|
|
#11
10-11-2005, 03:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: series prices
those lines look very good IMO
maybe the chisox shouldnt be favored so much, but they do have homefield and their rotation is going to be rested great while the angels have colon hurt and are getting crap for rest. i might put down on the cards at -190. i dont see how that series is close. 
|
|
#12
10-11-2005, 04:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: series prices
Actually Houston is tempting for a small wager. The price is close to right, St Louis is formidable but not unbeatable. Also Houston's pitching has the potential to dominate.
As for the AL, I already had LAA to win the pennant. No reason to take a lower price now, it ain't THAT good. Just hope LAA plays well enough to give me a hedge opp, should I choose to take it.......
|
|
#13
10-11-2005, 08:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: series prices
I've talked about Hou/StL in about 5 other threads. I see edge on Hou at this price.
Chi/LAA I won't touch. All else being equal it should be a coinflip. But all else isn't equal. No Colon maybe? And the rest of the staff is used and abused. And they spent a good portion of the last 48 hours on redeye flights. This is a unique situation that only rarely pops up in playoff baseball and I'll be honest and admit I am unsure of the magnitude of its effect. That said it, coupled ith Chicagos rest, should have some sort of impact. But as a White Sox fan I'm just gonna sit back and enjoy this one and hope my 20-1 White Sox AL pennant bet from back in April pays somes dividends in October! White Sox fans are'nt used to any of this and I just wanna enjoy it. Also if it happens I have tickets to Game One of the World Series [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#14
10-12-2005, 12:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: series prices
LAA is now -118 to win the series at Pinnacle.
This line move doesn't seem consistent. They were +165 as 2:30 pm yesterday (not sure if it moved since then), then won a game that they were big underdogs on the road to take a 1-0 lead. Mathematically, the original series price basically said the CWS are 56% to win each game. However, the line today says they are 57%+ to win each game. This, despite the fact that they just played a game that they were (according to the lines) 65% to win. Meaning, before game 1 the line said CWS was about 54.5% to win games 2-7, and now it is saying they are 57%. I have the "equivalent" line after game 1 as -132 for LAA.
|
|
#15
10-12-2005, 01:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: series prices
[ QUOTE ]
LAA is now -118 to win the series at Pinnacle. This line move doesn't seem consistent. They were +165 as 2:30 pm yesterday (not sure if it moved since then), then won a game that they were big underdogs on the road to take a 1-0 lead. Mathematically, the original series price basically said the CWS are 56% to win each game. However, the line today says they are 57%+ to win each game. This, despite the fact that they just played a game that they were (according to the lines) 65% to win. Meaning, before game 1 the line said CWS was about 54.5% to win games 2-7, and now it is saying they are 57%. I have the "equivalent" line after game 1 as -132 for LAA. [/ QUOTE ] Interesting point. It still comes down to balancing the book and the publics perceptions. Whether or not value has been created is another matter. Whether or not those that bet LAA for the series should take this opp to hedge is also debatable and individual in nature. Wish I'd made a bigger prop on LAA to win the pennant, earlier in the year.
|
|
#19
10-13-2005, 07:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: series prices
[ QUOTE ]
now the line doesn't seem to have moved enough after tonight's game. Mathematically, LAA should be in the +125 to +140 range following tonight's loss, but they are only +115. [/ QUOTE ] You think it is because they have 3 games in a row at home? If they take 2/3 they will be in "pretty" good shape. I am guessing the goal for a team on the road in a series during the playoffs is to take 1 of the first two games, which they did. I don't know, I am just trying to figure out why the adjustment might be different than you thought. Also, what should the line be if the LAA wins the first game at home? what if they lose? craig
|
|
#20
10-13-2005, 07:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: series prices
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] now the line doesn't seem to have moved enough after tonight's game. Mathematically, LAA should be in the +125 to +140 range following tonight's loss, but they are only +115. [/ QUOTE ] You think it is because they have 3 games in a row at home? If they take 2/3 they will be in "pretty" good shape. I am guessing the goal for a team on the road in a series during the playoffs is to take 1 of the first two games, which they did. I don't know, I am just trying to figure out why the adjustment might be different than you thought. Also, what should the line be if the LAA wins the first game at home? what if they lose? craig [/ QUOTE ] Well, I agree that LAA is in "pretty good" shape. The line is actually pretty consistent with the line before the start of the series. Actually, now that I checked the line again LAA is just +105. Now this seems a little off even from the start of the series. Still, the line after game 2 was easily the furthest off. It is strange though that losing game 2 according to the books only decreased LAA's chances of winning the series by 7 percent. Maybe the next game is figuring into the line. I see LAA is -148 with Lackey up against Garland. Seems about right IMO but I'm not sure since I haven't really capped the game. Next game however should have a huge effect on the line either way. With LAA favored to win about 59%, the series price says they are only 46.2% to win the remaining games. With a win LAA should be -169, while a loss would put them at nearly 3-1 underdogs (+288).
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
