A winner was posted here last Saturday (10-8-2, .556), capping a string of eight (8) straight winning weeks. The full-season performance finishes at .553 (94-76-5); a unique combination of both volume & success.
Let’s visit rank-value during those eight (8) weeks since the algorithm was adjusted. Over that time, the top eleven best-bets have gone .650 (52-28-3). Stellar, and a distinct double-down on the volume/success combo mentioned above.
Alas, it wouldn’t be a bona-fide Kingfish post without some (boring) tech talk. Was there a drill-down silver lining in the last week 10-8-2 performance that may bode well for the future? Maybe. Consider SpreadMargin (SM); the amount a team covers by, or fails to cover by.
Beyond wins & losses, the algorithm’s competitiveness can be secondarily judged by SM. The 6844-game database average SM is 12.3. So, theoretically, if your teams are winning by more than that, or losing by less than that -- you're doing well. You are competitive and, invariably, you will win your share of games. Especially if you have that predictive quality over the large volume of games.
Here's a small-sample last-week example. Of my 10 non-covering best-bets -- the SM average was 8.95. That was 73% (8.95/12.3) of the long-term SM average, and just 2 of those 10 no-cover best-bet outcomes exceeded the SM average. Both of those observations point toward positive structural performance. Humble opinion.....
Lest I forget this week! We have the antithesis of large opportunistic board volume – the conference championship games (8). My research database holds no neutral site games, and with just 3 of those 8 on home turf – my capping is limited. Thus, the box offers only the Hilltoppers as bankable:
WesternKentucky(+5)/JacksonvilleSt
It has been enjoyable to post in 2024, and I hope this corner brought you some value/entertainment. Until next year (if/when I return), I wish you the best.
Good luck,
TheKingfish
Hot Forum Topics
