A short one, so as not to cloud the mind with onerous Tech -- in the midst of the final CFP games. SpreadMargin (SM) is the amount by which a team covers, or fails to cover. Given that my regular season database only recently finalized itself (2013-24, 7583 games), I thought I’d share an offshoot. Specifically, I’ve done some Average SM work prior to the launch of my off-season research:
12.292 2013-23 12.151 2024 Comparatively, this means The Man was a better-predictor in season 2024 -- by 1.15 percent ([12.292-12.151]/12.292). Not good news.
The above is final line data. 12.278 2013-24 final line 12.396 2013-24 early line Comparatively, this means The Man has been a 1.03 percent weaker-predictor when players bet the early line (12.396/12.278). A slight player edge......when s/he bets into a line that is less mature/strong.
So, what might we infer from this, if anything? The second piece constitutes a capper strategy. A small thing that maybe slides into the back pocket.....
If valid, the first piece would seem to have more import. Assuming we have Artificial Intelligence operating, and The Man grows one percent better every year – we’re in trouble. However, given the Law of Diminishing Returns, it’s unlikely such an improvement magnitude could be sustained. However again, the Law of DR is also subject to our new world of AI.
So then. Is it a case of having fire where there is smoke? Or, OTOH, maybe I’m just “blowing” smoke...... Good luck, TheKingfish
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
A short one, so as not to cloud the mind with onerous Tech -- in the midst of the final CFP games. SpreadMargin (SM) is the amount by which a team covers, or fails to cover. Given that my regular season database only recently finalized itself (2013-24, 7583 games), I thought I’d share an offshoot. Specifically, I’ve done some Average SM work prior to the launch of my off-season research:
12.292 2013-23 12.151 2024 Comparatively, this means The Man was a better-predictor in season 2024 -- by 1.15 percent ([12.292-12.151]/12.292). Not good news.
The above is final line data. 12.278 2013-24 final line 12.396 2013-24 early line Comparatively, this means The Man has been a 1.03 percent weaker-predictor when players bet the early line (12.396/12.278). A slight player edge......when s/he bets into a line that is less mature/strong.
So, what might we infer from this, if anything? The second piece constitutes a capper strategy. A small thing that maybe slides into the back pocket.....
If valid, the first piece would seem to have more import. Assuming we have Artificial Intelligence operating, and The Man grows one percent better every year – we’re in trouble. However, given the Law of Diminishing Returns, it’s unlikely such an improvement magnitude could be sustained. However again, the Law of DR is also subject to our new world of AI.
So then. Is it a case of having fire where there is smoke? Or, OTOH, maybe I’m just “blowing” smoke...... Good luck, TheKingfish
Thanks for your reply. Clarification is always a good thing. I will answer your queries in opposite order.
My large historical database purposely does not contain neutral-site games. Therefore, the algorithm has no capability to evaluate them. And if those games were logged and processed separately -- that sample size would be too small to yield much predictive confidence. Leastwise, at a level I am comfortable with....
No systemic filtering to distinguish dogs and favorites. Categories are problematic, in that moving thru-zero changes the dynamic. For example, isn’t a 1-point favorite nearly identical to a 1-point dog? And to step further, is a 3-point dog the same as a 14-point dog? Instead, my system avoids that kind of rote category-lumping by focusing on the seamless combo of home-team and line magnitude.
Kindly reverse your perception. In non-robot terms, I am saying if you bet the line early you have more value. When The Man demonstrates a lower AveSM (late week), he is theoretically achieving more predictive-strength – to the disadvantage of players.
That said, we all know the line is not intended to be a predictor – but rather, a bettor-perception value intended to equalize intake ($). Questions and comments welcome. Good luck, TheKingfish
0
@MrFreedo
Thanks for your reply. Clarification is always a good thing. I will answer your queries in opposite order.
My large historical database purposely does not contain neutral-site games. Therefore, the algorithm has no capability to evaluate them. And if those games were logged and processed separately -- that sample size would be too small to yield much predictive confidence. Leastwise, at a level I am comfortable with....
