Question for Dr H
homerplayer
Senior Member
Feel free to answer this with as little as revealing information as necessary, or not all. And above all do not take this personal please, just some critical thinking on my part. Zero emotion.
Do you have an idea as to why you are producing numbers in hoops Totals that are consistently better than the market, but not on the Sides?
Without revealing too much. Is it two different models? I just cannot logically process how you can be so damn accurate on Totals, knowing where a game is going to land, but had some struggles on how those points would be distributed amongst the combatants. I believe if you had positive CLV on Sides you would have continued to pursue them.
Thanks.
Do you have an idea as to why you are producing numbers in hoops Totals that are consistently better than the market, but not on the Sides?
Without revealing too much. Is it two different models? I just cannot logically process how you can be so damn accurate on Totals, knowing where a game is going to land, but had some struggles on how those points would be distributed amongst the combatants. I believe if you had positive CLV on Sides you would have continued to pursue them.
Thanks.
Comments
You're pretty good at "working" people that thrive on ego messaging. Nothing person to you Jeff, just a general assessment here. Homer, look up the Yiddish word "Schmoozer" and then do a quick glance in the mirror.
Pretty mostly this.
I have a couple of other thoughts on why, but they aren't for a public message board.
Thanks. Appreciate the response and completely understand the guarded nature concerning public forums.
D - can you, or anyone, expand on that part of it? Just having trouble wrapping my limited brain power around the idea that a model could effectively gauge the outcome, but not the winner. I assume, perhaps incorrectly, that most models are going to use pace, possessions, fg%, rebounds all the normal and WA stats to produce a number.
Am I expecting too much? Meaning I should just accept that one could produce an accurate number for points scored combined without attaining a level of confidence on the individual input side.
You can be just as accurate predicting both and still have more success on totals vs. sides if the lines are tighter on sides.
Thread hijack.....patents force you to publicize your idea. The best bet is keeping it to yourself.
What Tommy said. You can have a model that is good enough for totals but just not sharp enough to beat sides. Most of the stuff I do ends up like this.
pretty sure H posted those 62% totals winners for free. i have zero interest in building a hoops model. if anything, this line of questioning falls under intellectual curiosity.
I concede my ignorance on this matter and accept that Totals are softer than Sides based on the input above. So I guess the next question, if anyone has the time or patience, would be why?
why would the same data produce sharper lines for sides than for totals, and given that sharps and pros know this, wouldn't the eventual conclusion be the smart money migrates to the softer lines (Totals) and eventually those evolve to more precise level as well? again, admitted ignorance, CBB Sides and Totals sport similar liimits?