BIZ - Betting The Bases Angles (One Step Ahead)

[Biz]

Many Many years ago the GREAT Mike Lee wrote a book titled "Betting The Bases". It had many different angles for betting on baseball. Some obsolete as the game has changed, some are still relevant.

It is a laborious task to do all of the many angles he had i the book by hand, and in the pre computer age you gleefully did it as it gave you an edge. In this day and age of computers, doing these by hand isn't quite as fun.

I will make a few different threads on these angles, and we will track their progress. This one is called "One Step Ahead". Its been a few years since I've tracked these plays. I'll try and stay on the qualifiers.

Lets see how relevant they still are, particularly this one fading a favorite.

Parameters:
1) Team WP >=55%, with a home WP of >=60%
2) Won at least 5 consecutive games
3) After this 5+ game win streak, you wait for this team to lose 2 consecutive games.
4) Once this happens, FADE this team over the next 10 games as long as they are favored.

LA Dodgers qualify. They are well above those WP, just lost 2 straight, from 5/1-8 won 6 straight. Fading them the next 10 games as a favorite.

5/13: Philadelphia +188
5/14: Philadelphia
5/15: Philadelphia
5/16: Arizona
5/17: Arizona
5/17: Arizona
5/18: Arizona
5/20: Philadelphia
5/21: Philadelphia
5/22: Philadelphia

 

[G-Man!]

Many Many years ago the GREAT Mike Lee wrote a book titled "Betting The Bases". It had many different angles for betting on baseball. Some obsolete as the game has changed, some are still relevant.

It is a laborious task to do all of the many angles he had i the book by hand, and in the pre computer age you gleefully did it as it gave you an edge. In this day and age of computers, doing these by hand isn't quite as fun.

I will make a few different threads on these angles, and we will track their progress. This one is called "One Step Ahead". Its been a few years since I've tracked these plays. I'll try and stay on the qualifiers.

Lets see how relevant they still are, particularly this one fading a favorite.

Parameters:
1) Team WP >=55%, with a home WP of >=60%
2) Won at least 5 consecutive games
3) After this 5+ game win streak, you wait for this team to lose 2 consecutive games.
4) Once this happens, FADE this team over the next 10 games as long as they are favored.

LA Dodgers qualify. They are well above those WP, just lost 2 straight, from 5/1-8 won 6 straight. Fading them the next 10 games as a favorite.

5/13: Philadelphia +188
5/14: Philadelphia
5/15: Philadelphia
5/16: Arizona
5/17: Arizona
5/17: Arizona
5/18: Arizona
5/20: Philadelphia
5/21: Philadelphia
5/22: Philadelphia

IMO
Blindly betting ten straight times against a team with that pitching staff is a bad idea. I would consider betting against only the Dodger pitcher during that 10 game span if he was only facing another team with a winning record and a starter that underachieved in his last start while still owning an era at 4.00 or under.

What would Lee do if both teams were facing each other with identical game results as mentioned above?

 

[Ice74]

I think this is an intriguing situation especially with the Dodgers because I think you’re only going to need Philly/Arizona to go 3-7 in these 10 games to break even anything better than 3-7 will be profitable

 

[Biz]

IMO
Blindly betting ten straight times against a team with that pitching staff is a bad idea. I would consider betting against only the Dodger pitcher during that 10 game span if he was only facing another team with a winning record and a starter that underachieved in his last start while still owning an era at 4.00 or under.

What would Lee do if both teams were facing each other with identical game results as mentioned above?

It’s not a bad idea and you miss the point. These teams are over valued. They are due for regression.

How did -240 Max Scherzer do tonight?? He lost.

Good pitchers lose, it’s about value. In this situation, according to Lee’s research when he wrote the book, it was profitable.

Walker Buehler started tonight. The Phillies were 15-17 starting Kyle Gibson with a 4+ ERA.

The -225 Dodgers with the superior pitcher lost.

If both teams were in the same situation easy answer. You take the dog. You’re always taking the dog.

 

[Biz]

5/13: Philadelphia +188
5/14: Philadelphia +165?
5/15: Philadelphia
5/16: Arizona
5/17: Arizona
5/17: Arizona
5/18: Arizona
5/20: Philadelphia
5/21: Philadelphia
5/22: Philadelphia

 

[Biz]

Milwaukee
1) 63%, Home 10-4
2) 4/26-30 won 5 straight
3) 5/7-8 lost 2 straight

I'll list all 10 games, they've played 4 already. Don't get a hard on about past posting, we are checking to see if its still a viable angle. They still have 6 games in the sequence.

