All Forums | Systems & Strategies

Basketball over / under system

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 79540
Posts: 300
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2009
Posts: 35
Posted: #251
Calin,  do you mean 01.04.09 - char/bos game?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 2081
Posted: #252
Quote Originally Posted by SSP_thang:

Calin,  do you mean 01.04.09 - char/bos game?

Right, my mistake, it's today 1st of april char-bos over .

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 2081
Posted: #253
One pick a day is kind of boring so let's rush things a little:
 
char-bos over 180
mia-dal over 196.5
sac-gsw under 237.5
noh-lac under 194
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2007
Posts: 2402
Posted: #254
RAS....Right Angle Sports.com
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 2081
Posted: #255
spurs-pacers under 200
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 2081
Posted: #256
hawks-celtics over 186
magic-cavs over 187
wolves-jazz under 202.5
kings-suns under 246
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 26029
Posted: #257
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 2081
Posted: #258
clippers-nuggets under 215
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2009
Posts: 263
Posted: #259
New to the forums.  This post and others focusing on system-handicapping was what drew me in.
Calinreddog - impressed with your efforts.  I've read through all of the pages, and I'm still unsure exactly where things stand as far as your current formula.  Perhaps it hasn't been disclosed.  I kind've wondered what has caused the various changes, as every time I saw a record posted it looked fine.  Maybe you switched the formula when the record took a downturn and then you didn't post updated records.  Anyway, I noticed the record posted on Feb 8 of 63-48 (58.3%) for CBB and 19-14 for the NBA.  Not a huge sample, but it is incredibly hard to hit 58% on over 100 games of anything so I thought it merited a longer tracking.  I also noticed a post in March basically saying "I realize now that no system can consistently succeed with a fairly large amount of games being picked."  Perhaps I'm stubborn, but I still believe there can be (and probably are) high-volume systems that can hit 56%.  I think your creativity and research is good, and I would hate to see you give up hope on a good system too quickly.  Especially since even a 56% system could go through lengthy periods of little or no profit.  Keep grinding.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 2081
Posted: #260
Quote Originally Posted by Chapter13:

New to the forums.  This post and others focusing on system-handicapping was what drew me in.
Calinreddog - impressed with your efforts.  I've read through all of the pages, and I'm still unsure exactly where things stand as far as your current formula.  Perhaps it hasn't been disclosed.  I kind've wondered what has caused the various changes, as every time I saw a record posted it looked fine.  Maybe you switched the formula when the record took a downturn and then you didn't post updated records.  Anyway, I noticed the record posted on Feb 8 of 63-48 (58.3%) for CBB and 19-14 for the NBA.  Not a huge sample, but it is incredibly hard to hit 58% on over 100 games of anything so I thought it merited a longer tracking.  I also noticed a post in March basically saying "I realize now that no system can consistently succeed with a fairly large amount of games being picked."  Perhaps I'm stubborn, but I still believe there can be (and probably are) high-volume systems that can hit 56%.  I think your creativity and research is good, and I would hate to see you give up hope on a good system too quickly.  Especially since even a 56% system could go through lengthy periods of little or no profit.  Keep grinding.

 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2005
Posts: 583
Posted: #261
Quote Originally Posted by calinreddog:

calinred

 

using your system i am 8-0 so far in nba playoffs,

thanks my friend.......

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 8426
Posted: #262
Quote Originally Posted by Chapter13:

New to the forums.  This post and others focusing on system-handicapping was what drew me in.
Calinreddog - impressed with your efforts.  I've read through all of the pages, and I'm still unsure exactly where things stand as far as your current formula.  Perhaps it hasn't been disclosed.  I kind've wondered what has caused the various changes, as every time I saw a record posted it looked fine.  Maybe you switched the formula when the record took a downturn and then you didn't post updated records.  Anyway, I noticed the record posted on Feb 8 of 63-48 (58.3%) for CBB and 19-14 for the NBA.  Not a huge sample, but it is incredibly hard to hit 58% on over 100 games of anything so I thought it merited a longer tracking.  I also noticed a post in March basically saying "I realize now that no system can consistently succeed with a fairly large amount of games being picked."  Perhaps I'm stubborn, but I still believe there can be (and probably are) high-volume systems that can hit 56%.  I think your creativity and research is good, and I would hate to see you give up hope on a good system too quickly.  Especially since even a 56% system could go through lengthy periods of little or no profit.  Keep grinding.

As yourself, I also checked out this thread and found it to be impressive, based on using sabermetric stats to do basketball totals shows a very high % of success ratio. 56% is "mild" in comparision to added variables, and correct management, I would say 65% when picking your spots. i have used this form over the years, but with added variables and have gotten increased value with continued research. confining it to NBA action only. This is an excellent thread for the novice to get a foundation on basketball total play, and brings the insight forward to the capper...

   calinreddog, good job, vg contribution, fine tune it..