No systemic filtering to distinguish dogs and favorites. Categories are problematic, in that moving thru-zero changes the dynamic. For example, isn’t a 1-point favorite nearly identical to a 1-point dog? And to step further, is a 3-point dog the same as a 14-point dog? Instead, my system avoids that kind of rote category-lumping by focusing on the seamless combo of home-team and line magnitude.
Kindly reverse your perception. In non-robot terms, I am saying if you bet the line early you have more value. When The Man demonstrates a lower AveSM (late week), he is theoretically achieving more predictive-strength – to the disadvantage of players.
That said, we all know the line is not intended to be a predictor – but rather, a bettor-perception value intended to equalize intake ($). Questions and comments welcome. Good luck, TheKingfish
Thanks for your posted support -- much appreciated.
My content tends to be an acquired-taste, as it was described by a (TalkSport) forum friend of long ago. Thus, typically, I get few players who wade-in with a reply. However, post algorithm adjustment, it was gratifying for me to bring some value to the forum during the final eight weeks of 2024 (top eleven, .650, 52-28-3).
Suffice to say, my madness is multi-faceted. And with research now pulling me back into the dungeon, I will happily see you all again in August...... Good luck, TheKingfish
0
@IntenseOperator
Thanks for your posted support -- much appreciated.
My content tends to be an acquired-taste, as it was described by a (TalkSport) forum friend of long ago. Thus, typically, I get few players who wade-in with a reply. However, post algorithm adjustment, it was gratifying for me to bring some value to the forum during the final eight weeks of 2024 (top eleven, .650, 52-28-3).
Suffice to say, my madness is multi-faceted. And with research now pulling me back into the dungeon, I will happily see you all again in August...... Good luck, TheKingfish
@MrFreedo Thanks for your reply. Clarification is always a good thing. I will answer your queries in opposite order. My large historical database purposely does not contain neutral-site games. Therefore, the algorithm has no capability to evaluate them. And if those games were logged and processed separately -- that sample size would be too small to yield much predictive confidence. Leastwise, at a level I am comfortable with.... No systemic filtering to distinguish dogs and favorites. Categories are problematic, in that moving thru-zero changes the dynamic. For example, isn’t a 1-point favorite nearly identical to a 1-point dog? And to step further, is a 3-point dog the same as a 14-point dog? Instead, my system avoids that kind of rote category-lumping by focusing on the seamless combo of home-team and line magnitude. Kindly reverse your perception. In non-robot terms, I am saying if you bet the line early you have more value. When The Man demonstrates a lower AveSM (late week), he is theoretically achieving more predictive-strength – to the disadvantage of players. That said, we all know the line is not intended to be a predictor – but rather, a bettor-perception value intended to equalize intake ($). Questions and comments welcome.Good luck,TheKingfish
@TheKingfish
I agree with this:
In non-robot terms, I am saying if you bet the line early you have more value.
I get what you’re saying that a dog is a dog and a favorite is a favorite, even though the way you try to explain it doesn’t make sense and is probably confusing as shit to others (and I’m not trying to be mean). I’d like to ask more questions about your system but maybe next year as I’d have too many. Not being able to filter through your own database to better evaluate your results and make improvements is a bummer and unfortunate. I did see you had a successful year so great job and keep staying with what works!
Play the game. Don’t let the game play you.
0
Quote Originally Posted by TheKingfish:
@MrFreedo Thanks for your reply. Clarification is always a good thing. I will answer your queries in opposite order. My large historical database purposely does not contain neutral-site games. Therefore, the algorithm has no capability to evaluate them. And if those games were logged and processed separately -- that sample size would be too small to yield much predictive confidence. Leastwise, at a level I am comfortable with.... No systemic filtering to distinguish dogs and favorites. Categories are problematic, in that moving thru-zero changes the dynamic. For example, isn’t a 1-point favorite nearly identical to a 1-point dog? And to step further, is a 3-point dog the same as a 14-point dog? Instead, my system avoids that kind of rote category-lumping by focusing on the seamless combo of home-team and line magnitude. Kindly reverse your perception. In non-robot terms, I am saying if you bet the line early you have more value. When The Man demonstrates a lower AveSM (late week), he is theoretically achieving more predictive-strength – to the disadvantage of players. That said, we all know the line is not intended to be a predictor – but rather, a bettor-perception value intended to equalize intake ($). Questions and comments welcome.Good luck,TheKingfish
@TheKingfish
I agree with this:
In non-robot terms, I am saying if you bet the line early you have more value.
