Interesting challenge without a doubt. That very same day I used that urge to see how something I’ve been working on for only a couple of years might stack-up. Back then it looked promising, but today I added things up to find my numbers are 6 points or closer to the actual line 73% of the time. Using numbers since week 4 , 219 total games 60 instances including the super bowl game. Unfortunately just like my-line those 60 sides are only covering 45% of the time. But if I focus only on those few times when the edge is 11 or more the cover rate is 83%, 5-1-1 it’s not many games but huge winners. In fact the only loss was week 15 HOUvs.IND where -7 was readily available and could be counted as a push.
I was a bit lax with the my-line numbers this year. Can someone check their records to see if the my-line numbers were within 6 points 80 percent of the time? And also see what the ATS record may have been with values 11 points better than the line?
Looking forward to seeing where this takes me, plan to back test previous four years.
Base on using preseason and giving 1 point to home up to week 11 than giving home 2 points. The record was 24-19 using a value of +6
me using it and picking the best one 11-9 record. Never keep track of +10 or more value...you bring in a ideal that I have not look at but will.next year I will make a point to post. 1... All line within the plus 6 and what is the % of those that are not....2.....keep track of +8 value,plus 10 value to get a ideal of where the most value is at.
Assuming RFB's record weeks 5 through 17
193 games. 25-27, that’s 141 games within the 6 point range = 73%
For what it’s worth, I’ve been tracking +6, +9, +11
This really got my attention last week with GreenBay +12 as a play. As you know statistically based systems rarely yield plays during the playoffs because all the teams are similarly good. Still have not back tested but it will come quickly once I have time to get started. Will report good or bad once back testing is complete.
193 games. 25-27, that’s 141 games within the 6 point range = 73%
For what it’s worth, I’ve been tracking +6, +9, +11
This really got my attention last week with GreenBay +12 as a play. As you know statistically based systems rarely yield plays during the playoffs because all the teams are similarly good. Still have not back tested but it will come quickly once I have time to get started. Will report good or bad once back testing is complete.
) This will defiantly be worth some off-season research.2014 5-1
2013 7-2
2012 I accidentally corrupted my data set, will need rebuild for testing.
2011 5-1
I did notice across the board these plays are overwhelmingly 95% dogs which is uncharacteristic of any statistically based system. However, this was just a tweak or variation of the system I call AFS. Without this twist the base system is 90% favorites. I’ll need to chew over that for a while.
Here is a taste of the system without the ‘my-line facsimile’ twist.
https://www.pickmonitor.com/user/teamfball2_5
The back testing results;
Using games starting week 4 , through the SB each of the last five years, 219 games per year 1095 total games, the AFSML predicted the line within six points 802 times or 73.2%. Of which 3 games were dead on the 6. 290 were over 6 at a 59% cover rate, 170-120. 104 were over 9 at a 64% cover rate, 67-37. And 44 were over 11 at a 77% cover rate, 34-10. Of those only 4 were ‘short’ favorites, 2 were pick-um so 38 plays were dogs, an exceptional result for any statistically based system. This is only 7 to 9 plays per season but these are true investment plays, to borrow a phrase from Ace.
2014 5-2
2013 6-1
2012 8-1
2011 7-3
2010 8-3
Out of respect to those looking for MyLine information I will not be posting these plays in this thread even though the concept is similar and the inspiration to develop it was found here.
…………..A link to the plays can be found here.
https://www.pickmonitor.com/user/teamfball2_5
Now for a confession.
A few years back I was rude to Ace whom I don’t know, trying to defend the Queen of Hearts, who again I just didn’t know very well. If you missed it, it’s too late all the posts have been deleted, and I’ve since been limited to some sort of probation here. None of that nonsense was my business and like most I give better advise to others than I practice myself. My apologies to ACE, Queen and the Rx.
Good luck to everyone let the games begin.
FYI, CFL games begin tonight.
Using games starting week 4 , through the SB each of the last five years, 219 games per year 1095 total games, the AFSML predicted the line within six points 802 times or 73.2%. Of which 3 games were dead on the 6. 290 were over 6 at a 59% cover rate, 170-120. 104 were over 9 at a 64% cover rate, 67-37. And 44 were over 11 at a 77% cover rate, 34-10. Of those only 4 were ‘short’ favorites, 2 were pick-um so 38 plays were dogs, an exceptional result for any statistically based system. This is only 7 to 9 plays per season but these are true investment plays, to borrow a phrase from Ace.
