The Problem with Narratives ( game write ups)

The Problem with Narratives

There are always plenty of projected game analyses on Covers (which I will be referring to as narratives).  Some are well researched, not are not, but invariably each of them will go into details about the usual suspects ( home field, coaching, match ups, weather, blah blah blah… the list is endless).   But my point is that for every narrative I read, there is usually a counter narrative than can be presented that is just as plausible as the first narrative.   Two sides to every story right?

But here is the problem – Anything that is generally known about any match up has already been accounted for.  The market has a relentless way of reducing any perceived advantage into a 50/50 proposition over time (meaning an unprofitable betting strategy). 

Notice I did NOT say the linemaker has adjusted the number (although this is part of the problem).  I said the MARKET has adjusted.  All that stuff we read about in any so-called analysis is already baked into the bet.  You have to find some other way to cap games to beat games.   You must do something that very few are doing.  Those that are betting with winning approaches are not talking.   IF they talk too much and people at large know about it, the market will adjust.  Good bye betting edge.

IF you have a piece of information no one else knows about, then that’s one way to beat it (unlikely here on Covers).

I actually kind of agree with you Train.   I think you just said it more concisely than I did.  Welcome back !! 

I don't post much about my handicapping and opinions relative to games and lines. The Covers trolls are more distracting than it is worth. We all have our own opinions, some better than others. Anyway, here's my take on the efficiency of lines and information and ultimately where to find some value...

Some lines are efficient and offer no value to the bettor, on either side. Other lines are wildly inefficient. The HARD part is deciding which is which. I start handicapping with Power Ratings. I do not develop my own. There are dozens of Power Ratings out there, some good, some bad. It is my job to figure out which are which. More power - and much respect -  to you if you develop your own Power Ratings. Oddsmakers base their original lines substantially on their own Power Ratings, then make adjustments based on a variety of factors, not the least of which is shading public teams by a point or more. 

Oddsmakers are very good at what they do.

But no set of power ratings and no computer algorithm I am yet familiar with can accurately crunch the "heart element" of the games to be played. Indeed, one team "wants it" more than the other. 

And that is our job to figure. Yet, we have plenty of angles to bring into our model. The Sandwich Game, the Letdown Game and the Lookahead Game are excellent approaches to determine the efficiency of a line. Indeed, the oddsmakers may have set a line that looks efficient based on their internal Power Ratings, but they may not have set a line that accurately considers the matchup, when one team may be distracted by the next team on its schedule.

Consider, for instance the Week 1 matchup between Texas -21.5 hosting Louisiana Tech. Consider this game in the context of LSU -28.0 hosting Georgia Southern. If any of you are asking "why" then you have a long way to go...but I will give you a head start. Because both favorites meet each other in the second game of the season!

What likely has not been baked into the lines are the "heart" angles of this classic Lookahead spot. Most of you know that Tom Herman is terrible ATS when in the favorite role. Most of you know GASO is sitting their starting QB and WR because of cocaine discovered on the hood and windshield of the QBs car (WTF!!!). 

But ask yourself, are either of the favorites gonna come out and pound their Week 1 opponents for 60 full minutes? Probably not. And let's not forget, the dogs are gonna want to show up and play a full 60 minutes of football against teams that passed over every single player on these "lesser" teams.

It is this "heart element" that I find is often left out of the equation. Making some lines inefficient.

As a bonus, consider the Week 1 matchup between Clemson and Georgia Tech. The total opened at 60.5 and has been bet down to around 59.0 What do we know about Georgia Tech? What do we know about Game #2 for Clemson? 

Full disclosure, I bet the Under 60.0 in this contest.

Good luck to you all - Peace Out

Rico - that alleged cocaine was birdsh^t...the GSU QB and I assume the WR will play...I agree with your sentiment...folks should pass on both LSU and Texas in week 1...

Interesting post - But I have to ask how you determine if a line is "efficient"?  Do you have a formula?  Eye test?   And how do we know the "double look ahead " match between Texas and LSU is not already baked into the market already?  To do this accurately, you need a way to make a line that is better than Vegas and that is hard to do.  

One thing I don't understand with most of the posters on Covers - How can you determine if a line is off if you don't make a line to compare it to?

I use game simulations.  I play a game between 1000 up to 10,000 times ( takes 3 minutes)   Predicts the most likely score for both teams over many plays

Example - This year is Florida 27, Miami 25,  Florida -2 but line is Florida -7.   5 point overlay means play Florida.  Translates to Miami with approximately a 65% chance to cover the number.

The weakness at this point in the season is we are relying on end of season data from last year so any manual adjustments like coaching changes, returning production, etc.  

Just putting it out there as an example of how I make a line.  Any input appreciated.

Correction = Play is on Miami, not on Florida

Excellent question and thanks for asking the right one !   Based on 2018 end of season data only.  Adjustments still need to be made to project for 2019.

Caveat - Most teams regress or advance very little from EOS to opening day.   As 2019 data comes in, I adjust based on data after week 2.   Floirda -2 is my starting point.  But in this game, I probably won't make enough of an adjustment to switch to playing Florida.   BIggest adjustments are usually on 2 to 3 points which would still make Miami a bet at +7.

Train - that is a very fair statement about the Vegas numbers being better.  Clearly they are.  None of us clowns can beat them at the numbers game.

But we CAN beat them by making a number and making the adjustments to the number which is what Train is saying.   I guess what I am saying is you gotta have a number but you have to know the subjective ( "eye test" ) adjustments to make to the number ( this agrees with Train I think)

Because you "never understood" something doesn't mean it has no value, does it?  

Train I think u are saying exactly what i said but with a different spin.   We both agree that vegas line is much sharper than our stuff.  U suggest making our line sharper by making subjective adjustments to our lines ( eye test, etc).  That would seem to make a better line than Vegas.... but only if your adding things that Vegas made unware of.  Easy to say for sure.  Much harder to do.  The theory is solid in my opinion.