Today Miami is a slight dog will wait for game time line

5/9: Cincinnati +160
5/10: Cincinnati +175
5/11: Cincinnati +175
5/13: Miami +125
5/14: Miami +100?
5/15: Miami
5/16: Atlanta
5/17: Atlanta
5/18: Atlanta
5/20: Washington

 

[Biz]

As soon as the Yankees lose 2 straight they'll be next.

Philadelphia: 2-0 (+3.53)
Miami: 3-2 (+2.35)

 

[G-Man!]

It’s not a bad idea and you miss the point. These teams are over valued. They are due for regression.

How did -240 Max Scherzer do tonight?? He lost.

Scherzer gave up 1 run. But for the Mets - they lose often to good left handers. Which is where they are again Sunday.

Good pitchers lose, it’s about value. In this situation, according to Lee’s research when he wrote the book, it was profitable.

I agree.

Walker Buehler started tonight. The Phillies were 15-17 starting Kyle Gibson with a 4+ ERA.

I bet Gibson because Buehler wasn't as good when up against Gibson. Also But again you won. Also Kershaw was supposed to be the starter but the rotation changed for the whole series.
Nola is the advantage over Gonsolin if he starts Sunday.

The -225 Dodgers with the superior pitcher lost.

If both teams were in the same situation easy answer. You take the dog. You’re always taking the dog.

Thanks for the info.

 

[Biz]

Yes Scherzer gave up a run. They lost whether its 2-1 or 11-10. Its a loss at an inflated number. That is the point. Every loss isn't necessarily the pitcher getting shelled. Sometimes its the bats that are silent. Sometimes the pitcher gets shelled.

Buehler is an all star and Cy Young caliber pitcher. Gibson isn't in his class.

Again, it doesn't matter who the pitcher is. Good teams lose 60+ times a season. These situations are when you take them to lose some of those 60 games regardless of who is pitching. Not every ace goes undefeated. These are spots to beat them

 

[Biz]

5/13: Philadelphia +188
5/14: Philadelphia +165?
5/15: Philadelphia +122
5/16: Arizona
5/17: Arizona
5/17: Arizona
5/18: Arizona
5/20: Philadelphia
5/21: Philadelphia
5/22: Philadelphia

5/9: Cincinnati +160
5/10: Cincinnati +175
5/11: Cincinnati +175
5/13: Miami +125
5/14: Miami +100?
5/15: Miami +150
5/16: Atlanta
5/17: Atlanta
5/18: Atlanta
5/20: Washington

 

[G-Man!]

It’s not a bad idea and you miss the point. These teams are over valued. They are due for regression.

Regardless of Over valued - its common because the masses are jumping on them after they start on a streak. Only one team in 60 years kept on winning and that was Cleveland a few years ago winning 22 straight.
The Lee theory plays out because its rare to win more than 7-10 in a row. Playing after 5 is logical, but again, only when the matchup shows its still a good side.
The Dog System you mention is coincidence because those teams on a win streak, are being loaded up on.
Im not diluting the theory, but when there is a loss its not because the dog was better that day. So to blindly bet against any team 10 straight times isnt true in capping.

How did -240 Max Scherzer do tonight?? He lost.

Good pitchers lose, it’s about value. In this situation, according to Lee’s research when he wrote the book, it was profitable.

Scherzer didnt lose. The Mets did. No pitcher loses when he allows 3 runs or less. His team lost because they were unproductive on offense period. Good pitching always beat good hitting and Vice versa,

Walker Buehler started tonight. The Phillies were 15-17 starting Kyle Gibson with a 4+ ERA.

The 15-17 recon never applies to me. Its unrelated to the last few games in which a pitcher is performing like,.

The -225 Dodgers with the superior pitcher lost.

Gibson was just as superior at the moment or against the Dodgers.

If both teams were in the same situation easy answer. You take the dog. You’re always taking the dog.

I know thats the theory, but I would always cap the pitchers regardless.
Lee simply used the streak as the odds multiplied because that what they do. The same thing happened to teams that lose 5 in a row as well. They get bet against in large masses.

There is nothing wrong with the Mike Lee theory at all.
Its mainly circumstantial and most streaks are usually against softer teams or pitching rotations that favored the winning teams.
Again its just my opinion. Not arguing the actual theory./

Great dialog. Always like your posts.

 

[Biz]

No worries.

Its strictly a value play. We can debate which pitcher is better at the moment. It doesn't matter. Starting pitching is often times over valued simply because they rarely go past 5-6 anymore.

