series prices

[DougOzzzz]

Also, maybe the public feels that LAA has "extra motivation" after the way game 2 was lost. I don't believe that will factor in but others might.

It might be a good time to bet CWS if you liked them at the start. Not THAT much has changed from the beginning. Sweeping in Chicago was unlikely but according to the lines the split reduced their odds of winning by over 10%. There is also no way that the game 2 result only changed LAA's chances by 7 percent (unless the motivation factor is real).

[DougOzzzz]

Yet another theory as to why the line didn't change much:

The public has "learned" something about the two teams the first two games. The Angels main problem coming in was a tired bullpen and a rotation missing their ace. The quality of their pitching, both the starters and the relievers, surprised the public by holding Chicago to 4 total runs. Chicago, on the other hand, had their two aces going the 1st 2 games so limiting LAA to 4 runs wasn't much of a surprise. LAA also gets a much needed day off to rest their overworked bullpen.

It's possible the public perceives LAA's problems as much more minor now than they were before the series. While this may be partially true I don't think it fully justifies the lack of line movement. Then again, I didn't think LAA's problems fully justified their large underdog status at the beginning of the series.