Another spin of an old, cracked record: It's all about spread, which we can control, and timing, which we can't.

(Please scroll down for updates!)
We dropped our visitor off at Reno-Tahoe Airport at sunrise today, and it will take me a while to catch up with sports book activity over the last few days.

Thursday was the fourth day in a row to deliver four right bets out of seven, and if luck had smiled on the 7-dog trial, 50x at least would be looking pretty darn good right now.

Instead, the wins keep skipping over the big bets, perhaps making a powerful argument for not dropping back to a minimum wager when a series achieves a full recovery.

I will post much more about this next time, and for now will simply post Friday's dog selections:

NBA 1730 #521 Orlando Magic +145 188/3.5
MLB 1120 #952 Chicago Cubs +110 6.5
MLB 1610 #955 Philadelphia Phillies +105 9.5
MLB 1635 #957 Pittsburgh Pirates +150 8.5
MLB 1810 #961 L.A. Dodgers +120 9.5
MLB 1905 #963 Washington Nationals +135 6.5
MLB 1915 #965 Arizona D'backs +120 7.5

The InvestaPick crew remain on vacation!

Perhaps they are tweaking their methodology to widen their spread and recover those big chunks of cold cash that get flushed down the toilet when a big win brings home just 90% of prior losses.

The rules that have governed the 7-dog trial since I launched it almost seven months ago are in some ways more aggressive than I would like.

But the 50x spread is a climb down from the original table games version of the strategy, and it is not working out as well as it should.

Limiting spread has always been the casinos' best means of boosting their bottom line, and they have far more control over it than bookies do.

For example, if a prolonged losing streak calls for an enormous jump in the next bet (NB) value when a win finally comes along, then a strict application of the rules will attract pit critter attention, and probably countermeasures too.

Sports books have limits as well, of course, but they can be relatively easily circumvented by parceling out a large NB to several different bookies.

Where I live, there are at least 20 books within an hour or so's drive, and having several online accounts simplifies the process even further.

What keeps us all in check, naturally, is money, money, money...and confidence.

The 50x rules set has been thwarted by unlucky timing so often in the past few days that while it is still in profit, it now stands at barely 12% of its best cumulative win to date.

Had the max been 100x, it would have been even worse off, deep in red ink at -160% of its BWTD.

At 150x, the current bankroll soars to 93% of its zenith and more than +8% of total action, and thereafter the bottom line keeps on getting fatter with each increase in the "max multiple."

It all comes down to the same old truth: winning can be an expensive proposition, but the only alternative (apart from losing!) is blind luck, and plenty of it.

Saturday, May 29 at 1:10pm

Friday brought just three right picks out of seven, but for once, the wins lined up with a big bet (one of two) and 50x got a much-needed boost.

Every time I visit one of my local casinos, someone asks "How's that underdog thing working out for you?" in much the same tone they'd use to ask "Is your invisible friend feeling better today?"

But to me, the whole dog concept is a flat-out no brainer, given that it's impossible to make a buck from consistently betting favorites unless you use some form of target betting such as the simple Martingale applied at InvestaPick.

Still no IP picks, by the way, making this a 33-day stand-down for all three sports funds.

The big question, of course, remains How much risk/investment is required to profit from underdog betting? and all I can do is refer to the comments I posted yesterday.

Skeptics always deride any long-term betting strategy by scoffing that if it were possible to keep on raising the bet until a losing streak ends, everyone except the bookies would be a winner.

It's not that simple.

Longshots do not win often enough for their high average paybacks to offset the bookies' advantage, and odds too close to even money fail for the opposite reason (paybacks too small to effectively exploit an increased win rate).

The 50x rules set, allowing a maximum bet of $5,000 against a minimum of $100, had a bumpy ride from the start of the 7-dog trial last November 1 until mid-December, when it took off like a rocket.

The 50x column fell foul of gravity a couple of months later, spending a day in the red on April 21 after falling to -$6,732.

Right now, it is $10,000-plus ahead of the bookies, which may seem a paltry return on seven months of almost daily betting, but sure as hell beats what most punters have to endure: LOSING.

As I said earlier, I have come to accept that a 5x spread is a lost cause - no surprise, because I predicted it! Acceptance in this context means affirmation that tight spreads are doomed in any game with a house advantage - and in the real world, there is no other kind.

Here are updated charts and summaries:-





Sunday, May 30 at 10:05am

Saturday was not a happy day for underdogs: a 33% DWR overall, and a pathetic 20% for MLB teams.

C'est la guerre...

Sunday's selections:

MLB 1010 #951 Philadelphia Phillies +105 9
MLB 1110 #957 NY Mets +115 9.5
MLB 1305 #963 Washington Nats +120 7
MLB 1005 #969 Oakland As +105 8.5
MLB 1235 #977 Seattle Mariners +145 9
MLB 1705 #979 TX Rangers +120 8.5
WNBA 1500 #651 Seattle Storm +115 2 149

WNBA teams have some seriously drippy names, it seems to me: baseball teams have names that mostly match up with their location, but Comets, Storm, Mystics and Sky are just four handles that don't seem to have much to do with anything!

