The following is my daily disclaimer. Anything in bold is something I added recently.
FWIW...
For those that are unfamiliar with my picks, I play games based on the announced referee matchups for each game. I have compiled sides and totals ATS records for every NBA ref for the past 8 years and ranked them all. My rankings are weighted toward more recent seasons to take into account refs that change their style over the years. They're also weighted more heavily toward refs with more games officiated to downplay short term trends that may or may not be just coincidental (ie. I rank Marc Davis, a ref with a career 28-19 home/away record below Joe Derosa, a ref with a career 247-239 record). In January, I added each ref's fouls/game average to the rankings, with the assumption that more fouls/game equates to a better chance for the over. Indeed, I have found that there is a pretty decent correlation factor between the two.
The results are quite interesting. There are numerous refs with a definite bias in one way or other. For example, one of my favorite refs is Joey Crawford who has made money for under bettors every year AND he's presently the best ref for playing road teams to boot. Very often, when he's one of the announced refs, I'll play the home team to go under the individual team total as a way of combining both trends. Of course, this is assuming that the other 2 refs do not have tendencies in the other direction. My go / no-go decision on playing the game is based on ALL 3 REFS, in other words.
Each game has 3 refs assigned to it, so what I'll do is compare the relative rankings of all 3 refs to see if they all have the same bias in some particular direction (home, road, over, or under). When I find a combination of refs whose biases combine to exceed my predetermined "go / no-go" level, I make the game a play.
I have used this system for 3 years and have hit 55% sides and nearly 60% on the totals. It has always worked best in the 2nd half of the season. I believe that is due to some refs that change their reffing style. My guess is that they are most likely to change their style between seasons, and consequently the early season games are more of a crapshoot. This season is showing the same trend. I was 17-19 before I stopped playing the games in early Dec. Since starting up again in early Jan, and after updating my data with fouls/game stats, I've gone 40 -36.
The one downside to posting these plays, however, is that the ref matchups are very often not announced til just a couple of minutes prior to gametime. Consequently, many of you wishing to play these games will miss out if you don't catch my post right away. I am always on the lookout for sites that announce the matchups sooner, but I haven’t found any as of yet. The 2 sites that I use are http://www.sportsnetwork.com/defaul...live/scores.htm and http://www.usatoday.com/sports/scores.htm. If anyone knows of another site that posts them earlier, please let me know. One important thing to note, though, is that many of these games don’t tip off at the official start time. Many books offer the game right up until tipoff, so even though it looks like my post comes too late, there often is several minutes left to get a wager in. I have found that the average game tips 5 minutes after official game time. *** (SEE IMPORTANT NOTE BELOW).
In each of my posts, I first display my rating for each game that I'm playing, then I post the team that applies to the rating. If I have time, I try to post my ratings for all games, then boldface the games that are plays. This is extremely time consuming, though, so I won’t be able to make a regular practice of this. Anyway, my rating is a numerical value of how strong the play is. The number is basically the ADJUSTED sums of the ATS career records of the 3 assigned refs for each game. As an example, let’s say that the three refs for a game are Bennie Adams, Blane Reichelt, and Greg Willard. The career (adjusted) ATS average winning pct for Home teams when one of these refs were officiating is 51.3%, 47.1%, and 52.6% respectively. I’ll calculate my rating for this game by summing the averages and subtracting the result from 150% (3 times a perfectly "average" ref). Therefore in this case we had 51.3 +47.1 + 52.6 = 151.0. 151.0 -150 = +1.0. This indicates there is a slight bias toward the home team by this trio of refs, but not enough to make the game a play. I’ll make a game a play if the number is higher than 7.2 (I make 7.2 the magic cutoff because 52.4% is the minimum winning pct needed to make money at 10% juice. 2.4 X 3 refs = 7.2), so this game was far below the level I judge to be a play. After completing the analysis for Home/Away, I do the same analysis for the over/under. Note: I still make all plays for
1 unit regardless of the strength of the play.