I get what you’re saying that a dog is a dog and a favorite is a favorite, even though the way you try to explain it doesn’t make sense and is probably confusing as shit to others (and I’m not trying to be mean). I’d like to ask more questions about your system but maybe next year as I’d have too many. Not being able to filter through your own database to better evaluate your results and make improvements is a bummer and unfortunate. I did see you had a successful year so great job and keep staying with what works!
Thank you for sharing information like this. This is one of the main reasons I go on betting forums. Being straight up, I’m not smart enough or just to old to do what you do. But I’m good at breaking down information that people/handicappers provide.
0
Thank you for sharing information like this. This is one of the main reasons I go on betting forums. Being straight up, I’m not smart enough or just to old to do what you do. But I’m good at breaking down information that people/handicappers provide.
You are welcome. And to MrFreedo, I offer some trailing commentary to assuage the confusion. First, the context. Most every ‘technical’ handicapper is in the business of crafting trends from-history that will be applicable to the future. So, as a Power-Rating (PR) capper, I share a classic-research stumbling-block example:
Let’s say I have this researched trend: Bet a Home Fav with a PR >= 89. It has reasonable volume and a success rate of .575, or some facsimile.
Structurally, that’s a trend with a binary component (category) and a variable component (PR). Think of Line as the x-axis, and PR as the y-axis. However, in this case, that fluid Line is divided into two categories.
This trend has an application problem due to that binary aspect; the rigid toggle between dog & fav.
If the Line moves thru zero (-1 >> +1), our coveted trend evaporates. So, on the field, even though that new Home Dog is not substantially different from the old HF -- the handicapper must abandon it. S/he has no data to support the HD it has become.
Mentioned prior, another large/inherent problem with this trend structure is line magnitude. Is that -1 HF identical to a -10 HF? Of course not; there are differing performance sectors along that x-axis. However, here’s the larger analysis problem -- optimum-seeking research employing TWO (2) variables is a challenge.
That most-optimum trend is difficult to identify. Successful research might state it as follows: Bet a Home Team having a PR >= 89, and a Line between -2.5 and +6.5.
Most-optimum being the operational phrase here. Tech stuff tends to be user-centric and often defies explanation -- but I hope that helped. Good luck, TheKingfish
0
@boro33
You are welcome. And to MrFreedo, I offer some trailing commentary to assuage the confusion. First, the context. Most every ‘technical’ handicapper is in the business of crafting trends from-history that will be applicable to the future. So, as a Power-Rating (PR) capper, I share a classic-research stumbling-block example:
Let’s say I have this researched trend: Bet a Home Fav with a PR >= 89. It has reasonable volume and a success rate of .575, or some facsimile.
Structurally, that’s a trend with a binary component (category) and a variable component (PR). Think of Line as the x-axis, and PR as the y-axis. However, in this case, that fluid Line is divided into two categories.
This trend has an application problem due to that binary aspect; the rigid toggle between dog & fav.
If the Line moves thru zero (-1 >> +1), our coveted trend evaporates. So, on the field, even though that new Home Dog is not substantially different from the old HF -- the handicapper must abandon it. S/he has no data to support the HD it has become.
Mentioned prior, another large/inherent problem with this trend structure is line magnitude. Is that -1 HF identical to a -10 HF? Of course not; there are differing performance sectors along that x-axis. However, here’s the larger analysis problem -- optimum-seeking research employing TWO (2) variables is a challenge.
That most-optimum trend is difficult to identify. Successful research might state it as follows: Bet a Home Team having a PR >= 89, and a Line between -2.5 and +6.5.
Most-optimum being the operational phrase here. Tech stuff tends to be user-centric and often defies explanation -- but I hope that helped. Good luck, TheKingfish
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
