:
02/21/10 11:24PM
I like to play some of the top teams on the runline early on when it has value before the lines tighten up. It is a low-risk way to put a play-on on them.

In april/may you get some +150 or better runlines on some of the top-tier teams, and it makes a play-on them very cheap and also good value-wise.

Obviously there are a lot of stipulations as to WHEN is the right situation to play a runline, but thats for another day.
tomseaver286 says:
02/21/10 11:32PM













You will most likely be laying steep odds if you only focus on the top 2 teams in each division. Besides, who is to say that the top 2 teams in each division will stay atop the standings? You are better off betting on dogs and an occasional favorite. No money to be made betting strictly on favorites.
shelbyxjackson says:
02/22/10 12:53AM

I cant see this being a good idea, the best teams are usually around -200 each game, sometimes even jucier, so they will have to win 2 times out of 3 just to break even, 3 times out of 4 to show a minimal profit.

 "i look at teams like the yanks, phills, cards, these teams win on average 20 to 35 times more a season then they lose"

I'm pretty sure thats not true. 35 times, really?!?! I dont want to burst your bubble, but 116-46 seasons happen about once a century. Even the low end of your statement, 20 times, would be a 101-61 season, and its a huge accomplishment to win 100 games. Yanks won 103 last year, they were the only team to win 100. In this day & age, its really, really hard to win 100 games. You can try this strategy if you want, I'm sure your bookie will love you, but it sounds stupid to me.

tomseaver286 says:
02/22/10 03:04AM


I caught that as well. I think he means 20-35 MORE wins then losses. With that said I still do NOT like his strategy. Even good teams lose 65-75 games. That juice will eventually drown you. You need a nice mix of dogs and with an occasional favorite mixed in. 

Mechanical systems dont work. You have to cap and find the value.
sam1 says:
02/22/10 11:39AM
I think the most important point thing that everyone is over looking is that it would be a consistent bet on the top dogs, EVERYDAY, i live in Vegas and am able to do this, im not looking to throw my money on underdogs, been there done that, not profitable by the end of the season, and for others look at the top teams records over the years you will see 20 MORE WINS then loses, even if im winning -200 wagers and losing -200 wagers, the goal is to have more wins then loses at the end of the season, I think if you really research this theory i wilol be profitable!
sam1 says:
02/22/10 11:43AM
Jackson, your statement is not right,  "Even the low end of your statement, 20 times, would be a 101-61 season",

 

 that would be a 40 win season, you have to have basic math skills to be able to join the adult chat area! you hear that your school bell is ringing

shelbyxjackson says:
02/22/10 12:00PM

I was trying to be nice and help you out, since you are obviously in need of some serious help, but now I'm just disappointed in myself that I actually took time to reply to this thread. I forgot 1 of the cardinal rules: if you see a post headline in ALL CAPS, don't even open it, its never worth the time. Please dont waste your time replying to me anymore in this thread, for this will be the last time I open it. Good luck with your baseball bets this year, I got a feeling you'll need it.

tomseaver286 says:
02/22/10 07:17PM


It will NOT work my friend. That juice will eat up your winnings. Back test it over a season or two and you will see. You are much better off playing the run line or playing SELECT straight up dogs.

If the average moneyline on a division leader were just -200 it would break you. You would be laying, ON AVERAGE, $200 dollars to win $100. Thats 200 to get back 300. $200 wager plus $100 in winnings.

200/300 = .6666 That means you need to be right 67% of the time just to make a profit. Now we will take that .6666 number and multiply it by the number of games for ONE team in a season.

162 games * .6666 = 108 wins

How many teams won 108 games last season? Exactly.

Blindly betting the top 2 teams in each division EVERY NIGHT will BREAK your bankroll. I guarantee it!


birdman11 says:
02/22/10 09:32PM
YEA I THINK IT WORKS BUT BE CAREFULL IN BEGININING OF SEASON AS GOOD TEAMS USUALLY START OFF LOSING, AND PLAY THE STREAKS
Flash_Man says:
02/23/10 05:05PM

I like playing favorites, usually lean towards the RL though if I can.  Also, I play favorites selectively.  Blindly playing the top two favorites every day is sure to lose you money in the long run. 

For a 3 year stretch, before last year, the Red Sox were about .500 against teams with a .500 record or better.  They had a ridiculous .700 winning % against sub .500 teams.  Those were the games to bet on.  Slightly higher juice but still better value and return. 

I hate it when people say playing the favorites will lose you money.  You just have to be selective and don't forget about the RL. 

Still for what its worth, playing the top two favorites everyday will LOSE You money.  That's the safest bet there is

sam1 says:
02/25/10 01:29PM
i thank you all for your input, i to am a big fan of the RL, but that turns a possible system into gambling?
rangerz2478 says:
02/25/10 01:47PM
The ONLY way this type of system has ANY chance is if you are using matchbook. If you are using any normal book (even one with 5 cent juice) you will NOT turn a profit. If you use matchbook while keeping the juice low (example -120/+119) you have a chance but that is the ONLY way.
tep says:
02/25/10 01:51PM
Guys very simple to track past results. Covers page. Go to the line that says money. This what each team would have produced at the end of the year if you bet $100.

GL
Flash_Man says:
02/25/10 02:28PM

Very interesting.  Question, if I faded lets say Ariz, every game for 162, should I reasonably expect a 2K return if I bet $100 every game?  I see they were -2290 for 2009

sam1 says:
02/25/10 05:08PM
this is a system worth looking into, there is a lot of cash in basball and with me living in Vegas i have the ability to grab the best lines that are out there, i live 2 minutes away from 3 casinos and work in one as well
Flash_Man says:
02/25/10 05:59PM

Makes sense.  For the record I would never bet that way, just trying to get a broader understanding.  I have a finance degree and love crunching numbers.  Can the season start already? lol

yankeefan98121 says:
03/02/10 02:03PM
Add your response:
Please note that the blogger has the option of reviewing all comments before they are displayed to the public. Your comment may not be published immediately.
 

Profile

User: sam1
Joined: July 2008
Location: Nevada
Team: St. Louis Cardinals
Occupation: Information Technology

Recent Posts

Archive

open2011
open2010

Categories

Advertisement