2014 5-2
2013 6-1
2012 8-1
2011 7-3
2010 8-3
Out of respect to those looking for MyLine information I will not be posting these plays in this thread even though the concept is similar and the inspiration to develop it was found here.
…………..A link to the plays can be found here.
https://www.pickmonitor.com/user/teamfball2_5
Now for a confession.
A few years back I was rude to Ace whom I don’t know, trying to defend the Queen of Hearts, who again I just didn’t know very well. If you missed it, it’s too late all the posts have been deleted, and I’ve since been limited to some sort of probation here. None of that nonsense was my business and like most I give better advise to others than I practice myself. My apologies to ACE, Queen and the Rx.
Good luck to everyone let the games begin.
FYI, CFL games begin tonight.
Glad you had the time to back test...you have found a gem that I did not think of....
the cofession is in the past...me it's about helping others ....QOH is in the past I have move on....you are welcome in my threads ...thanks a lot for the apologies....it tells me the kind of man you are...
I set numbers in preseason so it starts one week early than most that follow myline. It will be fun to see this year if it makes a difference in the %. Only time will tell.
make sense that any value over a prime number like 7 would be a better %. Why I pick 6 /20 years ago ...hmmm.
Have you you tested 7 or over vs 6 or over ?
Again ....you are welcome in my thread and you would be a value to all.
to a great year
Ace
So just for giggles I tested the 7 vs. the 6 and yeah the win percentage was slightly better about 1% but the total number of plays was reduced about 30%, that tells me your 6 has way more value than would 7.
I had 170-120 at the 6 = 50 covers over .500
With the 7 my numbers were, 125-86 only 39 covers over .500
I don’t plan on testing or tweaking this any further. One needs to be mindful of the difference between back testing and ‘back fitting’ the latter will get you in trouble every time. I have no clue how you came up with value at 6 twenty years ago but honestly I used 6 just as a barometer against your numbers. I went a step further measuring the value of 9 and 11 using sound logic before I ever seen the results. So 7 wasn’t tested until today and 8-10 or 12 has never been tested.
Because I do it both way on excel and paper .....on paper I do myline for over and unders....not sure I talk about that before,
each week I put the total down....than how much it was off plus or minus. Because I play unders more than overs after 4 weeks I like to see both teams in the minus.....there other factor I use to bet a under but that one of them.
after 5 years doing the LVH CONTEST this may be the 1st year I don't get in. Been in the top 5 two times....but I don't look at total that much because of the contest. Now that 1500 players will be in the contest (harder) vs 345 that I came in 3th.
more total plays this season if the value is there.
each week I put the total down....than how much it was off plus or minus. Because I play unders more than overs after 4 weeks I like to see both teams in the minus.....there other factor I use to bet a under but that one of them.
after 5 years doing the LVH CONTEST this may be the 1st year I don't get in. Been in the top 5 two times....but I don't look at total that much because of the contest. Now that 1500 players will be in the contest (harder) vs 345 that I came in 3th.
more total plays this season if the value is there.
AFS, ‘Applied Football Strategies’ does it work in the CFL..?
Will a statistically based system intended for the NFL work for the CFL..?
Last year I got bored waiting for the NFL to begin and ran the numbers for CFL beginning week 7.
And it did nicely going 6-2-1 ATS, I didn’t bet them all. Like an idiot I waited till it
was 5-0 before jumping in, after all it’s a game with different rules and divergent strategies, so yea
I lost a little seed money.
Fast forward to this year I compiled the stats and ran the system last week, week 4 for the CFL. Although there were no basic AFS plays I applied the ‘my-line facsimile’ discussed previously. There was a play and a heavy dog as well, but I didn’t play it, Winnipeg +8.5. Again, I was a bit anxious to bet a relatively new system on a game I know little about while knowing there were some recent rule changes, I knew absolutely nothing about.
As soon as the lines come out this week I’ll post the plays if there are any, I already know there will be no basic AFS plays, and the ML feature is line dependent. My projected lines, are as follows.
Calgary –3
Toronto –1
Winnipeg –3
Saskatchewan –7.5
I’m looking for a line that’s at least 6 points different, preferably 9 or 11.
