Stram passed away in
2005...here is his super bowl formula for picking the winner. This one so far is 40-6-2 with a win last year after a 3 year hiatus.
Give 10 points to a team if they have won a Super Bowl in the last three
seasons.Seattle
Give 8.0 points to either team if their opponent is playing in their very first
Super Bowl in franchise history.Push
Give 8.0 points to the team that has given up the fewer amount of defensive
rushes.New England
Give 7.0 points to the team with the best straight up win/loss record including
playoffs.Push
Give 7.0 points to the team with the most offensive rushes on the season.Seattle
Give 5.0 points to the team with the better defensive yards-per-carry average.Seattle
Give 4.0 points to the team that has the best net kick-punt touchdown returns.New
England Give 4.0 points to the team who performed better against the point spread
in the regular season.Seattle
Give 4.0 points to the team that has the better net penalty yards number.New
England
Give 3.5 points to the team that has the greater yards per pass attempt.Seattle
Give 3.5 points to the team that has allowed up the fewest points on the
season.Seattle
Give 3.5 points to the team that has given up the fewest amount of rushing
touchdowns.Seattle Give 3.0 points to the team
that has recorded the most sacks.
New England Give 2.5 points to the team
with the fewer offensive pass attempts.Seattle
Give 2.0 points to the team that had the best net punts (total) on the year.New
England
Give 1.5 points to the team with the best offensive yards-per-carry average.Seattle
Give 1.0 points to the team with the better completion percentage.New
England
The totals are:
Seattle 40.5
New England 22
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Stram passed away in
2005...here is his super bowl formula for picking the winner. This one so far is 40-6-2 with a win last year after a 3 year hiatus.
Give 10 points to a team if they have won a Super Bowl in the last three
seasons.Seattle
Give 8.0 points to either team if their opponent is playing in their very first
Super Bowl in franchise history.Push
Give 8.0 points to the team that has given up the fewer amount of defensive
rushes.New England
Give 7.0 points to the team with the best straight up win/loss record including
playoffs.Push
Give 7.0 points to the team with the most offensive rushes on the season.Seattle
Give 5.0 points to the team with the better defensive yards-per-carry average.Seattle
Give 4.0 points to the team that has the best net kick-punt touchdown returns.New
England Give 4.0 points to the team who performed better against the point spread
in the regular season.Seattle
Give 4.0 points to the team that has the better net penalty yards number.New
England
Give 3.5 points to the team that has the greater yards per pass attempt.Seattle
Give 3.5 points to the team that has allowed up the fewest points on the
season.Seattle
Give 3.5 points to the team that has given up the fewest amount of rushing
touchdowns.Seattle Give 3.0 points to the team
that has recorded the most sacks.
New England Give 2.5 points to the team
with the fewer offensive pass attempts.Seattle
Give 2.0 points to the team that had the best net punts (total) on the year.New
England
Give 1.5 points to the team with the best offensive yards-per-carry average.Seattle
Give 1.0 points to the team with the better completion percentage.New
England
Wow, that's great, now I don't have to watch the game since we know Seahawks will win. But I already bet the Patriots, no pain for me if I don't watch, I will just eat and drink and watch Katy Perry at the half.
0
Wow, that's great, now I don't have to watch the game since we know Seahawks will win. But I already bet the Patriots, no pain for me if I don't watch, I will just eat and drink and watch Katy Perry at the half.
This system DID NOT have a 3 year hiatus before last years super bowl. The last time the Patriots were in the super bowl this system picked the Patriots to crush the Giants 41-18 and it also had the 49ers crushing the Ravens which brought the total losses of the system to 6. While it is still an incredible record, it should be noted 5 of the 6 losses have come in the last 15 seasons, so while still doing well it has not been as awesome as it was in the first few decades of use. Below is a link for the Pats/Giants Super Bowl in 2012 and the systems record heading into that game.
The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.
0
This system DID NOT have a 3 year hiatus before last years super bowl. The last time the Patriots were in the super bowl this system picked the Patriots to crush the Giants 41-18 and it also had the 49ers crushing the Ravens which brought the total losses of the system to 6. While it is still an incredible record, it should be noted 5 of the 6 losses have come in the last 15 seasons, so while still doing well it has not been as awesome as it was in the first few decades of use. Below is a link for the Pats/Giants Super Bowl in 2012 and the systems record heading into that game.
This system DID NOT have a 3 year hiatus before last years super bowl. The last time the Patriots were in the super bowl this system picked the Patriots to crush the Giants 41-18 and it also had the 49ers crushing the Ravens which brought the total losses of the system to 6. While it is still an incredible record, it should be noted 5 of the 6 losses have come in the last 15 seasons, so while still doing well it has not been as awesome as it was in the first few decades of use. Below is a link for the Pats/Giants Super Bowl in 2012 and the systems record heading into that game.
Actually, my original statement of this system missing 3 straight super bowls prior to last year's superbowl is correct.
You covered the misses of superbowl 46 and 47 but you failed to go back to superbowl 45 which picked Pittsburgh over Green Bay by a huge margin. Here is the link to Stram's formula prediction for superbowl 45:
This system DID NOT have a 3 year hiatus before last years super bowl. The last time the Patriots were in the super bowl this system picked the Patriots to crush the Giants 41-18 and it also had the 49ers crushing the Ravens which brought the total losses of the system to 6. While it is still an incredible record, it should be noted 5 of the 6 losses have come in the last 15 seasons, so while still doing well it has not been as awesome as it was in the first few decades of use. Below is a link for the Pats/Giants Super Bowl in 2012 and the systems record heading into that game.
