It doesn't matter who you are fading. You are betting that a coin flip is going to have a higher win percentage than 52.38%. Why do we keep having to go over this?
You are ASSUMING that this strategy is the same as a coin flip. It is not. If he picked a winner for every game in a random fashion, then you could say that he is betting on a coin flip. His picks are not random, they are based on statistics.
I could argue that RAS, horn, StevieY, and actually anybody that bets on sports are really just betting on a 'coin flip'. Sure, you can look at numbers and say a game should go over, or under, or this team should win by X number of points. But if a player is injured, the books know it and adjust. Let's say Nowitzki is out. Who can accurately cap how his sub will do the whole game? I guess you can say Mr Sub avgs. 4.2 pts in 10 minutes so he should avg 12.6 in 30 minutes as a starter, but how do you adjust the potential points for the other starters? How often does someone 'step up' and play better because another starter is out? So you would have to GUESS how many minutes Mr Sub plays, as well as make a few more guesses/assumptions. Or will players play worse if someone like Steve Nash is out, a player with a lot of assists?
The difference between a 57% and a 52% player is only 5 games per 100. So I could argue that 90% of the games played are probably just a coin flip and maybe 10% of the games the person may have found an edge and went 7-3 or 8-2.
I'm sure most will disagree, but that is my opinion.
You are ASSUMING that this strategy is the same as a coin flip. It is not. If he picked a winner for every game in a random fashion, then you could say that he is betting on a coin flip. His picks are not random, they are based on statistics.
I could argue that RAS, horn, StevieY, and actually anybody that bets on sports are really just betting on a 'coin flip'. Sure, you can look at numbers and say a game should go over, or under, or this team should win by X number of points. But if a player is injured, the books know it and adjust. Let's say Nowitzki is out. Who can accurately cap how his sub will do the whole game? I guess you can say Mr Sub avgs. 4.2 pts in 10 minutes so he should avg 12.6 in 30 minutes as a starter, but how do you adjust the potential points for the other starters? How often does someone 'step up' and play better because another starter is out? So you would have to GUESS how many minutes Mr Sub plays, as well as make a few more guesses/assumptions. Or will players play worse if someone like Steve Nash is out, a player with a lot of assists?
The difference between a 57% and a 52% player is only 5 games per 100. So I could argue that 90% of the games played are probably just a coin flip and maybe 10% of the games the person may have found an edge and went 7-3 or 8-2.
I'm sure most will disagree, but that is my opinion.
If someone has no skill, which is the point you are arguing, then over time they are flipping coins and will produce 50% win rates. It's very simple guys.
Does that fact that the percentages are based on the yahoo public, which includes a whole lot of people making picks just for office pools. What I mean is that they are not putting any money down on these games so the line is never affected. Would these picks are squarer than usual? Maybe not.
If someone has no skill, which is the point you are arguing, then over time they are flipping coins and will produce 50% win rates. It's very simple guys.
but it isn't a coin flip. if you would assign, say tails to dogs and heads to faves, this system would tell you when to bet tails. just assuming here, but the people doing these polls are choosing heads every time.
also, unless anyone has the data of the dogs ATS during this span, we cannot call it a coin flip. might be over 50%.
i would think that faves and name recognition teams get most of the action on these polls. on the team mentioned above, i have betting public numbers at Wash 17%, Utah 24% and UConn 38%.
If someone has no skill, which is the point you are arguing, then over time they are flipping coins and will produce 50% win rates. It's very simple guys.
Absolutely incorrect. If they were picking blindly you would be correct, but they aren't. They have a little knowledge of these teams, programs, etc., enough to make it not 50/50. And since they don't have enough info to make an educated decision, they are once again, not 50/50. Also, it is much more likely that they will be picking the bigger or well known program, which in the end is where this turns out winners.
Very few people can be successful handicapping a game between a major conference team vs a mid level quality team.
A perfect example of this is Georgia vs UCF. Any casual football fan is going to think Georgia by as many as they want to score, but they sharps are on UCF, the line has crossed 7, and UCF is a very good team this year with a legit Defense.
Amen my brother.....too many pessimests in the crowd here.....you have a 3 yr record to prove it works so far and yet people still bitch, whine and doubt.
that's my boy. no one ever made money in this business following the crowd. nor did they get rich from group think.
you have got to take the evidence and data presented to you and put a fresh spin or some possibly illogical reasoning on it.
it has been awhile since i told, so Beef i F-ing love you. keep doing what you are doing. the market is efficient, meaning just about everything that can be known about a match-up is known and is baked in the line. but if you take something everyone sees as one way, and look at it in a different way, you are ahead of the game. of course, some things are winners and some losers, but if you aren't out their thinking off the wall thoughts that don't match everyone else, you are in trouble. of course i've been wrong about many things, but you have got to turn over every rock in your search for value.
