Re: Pittsburgh +230 at NYY (Clemens)
 

Heh, Nats closed at +395.

Re: Pittsburgh +230 at NYY (Clemens)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Heh, Nats closed at +395.

[/ QUOTE ]

Damn, I wish I would have gotten on this line. I was away from the computer all day. I'm already on the game but not at that price.

Re: Pittsburgh +230 at NYY (Clemens)
 

and Nats ML wins! wish I could have grabbed the 395 though (never saw it).

Re: Pittsburgh +230 at NYY (Clemens)
 

It was on pinny minutes before the game started.
Did anyone else think the lines moved a bit weird today?
Colorado line skyrocketed even if Orioles had Millar benched, I saw them at 159, and how can KC be favorites against the Phillies?

Re: Pittsburgh +230 at NYY (Clemens)
 

[ QUOTE ]
It was on pinny minutes before the game started.
Did anyone else think the lines moved a bit weird today?
Colorado line skyrocketed even if Orioles had Millar benched, I saw them at 159, and how can KC be favorites against the Phillies?

[/ QUOTE ]

Was KC favored at some point???

I can only guess because Meche is having a pretty good year, and because the NL is a joke.

Re: Pittsburgh +230 at NYY (Clemens)
 

I have 116 games in my database where the line was home team -300 or greater. The average line in those games was -337, and the home team actually went 89-27 or the equivalent of -329. The record for the Away team +1.5 was 44-72 or the equivalent of +164.

Its a very small sample size of course. But here's another set of data that looks bad for the run line away dog bettors: in games lined -250 to -299, (299 total games in my database), the away +1.5 has only covered the equivalent of +135.

Given this information, I wouldn't be happy getting Wash +1.5 +140.

Re: Pittsburgh +230 at NYY (Clemens)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have 116 games in my database where the line was home team -300 or greater.

[/ QUOTE ]

How many seasons back does your database go?

[ QUOTE ]
Here's another set of data that looks bad for the run line away dog bettors: in games lined -250 to -299, (299 total games in my database), the away +1.5 has only covered the equivalent of +135. Given this information, I wouldn't be happy getting Wash +1.5 +140.

[/ QUOTE ]

King, thanks for posting this. It's very helpful in trying to understand the potential uses of a database.

Re: Pittsburgh +230 at NYY (Clemens)
 

[ QUOTE ]
How many seasons back does your database go?

[/ QUOTE ]

1998-2006

Re: Pittsburgh +230 at NYY (Clemens)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have 116 games in my database where the line was home team -300 or greater. The average line in those games was -337, and the home team actually went 89-27 or the equivalent of -329. The record for the Away team +1.5 was 44-72 or the equivalent of +164.

Its a very small sample size of course. But here's another set of data that looks bad for the run line away dog bettors: in games lined -250 to -299, (299 total games in my database), the away +1.5 has only covered the equivalent of +135.

Given this information, I wouldn't be happy getting Wash +1.5 +140.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am curious what your thoughts are from a pure pricing perspective? Lets say the +1.5 was +140 at one book and at another book with normally efficient lines the 1.5/-1.5 was 129/-139. Now, you could make a .2% immediate profit (which is 73% annualized) by arbing or you can play a softside for a theoretical 2.92% (over 1000% annualized).

The market would have to be significantly off to justify the arb over the softline. In your experience, is the market reasonably efficient for a line shopper to not worry about handicapping concerns when simply playing a softside? Of course, the line shopper will often be wrong. But, I would think the shopper would be likely to be off in either direction equally over time to wash out any concerns.

Re: Pittsburgh +230 at NYY (Clemens)
 

My feeling in this case is that more bettors are looking to bet the +1.5 than the -1.5. This thread is a reflection of this natural demand, people want to be able to win without having to see a +350 dog win the game...thus they take the points or in this case the runline.

The sample size is too small to say that is the case based on the data alone. Still, my feeling is that the runline is shaded down. The books and/or linemakers may think it is fair value since they get plenty of action on the dog side at that price. From my experience, they often make valuations based on past betting. If in the past, when the line has been that high and they've received plenty of action on +1.5 +140, then they are likely to keep the line the same due to expected action.