Dog Money Line betting

[TheBeholdah]

I want to see what you guys think of this, Starting next season i want to have action on the money line of every underdog i bet in college hoops. They call it madness for a reason, alot of "upsets" happen. Last season i would only randomly take a Dog on the moneyline and somehow i went 3-0 on dogs +600 on the money line. I dont expect to ever get lucky like that again but a winning record isnt required to profit on Dog Mls, this season i havent been trying money lines but a handful of big dogs ive bet on have won outright and i intend on cashing in on those situations in the future.


Ive been thinking along the lines of a Tiered approach to betting dog mls, something like this:

Dogs +4 to +7.5 = 1 unit wager on ML


Dogs +8 to +10.5 = 0.75 unit wager on ML


Dogs +11 to +15 = 0.5 unit wager on ML


Dogs +15.5 to +20 = 0.25 unit wager on ML


Dogs +1 to +3.5 = No ML Wager , not enough take back


Dogs over +20 = No ML Wager, too unlikely



Would like to get some thoughts from you guys on this, thanks in advance for any input.

[akatdrake]

I'm surprised people didn't comment on this. Do you plan on betting every dog moneyline or stick to wide-open conferences? I wonder if you should start with one or two conferences rather than the entire card just in case you hit a bad patch. Maybe start today and bet one conference to get a small result??

I'd be interested in seeing how this works out.

[joepa66]

Maybe include some SCRF (Scarf) System plays in there......

I love taking the dogs, especially at home! Have you ever thought of trying out the system on a single conference and tracking those plays?

Maybe include some or all SCRF System plays in there......it's a well-known and often forgot about system lots of us on the board have followed but forget about every year. I have sprinkled some of them in during the course of my schedule but don't always consciously think about doing so.

Here's the link to the SCRF System thread posted by Flyers Fan a year or so ago.....

http://www.predictem.com/forums/coll...rf-system.html

Have fun!:thumbs:

[TheBeholdah]

I'm surprised people didn't comment on this. Do you plan on betting every dog moneyline or stick to wide-open conferences? I wonder if you should start with one or two conferences rather than the entire card just in case you hit a bad patch. Maybe start today and bet one conference to get a small result??

I'd be interested in seeing how this works out.

I plan on betting every dog money line unless theyre 20+ point dogs because in general i wouldnt bet on a dog unless i think they have a chance to win.

Sometime today or tomorrow im going to go thru my dog bets this year and make an estimate on how i would done this year had i been doing this. I'm going to use a spread money line conversion chart to figure out what the money line would have been and ill use conservative money line numbers. Ill post results in here.

[TheBeholdah]

Maybe include some SCRF (Scarf) System plays in there......

I love taking the dogs, especially at home! Have you ever thought of trying out the system on a single conference and tracking those plays?

Maybe include some or all SCRF System plays in there......it's a well-known and often forgot about system lots of us on the board have followed but forget about every year. I have sprinkled some of them in during the course of my schedule but don't always consciously think about doing so.

Here's the link to the SCRF System thread posted by Flyers Fan a year or so ago.....

http://www.predictem.com/forums/coll...rf-system.html

Have fun!:thumbs:

I remember you and flyers doing well with that system. Thats definately a solid system but i dont think it really applies to what im trying to do here. like i noted above i feel like dogs in the +1 to +3.5 range arent even worth making an extra bet on the ML because the best you'll get is +140. I think i need to either decide that ill always take those couple points or ill always pass on the points and take the money line with small dogs.

[TheBeholdah]

This isnt really a system im trying to do here. Im not just taking a bunch of random dog money lines. Basicaly every time one of my ATS bets happens to be a dog in the +4 to +18 range im making the wager because i feel they have a decent shot to win so i want action on the ML as well

[Stifler's Mom]

From past experience, when following the "scrf" system, imo you NEED to take the points. You'd be absolutely amazed how many +1.5 and +2.5 home dogs lose outright by 1 or 2 points over the course of a season, and at +105, +110, etc I seriously doubt that little extra payout would make up for the extra losses you would take.

