laughedatbytime Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RushCanuck Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 I plead stupidity what this chart means as I'm not a gambler... could you please explain to me? who looks like the favorite? sorry that I am a dunce about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laughedatbytime Posted February 28, 2015 Author Share Posted February 28, 2015 I plead stupidity what this chart means as I'm not a gambler... could you please explain to me? who looks like the favorite? sorry that I am a dunce about this.I'm not a gambler either...it's easier not to gamble when you understand the odds, especially when you have enough sense to have a developed sense of your limitations. Anyway, the number is an over under. Let's take the Blue Jays for an example, since we know that they're destined for another 83-79 year. In any case, the over under is 83.5 That means that if you think the Jays are more likely to win 84 or more games than 83 or less, you bet the over, and vice versa. The OV -110 means that if you bet the over (OV) you have to bet $110 to win $100 (plus your money back). Does that make sense... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RushCanuck Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 I plead stupidity what this chart means as I'm not a gambler... could you please explain to me? who looks like the favorite? sorry that I am a dunce about this.I'm not a gambler either...it's easier not to gamble when you understand the odds, especially when you have enough sense to have a developed sense of your limitations. Anyway, the number is an over under. Let's take the Blue Jays for an example, since we know that they're destined for another 83-79 year. In any case, the over under is 83.5 That means that if you think the Jays are more likely to win 84 or more games than 83 or less, you bet the over, and vice versa. The OV -110 means that if you bet the over (OV) you have to bet $110 to win $100 (plus your money back). Does that make sense...thank you... BTW Jays may be 81 and 81 this year - that's my call... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laughedatbytime Posted February 28, 2015 Author Share Posted February 28, 2015 I plead stupidity what this chart means as I'm not a gambler... could you please explain to me? who looks like the favorite? sorry that I am a dunce about this.I'm not a gambler either...it's easier not to gamble when you understand the odds, especially when you have enough sense to have a developed sense of your limitations. Anyway, the number is an over under. Let's take the Blue Jays for an example, since we know that they're destined for another 83-79 year. In any case, the over under is 83.5 That means that if you think the Jays are more likely to win 84 or more games than 83 or less, you bet the over, and vice versa. The OV -110 means that if you bet the over (OV) you have to bet $110 to win $100 (plus your money back). Does that make sense...thank you... BTW Jays may be 81 and 81 this year - that's my call...Then if you were to bet, go with the under. FWIW, my advice is not to gamble at all. We could have a free contest here to see who could get the most teams right. I plan on following up with my picks closer to the season... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 I am going to Vegas in a few weeks, might toss a $20 down on the Cubs for the hell of it (on the over) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 I can only hope the Nats are 93+ winners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laughedatbytime Posted February 28, 2015 Author Share Posted February 28, 2015 I can only hope the Nats are 93+ winners.They're definitely in the right division to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 I would be under on Pitt, they seem due for a slip this year .... and all the beheadngs in the name of the Pirates has to drag them down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laughedatbytime Posted February 28, 2015 Author Share Posted February 28, 2015 I would be under on Pitt, they seem due for a slip this year .... and all the beheadngs in the name of the Pirates has to drag them downThese are all tough (all of those big fancy buildings didn't appear in the middle of the desert because the owners are giving away money). I think my best bet would be over for the A's...or under on Cincinnati... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disk98 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 It's going to take more than 86 wins to win the A.L. East. I'll give Boston 90, Toronto 87, Baltimore 85, New York 83, and Tampa 80. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liquidcrystalcompass Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Is there any other team in baseball that is harder to predict than the Rangers? I have no idea what to expect. Crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Analog Cub Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 LABT what's your pick on the Cubs this season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laughedatbytime Posted March 1, 2015 Author Share Posted March 1, 2015 LABT what's your pick on the Cubs this season?No clue. I'd settle for steady improvement and acclimation for all of the young talent to the major leagues. Wins are less important this year than that. 2016 on the other hand, needs to be a year where playoffs or a run to the last few days of the season needs to happen, and 2017 needs to be a year where there's a run made in the playoffs. I'd probably take the under but that's more because I'm a pessimist than from any real analysis. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorkingAllTheTime Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I would take my Cardinals on the under. 87 wins is probably pushing it. To go 88 on the 87.5 would be nuts. They will probably get 85 and win the division. Methinks the NL Central is going to be a tight, but mediocre. Pitts hangs in at .500. Milwaukee will be around there, so will Chicago. I expect the only real dud to be Cincy. PS I am fine with 85 wins and the division. Hell, I am fine with 83 wins and the World Series (party like its 2006!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laughedatbytime Posted March 5, 2015 Author Share Posted March 5, 2015 I would take my Cardinals on the under. 87 wins is probably pushing it. To go 88 on the 87.5 would be nuts. They will probably get 85 and win the division. Methinks the NL Central is going to be a tight, but mediocre. Pitts hangs in at .500. Milwaukee will be around there, so will Chicago. I expect the only real dud to be Cincy. PS I am fine with 85 wins and the division. Hell, I am fine with 83 wins and the World Series (party like its 2006!).If you want a repeat of that debacle, the AL better send a team where the pitchers can't field worth a damn. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick N. Backer Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 It's going to take more than 86 wins to win the A.L. East. I'll give Boston 90, Toronto 87, Baltimore 85, New York 83, and Tampa 80. 90 for the Sox? No way. I think the rotation is going to be weak. I think 86 might be generous. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laughedatbytime Posted March 5, 2015 Author Share Posted March 5, 2015 It's going to take more than 86 wins to win the A.L. East. I'll give Boston 90, Toronto 87, Baltimore 85, New York 83, and Tampa 80. 90 for the Sox? No way. I think the rotation is going to be weak. I think 86 might be generous. All of his totals were generous...someone's got to lose all those games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost In Xanadu Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Number of minutes of baseball LiX will watch this season... over/under is at 12.5 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laughedatbytime Posted March 5, 2015 Author Share Posted March 5, 2015 Number of minutes of baseball LiX will watch this season... over/under is at 12.5 minutes.That's like half a game if you're talking time the ball's in play.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorkingAllTheTime Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 (edited) I would take my Cardinals on the under. 87 wins is probably pushing it. To go 88 on the 87.5 would be nuts. They will probably get 85 and win the division. Methinks the NL Central is going to be a tight, but mediocre. Pitts hangs in at .500. Milwaukee will be around there, so will Chicago. I expect the only real dud to be Cincy. PS I am fine with 85 wins and the division. Hell, I am fine with 83 wins and the World Series (party like its 2006!).If you want a repeat of that debacle, the AL better send a team where the pitchers can't field worth a damn. I think you are expecting too much of American League pitchers.... you expect them to field the ball? What's next, you want them to actually get in a batter's box, too? Edited March 7, 2015 by WorkingAllTheTime 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laughedatbytime Posted March 7, 2015 Author Share Posted March 7, 2015 I would take my Cardinals on the under. 87 wins is probably pushing it. To go 88 on the 87.5 would be nuts. They will probably get 85 and win the division. Methinks the NL Central is going to be a tight, but mediocre. Pitts hangs in at .500. Milwaukee will be around there, so will Chicago. I expect the only real dud to be Cincy. PS I am fine with 85 wins and the division. Hell, I am fine with 83 wins and the World Series (party like its 2006!).If you want a repeat of that debacle, the AL better send a team where the pitchers can't field worth a damn. I think you are expecting too much of American League pitchers.... you expect them to field the ball? What's next, you want them to actually get in a batter's box, too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now