8 tracked MLB positions Friday · Jul 10 · 8 settled and still on the board
Sorted by tip / first pitch. Nothing about this order implies quality.
SOARI @ LAD · 10:11PM ET
Tracked✓ Won
Projection?
1.08hits
68% range0.0to2.2line 1.5?
Slight lean to the under 1.5+195at —
LINE 1.5
← under pays
proj 1.08
✓ actual 1
0model band 0.0–2.2 · no game history on this row2
35.1%
Our chance?
0.0–2.2
68% range?
Slight lean to the under 1.5. It is a swingy one — the projection points this way, but results still bounce around, so size it accordingly.We project 1.08 hits against a line of 1.5 — 0.42 to the under side, inside a band of ±1.1. That is barely any separation. Real, but small. Size it accordingly. After calibration we put the under at 35.1%.Calibration: the shape above, on its own, would say 64.9%. Our calibration layer pulls that to 35.1%. The number we publish, grade and pay on is the calibrated one. Raw model probabilities have historically been badly overconfident, so we never show them as the answer.
Model EV
+3.49%
Break-even
33.9%
Edge vs BE
+1.2 pts
+1.95uSettled at +195 · graded from the box score.
VGTOR @ SD · 9:41PM ET
Tracked✓ Won
Projection?
0.83hits
68% range0.0to2.7line 1.5?
Slight lean to the under 1.5+190at —
LINE 1.5
← under pays
proj 0.83
✓ actual 1
0model band 0.0–2.7 · no game history on this row3
35.8%
Our chance?
0.0–2.7
68% range?
Slight lean to the under 1.5. It is a swingy one — the projection points this way, but results still bounce around, so size it accordingly.We project 0.83 hits against a line of 1.5 — 0.67 to the under side, inside a band of ±1.8. That is barely any separation. Real, but small. Size it accordingly. After calibration we put the under at 35.8%.Calibration: the shape above, on its own, would say 64.2%. Our calibration layer pulls that to 35.8%. The number we publish, grade and pay on is the calibrated one. Raw model probabilities have historically been badly overconfident, so we never show them as the answer.
Model EV
+3.85%
Break-even
34.5%
Edge vs BE
+1.3 pts
+1.90uSettled at +190 · graded from the box score.
RJLAA @ MIN · 8:11PM ET
Tracked✓ Won
Projection?
1.03hits
68% range0.0to2.4line 1.5?
Slight lean to the under 1.5+175at —
LINE 1.5
← under pays
proj 1.03
✓ actual 1
0model band 0.0–2.4 · no game history on this row3
36.6%
Our chance?
0.0–2.4
68% range?
Slight lean to the under 1.5. It is a swingy one — the projection points this way, but results still bounce around, so size it accordingly.We project 1.03 hits against a line of 1.5 — 0.47 to the under side, inside a band of ±1.4. That is barely any separation. That is close to a coin flip and we are showing it as one. After calibration we put the under at 36.6%.Risk: the band crosses the line comfortably in both directions.Calibration: the shape above, on its own, would say 63.4%. Our calibration layer pulls that to 36.6%. The number we publish, grade and pay on is the calibrated one. Raw model probabilities have historically been badly overconfident, so we never show them as the answer.
Model EV
+0.73%
Break-even
36.4%
Edge vs BE
+0.3 pts
+1.75uSettled at +175 · graded from the box score.
KCLAA @ MIN · 8:11PM ET
Tracked✓ Won
Projection?
0.96hits
68% range0.0to2.7line 1.5?
Slight lean to the under 1.5+165at —
LINE 1.5
← under pays
proj 0.96
✓ actual 0
0model band 0.0–2.7 · no game history on this row3
38.0%
Our chance?
0.0–2.7
68% range?
Slight lean to the under 1.5. It is a swingy one — the projection points this way, but results still bounce around, so size it accordingly.We project 0.96 hits against a line of 1.5 — 0.54 to the under side, inside a band of ±1.8. That is barely any separation. That is close to a coin flip and we are showing it as one. After calibration we put the under at 38.0%.Risk: the band crosses the line comfortably in both directions.Calibration: the shape above, on its own, would say 62.0%. Our calibration layer pulls that to 38.0%. The number we publish, grade and pay on is the calibrated one. Raw model probabilities have historically been badly overconfident, so we never show them as the answer.
Model EV
+0.67%
Break-even
37.7%
Edge vs BE
+0.3 pts
+1.65uSettled at +165 · graded from the box score.
