Solid week. Congratulations.
Week --- 2-0, won 2 units
other system --- 0-1 .................14-11
I don't see any BF plays next week. There is another regression method I got from online has a play I may consider taking.
My other system has 3 or 4 plays as of now, I haven't done all teams yet.
According to PR II Colts even despite 5 TO's outplayed Broncos so throughly they should of won SU by 6 pts.
Of course Broncos had 3 TO's so Colts lost TO battle by 2.
Broncos winning by the margin they did is the 2cd largest false final score of the season according to PR II.
Teams that have produced a false final score by more then 1 score are 13-19-1 ATS the following week thus far this season.
Week --- 2-0, won 2 units
other system --- 0-1 .................14-11
I don't see any BF plays next week. There is another regression method I got from online has a play I may consider taking.
My other system has 3 or 4 plays as of now, I haven't done all teams yet.
According to PR II Colts even despite 5 TO's outplayed Broncos so throughly they should of won SU by 6 pts.
Of course Broncos had 3 TO's so Colts lost TO battle by 2.
Broncos winning by the margin they did is the 2cd largest false final score of the season according to PR II.
Teams that have produced a false final score by more then 1 score are 13-19-1 ATS the following week thus far this season.
I had to go back into my laptop's really old folders to find an Excel doc I'd made in 2005 about the previous five seasons of NFL data. Can't remember the name of the website that at that time produced weekly roundups in which they called out "false final score" games. They never followed up to see how these teams fared the following week, but I did, SU and ATS.
The big surprise was that it barely mattered whether a team had won or lost a FFS game (I think it's hilarious to use this shorthand, for f's sake). Here's how it broke down:
Winners SU 59% in their next game, 49% ATS
Losers SU 62% in their next game, 52% ATS
Teams that lost did better in their next game than teams that had won, which makes sense to me.
What jumped out was whether they were favored or not in their followup:
Either team favored in their next game, 43% ATS
Either team an underdog in their next game, 55% ATS (home dogs 59%)
My recollection is that teams that lost a false final score game (so, in other words, they lost a game where the stats say they should have won) tended to cover large spreads the following week. The market thought they'd bounce back, and they did.
I had to go back into my laptop's really old folders to find an Excel doc I'd made in 2005 about the previous five seasons of NFL data. Can't remember the name of the website that at that time produced weekly roundups in which they called out "false final score" games. They never followed up to see how these teams fared the following week, but I did, SU and ATS.
The big surprise was that it barely mattered whether a team had won or lost a FFS game (I think it's hilarious to use this shorthand, for f's sake). Here's how it broke down:
Winners SU 59% in their next game, 49% ATS
Losers SU 62% in their next game, 52% ATS
Teams that lost did better in their next game than teams that had won, which makes sense to me.
What jumped out was whether they were favored or not in their followup:
Either team favored in their next game, 43% ATS
Either team an underdog in their next game, 55% ATS (home dogs 59%)
My recollection is that teams that lost a false final score game (so, in other words, they lost a game where the stats say they should have won) tended to cover large spreads the following week. The market thought they'd bounce back, and they did.
Interesting, thanks for posting that...................
My method works the opposite. Teams that lost don't do well the next week .Seems to only affect winning teams.
I'm quite sure they measure a FFS different then I do.
Teams that lost SU but should have won SU I never looked into this but I will now.
Also teams that should of lost SU but won SU.
I only use teams final score more then 1 score off my PR II final margin in the game. I determined this by breaking down years of the data.
that was the one area did well. But only teams off wins. Teams off losses didn't do well the next week.
I never looked at whether the team is a dog or favorite.
Interesting, thanks for posting that...................
My method works the opposite. Teams that lost don't do well the next week .Seems to only affect winning teams.
I'm quite sure they measure a FFS different then I do.
Teams that lost SU but should have won SU I never looked into this but I will now.
Also teams that should of lost SU but won SU.
I only use teams final score more then 1 score off my PR II final margin in the game. I determined this by breaking down years of the data.
that was the one area did well. But only teams off wins. Teams off losses didn't do well the next week.
I never looked at whether the team is a dog or favorite.
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.