 

 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2005
Posts: 583
Posted: #263
CALINRED
10-0 WITH YOUR SYSTEM ( nba playoffs 2009 )
 
thanks once again.......
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 8426
Posted: #264
calinreddog, please check out the end of your other thread
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2009
Posts: 263
Posted: #265
I guess what I should've made clearer on the post above is that I'm trying to figure out what the current (or final) version of the system.  Since there were various changes, I'm not exactly sure exactly what Calindred considered the best method.  I guess we're still on Point For Home plus Point-Against Home plus PF-away plus PA-away divide it all by 2.  Then compare to the line, and decide what percentage deviation you want to us to determine it as a play.  If anyone can confirm that it would be great, along with any additional tracking information.  Sports Network, if you wanted to throw out any other variables you have determined to be helpful then I'm sure nobody on here would complain.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2009
Posts: 4
Posted: #266
please post a summary of system?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 2081
Posted: #267
Quote Originally Posted by dominican capper:

CALINRED
10-0 WITH YOUR SYSTEM ( nba playoffs 2009 )
 
thanks once again.......

You gotta be joking...

You were lucky I guess, good luck with your further plays...

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 2081
Posted: #268
Chapter13, TheSharkTank, please believe me I forgot where's the end and what seemed to be the best way to determine totals. I considered this thread dead. I am sorry but I don't have records and I used several different formulas over the time...
I am surprised about Dominican Capper's post above with 10-0 using my formula. Maybe we should ask him what formula did he use. I had days with 8-2 on NCAAB but I also had days with 2-8, so I don't know...
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 2081
Posted: #269
Quote Originally Posted by sports_Network:

As yourself, I also checked out this thread and found it to be impressive, based on using sabermetric stats to do basketball totals shows a very high % of success ratio. 56% is "mild" in comparision to added variables, and correct management, I would say 65% when picking your spots. i have used this form over the years, but with added variables and have gotten increased value with continued research. confining it to NBA action only. This is an excellent thread for the novice to get a foundation on basketball total play, and brings the insight forward to the capper...

   calinreddog, good job, vg contribution, fine tune it..

 

sports_Network you're much to kind, thank you, but I didn't get anywhere with my trials.

 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2005
Posts: 583
Posted: #270
CALINREDDOG
 
I HAVE USED YOUR FORMULA STEP BY STEP, I AM 14-4 SO FAR IN NBA PLAYOFFS. WILL TRY IT IN NHL UPCOMING GAMES..
 
GOOD LUCK MY FRIEND.....-
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 2081
Posted: #271
Quote Originally Posted by dominican capper:

CALINREDDOG
 
I HAVE USED YOUR FORMULA STEP BY STEP, I AM 14-4 SO FAR IN NBA PLAYOFFS. WILL TRY IT IN NHL UPCOMING GAMES..
 
GOOD LUCK MY FRIEND.....-

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2009
Posts: 200
Posted: #272
so who are the picks for tonight?
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2009
Posts: 263
Posted: #273
Calinreddog:  It just looked to me that every time I saw records posted they looked pretty good.  Perhaps once the win percentage took a downturn you stopped posting the records.  I still think the PF/PA basic theory you were working had good logic and passed my smell test.  Still think you might be too hard on the systems and might've tossed something with promise too quickly.  If you could remember the basics and 2, 3 or 4 different variations you were working with some of us would still be interested in continuing things a bit farther next year.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2005
Posts: 583
Posted: #274
hoop121
 
pick for today saturday may 2nd
 
bulls/celtics over 196.5
 
* following calinred formula *
 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 2081
Posted: #275
Quote Originally Posted by Chapter13:

Calinreddog:  It just looked to me that every time I saw records posted they looked pretty good.  Perhaps once the win percentage took a downturn you stopped posting the records.  I still think the PF/PA basic theory you were working had good logic and passed my smell test.  Still think you might be too hard on the systems and might've tossed something with promise too quickly.  If you could remember the basics and 2, 3 or 4 different variations you were working with some of us would still be interested in continuing things a bit farther next year.

One variation I still recall and I continue to use on soccer as well is:

Compute offensive avg = pf avg road team + pf avg home team

Compute defensive avg = pa avg road team + pa avg home team

Compare the offensive avg and the defensive avg with the total set by the bookie and take the biggest distance or difference if the odds are in your favour.

Example:

dal - den

Offensive avg = 97.4 + 109.4 = 206.8

Defensive avg = 99.7 + 99.8 = 199.5

Total set by the bookie = 206.5

Distance for offensive avg = 0.3

Distance for defensive avg = -7.0

We should pick the under.

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.