Being doing a running assessment for two seasons now regarding playing the puck line (PL) versus risking the full money line (ML) amount on larger favorites. This season, I am 10-2-5 on puck line wagers for +8.00 units. These were sixteen -1 PLs and one -1.5 PL (I usually play the PL on anything over -150). So I am 15-2 straight up (SU) on these large favorites but lost five wins due to pushes. The only advantage to the -1 PL is a significantly smaller loss if the team loses outright. In my two losses, this has saved me 2.60 units. However, I've lost 5 units to pushes for a negative balance of -2.40 units. My overall SU record is 35-31 (adding both wins in my only 2-team parlay). If I played everything on the straight ML I'd be +3.40 units better off than I am. Of course, this all depends on the winning % of the plays. If I wasn't hitting such a high percentage to this point, the PL would be saving me so it's going to come down to the true winning % of these bets.
Going back to last season, these are the comparisons for betting the ML vs the -1 PL and the -1.5 PL for the same 71 wagers on large favorites that my work has identified as profitable. These have hit 77% straight up:
ML: 55-16 +25.37 units
-1 PL: 32-16-23 +15.01 units
-1.5 PL: 32-39 +13.49 units
The bottom line is the profit, which obviously playing the straight money line has been best by a lot to this point. Common sense says not to lay big juice. It's very difficult to lay twice as much or more than your return would be, but these factual numbers above say it's incorrect not to if the plays are hitting 77%. Like I said, it all comes down to the true winning percentage of your big favorites and if they out-perform the odds. You need to hit more than 60% at -150 and more than 66.7% at -200. Simple in logic but extremely hard to do with your hard-earned money. Something to chew on for every hockey bettor.
A lot of people set up rules for themselves beforehand before ever knowing their true winning %, like only bet underdogs, or not go above -125 for favorites, or nothing above -150. Why would you predetermine your limits like that before you know the strength of your handicapping? My suggestion would be to track your winning % for each money line level before putting any money down. Profit is profit, and it is available at any odds if your work is stronger than said odds. My next step here is to continue to monitor this and keep playing them at -1 until more data fills in. I'm going to need hundreds of games before I feel more confident in my true percentage.
Going back to last season, these are the comparisons for betting the ML vs the -1 PL and the -1.5 PL for the same 71 wagers on large favorites that my work has identified as profitable. These have hit 77% straight up:
ML: 55-16 +25.37 units
-1 PL: 32-16-23 +15.01 units
-1.5 PL: 32-39 +13.49 units
The bottom line is the profit, which obviously playing the straight money line has been best by a lot to this point. Common sense says not to lay big juice. It's very difficult to lay twice as much or more than your return would be, but these factual numbers above say it's incorrect not to if the plays are hitting 77%. Like I said, it all comes down to the true winning percentage of your big favorites and if they out-perform the odds. You need to hit more than 60% at -150 and more than 66.7% at -200. Simple in logic but extremely hard to do with your hard-earned money. Something to chew on for every hockey bettor.
A lot of people set up rules for themselves beforehand before ever knowing their true winning %, like only bet underdogs, or not go above -125 for favorites, or nothing above -150. Why would you predetermine your limits like that before you know the strength of your handicapping? My suggestion would be to track your winning % for each money line level before putting any money down. Profit is profit, and it is available at any odds if your work is stronger than said odds. My next step here is to continue to monitor this and keep playing them at -1 until more data fills in. I'm going to need hundreds of games before I feel more confident in my true percentage.
No comments:
Post a Comment