MLB Division Series, will this trend continue this year??

[duma]

i have been following for the past couple of years with the lines for the division series. what i have found might shock some. there is great value in betting the OVER on all games.

10/6 Hous Atlanta 8o -120 9-3 O
10/7 Hous Atlanta 9.5u -125 2-4 U
10/9 Atlanta Hous 9.5u -120 8-5 O
10/10 Atlanta Hous 9o -130 5-6 O
10/11 Hous Atlanta 9u -135 12-3 O

10/5 LA StL 8.5o -120 8-3 O
10/7 LA StL 9.5u -120 8-3 O
10/9 StL LA 9o -120 0-4 U
10/10 StL LA 9u -115 6-2 U

10/5 Bos Anh 8.5o -120 9-3 O
10/6 Bos Anh 9u -140 8-3 O
10/8 Anh Bos 9.5o -145 8-6 O

10/5 Minn NY 7.5u -110 0-2 U
10/6 Minn NY 9o -120 7-6 O
10/8 NY Minn 9.5o -120 8-4 O
10/9 NY Minn 8.5u -115 6-5 O

these are the results of last year's games. amazing results if you ask me. 12 out of 16 games went over. i am assuming that when the line is something like u-140 that the book is using a 20cent line and the price on the over would be +120. So if you wagered $100 on each game, your profit after all 16 games would have been +$651.87 or 6.52 units. i am taking a shot this year on the overs even though in 2003 the under was hitting more. in 2002 the over hit almost every game. there is a trend that says ever other year the overs will hit big.

in spite of this, i am going to ride this trend on ever game. 6 out of the 8 teams from last year are still playing this year. SD and Chicago are not very offensive prone, but their pitching has been very shaky late in the season. the Yankees and Sox pitching is worse this year than last. Atlanta scores runs now and Roger Clemens of Houston is now back down to earth. just thought id share this info for anyone who wants to hitch a ride on this money train /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
there is a trend that says ever other year the overs will hit big.

[/ QUOTE ]

An every-other-year trend? Based on a sample size of THREE?

NOW, I've heard everything.

Good luck with your plays. And if you like overs, beware PetCo Park.

[george w of poker]

lol!

I hope not, today I got

Cards/Pads under 7.5

Red/White under 9

Cards/Pads total hits+runs+errors under 24.5 +110

/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

gl /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[ThomasJoe]

how bout all those boys giving up the juice. That shld make for less homeruns.

[ QUOTE ]
Cards/Pads under 7.5


Cards/Pads total hits+runs+errors under 24.5 +110


[/ QUOTE ]

Off to a grand start /images/graemlins/frown.gif

Next game please /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[youtalkfunny]

Cards/Pads sails over.
Sox/Sox has gone over in the fourth inning.

I guess I'll have to get me some "over" on the late game.

[ QUOTE ]
Cards/Pads sails over.
Sox/Sox has gone over in the fourth inning.

I guess I'll have to get me some "over" on the late game.

[/ QUOTE ]

This trend is amazing! Im so stupid.... /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[20Five]

good start to this trend for sure!

[NajdorfDefense]

This gets my vote for post of the month - I agreed with your advice and bet 3 units over on all 3 games today and then added 2 more on O/9 Sox-Sox 'cos Clement sucks, I think the trend will continue all ALDS so I'm gonna keep it up. Anway, cashing big today so far and I think there's a chance Mussina gets lit up as well.

Naj

You're kidding right? Have you seen the sample size of his "trend"? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

GL with it

[duma]

dont doubt this trend i have been watching baseball all my life and more often than i can remember, the divisional series has always been a run scoring fest. the sample size is adaquete enough in my opinion. i am not betting everything i own on these games either, just 2 units each. if the trend does well again i might up the units. and yes i plan to lay off the games that are played at Petco that place is where runs go to die.

anyways got unlucky in the NYY LAA game the NY bats went cold after the 1st inning and the Angels bats never woke up! hopefully they turn it around tomorrow. onto the plays...

