looked like some good info
copied from
THEGAME9000
I love wal-mart
posted July 15, 2004 08:16 PM
you can't overlook my #'s system for the NFL...
in case lastyears runs to finish the season were forgotten...
HOME FAVS OVERALL 59-58-2 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 6 OR LESS 35-35-1 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 7 PTS 7-1-1 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 8-11 PTS 9-9 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 12 AND OVER 8-13 ATS
ROAD FAVS OVERALL 51-52-8 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 4 OR LESS 20-14-4 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 5 PTS 9-1 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 6-8 PTS 6-17-2 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 9-18 PTS 16-20-2 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 19 AND OVER 0-2 ATS
HOME TEAM PICKS 6-4 ATS
AS FAVORITES 6-1 ATS
AS UNDERDOGS 0-3 ATS
2ND HALF RUNS
HOME FAVS OF 3-6 PTS 16-6 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 7-11 PTS 15-4-1 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 12-14 PTS 5-0 ATS
HOME FAVS TOTAL 3-14 PTS 36-10-1 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 2 PTS 2-5-2 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 4-5 PTS 14-2 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 6-9 PTS 3-16-2 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 16 OR MORE 0-7-1 ATS
GAME.
Posts: 1054 | Location: MILWAUKEE | Registered: August 12, 2002
copied from
THEGAME9000
I love wal-mart
posted July 15, 2004 08:16 PM
you can't overlook my #'s system for the NFL...
in case lastyears runs to finish the season were forgotten...
HOME FAVS OVERALL 59-58-2 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 6 OR LESS 35-35-1 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 7 PTS 7-1-1 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 8-11 PTS 9-9 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 12 AND OVER 8-13 ATS
ROAD FAVS OVERALL 51-52-8 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 4 OR LESS 20-14-4 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 5 PTS 9-1 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 6-8 PTS 6-17-2 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 9-18 PTS 16-20-2 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 19 AND OVER 0-2 ATS
HOME TEAM PICKS 6-4 ATS
AS FAVORITES 6-1 ATS
AS UNDERDOGS 0-3 ATS
2ND HALF RUNS
HOME FAVS OF 3-6 PTS 16-6 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 7-11 PTS 15-4-1 ATS
HOME FAVS OF 12-14 PTS 5-0 ATS
HOME FAVS TOTAL 3-14 PTS 36-10-1 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 2 PTS 2-5-2 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 4-5 PTS 14-2 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 6-9 PTS 3-16-2 ATS
ROAD FAVS OF 16 OR MORE 0-7-1 ATS
GAME.
Posts: 1054 | Location: MILWAUKEE | Registered: August 12, 2002
posted August 01, 2004 08:43 PM
Hello my friends..
It is never a good idea to place a wager based strictly on a system or on a trend or because of an injury or just because of a weather concern, the reason why of course is because you can bet your bottom dollar that the odds maker also knows of these factors as well and has already made the adjustments.
Why would the odds maker make adjustments you ask? Simply put my friend, the reason why is because the odds maker already knows what todays “Joe Public” bettor will do and that is to pounce on the system or trend play or in the case of bad weather jump on the “UNDER” and when hearing about an injury jump on the opposing team like there is no tomorrow.
Personally, when hearing of a team suffering an injury to virtually any player with the exception of the QB, I have found it very profitable to play the ole “wait and see” game, meaning that later in the week once Joe Public has influenced the line that value will probably be found on the side of the team with the injury!
Below you will find a couple of NFL system plays dated since 1990 that have been quite profitable because of the fact that they are very uncommon in frequency and secondly because they combine solid handicapping theory, meaning that there is rhyme and reason as to why they occur!
________________________________________________
1)Play against teams playing their 3rd consecutive road game if they lost the 1st game and won the 2nd game. 15-4-1 ATS 79%
________________________________________________
What makes this system so useful is the fact that it is based on straight up wins and losses in a teams previous two games which allows a handicapper to see a prevailing pattern, in this pattern the team in question falls into two different handicapping situations that cannot be overlooked as the team in question will not only be in “Road Weary” mode, but they will also be in a prime spot for a “Letdown”.
Keep an eye on the Titans when they play the Colts on December 5th as they are the only team to meet these requirements in the 2004 season.
