So in a league with 32 teams, comprised of the best of the best player wise, we're supposed to be surprised that 29% of the games ended up 3 points or less?
What a shocker.
1
So in a league with 32 teams, comprised of the best of the best player wise, we're supposed to be surprised that 29% of the games ended up 3 points or less?
The stat doesn’t really say much. The stat should be how many games of 3 point spread finished within that spread. It really doesn’t matter if a 7 point spread finished within 3 points because most shouldn’t be playing that ML.
for all we know of that 29% only 5% we’re spreads of 3 or less and some of those were won by the dog.
my point os because a certain percentage of games finished within 3 points it doesn’t mean you should be playing MLs.
0
The stat doesn’t really say much. The stat should be how many games of 3 point spread finished within that spread. It really doesn’t matter if a 7 point spread finished within 3 points because most shouldn’t be playing that ML.
for all we know of that 29% only 5% we’re spreads of 3 or less and some of those were won by the dog.
my point os because a certain percentage of games finished within 3 points it doesn’t mean you should be playing MLs.
First... Your number is bad. 73 out of 271 games ended on 0, 1, 2, or 3 in 2022 regular season. That is 26.9%, not 29%.
But more importantly.... It isn't about frequency of margin of victory as much as it is identifying the games that are most likely to be that margin of victory.
The reason? It is baked in to the price. So if you simply took a strategy to blanket bet all games 3 and under, you would likely come close to breaking even but paying vig.
The difference between winning and losing at betting is identifying WHICH games or teams have the best chance of getting an edge.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
@AdVictoriam
First... Your number is bad. 73 out of 271 games ended on 0, 1, 2, or 3 in 2022 regular season. That is 26.9%, not 29%.
But more importantly.... It isn't about frequency of margin of victory as much as it is identifying the games that are most likely to be that margin of victory.
The reason? It is baked in to the price. So if you simply took a strategy to blanket bet all games 3 and under, you would likely come close to breaking even but paying vig.
The difference between winning and losing at betting is identifying WHICH games or teams have the best chance of getting an edge.
The stat doesn’t really say much. The stat should be how many games of 3 point spread finished within that spread. It really doesn’t matter if a 7 point spread finished within 3 points because most shouldn’t be playing that ML. for all we know of that 29% only 5% we’re spreads of 3 or less and some of those were won by the dog. my point os because a certain percentage of games finished within 3 points it doesn’t mean you should be playing MLs.
^^^
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Kadejax:
The stat doesn’t really say much. The stat should be how many games of 3 point spread finished within that spread. It really doesn’t matter if a 7 point spread finished within 3 points because most shouldn’t be playing that ML. for all we know of that 29% only 5% we’re spreads of 3 or less and some of those were won by the dog. my point os because a certain percentage of games finished within 3 points it doesn’t mean you should be playing MLs.
I think the important part is just the numerical value of what he is stating.
Basically over 1 in 4 games ends within 3 points.....(or 26.9%)
Therefore on a +3.5 line without even capping the game you already have 26.9% chance of winning the bet...without capping anything....just simply knowing the numerical values and the number you are betting into....
Van brings up a good point regarding selection. Obviously all games have a 26.9% chance of ending within 3 points, numerically speaking....but from using our knowledge of the sport we can say that certain games are more likely to fall in this range than others...let's use week 1 as an example
I think we can all agree that the tenn/no game has a higher chance of ending within 3 points than the hou/balt game. This is where "capping" comes into play. Sure the numbers state that hou/balt will end within 3 points 26.9% of the time, but based on all other factors (injuries, roster depth, coaching, etc...) will that actually occur in this single event...of course Houston is +10 here so the book is expecting them to keep it somewhere in the 10 range not the 3.5 range I'm just using it as an example
0
@Kadejax
I think the important part is just the numerical value of what he is stating.
Basically over 1 in 4 games ends within 3 points.....(or 26.9%)
Therefore on a +3.5 line without even capping the game you already have 26.9% chance of winning the bet...without capping anything....just simply knowing the numerical values and the number you are betting into....
Van brings up a good point regarding selection. Obviously all games have a 26.9% chance of ending within 3 points, numerically speaking....but from using our knowledge of the sport we can say that certain games are more likely to fall in this range than others...let's use week 1 as an example
I think we can all agree that the tenn/no game has a higher chance of ending within 3 points than the hou/balt game. This is where "capping" comes into play. Sure the numbers state that hou/balt will end within 3 points 26.9% of the time, but based on all other factors (injuries, roster depth, coaching, etc...) will that actually occur in this single event...of course Houston is +10 here so the book is expecting them to keep it somewhere in the 10 range not the 3.5 range I'm just using it as an example
Hot Forum Topics