Record: 2-1 (+2 units)

10/5/05
Hous Atl over 7.5 +115 (2 units)
Bos Chi over 9 -125 (2 units)

will post the Angels line as soon as it comes out. hopefully wont have to lay the juice on that one.

[craig r]

The sample size being too small is not a matter of opinion. And it would probably only take you 1 hour to look up the totals and final score of all DS games. I am not trying to be a jerk, but to use such a small sample size is not going to win in the long run. Also, if you are going to use a trend, you can't be picky with it. Based on your stats above you couldn't rule out Petco. You are basically datamining, which is not helpful in sports betting.

craig

[duma]

then trend is not the correct term. it should be gut feeling. trends like the the packers are 7-2 coming off double digit loss as the favorite are considered trends. would u classify this as too small a sample? didnt think so. these plays are for myself. i am trying to share my opinions on this forum. if u do not want them here then i will never post again. but seriously, how big must a sample size be for a trend? trends are just that, trends. they are not guarantees. and btw i looked up all the divional games since 2000. and every other year the over hits big. therefore 2005 is an under year and thus i am going against this trend for the reasons i stated! i did not post those results here for other years because i seriously didnt think i would get bashed by people stating that my sample size is too small! /images/graemlins/mad.gif and i am not stupid. i am laying off the Petco games just like any wise person would.

[craig r]

I didn't know anybody had bashed you. But, what are you asking me about when you say "would u classify this as too small a sample? didn't think so."?

Also, nobody said they didn't want your opinions here. But, if you are going to post games over such a small sample, I would hope that people would point that out. And this is a "trend".

And why would a wise person lay off the Petco games? Its not like they are going to have lines of 8.5. The lines are adjusted for playing in that park.

Anyways, somebody smarter than me can do the math on the chances of "success" on a 12-4 trend. If you flipped a coin 16 times, it wouldn't be that shocking if it came up heads 12 times. Now, if you flipped it 160 times and it came up tails 120 times, that would show much more.

craig

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
You're kidding right? Have you seen the sample size of his "trend"? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

GL with it

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't bet based solely on the trend, I thought there was a good chance WSox, Cards, Pads, Stros score a bunch more runs than people give them credit for.

Anyway, I put 3 units on all games so far 'cept Red Sox that I put 5 on each game. 11-3 so far with a push currently in Chitown so next run makes me 16-3.15 in units if that comes in.
Actually, I'm taking the under for the STL game tomorrow for 2 units because I think trend stops with those 2 starters.
Ensuring, of course, a 10-9 game tomorrow! /images/graemlins/grin.gif
/images/graemlins/heart.gif
Naj

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]

Anyways, somebody smarter than me can do the math on the chances of "success" on a 12-4 trend. If you flipped a coin 16 times, it wouldn't be that shocking if it came up heads 12 times. Now, if you flipped it 160 times and it came up tails 120 times, that would show much more.

craig

[/ QUOTE ]

There's been about 150 DS games since WC started, right?
Anyone got the O/U results for each year. I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that Over is king.

Naj

[craig r]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Anyways, somebody smarter than me can do the math on the chances of "success" on a 12-4 trend. If you flipped a coin 16 times, it wouldn't be that shocking if it came up heads 12 times. Now, if you flipped it 160 times and it came up tails 120 times, that would show much more.

craig

[/ QUOTE ]

There's been about 150 DS games since WC started, right?
Anyone got the O/U results for each year. I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that Over is king.

Naj

[/ QUOTE ]

Even so, would it be enough to overcome the juice and to show that it is not just an abberation? Also, you can't just look and see if the games went over. You have to find the record for each total seperately; i.e. 7. 7.5, etc...

craig

[duma]

craig. there has been only one game with juice so far. thats the beauty of this thing. books know people like unders in playoff games so they give great value on the overs.

1-0-1 so far today Atlanta game was an easy win!
putting 3 units on the NYY LAA game tonight over 9(-120)lets score some runs!