Here's my UPDATED (2/12/05) list of top 5's. Newcomers to the list are indicated in Bold:
Top 5 Refs for playing home teams
Sean Corbin 55.6% ATS
Tom Washington 54.2% ATS
Gary Zielinski 54.0% ATS
Ron Olesiak 53.4% ATS
Ed Rush 53.2%
Top 5 Refs for playing Road teams:
Joe Crawford 45.4% ATS
Jim Clark 45.9% ATS
Monty McCutchen 46.3% ATS
Blane Reichelt 47.1% ATS
Bob Delaney 47.1% ATS
Top 5 Refs for playing overs:
Joe Forte 56.5% ATS
Jim Clark 55.9% ATS
Phil Robinson 54.5% ATS
Ed Rush 54.5% ATS
Monty McCutchen 54.4% ATS
Top 5 Refs for playing unders:
Kevin Fehr 41.7% ATS
Joe Crawford 42.4% ATS
Mark Wunderlich 44.5% ATS
Scott Foster 44.6% ATS
Bob Delaney 45.0% ATS
A couple of things to note from these rankings. First, notice that the ATS percentages are more extreme for the over/unders than the home/aways. This goes a long way toward explaining why I have been more successful playing totals than sides.
Second, notice that there are 5 refs that appear in the top 5 in two different categories. When one of these refs is officiating, I often use this info to combine his tendencies into a single play on an individual team total. For example, in these five cases I may play it in the following manner (note: these strategies, of course, assume that the other 2 refs are not biased significantly in the other direction):
With Joe Crawford (42.3% overs, 45.3% home), I'll play the home team to go under.
With Bob Delaney (45.0% overs, 47.1% home), I'll also play the home team to go under.
With Ed Rush (54.7% overs, 52.8% home), I'll play the home team to go over.
With Jim Clark (56.0% overs, 45.4% home), I'll play the road team to go over.
With Monty McCutchen (54.4% overs, 46.3% home), I’ll also play the road team to go over.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
fficeffice" /><o
></o>
*** VERY IMPORTANT: ALTHOUGH I ORIGINALLY RECOMMENDED PLAYING THE 2ND HALVES OF GAMES, I AM NOW RECOMMENDING PLAYING FIRST HALVES ONLY.
I am still learning how to use all this data in the most advantageous way. One thing I've recently discovered is that playing the first half for these games seems to be a much more reliable method. I believe that this is because the total and side winners of so many games are decided in the last 2 minutes, very often with what I refer to as the "quick shot, foul, foul shot, time out, repeat" strategy that poisons so many games. The exact strategy employed in these final 2 minutes, however, depends almost entirely on the relative score at the time. If a team is leading by 3 or less, hardly any fouling will occur. However, if the lead increases to 4 to 7, the fouling often becomes non-stop. A third strategy emerges when the lead is 10 or more, in which case there is some fouling, but to a much lesser extent. The important thing to note here, though, is that this strategy is TOTALLY independent of WHO is refereeing. INTENTIONAL FOULS ARE CALLED BY ALL REFS. Intentional fouling is virtually non-existent in the first half, so consequently the game refs have a much greater influence in the 1st half outcome.
<o></o>
My unimpressive record (just a hair above 50%) has been a source of great frustration for me this year. I have become convinced, though, that this low success rate has much to do with playing full games instead of 1st halves. I am in the process of researching this as we speak to verify my hypothesis, but I am almost certain that it is true. So many of my picks this year were looking good at half time and even through 3 1/2 quarters, only to fall victim to the late game random madness that occurs in nearly every NBA game. One painful game in particular comes to mind from a couple of weeks ago. I had the under, and the game was looking like a sure winner, then an incredible 14 points were scored in the final 13 seconds to take the game over by 1 point. Another problem is overtime. I can think of at least 7 or 8 games that went OT when I was on the dog or had the under, yet only 1 time can I recall OT working in my favor. I've yet to see a 1st half go OT.
I realize that randomness works both ways eventually - that my luck will change and I'll start winning games that maybe I shouldn't. But the way I look at it is this - I would rather take as much of the randomness OUT of the equation as I can. The more random something becomes, the closer the occurrence tends toward 50%. Unfortunately, in this business 50% gets you to the poorhouse.
Therefore, from this point henceforth, I will make all my plays as first half plays only. Good luck (and less randomness) to all those using my information. Today's plays coming up soon.