A perfect example of this is Georgia vs UCF. Any casual football fan is going to think Georgia by as many as they want to score, but they sharps are on UCF, the line has crossed 7, and UCF is a very good team this year with a legit Defense.
Public on Georgia 87%
I would agree if this system was looking at people picking against the poinstspread. However even the sharpest of people who are in a contest like this would still have to think about taking Georgia, since there is no incentive for taking the underdog and you'd have to think Georgia wins this one more often than they don't.
you have a 3 yr record to prove it works so far and yet people still bitch, whine and doubt.
A sample size of three years proves little. Of course people will doubt when the reasoning for making these plays isn't really based in any logic. I just don't understand how the number of people that like Boise St (a 17 point favorite) to win straight up would have any coorolation on Utah covering a 17 point spread. Of course the public is going to pick Boise in these contests, quite frankly you'd be stupid not to take them.
Tommy, based of your logic here, would you just pick the favorite in every single game if you were in one of these pools? If you think you get nothing for picking underdogs, then the obvious answer would be to just run down the sheet and check off all the favorites to win outright, correct?
I would agree if this system was looking at people picking against the poinstspread. However even the sharpest of people who are in a contest like this would still have to think about taking Georgia, since there is no incentive for taking the underdog and you'd have to think Georgia wins this one more often than they don't.
there is an incentive in picking the underdog because if they win you will be one of the only players with a correct pick making that pick much more valuable then a winner on a fave.
You've got to start somewhere....the past 3 years it has worked....if the next year or two it doesn't then you could be a "Dougy Downer" and rain on his parade. In looking at RAS SPORTS page his very first reasoning is:
" RESULTS
CBB: 57.12%, +101.9 units, last 2 seasons (940 plays)"
Sure he has played longer but why use only 2 years as a reason? Why not all the years?
Lets look at Horn.....Is he good at capping, or the years he has been capping, is he good or since 2005 not enough info?
Im not taking BoiseSt either....nor Utah...........so I guess quite frankly, I must be stupid......
Personally there is NO correct way to cap or it would be simple and us gamblers would own Vegas.....
Not sure why people "question" something that is working.....He is not telling anyone to take the games he just giving his reason why. Now had he just posted the plays and put a paragraph or two of why he likes such team, you wouldn't be (for lack of better word) "dissing" his theory.....Just how I see it here
A sample size of three years proves little. Of course people will doubt when the reasoning for making these plays isn't really based in any logic. I just don't understand how the number of people that like Boise St (a 17 point favorite) to win straight up would have any coorolation on Utah covering a 17 point spread. Of course the public is going to pick Boise in these contests, quite frankly you'd be stupid not to take them.
Tommy, based of your logic here, would you just pick the favorite in every single game if you were in one of these pools? If you think you get nothing for picking underdogs, then the obvious answer would be to just run down the sheet and check off all the favorites to win outright, correct?
Not on the entire card, but certainly on games that have a spread that's high (of course "high" is subjective). There isn't a chance in hell that I'd take UConn or Utah or any other team that's a big dog, since at the end of the day the goal is to get the most correct and there just isn't a high enough chance of those teams winning to justify taking them.
You've got to start somewhere....the past 3 years it has worked....if the next year or two it doesn't then you could be a "Dougy Downer" and rain on his parade. In looking at RAS SPORTS page his very first reasoning is:
" RESULTS
CBB: 57.12%, +101.9 units, last 2 seasons (940 plays)"
Sure he has played longer but why use only 2 years as a reason? Why not all the years?
Lets look at Horn.....Is he good at capping, or the years he has been capping, is he good or since 2005 not enough info?
Im not taking BoiseSt either....nor Utah...........so I guess quite frankly, I must be stupid......
Personally there is NO correct way to cap or it would be simple and us gamblers would own Vegas.....
Not sure why people "question" something that is working.....He is not telling anyone to take the games he just giving his reason why. Now had he just posted the plays and put a paragraph or two of why he likes such team, you wouldn't be (for lack of better word) "dissing" his theory.....Just how I see it here
This is a "Discussion Forum". The point of it is to "discuss". If you can't recognize the difference between Ed having 940 plays over the past two years and the results from a limited number of bowl games, then I don't know what to tell you. If I did some data mining, I'm sure that I could find something like "teams with a mascot that's an animal playing teams that aren't an animal are 18-12 against the spread over the last two years". Would you suddenly start playing it or think it's a viable strategy since it's hitting at 60% against the spread?
Tommy, I think you are arguing a point that no one else is on the other side of. No one is suggesting to take huge dogs on the money line, or that in a pool like this you should do it if there is no weighing of picks involved, but for some of the very same reasons that the public hammers the big named/favorite teams is the same reasons dogs seem to do very well in bowl games.
