Posted:
#1
Hey folks. Haven't post for some time, but I recently had a thought. If you could identify a quality system or 2 (picking vs the spread at 54-55%), and identify a system that was struggling (picking sub 50% ATS) and then compared there picks, would you be able to identify the differences and then key in on those? The idea is to determine why the "good" system is tracking 6 or 7% points higher than the "bad" system.
So, if a system picks 100 teams and is right on 55, and a 2nd team is right on 48 it has to be because the good system was more correct when selecting differently on individual games than the bad system. When they pick the same, they will either be right or wrong together. When they pick differently they will start to separate and better system will emerge.
So, given that line of logic, and some simple on line tracking of various systems, here is what you come up with for this weekend. Note that I grabbed the data off a popular tracking site and focused only on the 2nd half picks %.
The top 4 systems picked this way:
3 of 4 like Cincy+4
3 of 4 like Det+10.5
3 of 4 like Denver+8.5
3 of 4 like Atl+3
The bottom 4 systems went this way:
Split on Cincy/Houston
3 of 4 like New Orleans -10.5
3 of 4 like Denver+8.5
4 of 4 like Atl+3
So what this all distills down to is this:
The good system likes Detroit+10.5, while the bad system likes New Orleans.
The good system likes Cincy+4, while the bad systems are split.
Both systems like Denver+8.5 and Atl+3
The key assumption that has to be considered here is that this is entirely based on the theory that systems who have a history of picking at a certain % will continue to do so, which means that the solid system will continue to pick at a higher % than the weak. If that is the case then the difference has to come from the games for which they pick differently. We shall see.
So, if a system picks 100 teams and is right on 55, and a 2nd team is right on 48 it has to be because the good system was more correct when selecting differently on individual games than the bad system. When they pick the same, they will either be right or wrong together. When they pick differently they will start to separate and better system will emerge.
So, given that line of logic, and some simple on line tracking of various systems, here is what you come up with for this weekend. Note that I grabbed the data off a popular tracking site and focused only on the 2nd half picks %.
The top 4 systems picked this way:
3 of 4 like Cincy+4
3 of 4 like Det+10.5
3 of 4 like Denver+8.5
3 of 4 like Atl+3
The bottom 4 systems went this way:
Split on Cincy/Houston
3 of 4 like New Orleans -10.5
3 of 4 like Denver+8.5
4 of 4 like Atl+3
So what this all distills down to is this:
The good system likes Detroit+10.5, while the bad system likes New Orleans.
The good system likes Cincy+4, while the bad systems are split.
Both systems like Denver+8.5 and Atl+3
The key assumption that has to be considered here is that this is entirely based on the theory that systems who have a history of picking at a certain % will continue to do so, which means that the solid system will continue to pick at a higher % than the weak. If that is the case then the difference has to come from the games for which they pick differently. We shall see.
0
Interesting. Thanks.
Hot Forum Topics