And as with any other system or whatever, I think it goes without saying that it's absolutely critical to get the best line possible too. I sometimes choose to pass completely if a line has moved off the opening number by more than a half pt when using the "scrf" system. Like if +2.5 moves to +2, i'll play it at +2 if i can't get a +2.5 with the thinking that if it lands on 2 then a win turns to a push, which sucks, but same as passing so no harm, but if +2 moves to +1.5, i might not, since in that case a push at the opener would become a loss.

I really have no input on taking the moneylines on the other games, other than to add that a pretty wise person once told me that a sharp player ALWAYS puts a small percentage of their total bet on the ml on underdogs (within reason, as would be suggested by passing on any of over +20). That statement is what led me to start looking into NFL spreads and noticing that "picking the winner" was a good way to go on anything under +/-7. More spreads seemed to come into play this year, however, but this isn't an NFL thread, so i'll stop with that talk, lol...

[TheBeholdah]

From past experience, when following the "scrf" system, imo you NEED to take the points. You'd be absolutely amazed how many +1.5 and +2.5 home dogs lose outright by 1 or 2 points over the course of a season, and at +105, +110, etc I seriously doubt that little extra payout would make up for the extra losses you would take.

And as with any other system or whatever, I think it goes without saying that it's absolutely critical to get the best line possible too. I sometimes choose to pass completely if a line has moved off the opening number by more than a half pt when using the "scrf" system. Like if +2.5 moves to +2, i'll play it at +2 if i can't get a +2.5 with the thinking that if it lands on 2 then a win turns to a push, which sucks, but same as passing so no harm, but if +2 moves to +1.5, i might not, since in that case a push at the opener would become a loss.

I really have no input on taking the moneylines on the other games, other than to add that a pretty wise person once told me that a sharp player ALWAYS puts a small percentage of their total bet on the ml on underdogs (within reason, as would be suggested by passing on any of over +20). That statement is what led me to start looking into NFL spreads and noticing that "picking the winner" was a good way to go on anything under +/-7. More spreads seemed to come into play this year, however, but this isn't an NFL thread, so i'll stop with that talk, lol...

thanks for the input stiff, that basically confirms the thought process that i had in regards to just taking the couple points offered, and it wouldnt make much sense to take the points and the money line either because just not enough extra winnings with a small money line.

[TheBeholdah]

ok i figured out where id be at this year...

ive bet on 37 dogs. 10 were in the +1 to +3.5 range so they dont apply. 2 were + 20 or more so they dont apply either.

That leaves 25 dogs that range from +4 to +17. only 7 won outright for a 7-18 record.
However, using conservative estimates on what the money lines would have been and using that tiered approached up top i'd be up roughly 6 units


dogs +4 to +7.5 (1 u wagers on ML), ML record is 3-6

the outrights:

+6 (+200)
+6(+200)
+7(+250)
=+6.5 units

6 losses= -6 units

Net: +0.5 u

dogs +8 to +10.5 (0.75 u wager on ML), ML record is 2-6

the outrights:

+9 (+350)
+10 (+425)
=+5.8 u

6 losses= -4.5 u

Net: +1.3 u

dogs +11 to +15 (0.5 u wager on ML), ML record is 2-5

the outrights:

+11 (+500)
+14.5 (+800)
= +6.5 u

5 losses= -2.5 u

Net: +4 u

dogs +15.5 to <20 (0.25 wager on ML, ML record is 0-1

1 loss= -0.25 u

so a 7-18 Dog ML record would have me up between 5.5 and 6 units

What has me optimistic is that 5 of the 18 losses were by 3 pts or less, including dogs of 17, 12, and 10. And of course the Wofford+300 wager where they lost by 4 @ xavier because of this: YouTube - Xavier vs. Wofford part 1
and this: YouTube - Xavier vs. Wofford part 2