Will a statistically based system intended for the NFL work for the CFL..?
Last year I got bored waiting for the NFL to begin and ran the numbers for CFL beginning week 7.
And it did nicely going 6-2-1 ATS, I didn’t bet them all. Like an idiot I waited till it
was 5-0 before jumping in, after all it’s a game with different rules and divergent strategies, so yea
I lost a little seed money.
Fast forward to this year I compiled the stats and ran the system last week, week 4 for the CFL. Although there were no basic AFS plays I applied the ‘my-line facsimile’ discussed previously. There was a play and a heavy dog as well, but I didn’t play it, Winnipeg +8.5. Again, I was a bit anxious to bet a relatively new system on a game I know little about while knowing there were some recent rule changes, I knew absolutely nothing about.
As soon as the lines come out this week I’ll post the plays if there are any, I already know there will be no basic AFS plays, and the ML feature is line dependent. My projected lines, are as follows.
Calgary –3
Toronto –1
Winnipeg –3
Saskatchewan –7.5
I’m looking for a line that’s at least 6 points different, preferably 9 or 11.
Okay, the lines are out
Calgary –5…. vs. my –3 that = no play
Toronto +3.5 ….vs. my –1 so that = slight lean Toronto 4.5 point advantage
Winnipeg +4.5…. vs. my –3 so that’s a heavier lean Winnipeg 7.5 point advantage
Saskatchewan –1 ….vs. my –7.5 so that’s a lean for Sask 6.5 point advantage
Nothing earth shattering for this week, yea we have two over the familiar 6 points, but it’s early season and I’m not confident in a new system for the CFL just yet. Had these been my regular AFS plays, yea I would get down a little action based on last years results. Believe it or not I’ll be plenty happy if Toronto, Winnipeg and Saskatchewan all cover.
YTD record
0-0, Basic AFS plays
5-3, Games under 6 point ML threshold.
0-0, 6 point plays---2 pending
0-0, 9 point plays
1-0, 11 point plays
Calgary –5…. vs. my –3 that = no play
Toronto +3.5 ….vs. my –1 so that = slight lean Toronto 4.5 point advantage
Winnipeg +4.5…. vs. my –3 so that’s a heavier lean Winnipeg 7.5 point advantage
Saskatchewan –1 ….vs. my –7.5 so that’s a lean for Sask 6.5 point advantage
Nothing earth shattering for this week, yea we have two over the familiar 6 points, but it’s early season and I’m not confident in a new system for the CFL just yet. Had these been my regular AFS plays, yea I would get down a little action based on last years results. Believe it or not I’ll be plenty happy if Toronto, Winnipeg and Saskatchewan all cover.
YTD record
0-0, Basic AFS plays
5-3, Games under 6 point ML threshold.
0-0, 6 point plays---2 pending
0-0, 9 point plays
1-0, 11 point plays
Never did cfl with my line...but...try hard for 5 years to do it will CFB ....you can't to do for all because all the teams are not even...but have done well with Mac And big 10 The only two I try myline with....it's hard because they play others outside the Mac and big 10....if they play outside like a pac team ect... Than those stats don't count . You are lucky to get 1-3 plays for all the work.
cfl could work ....base on all team are pro's. So they are on the same plane
cfl could work ....base on all team are pro's. So they are on the same plane
Agreed on CFB…. I tried my AFS system this past February limiting games and stats to BCS quality teams only, 625 games from 2014. Plays laying 2.5 or less were 12-9 but my very best category was the consensus of my AFS and AFSML at 11-7, just 18 plays from 625 games. My opinion is two fold; a wide gap in general team quality and the broad variance between run and pass teams. Ga.Tech and TCU are both quality teams but they get the job done in different ways.
Ace;
I’m not sure you understand my method to obtain AFS and AFSML plays. You have two separate systems 411 and MyLine. I only have one system AFS an acronym for Acquired Football Strategies. Here’s some food for thought, have you ever tried to convert your 411 system scoring into a game line? That’s more or less what I do with AFS. I have so much faith in the AFS scoring categories; I score it similar to your 411 finding favorites with lower lines. But when I translate those scores into a line for the game underdogs prevail. No disrespect to your 20 plus year effort with MyLine system, but what value does ‘time of possession’ have in today’s game? It’s no longer a ground and pound game.