FWIW...
For those that are unfamiliar with my picks, I play games based on the announced referee matchups for each game. I have compiled sides and totals ATS records for every NBA ref for the past 8 years and ranked them all. My rankings are weighted toward more recent seasons to take into account refs that change their style over the years. They're also weighted more heavily toward refs with more games officiated to downplay short term trends that may or may not be just coincidental (ie. I rank Marc Davis, a ref with a career 28-19 home/away record below Joe Derosa, a ref with a career 247-239 record). In January, I added each ref's fouls/game average to the rankings, with the assumption that more fouls/game equates to a better chance for the over. Indeed, I have found that there is a pretty decent correlation factor between the two.
The results are quite interesting. There are numerous refs with a definite bias in one way or other. For example, one of my favorite refs is Joey Crawford who has made money for under bettors every year AND he's presently the best ref for playing road teams to boot. Very often, when he's one of the announced refs, I'll play the home team to go under the individual team total as a way of combining both trends. Of course, this is assuming that the other 2 refs do not have tendencies in the other direction. My go / no-go decision on playing the game is based on ALL 3 REFS, in other words.
Each game has 3 refs assigned to it, so what I'll do is compare the relative rankings of all 3 refs to see if they all have the same bias in some particular direction (home, road, over, or under). When I find a combination of refs whose biases combine to exceed my predetermined "go / no-go" level, I make the game a play.
I have used this system for 3 years and have hit 55% sides and nearly 60% on the totals. It has always worked best in the 2nd half of the season. I believe that is due to some refs that change their reffing style. My guess is that they are most likely to change their style between seasons, and consequently the early season games are more of a crapshoot. This season is showing the same trend. I was 17-19 before I stopped playing the games in early Dec. Since starting up again in early Jan, and after updating my data with fouls/game stats, I've gone 40 -36.
The one downside to posting these plays, however, is that the ref matchups are very often not announced til just a couple of minutes prior to gametime. Consequently, many of you wishing to play these games will miss out if you don't catch my post right away. I am always on the lookout for sites that announce the matchups sooner, but I haven’t found any as of yet. The 2 sites that I use are http://www.sportsnetwork.com/defaul...live/scores.htm and http://www.usatoday.com/sports/scores.htm. If anyone knows of another site that posts them earlier, please let me know. One important thing to note, though, is that many of these games don’t tip off at the official start time. Many books offer the game right up until tipoff, so even though it looks like my post comes too late, there often is several minutes left to get a wager in. I have found that the average game tips 5 minutes after official game time. *** (SEE IMPORTANT NOTE BELOW).
In each of my posts, I first display my rating for each game that I'm playing, then I post the team that applies to the rating. If I have time, I try to post my ratings for all games, then boldface the games that are plays. This is extremely time consuming, though, so I won’t be able to make a regular practice of this. Anyway, my rating is a numerical value of how strong the play is. The number is basically the ADJUSTED sums of the ATS career records of the 3 assigned refs for each game. As an example, let’s say that the three refs for a game are Bennie Adams, Blane Reichelt, and Greg Willard. The career (adjusted) ATS average winning pct for Home teams when one of these refs were officiating is 51.3%, 47.1%, and 52.6% respectively. I’ll calculate my rating for this game by summing the averages and subtracting the result from 150% (3 times a perfectly "average" ref). Therefore in this case we had 51.3 +47.1 + 52.6 = 151.0. 151.0 -150 = +1.0. This indicates there is a slight bias toward the home team by this trio of refs, but not enough to make the game a play. I’ll make a game a play if the number is higher than 7.2 (I make 7.2 the magic cutoff because 52.4% is the minimum winning pct needed to make money at 10% juice. 2.4 X 3 refs = 7.2), so this game was far below the level I judge to be a play. After completing the analysis for Home/Away, I do the same analysis for the over/under. Note: I still make all plays for
1 unit regardless of the strength of the play.
