We're about 110 games into the MLB season, so we are at the point where we probably know as much about most of the teams as were are ever going to know. Since we are at that point, it makes sense to look at the teams that have been the most profitable so far on the run line and the money line. By seeing which teams are providing a nice return, and by understanding how they have done it, we can learn what has worked and how it can be applied to make the last 50 games of the year profitable.

Run line

1. Colorado. The success of the Rockies for bettors this year comes down to one thing - they are significantly better than anyone thought that they would be. When a team comes in with low expectations and they win consistently but not in a flashy way that draws a lot of attention, they are going to be profitable. Colorado ends up being the underdog quite often, they have won consistently when they are, they have an explosive offense that puts up a lot of runs when they are hot, and they stay close often times when they lose. That all adds up to a dynamite run line team. In fact, they have been about 20 percent more profitable than any other team in the league in that area.

2. Philadelphia. The Phillies got off to a dismal start, and then followed that up with a patch of spotty play, so the public was turned off. It helped value bettors as well that Ryan Howard, last year's MVP and a fan favorite, struggled to start the season. That meant that people perceived that the team was worse than it actually was. By the time the second week of May rolled around the Phils had found their game again, and they have been as solid as anyone since then. Those low early perceptions probably caused prices to be better than they should have been, and that led to profits. The offense is deep and powerful, and that, when coupled with inaccurate public perceptions, is what is needed for run line success.

3. Seattle. The Mariners have rewarded bettors this year for most of the same reasons as Colorado. People were so convinced that they were going to finish at the bottom of the league that they forgot to notice that they actually have a pretty decent team. They have also been helped by some inaccurate public perceptions like those surrounding Jeff Weaver. Weaver was as bad as a major league pitcher can be at the start of the year, but he was hurt. When he returned from the DL he found some great form and was as good as any pitcher out there through June, and acceptably good since then. People were so blinded by his huge ERA that they failed to see how good he was playing, and that created huge value.

4. Arizona. Do you notice a trend here? Given the presence of the Padres and the Dodgers, many people expected the Diamondbacks to struggle a bit in the NL West, not get hot and take control in August. What s interesting about this team is that they aren't particularly good offensively. Their success has come from solid pitching and unflappable consistency. The D-Backs haven't been getting respect or recognition for how well they are playing (they have the second best record in the NL), and that has been golden for their backers. Need proof? The team just won five of six from chief rivals the Padres and Dodgers. In four of the five wins they were the underdog.

5. Toronto. I was a bit surprised to see the Jays this high up on the list, but once I thought about the fact, it made sense. Though they are just barely an average team, they are perceived to be worse because they are compared to the two powerhouses at the top of their division. Because of that, they have spent a lot of time this year as the underdog, and have won their share in that role. That means profits. From a betting perspective, the other thing that is great about this team is that they are streaky. When they start to lose they often string together several in a row. Once things go wrong, then, you can just sit on the sidelines and let them straighten things out before backing them again.

Money line

Some of this list is the same as the run line, and the reasons are similar. There are, though, a few differences.

1. Seattle.

2. Washington. The Nationals have been serving up huge value for much of the year. They aren't a good team by any means, but several experts thought that they might be historically bad, and they aren't at all. In fact, their .455 record is better than seven other teams in the league. The public has assumed, though, that they are a punch line and have bet them accordingly. That means that they have regularly won at huge prices and more than offset their losses. The betting plight of this team all year, and the Yankees at the beginning of the year, show that the public is slow to accept that bad teams are better than expected, or that good teams just aren't that good.

3. Arizona.

4. Colorado.

5. Boston. The Red Sox have been at the top of the league standings most of the year, and they have been kind to bettors at the same time. On the surface that's a bit of a surprise. I think a contributing factor, though, is that though the team has kept winning, they certainly don't look invincible, and that has kept their prices in the stratosphere. They have great pitching at the top of the rotation, but it drops off significantly after that, and that means that they have been underdogs more than a team of their record should be. It also helps that they are almost as strong on the road as they are at home. Fenway is a huge home-field advantage, and bettors treat it accordingly. They seem to overcompensate for that advantage when the team goes on the road, though, and that has allowed the team to be nicely profitable away from Boston.