These games are like no others during the season. People don't know what to do with the information out there and it's hard to get off the favorites/big names since it's easy to talk yourself into them. They played a tougher schedule, they have better athletes, coach is more successful, "how could they possibly lose", and I could go on. So, in my opinion, there is a ton of value in a lot of these games due to the fact that the spread is put where it is knowing the public can do nothing but bet the favorites/big names during bowl season.
Now beefcake's manor of how he brings these bets to the forefront may not be to your approval, but in reality, all he is pointing out is that these big dogs might not be as bad as the public thinks they are against teams with less to play for, NFL contracts ready to sign, etc. If you were going to blindly take favs or dogs during the bowl season I think that's a pretty easy answer, and maybe that's all it comes down to.
If StevieY is around, maybe he can throw some numbers at us regarding dogs of X points or more ATS in recent bowl history. I think if you take away the occasion big name dog, you will find favorable numbers, which is probably why we are seeing a lot of reverse line movement from sharps
Tommy, you missed my point and evidently I can't explain it here without you becoming aggressive. It is a discussion forum and it seems there is not too much discussion with you. Im not trying to argue with you but your posts lean to where you are becoming offended so I am ending it here. Sorry if I offended you.....Moving on.................
Good Luck Beef! Love your thoughts.
This is a "Discussion Forum". The point of it is to "discuss". If you can't recognize the difference between Ed having 940 plays over the past two years and the results from a limited number of bowl games, then I don't know what to tell you. If I did some data mining, I'm sure that I could find something like "teams with a mascot that's an animal playing teams that aren't an animal are 18-12 against the spread over the last two years". Would you suddenly start playing it or think it's a viable strategy since it's hitting at 60% against the spread?
Tommy, you missed my point and evidently I can't explain it here without you becoming aggressive. It is a discussion forum and it seems there is not too much discussion with you. Im not trying to argue with you but your posts lean to where you are becoming offended so I am ending it here. Sorry if I offended you.....Moving on.................
Good Luck Beef! Love your thoughts.
One of the biggest selections was on Boise tonight. The Next 2 big landslides are Nebraska over Washington and Oklahoma over Uconn. Hopefully Utah can pull this one out tonight!
3-3 so far.. vs the opening number it would have been ..4-3..first big public fade moneyline winner last night with tulsa..can we turn the corner tomorrow?
Sunday FIU +1.5..29%
Mondays game is a dead heat on yahoo..does anyone know what Americas vote is on the ga tech/airforce is?
Here is the latest stats on public plays for GT/AF game
STREAK ML-GT 46% --AF 54% O/U 46% OVER 54% UNDER
Sportsbook Stats
GT SPREAD 32%
AF 68% O/U 46% UNDER 54%
VEGAS INV
GT SPRD OPENED +2 NOW+3
TOTAL OPENED 55.5 NOW 56
MONEYLINE AF 54%
One glaring stat is Sportsbook public has A.F 81.5 plays and GT has 18.5% PLAYS
Deduction if you are a contrarian fader of public the play should be GA TECH and over
Thhink this game sets up for a 2 team teaser GT and OVER
Comments
You are ASSUMING that this strategy is the same as a coin flip. It is not. If he picked a winner for every game in a random fashion, then you could say that he is betting on a coin flip. His picks are not random, they are based on statistics.
I could argue that RAS, horn, StevieY, and actually anybody that bets on sports are really just betting on a 'coin flip'. Sure, you can look at numbers and say a game should go over, or under, or this team should win by X number of points. But if a player is injured, the books know it and adjust. Let's say Nowitzki is out. Who can accurately cap how his sub will do the whole game? I guess you can say Mr Sub avgs. 4.2 pts in 10 minutes so he should avg 12.6 in 30 minutes as a starter, but how do you adjust the potential points for the other starters? How often does someone 'step up' and play better because another starter is out? So you would have to GUESS how many minutes Mr Sub plays, as well as make a few more guesses/assumptions. Or will players play worse if someone like Steve Nash is out, a player with a lot of assists?
The difference between a 57% and a 52% player is only 5 games per 100. So I could argue that 90% of the games played are probably just a coin flip and maybe 10% of the games the person may have found an edge and went 7-3 or 8-2.
I'm sure most will disagree, but that is my opinion.
If someone has no skill, which is the point you are arguing, then over time they are flipping coins and will produce 50% win rates. It's very simple guys.
but it isn't a coin flip. if you would assign, say tails to dogs and heads to faves, this system would tell you when to bet tails. just assuming here, but the people doing these polls are choosing heads every time.
also, unless anyone has the data of the dogs ATS during this span, we cannot call it a coin flip. might be over 50%.
i would think that faves and name recognition teams get most of the action on these polls. on the team mentioned above, i have betting public numbers at Wash 17%, Utah 24% and UConn 38%.