________________________________________________
2)Play against a team playing their 3rd consecutive home game if they are a dog of more than 3 points and they lost their 2 previous games in straight up fashion. 10-4 ATS 72%
________________________________________________
Like the above system, is a very uncommon but very effective situation indeed when considering that six different teams played three straight home games during the 2003 season but none ended up classifying for the system.
The last time this system came into play happened at the end of the 2001 season when the Panthers of Carolina played host to the Patriots after coming off consecutive home losses to St. Louis and Arizona.
Those of us that were fortunate enough to have wagered on New England in that contest were rewarded with a 38-6 Patriot win and cover!
The 2004 regular season schedule reveals that two teams may very well fall into this system when New England plays host to the Jets on October 24th and Seattle is home on MNF against the Boyzzzzz of Dallas on December 6th.
Take care my friends and be well
Jim Campbell
Dirtydog Sports
Hello my friends..
It is never a good idea to place a wager based strictly on a system or on a trend or because of an injury or just because of a weather concern, the reason why of course is because you can bet your bottom dollar that the odds maker also knows of these factors as well and has already made the adjustments.
Why would the odds maker make adjustments you ask? Simply put my friend, the reason why is because the odds maker already knows what todays “Joe Public” bettor will do and that is to pounce on the system or trend play or in the case of bad weather jump on the “UNDER” and when hearing about an injury jump on the opposing team like there is no tomorrow.
Personally, when hearing of a team suffering an injury to virtually any player with the exception of the QB, I have found it very profitable to play the ole “wait and see” game, meaning that later in the week once Joe Public has influenced the line that value will probably be found on the side of the team with the injury!
Below you will find a couple of NFL system plays dated since 1990 that have been quite profitable because of the fact that they are very uncommon in frequency and secondly because they combine solid handicapping theory, meaning that there is rhyme and reason as to why they occur!
________________________________________________
1)Play against teams playing their 3rd consecutive road game if they lost the 1st game and won the 2nd game. 15-4-1 ATS 79%
________________________________________________
What makes this system so useful is the fact that it is based on straight up wins and losses in a teams previous two games which allows a handicapper to see a prevailing pattern, in this pattern the team in question falls into two different handicapping situations that cannot be overlooked as the team in question will not only be in “Road Weary” mode, but they will also be in a prime spot for a “Letdown”.
Keep an eye on the Titans when they play the Colts on December 5th as they are the only team to meet these requirements in the 2004 season.
________________________________________________
2)Play against a team playing their 3rd consecutive home game if they are a dog of more than 3 points and they lost their 2 previous games in straight up fashion. 10-4 ATS 72%
________________________________________________
Like the above system, is a very uncommon but very effective situation indeed when considering that six different teams played three straight home games during the 2003 season but none ended up classifying for the system.
The last time this system came into play happened at the end of the 2001 season when the Panthers of Carolina played host to the Patriots after coming off consecutive home losses to St. Louis and Arizona.
Those of us that were fortunate enough to have wagered on New England in that contest were rewarded with a 38-6 Patriot win and cover!
The 2004 regular season schedule reveals that two teams may very well fall into this system when New England plays host to the Jets on October 24th and Seattle is home on MNF against the Boyzzzzz of Dallas on December 6th.
Take care my friends and be well
Jim Campbell
Dirtydog Sports
copied from
the dawg, info
Played this last couple of years with almost 100% success. Take the home dawg when.......
The visitor is coming from different time zone
AND
The visitor plays home games on different type of turf.
Hint.. Hint... 49's to start off the year
Posts: 30 | Registered: March 29, 2003
Updated numbers:
1997: 8-12 SU & 11-9 ATS.
1998: 8-11 SU & 11-5-3 ATS.
1999: 8-5 SU & 10-3 ATS.
2000: 6-10 SU & 7-9 ATS.
2001: 9-17 SU & 16-10 ATS.
2002: 11-11 SU & 15-7 ATS.
2003: 10-5 SU & 12-2-1 ATS.
Overall past seven seasons:
60-71 SU & 82-45-4 ATS.
the dawg, info
Played this last couple of years with almost 100% success. Take the home dawg when.......
The visitor is coming from different time zone
AND
The visitor plays home games on different type of turf.
Hint.. Hint... 49's to start off the year
Posts: 30 | Registered: March 29, 2003
Updated numbers:
1997: 8-12 SU & 11-9 ATS.
