I'm just curious, how are you back testing this? The rules are so vague. I'm not saying this will happen but if you bring up a loss he can easily say that it didn't fit the "other criteria that may be relevant" clause.
0
I'm just curious, how are you back testing this? The rules are so vague. I'm not saying this will happen but if you bring up a loss he can easily say that it didn't fit the "other criteria that may be relevant" clause.
I'm just curious, how are you back testing this? The rules are so vague. I'm not saying this will happen but if you bring up a loss he can easily say that it didn't fit the "other criteria that may be relevant" clause.
. your right not as easy to back test as I first thought it might be. I was using static pct lines of what the teams ended up with at the end of 2013 found that info on covers here. for last year. I didn't know until a few minutes ago looking at espn website that in mlb the pct for 2013 is tracked month to month so bos would be a different pct in april of 2013 than they are in may of that same year. maybe there wasn't 2 losses last year because I wasn't taking into account what the actual pct was at the time.
I noticed something else about this system that if the under dog wins on A bet then the home team will often win on B or C bet. this might be a good 2 game chase using aggressive labby. at 1% bankroll. but when I noticed this I was also back testing with static pct lines. backtesting with the way pct lines are set up on espn from month to month would be more accurate. more time consuming.
0
Quote Originally Posted by BCap888:
I'm just curious, how are you back testing this? The rules are so vague. I'm not saying this will happen but if you bring up a loss he can easily say that it didn't fit the "other criteria that may be relevant" clause.
. your right not as easy to back test as I first thought it might be. I was using static pct lines of what the teams ended up with at the end of 2013 found that info on covers here. for last year. I didn't know until a few minutes ago looking at espn website that in mlb the pct for 2013 is tracked month to month so bos would be a different pct in april of 2013 than they are in may of that same year. maybe there wasn't 2 losses last year because I wasn't taking into account what the actual pct was at the time.
I noticed something else about this system that if the under dog wins on A bet then the home team will often win on B or C bet. this might be a good 2 game chase using aggressive labby. at 1% bankroll. but when I noticed this I was also back testing with static pct lines. backtesting with the way pct lines are set up on espn from month to month would be more accurate. more time consuming.
3 both teams have to have pct rating above 400 pct or higher the last 3 years
4 look to see how the teams matched up against each other the last 3 years by looking at wins vs losses on road or at home. what ever stadium the games taking place.
if all the above are good then the only other thing to look for if the road team lost 3 in a row. or if home team won 3 in a row then it's not a play.
also I ran across where home team had a lower pct than road this also seems to work as long as the home team is listed as a dog in the first game.
l
0
this is how I understand the rules
1 home team pct has to be higher than road team
2 road team pct has to be lower than home team
3 both teams have to have pct rating above 400 pct or higher the last 3 years
4 look to see how the teams matched up against each other the last 3 years by looking at wins vs losses on road or at home. what ever stadium the games taking place.
if all the above are good then the only other thing to look for if the road team lost 3 in a row. or if home team won 3 in a row then it's not a play.
also I ran across where home team had a lower pct than road this also seems to work as long as the home team is listed as a dog in the first game.
5 also forgot to mention that the last ten games that both teams played have to have between 4-6 wins.
for each team so if bos played mn then bos would have to have between 4-6 wins in the last 10 games and mn would have to have a 4 to 6 wins in the last 10 games
0
Quote Originally Posted by coolspot:
5 also forgot to mention that the last ten games that both teams played have to have between 4-6 wins.
for each team so if bos played mn then bos would have to have between 4-6 wins in the last 10 games and mn would have to have a 4 to 6 wins in the last 10 games
hope this helps clear things up. this is the way I'm going to cap it tommorow using pct lines from espn because there more accurate. not saying it's perfect capping it this way either just that it will give a better idea of what the results were last year.
sombodey let me know if the rules are different than what I understand.
0
hope this helps clear things up. this is the way I'm going to cap it tommorow using pct lines from espn because there more accurate. not saying it's perfect capping it this way either just that it will give a better idea of what the results were last year.
sombodey let me know if the rules are different than what I understand.
Hey Guys… just happened to stumble on the following link while I was searching for some Dog systems… though it might interest some on this thread: https://forums.statfox.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26528
0
Hey Guys… just happened to stumble on the following link while I was searching for some Dog systems… though it might interest some on this thread: https://forums.statfox.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26528
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.
Hot Forum Topics