Here's my UPDATED (2/12/05) list of top 5's. Newcomers to the list are indicated in Bold:
Top 5 Refs for playing home teams
Sean Corbin 55.6% ATS
Tom Washington 54.2% ATS
Gary Zielinski 54.0% ATS
Ron Olesiak 53.4% ATS
Ed Rush 53.2%
Top 5 Refs for playing Road teams:
Joe Crawford 45.4% ATS
Jim Clark 45.9% ATS
Monty McCutchen 46.3% ATS
Blane Reichelt 47.1% ATS
Bob Delaney 47.1% ATS
Top 5 Refs for playing overs:
Joe Forte 56.5% ATS
Jim Clark 55.9% ATS
Phil Robinson 54.5% ATS
Ed Rush 54.5% ATS
Monty McCutchen 54.4% ATS
Top 5 Refs for playing unders:
Kevin Fehr 41.7% ATS
Joe Crawford 42.4% ATS
Mark Wunderlich 44.5% ATS
Scott Foster 44.6% ATS
Bob Delaney 45.0% ATS
A couple of things to note from these rankings. First, notice that the ATS percentages are more extreme for the over/unders than the home/aways. This goes a long way toward explaining why I have been more successful playing totals than sides.
Second, notice that there are 5 refs that appear in the top 5 in two different categories. When one of these refs is officiating, I often use this info to combine his tendencies into a single play on an individual team total. For example, in these five cases I may play it in the following manner (note: these strategies, of course, assume that the other 2 refs are not biased significantly in the other direction):
With Joe Crawford (42.3% overs, 45.3% home), I'll play the home team to go under.
With Bob Delaney (45.0% overs, 47.1% home), I'll also play the home team to go under.
With Ed Rush (54.7% overs, 52.8% home), I'll play the home team to go over.
With Jim Clark (56.0% overs, 45.4% home), I'll play the road team to go over.
With Monty McCutchen (54.4% overs, 46.3% home), I’ll also play the road team to go over.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
fficeffice" /><o></o>*** VERY IMPORTANT: ALTHOUGH I ORIGINALLY RECOMMENDED PLAYING THE 2ND HALVES OF GAMES, I AM NOW RECOMMENDING PLAYING FIRST HALVES ONLY.
I am still learning how to use all this data in the most advantageous way. One thing I've recently discovered is that playing the first half for these games seems to be a much more reliable method. I believe that this is because the total and side winners of so many games are decided in the last 2 minutes, very often with what I refer to as the "quick shot, foul, foul shot, time out, repeat" strategy that poisons so many games. The exact strategy employed in these final 2 minutes, however, depends almost entirely on the relative score at the time. If a team is leading by 3 or less, hardly any fouling will occur. However, if the lead increases to 4 to 7, the fouling often becomes non-stop. A third strategy emerges when the lead is 10 or more, in which case there is some fouling, but to a much lesser extent. The important thing to note here, though, is that this strategy is TOTALLY independent of WHO is refereeing. INTENTIONAL FOULS ARE CALLED BY ALL REFS. Intentional fouling is virtually non-existent in the first half, so consequently the game refs have a much greater influence in the 1st half outcome.
<o
></o>My unimpressive record (just a hair above 50%) has been a source of great frustration for me this year. I have become convinced, though, that this low success rate has much to do with playing full games instead of 1st halves. I am in the process of researching this as we speak to verify my hypothesis, but I am almost certain that it is true. So many of my picks this year were looking good at half time and even through 3 1/2 quarters, only to fall victim to the late game random madness that occurs in nearly every NBA game. One painful game in particular comes to mind from a couple of weeks ago. I had the under, and the game was looking like a sure winner, then an incredible 14 points were scored in the final 13 seconds to take the game over by 1 point. Another problem is overtime. I can think of at least 7 or 8 games that went OT when I was on the dog or had the under, yet only 1 time can I recall OT working in my favor. I've yet to see a 1st half go OT.
I realize that randomness works both ways eventually - that my luck will change and I'll start winning games that maybe I shouldn't. But the way I look at it is this - I would rather take as much of the randomness OUT of the equation as I can. The more random something becomes, the closer the occurrence tends toward 50%. Unfortunately, in this business 50% gets you to the poorhouse.
Therefore, from this point henceforth, I will make all my plays as first half plays only. Good luck (and less randomness) to all those using my information. Today's plays coming up soon.
