DogbiteWilliams

I'll try that again:

season > 2015 and p:PY>op:PY and p:RY<op:RY and D and on:F and p:W and week>2 and total<48

ATS:  26-53-2 (-5.0,32.9%)

The query in Post #292 looks promising because it is not just a one-season fluke:

p:PY>op:PY and p:RY

ATS:  26-53-2 (-5.0,32.9%)

Thanks for posting.

p:points < 9.5 and HF and WP > 65

SU:  74-23 (10.2,76.3%)

ATS:   57-37-3 (3.9,60.6%)  avg line -6.48

This query is unusually interesting because it's better to lay MORE points:

and line > -8.2    ATS:   40-31-3 (3.6,56.3%)

and line < -8.2    ATS:   17-6 (4.6,73.9%)    Unfortunately, this only has had two plays since the 2011 season.
 

Good to hear.

@jowchoo

Your take might well work.  60% on over 1000 plays would be quite rewarding.

From Post #229:

season=2024 and oA(margin)

While 22-5 is excellent, season 2024 can only be described as an outlier.  Seasons 2017-2023 were ALL losing seasons.

oA(margin)

ATS:  58-82-7 (-3.4,41.4%) 

I screwed up.  Reject this BS - o:INT = 0 is a CURRENT parameter.  I made a rookie mistake; shame on me.

Reject the query in Post #214 for the same reason.

More improvements generated a sample size of over 400 games - hooray!

season > 1999 and p:day=Sunday and p:HF and op:W and line < 2.7 and o:INT = 0 and week > 2.5

ATS:  276-158-10 (4.9,63.6%)

Thanks for the inspiration, hoody.

After I added the INT parameter, I should have rechecked the weeklies before posting.  This is an improvement:

season>=2018 and p:day=Monday and p:HF and op:W and line < 2.7 and o:INT < 1.5 and 3.5 < week < 13.5

ATS:  16-3 (5.3,84.2%)

One extra parameter:

season>=2018 and p:day=Monday and p:HF and op:W and line<3 and 17>week>2 and o:INT < 1.5

ATS:  18-6 (4.2,75.0%)

Conspiracy theorists have only a tenuous grasp on reality; you can't expect them to post in the correct forum.

Attention gator26 - BYU won outright and covered the spread despite any implicit claims of incompetence or fixes.

According to The Minnesota Star Tribune:

"But the prospect of Rodgers coming to Minnesota seems dead for now."

https://www.startribune.com/minnesota-vikings-aaron-rodgers-jj-mccarthy-qb-nfl-free-agency-kevin-oconnell/601239754

It looks like MIN is sold on J.J. McCarthy, and Rodgers will be stuck behind an inferior OFF line.

According to this CBS mock draft, KC is projected to pick Kenneth Grant (a DEF tackle) with the 31st pick.  Apparently some people in the KC organization don't think the OFF line is a major problem, or maybe Wilson and Renner don't know WTF they're talking about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vovDQiPSB8k

I am not a fundamental handicapper and I do not follow KC; I am just presenting this FYI.

@hoody

 No, I mostly use GTD because I am not a KS member.

That is a current parameter which is not predictive.  Look how strong it is if somehow you can predict teams that make more than one red zone conversion in the curtrent game:

RZM > 1

ATS:  3369-1977-172 (4.5,63.0%)

That is absolutely fantastic if you have a way to predict teams that will have at least two red zone conversions.

p:RZM > 1

ATS:  2516-2588-137 (-0.1,49.3%)

That is absolutely useless.

RE the Post #1 query:

season < 2024 and p:plays>op:plays and D and H and week<8

ATS:  178-172-13 (0.1,50.9%)

That is pretty close to dead even; the 2024 season was probably an outlier.

That is a current game parameter which is hard to predict.

Are you the Pinnacle sportsbook manager?

Sometimes fading those good QBs playing well is the profitable thing to do as this query attests:

p:PY > 310 and pp:PY > 310 and HF

SU:  115-50-1 (6.4,69.7%)

ATS:  70-90-6 (-0.9,43.8%)

Home favorites off two games wherein they gained over 310 passing yards cover just 43.8% of the time.  There were 3 games in the 2024 season and Burrow, Tagovailoa and Josh Allen all failed to cover.

Now I do not consider this a strong query because the average fading margin is less than one point; that is not playable in my mind.  I would just use this query to support other stronger queries and inject a note of caution when revered QBs look unstoppable.