CBNYY @ WSH · 7:46PM ET
Tracked✗ Lost
Projection?
0.64hits
68% range0.0to3.3line 1.5?
Slight lean to the under 1.5+180at —
LINE 1.5
← under pays
proj 0.64
✗ actual 2
0model band 0.0–3.3 · no game history on this row4
37.4%
Our chance?
0.0–3.3
68% range?
Slight lean to the under 1.5. It is a swingy one — the projection points this way, but results still bounce around, so size it accordingly.We project 0.64 hits against a line of 1.5 — 0.86 to the under side, inside a band of ±2.7. That is barely any separation. That is close to a coin flip and we are showing it as one. After calibration we put the under at 37.4%.Risk: the band crosses the line comfortably in both directions.Calibration: the shape above, on its own, would say 62.6%. Our calibration layer pulls that to 37.4%. The number we publish, grade and pay on is the calibrated one. Raw model probabilities have historically been badly overconfident, so we never show them as the answer.
Model EV
+4.83%
Break-even
35.7%
Edge vs BE
+1.7 pts
−1.00uSettled at +180 · graded from the box score.
EVMIL @ PIT · 7:35PM ET
Tracked⊘ Void · did not play
Projection?
2.51total bases
68% range0.0to6.2line 1.5?
Slight lean to the over 1.5+164at —
LINE 1.5
over pays →
proj 2.51
0model band 0.0–6.2 · no game history on this row7
39.2%
Our chance?
0.0–6.2
68% range?
Slight lean to the over 1.5. It is a swingy one — the projection points this way, but results still bounce around, so size it accordingly.We project 2.51 total bases against a line of 1.5 — 1.01 to the over side, inside a band of ±3.7. That is barely any separation. That is close to a coin flip and we are showing it as one. After calibration we put the over at 39.2%.Risk: the band crosses the line comfortably in both directions.Calibration: the shape above, on its own, would say 60.8%. Our calibration layer pulls that to 39.2%. The number we publish, grade and pay on is the calibrated one. Raw model probabilities have historically been badly overconfident, so we never show them as the answer.
Model EV
+3.51%
Break-even
37.9%
Edge vs BE
+1.3 pts
0.00uDid not play. Voided, no stake risked, and kept on the record as a void — not deleted.
ROMIL @ PIT · 7:35PM ET
Tracked⊘ Void · did not play
Projection?
2.34total bases
68% range0.0to6.1line 1.5?
Slight lean to the over 1.5+146at —
LINE 1.5
over pays →
proj 2.34
0model band 0.0–6.1 · no game history on this row7
41.2%
Our chance?
0.0–6.1
68% range?
Slight lean to the over 1.5. It is a swingy one — the projection points this way, but results still bounce around, so size it accordingly.We project 2.34 total bases against a line of 1.5 — 0.84 to the over side, inside a band of ±3.8. That is barely any separation. That is close to a coin flip and we are showing it as one. After calibration we put the over at 41.2%.Risk: the band crosses the line comfortably in both directions.Calibration: the shape above, on its own, would say 58.8%. Our calibration layer pulls that to 41.2%. The number we publish, grade and pay on is the calibrated one. Raw model probabilities have historically been badly overconfident, so we never show them as the answer.
Model EV
+1.28%
Break-even
40.7%
Edge vs BE
+0.5 pts
0.00uDid not play. Voided, no stake risked, and kept on the record as a void — not deleted.
CPMIL @ PIT · 7:35PM ET
Tracked⊘ Void · did not play
Projection?
0.94total bases
68% range0.3to1.5line 1?
Slight lean to the under 1+120at —
LINE 1
← under pays
proj 0.94
0model band 0.3–1.5 · no game history on this row2
46.0%
Our chance?
0.3–1.5
68% range?
Slight lean to the under 1. It is a swingy one — the projection points this way, but results still bounce around, so size it accordingly.We project 0.94 total bases against a line of 1 — 0.06 to the under side, inside a band of ±0.6. That is barely any separation. That is close to a coin flip and we are showing it as one. After calibration we put the under at 46.0%.Risk: the band crosses the line comfortably in both directions.Calibration: the shape above, on its own, would say 54.0%. Our calibration layer pulls that to 46.0% — closer to a coin flip. The number we publish, grade and pay on is the calibrated one. Raw model probabilities have historically been badly overconfident, so we never show them as the answer.
Model EV
+1.27%
Break-even
45.5%
Edge vs BE
+0.6 pts
0.00uDid not play. Voided, no stake risked, and kept on the record as a void — not deleted.