Time tells you control the ball more. take gb vs DET in there 1st game last year. DET had the ball 20 more mins than gb. Score was DET 19 to gb 7. If the other team don't have the ball but 20 mins in a game it's harder for a tea to win. Now I know you can show me a team like Ne that only had 19 mins of play and beat NYJ 27-25. But did not cover that game was -9.5 last year.point is I value out of the 4 thing that make up my line that time is the 2nd best stat after turnovers. if you had to name two stats what would it be? .the game has change....but....those 4 stats do work and now could work better looking at more value than the 6 I been looking at....
I couldn’t disagree more regarding your top two. My top 2 are Passing and defending the pass.
In that first matchup week three you’ll find that DET had much better passing results and the early lead allowing them to mix a healthy dose of the run. And GB in that early season funk just sucked passing probably because the D-line got after Rodgers and the secondary was able to defend, though I have no recollection of the game.
TOP, it’s just a result of being good at things like running and passing. And sometimes it’s as simple as getting on the board early and that’s not always predictable either.
But turnovers are way down my list. They explain a lot, but always after the fact. They are neither repeatable nor predictable. The Bears-Def from maybe 5 years ago started the season with a bang, had maybe a +20 turnover ratio and 5 or 6 return TD’s. That was the first half of the season, guess what they accomplished the second half…..way way below league average.
So we differ on these viewpoints, probably a lot more but that’s okay. As long as we don’t start that angry stuff, I refuse to go there again.
Lol. If we all agree it would be no fun....we all can take something from everyone. I see it's about finding the right thing that work for you.
i would love to see another way to come up with a line that within 80% of the line the books make. Pass games can tell you about future games. IF one can know who going to turn over the ball in a game $$$$ the only way I can is seeing pass games. Same with 411...past will show you a good edge on future games. That's all any system can do. And right now both have done a good job.
teamball, your like me question and try to make it better. Can't wait to see what you find. Goal is alway to make profit.
i would love to see another way to come up with a line that within 80% of the line the books make. Pass games can tell you about future games. IF one can know who going to turn over the ball in a game $$$$ the only way I can is seeing pass games. Same with 411...past will show you a good edge on future games. That's all any system can do. And right now both have done a good job.
teamball, your like me question and try to make it better. Can't wait to see what you find. Goal is alway to make profit.
Hi,
FYI I do a lot of studies w ATS databases. TOP is good. Overall I find pts is the best and most simple metric. Predict which team will score the most pts. Rush yards is also very good.
Turnovers are hard to predict but are about the best measure ie Team w more takeaways covers more. Sacks I feel are better because they are more predicable
Anyway here are some of the best measures ATS
Most pts wins 82% Do the math and predict the winner but there are always hard to predict upsets
Turnover margin winner ie ( team w more takeaways from opponent) > 0 covers 76%
Sack margin winner 67% ( team w more D sacks on opponent's O)
Rush yards RY winner 68%
Time of possession winner 64%
Total yards winner 63%
There are also great measures based on simple averages. The avg pts is ~ 22. Avg RY 114
F (fav) D (dog)
D pts > 20 80%
F pts > = 25 76%
D RY > 114 70%
Basically look for dogs who can run the ball decent and put up a few pts. look for F only who can score way above avg. Note these %s increase noticeably as the pts, yds etc increase.
Hope this helps.
Jgm
FYI I do a lot of studies w ATS databases. TOP is good. Overall I find pts is the best and most simple metric. Predict which team will score the most pts. Rush yards is also very good.
Turnovers are hard to predict but are about the best measure ie Team w more takeaways covers more. Sacks I feel are better because they are more predicable
Anyway here are some of the best measures ATS
Most pts wins 82% Do the math and predict the winner but there are always hard to predict upsets
Turnover margin winner ie ( team w more takeaways from opponent) > 0 covers 76%
Sack margin winner 67% ( team w more D sacks on opponent's O)
Rush yards RY winner 68%
Time of possession winner 64%
Total yards winner 63%
There are also great measures based on simple averages. The avg pts is ~ 22. Avg RY 114
F (fav) D (dog)
D pts > 20 80%
F pts > = 25 76%
D RY > 114 70%
Basically look for dogs who can run the ball decent and put up a few pts. look for F only who can score way above avg. Note these %s increase noticeably as the pts, yds etc increase.
Hope this helps.
Jgm