[whipsaw]

[ QUOTE ]

There's been about 150 DS games since WC started, right?
Anyone got the O/U results for each year. I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that Over is king.

Naj

[/ QUOTE ]

I pulled the data from covers for 99-04 (what a PIA btw). A little surprising:

Line Over Under
7 2 11
7.5 10 5
8 8 8
8.5 13 14
9 9 6
9.5 5 7
10 4 2
10.5 0 1
Total 51 54

I apologize for the difficulty in reading the chart.

I too thought that the over would dominate over time, but it doesn't appear that way. The results are really erratic, and I can provide year-by-year data upon request. Just by example, in 2001 the O/U was 5-12-1, while in 2002 the O/U was 15-2.

I hope this helps.

[craig r]

Nice job Whipsaw. I think going year by year is too much datamining. When you form a "hypothesis" you can't use data to form the hypothesis and then use that same data. There is too much bias in your idea then.

Anyways, it seems that if one were to blindly bet either way, they would lose. Thanks for dividing it up by the actual total also.

craig

[mrbaseball]

[ QUOTE ]
in 2001 the O/U was 5-12-1, while in 2002 the O/U was 15-2.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sports trends are purely random. What is important is each individual matchup and handicap. I can't believe people even try to buy into this sort of voodoo?

That said I think there are certain line based trends that have merit like fading the perpetually overpriced or certain underdog situations where public ignorance is exemplified.

[duma]

Record to date: 4-3-1 +2.12 units

Cardinals game today could have easily gone over and the Boston push yesterday could have gone over if Boston showed any heart at all and tried to get back in the game. still up on this trend but its not looking as juicy as it was last year.

[ QUOTE ]
Record to date: 4-3-1 +2.12 units

Cardinals game today could have easily gone over and the Boston push yesterday could have gone over if Boston showed any heart at all and tried to get back in the game. still up on this trend but its not looking as juicy as it was last year.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the games COULD have gone over, they just didnt score enough runs

[craig r]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Record to date: 4-3-1 +2.12 units

Cardinals game today could have easily gone over and the Boston push yesterday could have gone over if Boston showed any heart at all and tried to get back in the game. still up on this trend but its not looking as juicy as it was last year.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the games COULD have gone over, they just didnt score enough runs

[/ QUOTE ]

Not only that but if Boston would have scored more runs than CHI they would have won. BTW, please refer to me as Craig Madden from now on.

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're kidding right? Have you seen the sample size of his "trend"? /images/graemlins/confused.gif
GL with it

[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't bet based solely on the trend, I thought there was a good chance WSox, Cards, Pads, Stros score a bunch more runs than people give them credit for.

Anyway, I put 3 units on all games so far 'cept Red Sox that I put 5 on each game. 11-3 so far with a push currently in Chitown so next run makes me 16-3.15 in units if that comes in.
Actually, I'm taking the under for the STL game tomorrow for 2 units because I think trend stops with those 2 starters.
Ensuring, of course, a 10-9 game tomorrow! /images/graemlins/grin.gif
/images/graemlins/heart.gif
Naj

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's see I took the Angels in this series, either that and/or the over tonite is an automatic win now, I bet 2 on Angels in series and 5 units on all Sox games -a wash-, 3 on all other Overs, 2 on one under.
Yanks series o/u 1-3 to date
Houston 5-0 Over wins all 5.
STL 2-1 O, but I took under game 2 as noted, so 3-0 for me.
Sox 1-1-1.
So, Overs so far 9-5-1 and one more run in Yanks game will make it 10-5-1. Pretty good results, 'trend' or no.

Since I swapped to under Game 2 STL, currently 10-4-1 betting MLBDS O/U or +31-14 for 17 units. An Angels win and another run will make that to 12-4 w/l and 22.5 units. Not bad for a week's work. /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I only win at MLB when I make bets with no hard data in front of me. /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Naj /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... while in 2002 the O/U was 15-2.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sports trends are purely random. What is important is each individual matchup and handicap. ...
That said I think there are certain line based trends that have merit like fading the perpetually overpriced or certain underdog situations where public ignorance is exemplified.