Actually, my original statement of this system missing 3 straight super bowls prior to last year's superbowl is correct.
You covered the misses of superbowl 46 and 47 but you failed to go back to superbowl 45 which picked Pittsburgh over Green Bay by a huge margin. Here is the link to Stram's formula prediction for superbowl 45:
You said it was on a 3 year hiatus prior to last years super bowl, hiatus means it was on a break, a gap of time not counting. Those games were counted hence it was not on hiatus and hence the two added losses during that time in the last few seasons. I was not discounting any super bowls. If that is not what any of this meant then colour me completely confused and goodluck either way with your Stram trend, but it was not on Hiatus for 3 seasons before last years super bowl.
The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.
1
You said it was on a 3 year hiatus prior to last years super bowl, hiatus means it was on a break, a gap of time not counting. Those games were counted hence it was not on hiatus and hence the two added losses during that time in the last few seasons. I was not discounting any super bowls. If that is not what any of this meant then colour me completely confused and goodluck either way with your Stram trend, but it was not on Hiatus for 3 seasons before last years super bowl.
You said it was on a 3 year hiatus prior to last years super bowl, hiatus means it was on a break, a gap of time not counting. Those games were counted hence it was not on hiatus and hence the two added losses during that time in the last few seasons. I was not discounting any super bowls. If that is not what any of this meant then colour me completely confused and goodluck either way with your Stram trend, but it was not on Hiatus for 3 seasons before last years super bowl.
Hiatus as in break...as in break from being successful. I counted those games in the formula total hence they were counted.
Of course the alternative would have been to admit that there was an error in your correction, but your 'hubris' would not permit you to do that. Hubris, by the way, means excessive pride.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Polar_Bear:
You said it was on a 3 year hiatus prior to last years super bowl, hiatus means it was on a break, a gap of time not counting. Those games were counted hence it was not on hiatus and hence the two added losses during that time in the last few seasons. I was not discounting any super bowls. If that is not what any of this meant then colour me completely confused and goodluck either way with your Stram trend, but it was not on Hiatus for 3 seasons before last years super bowl.
Hiatus as in break...as in break from being successful. I counted those games in the formula total hence they were counted.
Of course the alternative would have been to admit that there was an error in your correction, but your 'hubris' would not permit you to do that. Hubris, by the way, means excessive pride.
My Hubris, I like it lol!! Yes I saw that the losses were included in your record, I guess I was just puzzled at your choice of words as it would have been simpler to say it had not faired as well the past handful of seasons I guess, as opposed to suggesting it had not been in use those 3 seasons and it led me to thinking that you were not necessarily counting those recent seasons and just using a record you found on the internet. My Hubris is in check I promise you. The record is obviously fantastic no matter how spun, I was simply trying to make sure anyone perusing the posting was aware that it had not at all fared as well recently as it had back before old Hank The Tank passed away. That's all brother, goodluck with everything. I honestly thought you made an honest error in the posting and was just chiming in to help clear up it's recent trend history, was not trying to attack yourself or the trend.
The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.
0
My Hubris, I like it lol!! Yes I saw that the losses were included in your record, I guess I was just puzzled at your choice of words as it would have been simpler to say it had not faired as well the past handful of seasons I guess, as opposed to suggesting it had not been in use those 3 seasons and it led me to thinking that you were not necessarily counting those recent seasons and just using a record you found on the internet. My Hubris is in check I promise you. The record is obviously fantastic no matter how spun, I was simply trying to make sure anyone perusing the posting was aware that it had not at all fared as well recently as it had back before old Hank The Tank passed away. That's all brother, goodluck with everything. I honestly thought you made an honest error in the posting and was just chiming in to help clear up it's recent trend history, was not trying to attack yourself or the trend.
P.S The most impressive trend to me heading into the super bowl is Russell Wilson being 10-0 against super bowl winning quarterbacks. hard to get around that one if you are a lover of trends.
The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.
0
P.S The most impressive trend to me heading into the super bowl is Russell Wilson being 10-0 against super bowl winning quarterbacks. hard to get around that one if you are a lover of trends.
Polar_Bear, have a feeling you don't want to to hear this, events like this are coincidental, have no bearing, it will end sometime soon, maybe in the SB, but good luck to you.
0
Polar_Bear, have a feeling you don't want to to hear this, events like this are coincidental, have no bearing, it will end sometime soon, maybe in the SB, but good luck to you.
Polar_Bear, have a feeling you don't want to to hear this, events like this are coincidental, have no bearing, it will end sometime soon, maybe in the SB, but good luck to you.
No problem hearing that and I hope you're right. I'm just on the total for the super bowl and passing on the side myself. Not a huge fan of either team but wouldn't mind seeing Brady Bunch win his 4th ring before father time takes him away. Wilson has lots of time left to win more rings and i'm sure he will.
The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.
0
Quote Originally Posted by howzuck:
Polar_Bear, have a feeling you don't want to to hear this, events like this are coincidental, have no bearing, it will end sometime soon, maybe in the SB, but good luck to you.
No problem hearing that and I hope you're right. I'm just on the total for the super bowl and passing on the side myself. Not a huge fan of either team but wouldn't mind seeing Brady Bunch win his 4th ring before father time takes him away. Wilson has lots of time left to win more rings and i'm sure he will.
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.