Precisely the same logic. There are no games on the NBA tonight that fit that description. Orlando is the closest team to bet against with this strategy, but I'd rather wait for the right numbers.
0
Precisely the same logic. There are no games on the NBA tonight that fit that description. Orlando is the closest team to bet against with this strategy, but I'd rather wait for the right numbers.
Although a more likely scenario in the NBA would probably be teams which :
score 105+
hold opp's to 88 or less
In back to back games...
It seems like games of that outcome (scoring 105+ points... holding opponents to less than 90 ppg) -- especially on a back-to-back basis, would be pretty rare.
A little tweaking maybe?
For example
Team which score OVER 100 PPG
and hold OPPONENTS to UNDER 90 PPG
in back-to-back games?
It seems like you'd have a bigger range of games to work with an in theory the principle is still the same, albeit watered down just a bit from the original 108 vs. 88 PPG.
0
Although a more likely scenario in the NBA would probably be teams which :
score 105+
hold opp's to 88 or less
In back to back games...
It seems like games of that outcome (scoring 105+ points... holding opponents to less than 90 ppg) -- especially on a back-to-back basis, would be pretty rare.
A little tweaking maybe?
For example
Team which score OVER 100 PPG
and hold OPPONENTS to UNDER 90 PPG
in back-to-back games?
It seems like you'd have a bigger range of games to work with an in theory the principle is still the same, albeit watered down just a bit from the original 108 vs. 88 PPG.
I had a simple formula for handicapping college football...
Get the average PPG each team scores...
Add the amount of POINTS the underdog is receiving.
And if the DOG wins out-right with the POINTS...
Take the dog.
It went something like 22-9 until I got too lazy to keep up with it.
So for example, in college football, tonight...
Iowa AVERAGES 29 points a game...
They're getting 3 points... so Iowa + 3 = would mean the projected score for tonight would be...
IOWA 32
MISSOURI 30 (<---- Missouri AVG 30 PPG)
So Statistically, IOWA is the play.
Of course the flaw in this system is that it doesn't take DEFENSE into account, but over-all, on the whole... it was VERY VERY accurate for 60%+ of the time.
So for NCST & WVU...
0
I had a simple formula for handicapping college football...
Get the average PPG each team scores...
Add the amount of POINTS the underdog is receiving.
And if the DOG wins out-right with the POINTS...
Take the dog.
It went something like 22-9 until I got too lazy to keep up with it.
So for example, in college football, tonight...
Iowa AVERAGES 29 points a game...
They're getting 3 points... so Iowa + 3 = would mean the projected score for tonight would be...
IOWA 32
MISSOURI 30 (<---- Missouri AVG 30 PPG)
So Statistically, IOWA is the play.
Of course the flaw in this system is that it doesn't take DEFENSE into account, but over-all, on the whole... it was VERY VERY accurate for 60%+ of the time.
I'd be willing to wager that if you bet against NBA teams which...
score 100+
hold opposition to <90
two games in a row...
The principle would still hold just about as accurate... but you'd have a much larger amount of games to choose from.
I'm sure that your "tweak" would probably do well, but not as well as a 20 point difference; or in other words, a TWO ST. DEVIATION DIFFERENCE.
The only spin I'd say would be a 20 pt differential in back to back weeks.
NOTE: NBA teams do play more games per week than the NFL; therefore, this system may not work as well to begin with. This NFL strategy is UNDEFEATED going back to the 1970s - so I'm quite certain that this statictical strategy does well enough to make lots of $.
Back test it if you want to see the evidence. I know it's there!
0
Quote Originally Posted by ozzwald:
I'd be willing to wager that if you bet against NBA teams which...
score 100+
hold opposition to <90
two games in a row...
The principle would still hold just about as accurate... but you'd have a much larger amount of games to choose from.
I'm sure that your "tweak" would probably do well, but not as well as a 20 point difference; or in other words, a TWO ST. DEVIATION DIFFERENCE.
The only spin I'd say would be a 20 pt differential in back to back weeks.
NOTE: NBA teams do play more games per week than the NFL; therefore, this system may not work as well to begin with. This NFL strategy is UNDEFEATED going back to the 1970s - so I'm quite certain that this statictical strategy does well enough to make lots of $.
Back test it if you want to see the evidence. I know it's there!
I'm sure that your "tweak" would probably do well, but not as well as a 20 point difference; or in other words, a TWO ST. DEVIATION DIFFERENCE.
The only spin I'd say would be a 20 pt differential in back to back weeks.
NOTE: NBA teams do play more games per week than the NFL; therefore, this system may not work as well to begin with. This NFL strategy is UNDEFEATED going back to the 1970s - so I'm quite certain that this statictical strategy does well enough to make lots of $.
Back test it if you want to see the evidence. I know it's there!
So would it be accurate to say that what I proposed would be a ONE Standard Deviation difference?
Thus becoming less accurate by what % I suppose.
This is fucking cool stuff man. Thanks for the heads up, we need to form a thread pointing these games out on a daily basis as well as games which CLOSELY follow this statistical trend as well (for example ORLANDO tonight).
0
Quote Originally Posted by tafter12:
I'm sure that your "tweak" would probably do well, but not as well as a 20 point difference; or in other words, a TWO ST. DEVIATION DIFFERENCE.
The only spin I'd say would be a 20 pt differential in back to back weeks.
NOTE: NBA teams do play more games per week than the NFL; therefore, this system may not work as well to begin with. This NFL strategy is UNDEFEATED going back to the 1970s - so I'm quite certain that this statictical strategy does well enough to make lots of $.
Back test it if you want to see the evidence. I know it's there!
So would it be accurate to say that what I proposed would be a ONE Standard Deviation difference?
Thus becoming less accurate by what % I suppose.
This is fucking cool stuff man. Thanks for the heads up, we need to form a thread pointing these games out on a daily basis as well as games which CLOSELY follow this statistical trend as well (for example ORLANDO tonight).
A fifteen point difference is a ST DEV and a half away - not quite Two, but close. You do have yours for 3 games which may make your pick just as good.
0
A fifteen point difference is a ST DEV and a half away - not quite Two, but close. You do have yours for 3 games which may make your pick just as good.
Great thread but the NHL is an uninspiring 1-1 this year. I was expecting a few more fames to fit the category given that we are a good way through the season.
0
Great thread but the NHL is an uninspiring 1-1 this year. I was expecting a few more fames to fit the category given that we are a good way through the season.
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.
Hot Forum Topics