Oh well, it's a free country. All that matters is that the ladies win when I pick 'em.

Monday, May 31 at 10:15am

A woeful weekend, all told...

The 5x rules set hit its lowest red numbers to date, and 50x was a color match for the first time in weeks.

More about the latest damage tomorrow, and in the meantime, add the NHL's Philly Flyers (1700 #003 +160 6) to the following MLB bets for today's selections:-


Tuesday, June 1 at 12:55pm

Underdogs took another beating Monday and so did we, on the day that the 7-dog trial reached its seven-month milestone (or millstone!).

Bottom line: the 5x rules set now seems permanently mired in the muck, and the 50x wider spread approach has slipped to its lowest point since the trial was just over a month old on December 3, 2009.

So, no good news to crow about, except that a lot of useful lessons have been learned since this whole sports book saga began late last August.

More about that when I have more time in a day or two.

Meanwhile, today's bets (in bold type in this extract from the expanding MLB database)...


...and something to think about in the coulda, woulda, shoulda department:




The last of three snaps above shows where we are at with a 50x max and each series falling back to a minimum bet after meeting its target (aka recovery).

The middle graph shows the dramatic change that woulda occurred if the max had been 150x the min instead of 50x.

The first of the three new graphs depicts the overall outcome with 150x and post-recovery bets set at not less than LTD/140, meaning that instead of falling back to $100 after a series turns around, we raise the minimum to a percentage of the combined LTD for all seven lines or series.

What does all this mean?

For one thing, it proves what I have been saying for years about the need to spread as wide as possible, just as target betting requires you to do against table games.

Spreading wide, of course, means making your maximum bet as large a multiple of your minimum bet as you can afford.

The effect, as you can see above, is reduced risk, not the opposite.

It confirms that casinos and bookies win in the end not because of their relatively paltry house edge but because they have more money than we do.

The InvestaPick sports funds remain frozen in time, with no bets since April 27.

Odd.

Wednesday, June 2 at 3:45pm

Summarizing the seven months of the seven-dog trial is taking longer than I hoped, especially since the family breaks I took in May have left me with a whole lot of "real work" catching up to do.

Meanwhile, with apologies to those of you who like to match my bets (there must be thousands of you!), please add the NHL's Chicago Blackhawks (1700 #005 +110 5.5) to the following MLB dog selections for today, Wednesday, June 2:


Thursday, June 3 at 11:15am

The 7-dog trial was skunked yesterday, for only the fourth time in seven months of almost daily betting!

Bummer...

No picks today, Thursday, not because of Wednesday's disaster but because there are not enough qualifying options on a slow baseball day.

I'm still working on the 7-month summary. Bear with me, OK?

Friday, June 4 at 1:35pm

The 7-month 7-dog trial analysis will go up as a new post either later today or tomorrow.

I want to include underdog data going all the way back to the start of the 2008 baseball season, and the enormity of that task is slowing me down somewhat!

The question begged by the 7-month data is of course whether or not the patterns or trends applicable in that time span can also be seen throughout a much longer period.

If not, the whole "dog" concept is USCWAP (up #@!% creek without a paddle!).

Meantime, here are today's baseball selections:


The InvestaPick hiatus is now well into its second month for all three sports funds, and I can find no explanation anywhere on line.

I have also been unable to locate a Financial Times reference to InvestaPick, which is disappointing...


Saturday, June 5 at 3:45pm

Still working on the summary, and I toiled right past the window for Saturday's dog bets. I'll try to do better tomorrow...

Sunday, June 6 at 9:35am

...and here we are! The last couple of weeks have been deadly for dogs - and, worse, when they've squeaked out wins, I haven't picked 'em.


Today's seven underdog picks are in bold type. The "U" against some games indicates that the dog "qualifies" in the +100 to +180 range, but since I am restricted to seven selections a day, some qualifiers fail to make the cut.

Lately, the teams I have discarded have won and my picks have been thrashed, which would seem to make a solid case for backing ALL dogs on any given day.

In the seven-month roundup, you will see 12 series, not just 7. And if the range is widened by removing the upper limit while still requiring that dogs must pay back even money at least, there can be more than twice that many lines on days when multiple sports are in the mix.

An important reminder: The only person likely to make money out of this blog is you, Dear Reader. There's nothing to buy, ever, and your soul is safe (from me, at least). Test my ideas and use them or don't. It's up to you. One more piece of friendly advice: If you are inclined to use target betting with real money against online "casinos" such as Bodog, spend a few minutes and save a lot of money by reading this._