Raider 99 -- Thank you so much for posting this!
I had thought about fading the high-consensus plays, but somehow, I did not bother to check through the records.
Well I did that, finally. I went back about ten days of baseball records and found out of 20 samples:
HOME-FAVORITE wins (70%-favored teams winning) -- 7
AWAY-FAVORITE wins (70%-favored teams winning) -- 3
HOME-FAVORITE losses (70%-favored teams losing) -- 6
AWAY-FAVORITE losses (70%-favored teams losing) -- 4
So out of this small 20-game sample (a 40-game sample would be better... as anything over a 32-count sample would be more representative of the whole of baseball, statistics-wise), the results were even with 10 winning bets and 10 losing bets.
10 losing bets (betting against the favorites who won), assuming that each bet was $100, so a total loss of $1,000.
10 winning bets (betting against the favorites who lost), assuming that each bet was $100 and that the average profit was about $170, plus the bet back, due to the high chalk of the favorites... a total profit of $1,700, plus your $1,000 of bet money back, for a total return of $2,700.
Total return: $2,700
Total losses:
$1,000Net profit $1,700 
Nice! Shit, I should have done this a LONG TIME AGO!
But we have the hockey season coming up that has very similar betting structures to baseball, so perhaps, this fade-the-70%-favorite consensus model can carry over into hockey?
I'm going to take a look into NCAAF football and NFL football, too, but given their point-spread systems, I doubt that the fade-the-70% favorite model would hold up in those sports, but I'll surely take a close look at the point spreads vs. the SU betting results.
good luck man 
Hot Forum Topics