1998: 8-11 SU & 11-5-3 ATS.
1999: 8-5 SU & 10-3 ATS.
2000: 6-10 SU & 7-9 ATS.
2001: 9-17 SU & 16-10 ATS.
2002: 11-11 SU & 15-7 ATS.
2003: 10-5 SU & 12-2-1 ATS.
Overall past seven seasons:
60-71 SU & 82-45-4 ATS.
posted July 17, 2003 08:15 PM
Hope this helps?
Never Too Early --
Preseason Research
Wagering on preseason games may be seen as risky by many, but what if teams with lousy previous year performance are more interested in posting some wins in pre-season than teams coming off strong seasons?
Part I -- Preseason "GAP" comparisons
It's some months until the 2003 pre-season games kick off, but it's a good time to be rolling out some research on how one might try to tackle betting on these games where, to paraphrase Charles Dickens, "There was everything at stake, there was nothing at stake."
The first thing that came to mind when we thought about this thorny issue -- since our approaches for the regular season, heavily dependent on statistical analysis, don't seem likely to do the job for the scrimmages -- is grouping team's by their prior season records. The theory here is that teams with lousy previous year performance might be more interested in posting some W's in pre-season, whereas the teams coming off strong seasons could really care less about the outcome of the exhibitions.
Pulling our quantifying motivation table structure out of the subscriber area, we elected to categorize teams as follows:
Good -- teams with a 10 or more wins in the prior regular season
Average -- teams with 7 to 9 wins
Poor -- teams with less than 7 wins
Running these guidelines through all the pre-season match-ups for the period of 1997-2002 (eg a six year span) produced the following results:
Home Team Away Team Won
(vs Spr) Lost
(vs Spr) Home
W%
Good Good 18 19 48 %
Good Average 18 17 51 %
Good Poor 18 22 45 %
Average Good 20 19 51 %
Average Average 26 17 60 %
Average Poor 8 28 22 %
Poor Good 14 15 48 %
Poor Average 19 26 42 %
Poor Poor 20 26 43 %
The pairing that jumps off the page is of course the "Average home team vs Poor away team" match-up, where remarkably the poor team has covered 78% of the time (28-8)! That's certainly an unlikely record based strictly on randomness, but how to explain such an extreme mark? The average teams may overlook a lowlier opponent, while the poor side might feel a win to be a mark of improvement to the next level in the NFL scheme...eg "if we are going to move up this season, we'll need to knock off teams like X."
Now, we noticed this trend prior to the 2002 season exhibitions (you might say this is "preseason research revisited") when it was 24-6 from 1997 to 2001, and it produced a solid 4-2 mark on "live games" last year. So, we'll keep a close eye on when this situation arises in 2003 scrimmages.
Average home teams have had the better of it against average opponents, but this pattern was 2-2 in 2002 and at 60% over 43 games doesn't give a huge measure of confidence. A case could be made that lines are under-stated in pre-season and a match-up between two average sides might be an instance where the home team does make more of an effort.
The next thing you might say is, well what about breaking it out by the specific weeks (conventionally labeled week "zero" to week four)? The drawback to this is our already small sample size gets even smaller, but we went ahead and ran it anyway and rather than give you the full tables, we'll summarize the interesting findings:
Week 1 - Poor prior season teams were 1-11 against the spread at home against poor or average away teams from '97-01 and 1-3 in 2002!
Week 2 - Poor prior season teams were an amazing 22-6 (78%) versus the line against good or average teams from '97-01 and 4-2 in 2002. Interestingly the poor sides are especially strong as road warriors, 14-1 versus good/average home teams.
Week 3 - In what some people consider the most serious week of play, poor teams have struggled at home against average/good teams, mustering a 4-14 record as the superior teams "come to play."
