Matty Rain's 2024 MLB Betting Thread

Probably, yes. The idea for this thread was to use a nice round baseline number ($1k) to see how many times we can x it over a season by flat-betting 1% of the bankroll per play. That said I will be adding to my bankroll and increasing my bet sizes. Still undecided as to whether I want to reflect that in this thread or pretend I'm playing with just the original $1000.

When I run simulations in Excel I always use $1000 as a starting balance.

I dunno. Open to suggestions. I think the theoretical $1000 is interesting especially as we roll it over, over a number of seasons/years.
 
I like the theoretical $1000 even if you add. The math is long gone from my head but wasn't 2% basically the highest one should to avoid busting if they had a very slight edge?
 
Love the 1% flat betting to start out. All
my previous seasons were $30 flat wagers. My friends in real life (who are as square as they come) laugh at me for such a "small" wager.

They still laugh at me for the time I pumped up my flat wager size on Vegas a trip 5 years ago to $200 (on a Red Sox game where I felt I had a lot more edge than normal and I was on vacation) and I announced in the Aria elevator that it was the "largest sports bet in my life".
 
Boner_18
I like the theoretical $1000 even if you add. The math is long gone from my head but wasn't 2% basically the highest one should to avoid busting if they had a very slight edge?
Click to expand...
It all depends on the edge, yeah. Ganchrow at SBR had developed a whole bunch of neat calculators that seem to have disappeared, including a Kelly calculator so you could compute the optimal bet size based on your edge.

Of course, calculating a precise edge is easier said than done. I'm keeping track of closing lines vs. the price I paid so I can compute my theoretical lifetime edge, but I doubt I'll ever reach a point where I'm confident enough in my model that I'll play multi-unit bets on any one game. Also, I suspect that MLB closing lines are not as sharp as those of other major sports, in part because there are so many more games.

If I did blindly trust my model, Jays would be my biggest play today. I have them as a -113 fave.

Edit: the Kelly calculator is still here! https://www.sportsbookreview.com/betting-calculators/kelly-calculator/
 
Last edited:
Matty
Probably, yes. The idea for this thread was to use a nice round baseline number ($1k) to see how many times we can x it over a season by flat-betting 1% of the bankroll per play. That said I will be adding to my bankroll and increasing my bet sizes. Still undecided as to whether I want to reflect that in this thread or pretend I'm playing with just the original $1000.

When I run simulations in Excel I always use $1000 as a starting balance.

I dunno. Open to suggestions. I think the theoretical $1000 is interesting especially as we roll it over, over a number of seasons/years.
Click to expand...
I like the theoretical $1000. I also like keeping unit sizes within reason.

The dynamic units are a bit strange in that they wind up weighing games differently. If you kept the unit size flat all year with no dynamic, every game has the same value. With this system, games are weighted based on how the last day or week(s) have gone. Games after win streaks are worth more, games after losing streaks worth less.

So my point is, for track keeping purposes, flat bets with no repricing is best; but then that's what the unit tracker is for. So if you want to ride the wave of betting more with larger bankroll and less with smaller bankroll, you could easily bump it up to 2% or 3% and perform the same function, just with 2-3x the highs and lows.

Doesn't matter either way just food for thought.
 
Note that I'm not lowering the base unit amount, only increasing it. If my method is not profitable I deserve to lose it all. :handshake:

And yeah, the unit tracker makes it simple - +100 units is double the starting bankroll if you keep flat-betting $10.
 
Last edited:
Matty
Note that I'm not lowering the base unit amount, only increasing it. If my method is not profitable I deserve to lose it all. :handshake:

And yeah, the unit tracker makes it simple - +100 units is double the starting bankroll if you keep flat-betting $10.
Click to expand...
So once it increases, it never decreases? All that does is weigh late season games more heavily, right?
 
It merely means that if I can't ride out a losing streak and "resurface" above 100 units, my model is shit. The assumption is that the model is +EV and that gradually increasing bets will compound winnings.
 
March 31 (still $10.30 per unit)

LAA +135 (Detmers/Wells)
WSH +145 (Irvin/Martinez)
MIA -130 (Falter/Rogers)
CHW +135 (Flaherty/Fedde)
TEX -135 (Wicks/Gray)
STL +155 (Matz/Stone)

BoSox would be a play at +135 or better, and all I have access to right now is +130. Keeping an eye on it.
 
As a side note, I've never heard of 99% of these starting pitchers. :wah:
 
Matty
It merely means that if I can't ride out a losing streak and "resurface" above 100 units, my model is shit. The assumption is that the model is +EV and that gradually increasing bets will compound winnings.
Click to expand...
Makes sense. GL sir!
 
I'm mentally prepared for the donut. You can't hurt me.
 
If the Dodgers come back and win you won't have to fend off any questions on Sunday about why you're not raising your flat bet amount

:handshake:
 
Bases loaded with Ohtani at the plate. I hate betting this sport so much.
 
Last edited:
Cards save the donut

:woohoo:

Fuck baseball. See y'all tomorrow.
 
Matty
7-4-0, +4.00u, $1,040.32 YTD

March 30 ($10.30 unit)

CHW +120 (Maeda/Soroka) :redx:
PHI +115 (Fried/Nola) :redx:
TOR +110 (Kikuchi/Littell) :redx:
ARI -170 (Gomber/Henry) :redx:
STL +190 (Lynn/Yamamoto) :greencheck:

A's are close to being a play again, I would need +125 or so to officialize it. That would be it for today. :handshake:
Click to expand...

1-4 -2.80u (-$28.84)

YTD 8-8-0 +1.2u $1,011.48

March 31 Plays ($10.30 per unit)

LAA +135 (Detmers/Wells)
WSH +145 (Irvin/Martinez)
MIA -130 (Falter/Rogers)
CHW +135 (Flaherty/Fedde)
TEX -135 (Wicks/Gray)
STL +155 (Matz/Stone)
 
Matty forgot to mention to you how inconsistent Nola had become last year. Thought to myself, would turn it around but an abysmal performance yesterday.
Line score for Nola
4.1 inn
12 hits
7 runs all earned
3 K
1 BB
14.54 ERA

Contract 7 yrs/172 mil seems low averaged yearly. And not nearly that bad as yesterday, but damn can't withstand 7 years of average p[itching for sure. And fans have loved the guy but won't tolerate this if it continues.

Hate those long term pitcher contracts. Wheeler at 3 yrs/128 mil better for me. Nola never being Injured got him the years, but what guarantees no injury couple years down road. WTH, pitchers like him might be getting 40-50 mil as the norm 5 years down the road.

Going to fangrapghs looking at ....
ERA vs xERA
1923 - 4.46 - 3.71
1922 - 3.25 - 2.71
1921 - 4.63 - 3.35

Usually if correct more times than not xERA will be higher? Maybe could say Nola unlucky, but saw too many games where out of 6 inn pitched, he would say allowed a couple runners to reach base for 5 inn, then have 1 blowup frame letting 3,4,5 runs.

Now looking at WHIP and shows a quality pitcher...
1923 - 1.15
1922 - 0.96
1921 - 1.14
 
His projected WAR is between 4.2 and 5. That's all I care about really. I'll be updating the projections later in the season, still unsure exactly when.

Baseball is random AF. Small plays, trust the math, keep plugging away. :handshake:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.