The game Scherzer started, he lost. Doesn't matter what he did in the game. He lost as a -240 favorite. Sometimes its a 2-1 loss, sometimes its a 5-4 or 9-7. Its a loss. The team that he pitched for, regardless of how great he pitched, lost. Good pitchers lose.

That is the point. You are diving too deep into this. Its about getting a dog price in spots where teams are due for regression.

If you capped the pitchers, you're missing a lot of the wins because most of the time - on paper - the favorite has the better pitcher.

These teams don't win for many reasons. They can't hit - which is why I don't care if its Scherzer, Buehler, etc........bullpen meltdown, errors, whatever. They lose.

BTW Gibson pitched worse than Beuehler in that game.

As far as Lee's theory, we aren't playing against a team on a current win streak. We aren't betting against a team on a current 5+ game win streak. We are betting them AFTER the streak, after they have lost 2 in a row at some point after the streak.

 

[Biz]

@G-Man!

It may be interesting for you to take the list, and from there list the games you would play based on your handicapping factors. Like the Gibson/Buehler game for example.

Just a thought. Great dialogue....

 

[Biz]

Milwaukee

5/9: Cincinnati +160
5/10: Cincinnati +175
5/11: Cincinnati +175
5/13: Miami +125
5/14: Miami +100?
5/15: Miami +150
5/16: Atlanta
5/17: Atlanta
5/18: Atlanta
5/20: Washington

3-3 (+1.35)

 

[Biz]

Los Angeles Dodgers

5/13: Philadelphia +188
5/14: Philadelphia +165?
5/15: Philadelphia +122 Knebel blows yet another save
5/16: Arizona
5/17: Arizona
5/17: Arizona
5/18: Arizona
5/20: Philadelphia
5/21: Philadelphia
5/22: Philadelphia

2-1 (+2.53)

 

[Biz]

San Francisco
1) 20-14 (58.8%), Home 11-7 (61.1%)
2) Won 6 straight 5/7-13
3) Lost 2 straight 5/14-15

5/16: Colorado
5/17: Colorado
5/18: Colorado
5/20: San Diego
5/21: San Diego
5/22: San Diego
5/23: NY Mets
5/24: NY Mets
5/25: NY Mets
5/27: Cincinnati

 

[G-Man!]

San Francisco
1) 20-14 (58.8%), Home 11-7 (61.1%)
2) Won 6 straight 5/7-13
3) Lost 2 straight 5/14-15

5/16​	​	at COLORADO
5/17​	​	at COLORADO
5/18​	​	at COLORADO
5/20​	​	vs SAN DIEGO
5/21​	​	vs SAN DIEGO
5/22​	​	vs SAN DIEGO
5/23​	​	vs NY METS
5/24​	​	vs NY METS
5/25​	​	vs NY METS
5/27​	​	at CINCINNATI

There are two winning teams they re facing and one at .500. So again that must be considered and who's is pitching. The losing team Cincy are expect to get beat, so if SF loses to them it would be a surprise. But SF will be the dog against the Mets and San Diego at some point, which means it will be interesting to play the dog in all those matchups.
If SF played 10 games against bad teams The dog would likely lose more than half. Just my opinion.
Thanks for posting.

 

[Biz]

You're only playing the other team if they are a dog. You are NOT just playing the dog in every game. You're playing AGAINST the team when they are FAVORED.

4) Once this happens, FADE this team over the next 10 games as long as they are favored.

If SF played 10 games against bad teams The dog would likely lose more than half. Just my opinion.
Thanks for posting.

This thinking is why the public loses. Again, and I'll just say this for the last time.

This is a regression spot. Good teams lose. Good teams lose to bad teams. If you don't or refuse to believe this, I don't know what more to say.

BTW the almighty Dodgers were a blown save away from going 0-3 in this spot........and Buehler was pitching. You can talk yourself in to thinking Gibson was on his level, pitching matters, whatever. They lost.

If you think SF will beat bad teams more than half the time, then load up and make a fortune.

We're not gonna agree here, lets just let the game play and find out.

 

[RussellPeters]

Thanks for sharing Biz. I didn’t play the Phillies 3 games but was watching and hoped you were winning. First two wins by Phi I was like wow! Then they were winning Sunday too. Blow save away from a sweep. Keep at it man. Great stuff!! Rosie would be proud of papa!!!

 

[Biz]

Rosie would be proud of papa!!!

Thx buddy I miss that little dog terribly, but have lots of pictures that make me smile.