Week 4 - nothing stands out as too strong.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another area to explore is favorites/dogs. The following table reflects games where the home team was favored by three or more points (eg at least a field goal) --
Home Team Away Team Won
(vs Spr) Lost
(vs Spr) Home
W%
Good Good 12 16 42 %
Good Average 16 12 57 %
Good Poor 16 21 43 %
Average Good 6 8 42 %
Average Average 18 8 69 %
Average Poor 7 22 24 %
Poor Good 2 4 33 %
Poor Average 8 14 36 %
Poor Poor 11 16 40 %
We already know about the Average-Poor clashes, but of interest is that Average teams at home favored by a field goal are a more than respectable 18-8 against the line versus average away teams (including 2-0 last year). note is that Poor teams at home favored by 3+ points are a mediocre 21-34 or 38% (and 5-8 in 2002) suggesting that the public may be overplaying the "they will want the win more" sentiment. For those wondering whether "home dogs" have the same value in pre-season that they do in the regular season, the quick answer is no: home teams getting 3+ points are 17-15.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, we know that a lot of people are looking to play the over/under totals as well, so running the same "GAP" breakouts but against the total instead of the spread, we arrive at the following:
Home Team Away Team Over Under Over %
Good Good 18 19 48 %
Good Average 17 16 51 %
Good Poor 20 20 50 %
Average Good 15 22 40 %
Average Average 22 21 51 %
Average Poor 20 15 57 %
Poor Good 14 14 50 %
Poor Average 25 20 55 %
Poor Poor 24 22 52 %
No category in the above seems strong enough to really warrant further investigation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We believe some of the GAP data conclusions are worth looking for in the 2003 action --
Play POOR away teams against AVERAGE home teams
Play AGAINST Poor home teams in week one versus AVERAGE/POOR away teams
Play POOR teams in week two against GOOD/AVERAGE opponents, particularly on the road
In week three, Lean to AVERAGE/GOOD home teams on the road against prior year POOR teams
Lean to AVERAGE home teams when they are favored by 3+ points against AVERAGE away teams
Lean AGAINST Poor home teams when they are favored by 3+ points
Hope this helps?
Never Too Early --
Preseason Research
Wagering on preseason games may be seen as risky by many, but what if teams with lousy previous year performance are more interested in posting some wins in pre-season than teams coming off strong seasons?
Part I -- Preseason "GAP" comparisons
It's some months until the 2003 pre-season games kick off, but it's a good time to be rolling out some research on how one might try to tackle betting on these games where, to paraphrase Charles Dickens, "There was everything at stake, there was nothing at stake."
The first thing that came to mind when we thought about this thorny issue -- since our approaches for the regular season, heavily dependent on statistical analysis, don't seem likely to do the job for the scrimmages -- is grouping team's by their prior season records. The theory here is that teams with lousy previous year performance might be more interested in posting some W's in pre-season, whereas the teams coming off strong seasons could really care less about the outcome of the exhibitions.
Pulling our quantifying motivation table structure out of the subscriber area, we elected to categorize teams as follows:
Good -- teams with a 10 or more wins in the prior regular season
Average -- teams with 7 to 9 wins
Poor -- teams with less than 7 wins
Running these guidelines through all the pre-season match-ups for the period of 1997-2002 (eg a six year span) produced the following results:
Home Team Away Team Won
(vs Spr) Lost
(vs Spr) Home
W%
Good Good 18 19 48 %
Good Average 18 17 51 %
Good Poor 18 22 45 %
Average Good 20 19 51 %
Average Average 26 17 60 %
Average Poor 8 28 22 %
Poor Good 14 15 48 %
Poor Average 19 26 42 %
Poor Poor 20 26 43 %
The pairing that jumps off the page is of course the "Average home team vs Poor away team" match-up, where remarkably the poor team has covered 78% of the time (28-8)! That's certainly an unlikely record based strictly on randomness, but how to explain such an extreme mark? The average teams may overlook a lowlier opponent, while the poor side might feel a win to be a mark of improvement to the next level in the NFL scheme...eg "if we are going to move up this season, we'll need to knock off teams like X."
Now, we noticed this trend prior to the 2002 season exhibitions (you might say this is "preseason research revisited") when it was 24-6 from 1997 to 2001, and it produced a solid 4-2 mark on "live games" last year. So, we'll keep a close eye on when this situation arises in 2003 scrimmages.
Average home teams have had the better of it against average opponents, but this pattern was 2-2 in 2002 and at 60% over 43 games doesn't give a huge measure of confidence. A case could be made that lines are under-stated in pre-season and a match-up between two average sides might be an instance where the home team does make more of an effort.
The next thing you might say is, well what about breaking it out by the specific weeks (conventionally labeled week "zero" to week four)? The drawback to this is our already small sample size gets even smaller, but we went ahead and ran it anyway and rather than give you the full tables, we'll summarize the interesting findings:
Week 1 - Poor prior season teams were 1-11 against the spread at home against poor or average away teams from '97-01 and 1-3 in 2002!