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, scoring trends are not purely random, there are rules changes, umpiring changes, umpire selection for playoffs, that all affect scoring and that are distinct from year to year. You don't think scoring totals for MLB games went up from 70s to 80s to 90s? Or is that voodoo?

Anyway O/U 3 of last 4 years in Div Series:
15-2
12-4
9-6-1 = 36-12-1. That's a trend. I don't have the 2003 stats, but even if 4-12 that's 63% over covers. How many games at a 60% ratio of overs will it take to convince you - 100? 1000?

Naj

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
Let's see I took the Angels in this series, either that and/or the over tonite is an automatic win now, I bet 2 on Angels in series and 5 units on all Sox games -a wash-, 3 on all other Overs, 2 on one under.
Yanks series o/u 1-3 to date
Houston 5-0 Over wins all 5.
STL 2-1 O, but I took under game 2 as noted, so 3-0 for me.
Sox 1-1-1.
So, Overs so far 9-5-1 and one more run in Yanks game will make it 10-5-1. Pretty good results, 'trend' or no.

Since I swapped to under Game 2 STL, currently 10-4-1 betting MLBDS O/U or +31-14 for 17 units. An Angels win and another run will make that to 12-4 w/l and 22.5 units. Not bad for a week's work. /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Naj /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
10-5-1 on O/U and won 2.6 units on Angels. 33.6-17 for 16.6 units on MLB DS. -1 unit on Padres makes it +15.6.
Also have Angels WS bet at +850 or so. I think they take the White Sox even on short rest.

Naj

[20Five]

[ QUOTE ]
You don't think scoring totals for MLB games went up from 70s to 80s to 90s? Or is that voodoo?

[/ QUOTE ]

Its the juice /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You don't think scoring totals for MLB games went up from 70s to 80s to 90s? Or is that voodoo?

[/ QUOTE ]

Its the juice /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
1) They moved the manufacturing plant and started winding the balls tighter, MLB lying denials notwithstanding.
2) Expansion = crappier pitching
3) Coors Field
4) Move towards smaller parks - Cit Bank Park, Enron, etc.
5) HR hitters get PAID, singles hitters get traded to Oak.

Yeah, maybe some juice was involved too. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

Naj

[whipsaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... while in 2002 the O/U was 15-2.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sports trends are purely random. What is important is each individual matchup and handicap. ...
That said I think there are certain line based trends that have merit like fading the perpetually overpriced or certain underdog situations where public ignorance is exemplified.

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, scoring trends are not purely random, there are rules changes, umpiring changes, umpire selection for playoffs, that all affect scoring and that are distinct from year to year. You don't think scoring totals for MLB games went up from 70s to 80s to 90s? Or is that voodoo?

Anyway O/U 3 of last 4 years in Div Series:
15-2
12-4
9-6-1 = 36-12-1. That's a trend. I don't have the 2003 stats, but even if 4-12 that's 63% over covers. How many games at a 60% ratio of overs will it take to convince you - 100? 1000?

Naj

[/ QUOTE ]

2003 was 5-11-2, bringing your total to 37-23-3, or 74% over. If you add in 2001, which there's really no reason not to, you add another 5-12-1, making the total 42-35-4, which is 55% over. 2000 was 6-9, bringing the total to 48-44-4, 52% over. 1999 is the earliest year for which I have numbers, and that year was 8-8, making the total 56-52-4, slightly under 52%.

So unless you can give a cognizable reason why pre-2002 numbers shouldn't be included, it doesn't look like much of a trend to me. I posted on this a few days ago giving these #s.

[mrbaseball]

[ QUOTE ]
O/U 3 of last 4 years

[/ QUOTE ]

Whats the last 4 out of 4 years?

[plus_man]

Personally, I appreciate your efforts into this. It is easy to dismiss "strategm" in gambling but it takes a noble effort to try.