Also I'd like to thank the board for all the usefull info that is posted . GL
Absolutely incorrect. If they were picking blindly you would be correct, but they aren't. They have a little knowledge of these teams, programs, etc., enough to make it not 50/50. And since they don't have enough info to make an educated decision, they are once again, not 50/50. Also, it is much more likely that they will be picking the bigger or well known program, which in the end is where this turns out winners.
Very few people can be successful handicapping a game between a major conference team vs a mid level quality team.
A perfect example of this is Georgia vs UCF. Any casual football fan is going to think Georgia by as many as they want to score, but they sharps are on UCF, the line has crossed 7, and UCF is a very good team this year with a legit Defense.
Public on Georgia 87%
I would agree if this system was looking at people picking against the poinstspread. However even the sharpest of people who are in a contest like this would still have to think about taking Georgia, since there is no incentive for taking the underdog and you'd have to think Georgia wins this one more often than they don't.
A sample size of three years proves little. Of course people will doubt when the reasoning for making these plays isn't really based in any logic. I just don't understand how the number of people that like Boise St (a 17 point favorite) to win straight up would have any coorolation on Utah covering a 17 point spread. Of course the public is going to pick Boise in these contests, quite frankly you'd be stupid not to take them.
there is an incentive in picking the underdog because if they win you will be one of the only players with a correct pick making that pick much more valuable then a winner on a fave.
" RESULTS
CBB: 57.12%, +101.9 units, last 2 seasons (940 plays)"
Sure he has played longer but why use only 2 years as a reason? Why not all the years?
Lets look at Horn.....Is he good at capping, or the years he has been capping, is he good or since 2005 not enough info?
Im not taking BoiseSt either....nor Utah...........so I guess quite frankly, I must be stupid......
Personally there is NO correct way to cap or it would be simple and us gamblers would own Vegas.....
Not sure why people "question" something that is working.....He is not telling anyone to take the games he just giving his reason why. Now had he just posted the plays and put a paragraph or two of why he likes such team, you wouldn't be (for lack of better word) "dissing" his theory.....Just how I see it here
Not on the entire card, but certainly on games that have a spread that's high (of course "high" is subjective). There isn't a chance in hell that I'd take UConn or Utah or any other team that's a big dog, since at the end of the day the goal is to get the most correct and there just isn't a high enough chance of those teams winning to justify taking them.
This is a "Discussion Forum". The point of it is to "discuss". If you can't recognize the difference between Ed having 940 plays over the past two years and the results from a limited number of bowl games, then I don't know what to tell you. If I did some data mining, I'm sure that I could find something like "teams with a mascot that's an animal playing teams that aren't an animal are 18-12 against the spread over the last two years". Would you suddenly start playing it or think it's a viable strategy since it's hitting at 60% against the spread?
BEST
These games are like no others during the season. People don't know what to do with the information out there and it's hard to get off the favorites/big names since it's easy to talk yourself into them. They played a tougher schedule, they have better athletes, coach is more successful, "how could they possibly lose", and I could go on. So, in my opinion, there is a ton of value in a lot of these games due to the fact that the spread is put where it is knowing the public can do nothing but bet the favorites/big names during bowl season.
Now beefcake's manor of how he brings these bets to the forefront may not be to your approval, but in reality, all he is pointing out is that these big dogs might not be as bad as the public thinks they are against teams with less to play for, NFL contracts ready to sign, etc. If you were going to blindly take favs or dogs during the bowl season I think that's a pretty easy answer, and maybe that's all it comes down to.
If StevieY is around, maybe he can throw some numbers at us regarding dogs of X points or more ATS in recent bowl history. I think if you take away the occasion big name dog, you will find favorable numbers, which is probably why we are seeing a lot of reverse line movement from sharps
Good Luck Beef! Love your thoughts.
I wasn't offended at all.
I'm guessing the public likes Boise by a landslide tonight.
Sunday FIU +1.5..29%
Mondays game is a dead heat on yahoo..does anyone know what Americas vote is on the ga tech/airforce is?
STREAK ML-GT 46% --AF 54% O/U 46% OVER 54% UNDER
Sportsbook Stats
GT SPREAD 32%
AF 68% O/U 46% UNDER 54%
VEGAS INV
GT SPRD OPENED +2 NOW+3
TOTAL OPENED 55.5 NOW 56
MONEYLINE AF 54%
One glaring stat is Sportsbook public has A.F 81.5 plays and GT has 18.5% PLAYS
Deduction if you are a contrarian fader of public the play should be GA TECH and over
Thhink this game sets up for a 2 team teaser GT and OVER
gl all