Congrats Bronco...great work...added Colorado cause I thought it was a play and won with them...so I went 3-1 with the dogs...yeahhhh!! My daily pick still playing, Dodgers but ahead 2-0 over Padres...your system looking very good. Thanks and if you keep this up may join you in Vegas...if I can sell my business...who knows
With so many early games today, I'm posting my plays now.
4/9 Plays:
Baltimore +161
Boston/TB Under 8.5 - our first total
St. Louis -191
St. Louis RL Even (1 unit)
Another wrinkle I've encountered. KC would be a play according the numbers from Accuscore. However, the numbers were so close I took a look around at some Vegas books. I averaged out their ML listings and with that, KC won't be a play. To try and limit the confusion about value with the varying ML's out therem, any play that is very close will have this secondary check done, kind of like an added filter.
Personally, I don't like laying that much juice with St. L. I may not even play it, but it is technically a system play so there it is for tracking and for anyone who may want it.
4/9 Plays:
Baltimore +161
Boston/TB Under 8.5 - our first total
St. Louis -191
St. Louis RL Even (1 unit)
Another wrinkle I've encountered. KC would be a play according the numbers from Accuscore. However, the numbers were so close I took a look around at some Vegas books. I averaged out their ML listings and with that, KC won't be a play. To try and limit the confusion about value with the varying ML's out therem, any play that is very close will have this secondary check done, kind of like an added filter.
Personally, I don't like laying that much juice with St. L. I may not even play it, but it is technically a system play so there it is for tracking and for anyone who may want it.
Quick MM question for Bronco and everyone else: even though both st Louis plays qualify, the RL and the ML, aren't we essentially still laying double our unit risk on in the event of a flat out loss? Specifically, we are down around 8.73 units on a loss(our actual risk here), but may break even in the even of a 1 run win or gain 6 units in the event of a win greater than two runs. Do you guys think it may be to our advantage from a mm perspective to split our standard three unit play amongst the ML and RL thereby keeping our risk in our standard range for any single event?
I think you should do whatever you're comfortable with. I list the plays exactly how I play them. That's why it's only one unit on the RL. If St.L wins by only 1, still up 2 units on the play, if they lose outright, only one additional unit lost. If win by 2 or more, obviously, you're winning more. The long term thinking is that the RL will win more than lose so long term, it equals extra units.
bronco, can you keep track one more thing? the cash or unit volume of all your picks RL picks in ML volume? I understand that over 200 for today's STL game wont be profitable in a long run I guess, but when you bet you always want to win, if STL wins, RL or ML dont really matters, but if they lose, there is a big difference..........I am just curious, how many games that you pick throughtout the season in RL but fall short and end up winning only one run, RL is really hard to play I think.......do you have the record for "-200 plus" favorites that lose the game and win only by one? Of course except the yankess.....it will probably just even out........
