Got 1-0 yesterday. Thanks to GoBlue for finding the dog I missed.
Record is 3-1 last two days.
I just got one today
San Diego +125
Feel free to look for others. I surely can miss them and having a good backup like GoBlue yesterday helped with a winner. Just want to point out, Dogs with an era of 3 or less are no plays. Rarely do they occur but when a pitcher is a dog and his era is that low there is normally some kind of problem and they just do not win very well.
Leiter with the Mets would be one if his ERA wasn't so damn low. Some stats on Leiter as a dog at home.
Al Leiter as dog at home... Wins Losses Pct Units
overall 9 1 90% +9.4
this month 2 0 100% +2.5
on grass 9 1 90% +9.4
against a righthander 6 1 85.7% +5.9
against ground ball-hitting team 3 0 100% +3.3
Total units... +30.5
I will send you an email soon with some spreadsheets. Use them as you wish. They are just ok like I said but they show some good stuff which is the key.
The Mets game is surely a good example though. When the dog pitch has that low of an era he should not be the dog unless something is wrong, like the Mets cannot win and really do not have good hitters. When they showed up as dogs last year they did not make a profit.
You are right Jerbeek, No dogs below +110 or above +200. As for the Cleveland game Sabathia has an era in the range that did not do that well, smae goes for Leiter in the Mets game. Below 3.00 for the dog and below 4.00 for the favorite. I stay away from those. It only drops 19 games from the era 1 side of things and picked the dogs at 53-33 on the ML. I do not have a calculator handy but that is a pretty good win % on all dogs above +110. Things could go different this year but I do not think they will. I know adding you LA test as a filter made the system hit a higher percentage than this on dogs but I have to go dig that up.
This is a study I did with last years numbers:
Here are some stats
ERA1 is the era of the dog, the lower era
ERA2 is the era of the fav, the higher era
I noted in Vazquez's first start on the road this season that he is a miserable pitcher when a favorite on the road (currently 6 - 20). There just might be a catch to that tonight.
Chuck Meriwether is the home plate ump tonight and Vazquez is 2 - 0 with Meriwether behind the plate for road games. The home team is also 19 - 37 when a dog and Meriwether behind the plate.
I also really like the Over in this game. Harden has not shown me anything this year, and Vazquez is not at his best on the road. The Yankess could take this over by themselves, which is currently 8.5 -130.
Ok, I dug into the spreadsheets today and found the most updated numbers I have on this system. I think it is from May 13th range to July 31st of last season. Had a little slump in some areas but here are the numbers and what I feel are the best filters. This is 30IP+ no dogs below +110 or above +200. Probably will look like mess. The first stat is the ML the second is the RL. I sent Colin a few spreadsheets so he may put them somewhere.
Era 1 (Dog era)
less than 3.00 13-13 (+3.9) 18-8 (+6.0)
from 3 to 4 31-21 (+23) 33-19 (+4.6)
from 4 to 5 29-25 (+12.65) 39-15 (+15.4)
above 5.00 6-6 (+3) 8-4 (+2.2)
Era 2 (Fav era)
less than 4.00 10-20 (-6.7) 16-14 (-4.65)
from 4 to 5 36-20 (+28.95) 41-15 (+18.65)
from 5 to 6 27-21 (+15.60) 32-16 (+7.15)
above 6.00 6-4 (+4.7) 9-1 (+7.25)
Pretty much the same as what I had earlier. Really like the dogs with an era between 3 and 5. Really like the favs(in the system) with an era of 4 and up. Can bet them on the RL and ML to maximize profits. Just think if you bet just $100 on all these last year. Made yourself around $8500 in a few months without even having a good losing streak to worry about.
Next step, the alternate run line!! I am interested in that. That is the next project. To find the percentage that would have covered that. Give me a day, I have the teams and dates, just need to see which ones covered that.
Ohh yeah, Past results do not guarantee future performance!!
GL!
PS- If you are reading this and do not understand any part of it just holler at me. I can probably explain it.