Week 2 - Poor prior season teams were an amazing 22-6 (78%) versus the line against good or average teams from '97-01 and 4-2 in 2002. Interestingly the poor sides are especially strong as road warriors, 14-1 versus good/average home teams.
Week 3 - In what some people consider the most serious week of play, poor teams have struggled at home against average/good teams, mustering a 4-14 record as the superior teams "come to play."
Week 4 - nothing stands out as too strong.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another area to explore is favorites/dogs. The following table reflects games where the home team was favored by three or more points (eg at least a field goal) --
Home Team Away Team Won
(vs Spr) Lost
(vs Spr) Home
W%
Good Good 12 16 42 %
Good Average 16 12 57 %
Good Poor 16 21 43 %
Average Good 6 8 42 %
Average Average 18 8 69 %
Average Poor 7 22 24 %
Poor Good 2 4 33 %
Poor Average 8 14 36 %
Poor Poor 11 16 40 %
We already know about the Average-Poor clashes, but of interest is that Average teams at home favored by a field goal are a more than respectable 18-8 against the line versus average away teams (including 2-0 last year). note is that Poor teams at home favored by 3+ points are a mediocre 21-34 or 38% (and 5-8 in 2002) suggesting that the public may be overplaying the "they will want the win more" sentiment. For those wondering whether "home dogs" have the same value in pre-season that they do in the regular season, the quick answer is no: home teams getting 3+ points are 17-15.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, we know that a lot of people are looking to play the over/under totals as well, so running the same "GAP" breakouts but against the total instead of the spread, we arrive at the following:
Home Team Away Team Over Under Over %
Good Good 18 19 48 %
Good Average 17 16 51 %
Good Poor 20 20 50 %
Average Good 15 22 40 %
Average Average 22 21 51 %
Average Poor 20 15 57 %
Poor Good 14 14 50 %
Poor Average 25 20 55 %
Poor Poor 24 22 52 %
No category in the above seems strong enough to really warrant further investigation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We believe some of the GAP data conclusions are worth looking for in the 2003 action --
Play POOR away teams against AVERAGE home teams
Play AGAINST Poor home teams in week one versus AVERAGE/POOR away teams
Play POOR teams in week two against GOOD/AVERAGE opponents, particularly on the road
In week three, Lean to AVERAGE/GOOD home teams on the road against prior year POOR teams
Lean to AVERAGE home teams when they are favored by 3+ points against AVERAGE away teams
Lean AGAINST Poor home teams when they are favored by 3+ points
truelyhandicapping,
Played this last couple of years with almost 100% success. Take the home dawg when.......
The visitor is coming from different time zone
AND
The visitor plays home games on different type of turf.
Hint.. Hint... 49's to start off the year
Posts: 30 | Registered: March 29, 2003
Updated numbers:
1997: 8-12 SU & 11-9 ATS.
1998: 8-11 SU & 11-5-3 ATS.
1999: 8-5 SU & 10-3 ATS.
2000: 6-10 SU & 7-9 ATS.
2001: 9-17 SU & 16-10 ATS.
2002: 11-11 SU & 15-7 ATS.
2003: 10-5 SU & 12-2-1 ATS.
Overall past seven seasons:
60-71 SU & 82-45-4 ATS.
I ran the above numbers but they refer to the regular season, not pre-season.
Big Lou
Played this last couple of years with almost 100% success. Take the home dawg when.......
The visitor is coming from different time zone
AND
The visitor plays home games on different type of turf.
Hint.. Hint... 49's to start off the year
Posts: 30 | Registered: March 29, 2003
Updated numbers:
1997: 8-12 SU & 11-9 ATS.
1998: 8-11 SU & 11-5-3 ATS.
1999: 8-5 SU & 10-3 ATS.
2000: 6-10 SU & 7-9 ATS.
2001: 9-17 SU & 16-10 ATS.
2002: 11-11 SU & 15-7 ATS.
2003: 10-5 SU & 12-2-1 ATS.
Overall past seven seasons:
60-71 SU & 82-45-4 ATS.
I ran the above numbers but they refer to the regular season, not pre-season.
Big Lou
