What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

Brenthoven said:
For the record, the last I saw for odds on tomorrow's game:

MN -170
Det +150
o/u 8.5

MN -1.5 (+125)
Det +1.5 (-145)


FWIW. ;)

I may have taken the -170/over
Click to expand...

I never really understood the moneyline for baseball. Only about 1 in 4 Twins wins didn't cover the spread this year, and if they win by more than a run, you get over twice the payout compared to the moneyline.

I'm by no means a math guy, but the pot odds seem like you should always take the spread.

EDIT: I did the math. At those odds, three wins and a loss with the spread comes out a little bit ahead of four wins with the moneyline. (2.75 units to 2.32 units). Of course, gambling is never that simple, especially on baseball.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

I got tickets at face value...LOWER LEVEL! :D
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

MaizeRage said:
I never really understood the moneyline for baseball. Only about 1 in 4 Twins wins didn't cover the spread this year, and if they win by more than a run, you get over twice the payout compared to the moneyline.

I'm by no means a math guy, but the pot odds seem like you should always take the spread.

EDIT: I did the math. At those odds, three wins and a loss with the spread comes out a little bit ahead of four wins with the moneyline. (2.75 units to 2.32 units). Of course, gambling is never that simple, especially on baseball.
Click to expand...

I never touch the spread in baseball, simply because of bullpens. In football, hockey, basketball, etc, you don't have those "backups" to come in to help you (quarterback/goalie/uhhhh whoever, respectively). But some people love the spreads.

For baseball, I stick to moneylines and o/u.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

Handyman said:
BTW with the amount of tickets being scalped on Craigslist (125 bucks for the upper deck reserved, 90 for Upper GA...hahahahahahahaha)
Click to expand...

If I didn't have to work from 2:30 to 11pm tomorrow, I'd pay 90 bucks to get in there. I caught the last half hour of the postgame show from Sunday, and it honestly made me a little sad that I probably won't see another baseball game at the Metrodome (and stupid John Gordon made me cry when he introduced the Kirby video). Like Herbie said, it's not over...I think there's one more Central Division Title left in the Dome. Until they finally lock the doors on the Dome, I love that ugly place! Go Twins!

 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

MaizeRage said:
I never really understood the moneyline for baseball. Only about 1 in 4 Twins wins didn't cover the spread this year, and if they win by more than a run, you get over twice the payout compared to the moneyline.

I'm by no means a math guy, but the pot odds seem like you should always take the spread.

EDIT: I did the math. At those odds, three wins and a loss with the spread comes out a little bit ahead of four wins with the moneyline. (2.75 units to 2.32 units). Of course, gambling is never that simple, especially on baseball.
Click to expand...

If you took the Tigers straight up, they have a 22% chance of winning today. The spread between each starting pitcher's ERA is negligible, based on previous results this season at the Dome. I'd take the Twins giving the runs. They'll win by more than two.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

Betting on the outcome of a single baseball game isn't that far removed from betting on a coin flip. There's a reason teams play 162 game seasons, and even then, you don't get the kind of separation you see in the NFL where in this decade, one team has gone 16-0 while another went 0-16. In baseball, the best team loses routinely.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

Exactly. The best teams in baseball rarely go much above .600 for the year. .600 baseball over 162 games is just over 97 wins.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

I know what you guys are saying. My original post was really more about the math than about baseball.

I was just saying his moneyline bet gave up 53% of his potential profit for insurance on something has a 26% chance of happening, and in the long run, he'd end up making less than he potentially could.

But that's probably discussion for the offseason and not before the biggest game of the season. Back on topic, screw TBS for having this game start at 4pm so they could show 9 straight re-runs of The Office in primetime. I hope the cops don't monitor 35W southbound in the north Metro too closely at about 3:45 this afternoon.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

MaizeRage said:
But that's probably discussion for the offseason and not before the biggest game of the season. Back on topic, screw TBS for having this game start at 4pm so they could show 9 straight re-runs of The Office in primetime. I hope the cops don't monitor 35W southbound in the north Metro too closely at about 3:45 this afternoon.
Click to expand...

Given it the game should have been yesterday I'm surprised it wasn't played at noon/1PMish today.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

Yeah, I'm guessing that the main reason for the game being early is just to give the winner a couple more hours to travel to New York, so they don't get there quite as late.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

MaizeRage said:
I hope the cops don't monitor 35W southbound in the north Metro too closely at about 3:45 this afternoon.
Click to expand...
Unless they've cleaned up that construction...there's really no place to monitor it from until south of 62...

I'd say most will be along 3/494...
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

If it were yesterday it might have been prime time but chances are the winner has to play in NY tomorrow. If the game started at 7 it would end around 10 they would be lucky to land in NY by 1 AM. Hotel by 2. Plus lose an hour they would be looking at falling asleep around 4 NY time for a 6 pm game.
Early game makes sense to me.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 3 - It's still not over...statistically

MinnesotaNorthStar said:
Unless they've cleaned up that construction...there's really no place to monitor it from until south of 62...

I'd say most will be along 3/494...
Click to expand...

I'm guessing if it keeps raining like this speed won't be an issue - the whole system will be "creepin & beepin" {(c) Kenny "the soulman" Olson} during rush hour.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top