I understood what you were saying, and I still disagree that there's anything blind about it. That's how I pick my games. If I see a better pitcher on a better team getting a favorable number, it's a play. JJ is a far better pitcher than Correia, and the Braves (we assume) are a better team than the Padres. -116 is a very favorable number in that matchup (the opening -145 was more indicative of the disparity, but I would not have played it at that) and I would bet again in 4 days if there were a rematch with identical parameters. I scoured my Braves resources for any reason why JJ shouldn't be expected to do what he normally does, which is about 7 innings of ~3 runs or less. He's had success against Padre hitters and the Padres are a less than stellar offensive team. Correia is an average to slightly above average pitcher.
The Braves should have been favored in that game and it should have been for more than -116 vig. The fundamental difference in our approaches is for me that makes it a play and for you that makes it suspicious. I'm not telling you how much money you are going to lose by simply fading fading public plays and "fishy" lines. I have no idea how that approach will pan out over the long haul. I hope it does well for you. But I'm going to continue doing things the way I do them, and while I appreciate your attempt to educate me it comes across as a wee bit condescending when you add something like "sweet cheeks" to the end.
ink:
