All Forums | Systems & Strategies

A conference a day (NCAAF results using Morrison's NFL system)

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 19116
Posts: 209
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2005
Posts: 1925
Posted: #26
Looks like LaBouchere would kick ass with this!
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2009
Posts: 2067
Posted: #27
Nice work kangy. That is a lot of screen time. If they ever allow sportsbetting in delaware and you make a road trip, I'll meet u and i'm buyin' u a beer.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 3087
Posted: #28
Thanks again for all the work kangy!! 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2006
Posts: 2774
Posted: #29
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2008
Posts: 1499
Posted: #30
I just brought John Morris's system today but I want to know when he will sent email for his pick?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2006
Posts: 2894
Posted: #31
The final installment of this series features the WAC conference.  Covers data is sporadic on the teams in this conference, but a majority of the stats are complete back to 1988. 


WAC

Boise State (1-0; 0-0) - 1 (1) / 0 / 0   (incomplete data prior to 1995)
Fresno State (3-1; 2-1) - 3 (1) / 0 / 0  (incomplete data prior to 1988)
Hawaii (3-1; 2-1) - 3 (1) / 0 / 0  (1 incomplete series loss at [A]) 
Idaho (3-0; 3-0) - 0 / 2 / 1  (1 incomplete series loss at [A], incomplete data prior to 1996)
Louisiana Tech (4-0; 3-0) - 1 / 3 (1) / 0  (No lines prior to 1989)
Nevada (2-0; 1-0) - 2 (1) / 0 / 0  (No lines or incomplete data prior to 1992)
New Mexico State (6-2; 4-2) - 4 (2) / 2 / 0  (incomplete data prior to 1988)
San Jose State (8-1; 7-1) - 6 (1) / 2 / 0  (1 incomplete series loss at [B]) 
Utah State (7-2; 6-2) - 6 / 1 (1) / 0  (1 incomplete series loss at [A])

Total (37-7)
Record if not including incomplete series (22-7)
26 games won at the [A] bet (7 of these were incomplete series wins)
10 games won at the [B] bet (2 of these were incomplete series wins)
1 games won at the [C] bet
3 incomplete series [A] losses
1 incomplete series [B] loss
Ratio of incomplete series [A] losses to [A] wins:  3/7 (42%)
Ratio of incomplete series [B] losses to [B] wins:  1/2 (50%)


The only bright spots I see here are LA Tech (4-0), Idaho (3-0) and Nevada (2-0) and the [A] games on the second to last game of the season go 4-2.  Everything else is mediocre at best.  When teams are bad, they are terrible.  With the powerhouse conferences, a team can go 0-11 and still come up with series wins.   The 42% above is driven mainly by the [A] wins that have come up on that second to last game.  However, from a units standpoint, this conference is not the worst.  As I will show in the next posts. 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2006
Posts: 2894
Posted: #32
Thank you guys for your thanks and comments.  I believe LaBouchere would work here.  More stuff to come over the next few days. 

I feel like I've just graduated!! 

Venom, wrong thread to ask this question. 


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2006
Posts: 2894
Posted: #33
OK, one more correction....  Scratching incomplete series, the record is 28-7, not 22-7.  I cannot add (or type) today.  Just an anxiety rush this morning. 

Here is the corrected post.


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2006
Posts: 2894
Posted: #34
The final installment of this series features the WAC conference.  Covers data is sporadic on the teams in this conference, but a majority of the stats are complete back to 1988. 


WAC

Boise State (1-0; 0-0) - 1 (1) / 0 / 0   (incomplete data prior to 1995)
Fresno State (3-1; 2-1) - 3 (1) / 0 / 0  (incomplete data prior to 1988)
Hawaii (3-1; 2-1) - 3 (1) / 0 / 0  (1 incomplete series loss at [A]) 
Idaho (3-0; 3-0) - 0 / 2 / 1  (1 incomplete series loss at [A], incomplete data prior to 1996)
Louisiana Tech (4-0; 3-0) - 1 / 3 (1) / 0  (No lines prior to 1989)
Nevada (2-0; 1-0) - 2 (1) / 0 / 0  (No lines or incomplete data prior to 1992)
New Mexico State (6-2; 4-2) - 4 (2) / 2 / 0  (incomplete data prior to 1988)
San Jose State (8-1; 7-1) - 6 (1) / 2 / 0  (1 incomplete series loss at [B]) 
Utah State (7-2; 6-2) - 6 / 1 (1) / 0  (1 incomplete series loss at [A])

Total (37-7)
Record if not including incomplete series (28-7)
26 games won at the [A] bet (7 of these were incomplete series wins)
10 games won at the [B] bet (2 of these were incomplete series wins)
1 games won at the [C] bet
3 incomplete series [A] losses
1 incomplete series [B] loss
Ratio of incomplete series [A] losses to [A] wins:  3/7 (42%)
Ratio of incomplete series [B] losses to [B] wins:  1/2 (50%)


The only bright spots I see here are LA Tech (4-0), Idaho (3-0) and Nevada (2-0) and the [A] games on the second to last game of the season go 4-2.  Everything else is mediocre at best.  When teams are bad, they are terrible.  With the powerhouse conferences, a team can go 0-11 and still come up with series wins.   The 42% above is driven mainly by the [A] wins that have come up on that second to last game.  However, from a units standpoint, this conference is not the worst. 


Next up, a breakdown in terms of net profit by each conference. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2006
Posts: 2894
Posted: #35
This post lists all conferences in the order of profitability with the following criteria:

1)  All series (both complete and incomplete) are considered.
2)  A full series loss (a loss at the [C] bet) is counted as 1.00 loss (equivalent to approximately 7.7 units).
3)  An incomplete loss at the [A] bet is counted as 0.16 loss (equivalent to approximately 1.2 units).
4)  An incomplete loss at the [B] bet is counted as 0.47 loss (equivalent to approximately 3.5 units).
5)  We use the JM method of betting, the Martingale.  This ensures worse case scenario. 
6)  Unlike previously, losses of an incomplete series are figured into the losses and unit tally .
7)  Overall records at the time of the beginning of the chase are not used in determining if the series should be thrown out (e.g. winning percentage for a team must be 0.375).  I will run those numbers when I have the time. 


ACC - 53.0 wins, 3.6 losses  (+25.0 units)
MAC - 59.0 wins, 5.3 losses  (+18.6 units)
Sun Belt - 27.0 wins, 1.2 losses  (+18.1 units)
Independents - 19.0 wins, 0.2 losses  (+17.8 units)
PAC-10 - 60.0 wins, 6.7 losses  (+8.1 units)
Conference USA - 68.0 wins, 9.1 losses  (-1.7 units)
SEC - 49.0 wins, 6.9 losses  (-4.1 units)
Mountain West - 45.0 wins, 6.9 losses  (-8.1 units)
WAC - 37.0 wins, 6.0 losses  (-8.8 units)
Big East - 32.0 wins, 5.4 losses  (-9.3 units)
Big Ten+1 - 58.0 wins, 9.7 losses  (-16.9 units)
Big 12 - 59.0 wins, 9.9 losses  (-17.2 units)
 

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2009
Posts: 65
Posted: #36
Hey Kangy,
Thanks for all the hard work!!  Would you happen to know what last years record would have been had the top five conferences been played?  Just for last season.
Thanks
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2006
Posts: 2894
Posted: #37
Quote Originally Posted by CInderellaStory:

Hey Kangy,
Thanks for all the hard work!!  Would you happen to know what last years record would have been had the top five conferences been played?  Just for last season.
Thanks

Yes, The records for those top five conferences in all series went 9 wins, 2.2 losses (-7.9 units).   For the entire season last year, I calculated, the teams went 27 wins, 2.8 losses (+5.4 units). 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2008
Posts: 423
Posted: #38
Kangy - awesome work man! What if one were to just bet ea. of these a, b, c games straight for the same amount. Would that have better results?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2006
Posts: 2894
Posted: #39
I'm not sure about that one stickbit, as I didn't look at that from that angle.  I designated the wins and losses as one of six types - win at [A], win at [B], win at [C], loss at [A], loss at [B] or loss at [C].  It would take a little time to sort through the mess and get you a fairly accurate overall [A], [B] and [C] record.  However, I am working on a couple filters now for the data I have collected.  I will let you know what I find.  If I can turn all the conferences into a profit, I will post it here the system and the filters for the world to see - so it might be a couple days before I post again.  That is because I am diligently working to increase our wallets.
 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2008
Posts: 423
Posted: #40
you are the man! I cannot thank you enough! We all appreciate the time and efforts you are putting into this. I bet this thing will be well worth playing this season. I don't know about you guys but I am pumped about football starting!
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2009
Posts: 488
Posted: #41
usakangy,
 
Tremendous amount of time spent...thanks for sharing the information.  May you prosper always!
 
LuckyEight
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 136
Posted: #42
Ok I have this system, it plays like this. Take a team that has lost 3 straight up and ats but only when the wind was blowing more than 15 mph in an east by southeast direction in all three games. Then play them on the money line but only if they are more than oh say -300 favorites at home on a thursday. And then chase them forever until they finally cover a spread. It works 100% of them time cause eventually they will cover a spread. Its the only full proof system out there. You may have to wager like 90K to win 4k but eventually it will work. Trust me.
 
Oh yeah dont forget to throw out game in which SEC teams play on Thursdays and any game where a team has a player charged with DUI or assault within 3 years. Best of Luck.
 
God I love chase systems.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2006
Posts: 2894
Posted: #43
OK kbit, can't wait to see your plays for this system.  Please back test for five years and let us know the results... 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2009
Posts: 65
Posted: #44
Hey Kangy,

What do you think as far as MM goes?  Chase or Labourchere?  Maybe try to filter it down to a 2 game chase?
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2008
Posts: 423
Posted: #45
From looking at the research it still seems very profitable and a bit safer to only chase 'a' and 'b' games and taking a loss if b loses...thoughts?

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2006
Posts: 2894
Posted: #46
CinderellaStory, to filter it would not be to make it a two-game progression.  After all, I took this from Morrison's system.  But I think Labourchere would work a lot better than the chase.  For Labourchere to fail, would mean every series would have to go to a [C] bet.  And that does not happen.  Taking a quick glance at my previous posts, shows that in all conferences, there were more [A] bets won than [B] or [C].  So definitely playing Labourchere for all three bets is the way to go. 


Now an update to my research:

In post #35, I had found that the total record for all teams playing ALL series (complete and incomplete) was 566 wins and 70.7 losses (+21.4 units).


Applying phase one of a filter, cut out most losses, but also filtered out a lot of wins.  So far, 180 of those 566 wins were filtered out.  However, I can say that 42.1 of the 70.7 losses were filtered out as well.  Do the math at 7.7 units per loss.  I am looking at 386 wins and 28.6 losses (+166.0 units) over the past 24 years.


Now I am working an anti-filter, to bring back as many of those 180 wins as possible!!!  I am working a couple different scenarios of the anti-filter to see which one benefits us the most. 

Will keep you updated!



 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2009
Posts: 65
Posted: #47
Thanks for all of your hard work man!  I'm sure you have a lot of time wrapped up in this thing, so hopefully you'll come out way ahead by seasons end.  
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2008
Posts: 423
Posted: #48
Hey Kangy!
I hope all is well man. Just curious if you had time to run add'l filters on this system. Looking forward to seeing how this does in a few weeks. Thanks again for researching this.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2006
Posts: 2894
Posted: #49
Still working on the filters.  I have to go back through each team's stats a second time scanning for the requirements.  I will definitely have this up in time to make the first plays.  Cheers!
 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2008
Posts: 473
Posted: #50
Good one kbit........ Hahaha.....
As long as chases are backtested and are proven........
They are money over the course of a season
I always prefer filters to eliminate losses even though it takes out wins too and if the #'s add up between units won - how deep the the series go showing the strength of the sys - series losses and how many units it eats up and if each individual can stomache what they'e getting into, then lets rock
Otherwise if not........... ok
Hey usakangy.......... With all this work man kick back enjoy some bbq and ball games with the holiday......
Thanks man - good looking out
All Forums | Systems & Strategies
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

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.