Steeltown Dre Posted September 7, 2007 Author Share Posted September 7, 2007 That came close at the end, thanks to a couple defensive TDs in the game, but the Unders prevailed. I hit the Under and a Colts/Under parlay. Again, being cautious w/ my levels as this is just week 1, we have a full season and postseason ahead of us. My advice to you would be the same. Walking away each day, each week, and each season w/ more money than you started the day/week/season with is always the goal. It's the first game of the year, so win or lose last night, everyone is still in for a profitable season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gdawg Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 Dre, great reads as always. I took the under according to your info and loved it. The Colts were money too. Brandon Lang is a bum, I don't follow that schmuck at all. I too am curious about road favorites. Philly is very appealing. Those GB corners could cause trouble though. And I just started using BookMaker.com for my sportsbook. Early lines and all, solid! Lang is a bum. Faded him quite a bit the last month when betting baseball. I've been using Sportsbook.com since last January and I agree, very solid book Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steeltown Dre Posted September 7, 2007 Author Share Posted September 7, 2007 I ran some data on your request for underdogs in week 1. Home underdogs between +3 and +6.5 in week 1 since 1995 went 24-16-1 (60%) If you throw into the parameters that the team was <.500 win % the prior year (which means public has negative thoughts of this team going in), you get a record of 20-9 (69%). Only 2 teams fall into that this year, the Bills and the Browns. I looked at adding in there a stipulation that the opponent (the road fav) had to have a record of .500 or more the prior year. That didn’t seem to matter much – the record was 14-6 (70%), but now only the Bills would be a play. If you ignore the home dog’s record the prior season, and just look at the road fav’s prior record: If the road fav had a winning record the prior season, the home dog went 17-11-1 (61%), and the teams that would fall here would be the Bills, Jets and Packers. The bottom line: This is not a strong week #1 trend. The trends I used to come up w/ my Under last night went 80%, 75%, and combining the parameters, went 8-1 (89%). Those are strong trends. One interesting trend I did spot as I was running searches: The O/U when the total is 40 or more for home dogs in the same situation as described above (week 1, between +3 and +6.5, since 95) went 11 Unders and 0 Overs. That plays that fall under that 11-0 trend would be the under in Pats/Jets (41) and under in Eagles/Packers (43.5). I have not looked at these games to determine whether I would lean one way or another to the O/U. Just sharing the info. I don’t really like to play games just based on one trend or another – as you know, you can sometimes get numbers to say anything you want them to say. And I’m not interested in finding some random “undefeated” historical trend, I’m looking to find winning plays for this year. At the same time, I have looked at this trend and what happens AFTER week 1. After week 1, the same trend has gone 70-70-2 in weeks 2-17. There are some things about week 1 where avg bettors are still stuck on perceptions from last season. But in this case, you have to ask yourself: why would a team that is a home dog between a FG and a TD have a huge shot at an under in a game against a team that is a road fav and won 60% of its games last year? There is nothing in my mind that would say this trend makes great logical sense. You could come up w/ some arguments, but I don't think any are that strong. It could be more a coincidence than sharp gambling, and you have to take a step back and think about these things before you impusively make a play. I see many touts state similar trends (although I have not heard this one before - just stumbled upon it while crunching numbers this morning). Its the same to me as the football announcers who compare 2 RBs and say: Player X had 3 100 yard games last year but Player Y had 8 100 yard games. And then they move on, as if to show that Player Y is twice the back as Player X. They don't bother to tell the unintelligent fan that Player Y was given 24 rushes per game and played in the weakest run division in the NFL, whereas Player X was out for a couple games and then had many fewer carries since his team is worse and was losing most of the game, and he plays in the toughest run division in the NFL. I question anything I hear when it comes to stats, and I hope you do too. Because lines are set based on public perception, and when ESPN goes on and on about something, you can bet the public is going to listen. And these flashy stats they pull out are not always realistic or show the whole picture, and that's why I am an advocate of "digging deeper" and finding the truth behind the numbers. Enough of sharing my strategies (I'm always willing to hear yours or your comments on mine - we're here to help one another). I’ll share some more of my ideas on this weekend closer to Sunday. In the meantime, I'm looking forward to seeing where you guys are headed w/ your logic and your plays. Good luck this weekend! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gdawg Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 That came close at the end, thanks to a couple defensive TDs in the game, but the Unders prevailed. I hit the Under and a Colts/Under parlay. Again, being cautious w/ my levels as this is just week 1, we have a full season and postseason ahead of us. My advice to you would be the same. Walking away each day, each week, and each season w/ more money than you started the day/week/season with is always the goal. It's the first game of the year, so win or lose last night, everyone is still in for a profitable season. Well said Dre! I think we all need to reminded of this from time to time, especially when a new season kicks off. It's a marathon, not a sprint Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 $25 parlay on the Saints and the over last night...... Moral of the story, don't listen to me, and I need help. This thread is awesome !!! Great work guys. One thing that would be helpful is to hear what some of you experienced gamblers actually decide to go with prior to the games starting. I'm not saying I would simply copy, but, it would give us beginners a chance to see where your head ends up after all of the number crunching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 25.00 tease with the over (47) and the Saints (+12)....I should have gone more, but I didn't like it too much.... plus I also took the saints (+15) in a sweetheart teaser and lost that one.... hopefully my parlays aren't so bad....I've already placed 4 bets and it isn't even Sunday....but I'm making sure to go light so I don't screw the pooch early and everything being up in the air on week 1... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojo Rising Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 Dre, should of taken your advice on that under.....just thought they were going to light it up last night. I ended up taking the Over for the full game and placed another wager at halftime on the Over 24.5. You can only imagine how happy I was to see Giordano run that back 83 yards! I was sure he was going to take a knee and call it a game. Looking forward to Sunday! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 1-0 to start with Indy- nice call on the under fellas. Heading out of town - playing a few games before I take off. all favorites, unusual for me- but I like all 3......... Hou -3 Jax -6.5 Sea -6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 25.00 tease with the over (47) and the Saints (+12)....I should have gone more, but I didn't like it too much.... plus I also took the saints (+15) in a sweetheart teaser and lost that one.... hopefully my parlays aren't so bad....I've already placed 4 bets and it isn't even Sunday....but I'm making sure to go light so I don't screw the pooch early and everything being up in the air on week 1... if you didn't like your tease in the first place, why did you bet it?? Just for some action on opening night? If so, understandable. If not, then take Dre's advice...its a long season....it'a about being profitable...unless you feel strongly about a position, don't place a wager on it. You'll be out of ching before the seaosn gets rolling, and there will be lots of "solid plays" as the season rolls forward. good call on going light...the last thing anyone wants to do is be chasing their losses from the get-go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 Great stuff on the home dogs, Dre. I didn't remember the trend being significant one way or the other, and your data proved that to be correct, though it does lean slightly to the home dog. But while you aren't sold on the O/U trend for games in which there is a home dog, it makes some sense to me, if the situation bears it out: Home dogs are likely just that because of (1) perception of their opponent from prior year, (2) perception of themselves from prior year, (3) pre-season sentiment of the favorite to do well, and of course (4) the individual offensive and defensive match-ups. That being said, I absolutely love the under in the Ealges/Packers game. I think this game will be a dogfight for the favored Eagles, as they still will be looking to get in sync offensively agaisnt a much-improved Packers defense. While we certainly will see our share of the usual Mcnabb-led arial attack, it was reported this week that Marty Morningweigh(sp.?) will continue to handle playcalling duties for the Eagles. If everyone remembers last year, after McNabb went down, the Eagles went to a more run-oriented gameplan with Marty calling the shots. I see this continuing, especially early in the season as the Eagles look to protect McNabb while he gets his feet wet again. Look for a big dose of clock-controlling Westbrook, as the Eagles play away from the strength of the Packer's defense (strong CBs) and establish the run...and eat lots of clock. However, the Packers are under-ratedly strong up front, and this gameplan will find some tough going. I see the Eagles having some success, but just as many stalled drives... On the opposite side of the ball, the Packers appear to be thin at RB, with the unproven Brandon Jackson entering the game as the starting RB. While he may find success from time to time against a suspect Eagles run defense (led by 3 new starting LBs), the Eagles will eventually be able to stack the box and force Favre to throw into their strength, the secondary. With the Packers becoming one dimensional, the Eagles should be able to control the GB offense, or at least limit their production. I looked at this under a variety fo scenarios, and the highest total I came up with was 41 points (Eagles 24-Packers 17), just under the number. In the most likely scenario, I see a hard-fought 20-13, 20-16, 24-13 type of game....all totals well under the posted 43 O/U. Many pundits are picking the Eagles to make another run for the division crown, and perhaps advance deep into the playoffs, based on their hisotry of being a "west-coast, pile-up-points type of offense"....while this may be the case as the season progresses, it will take a few weeks for this Eagles team to re-aquaint iteself with one another, and for McNabb to get his mojo back. The strengthening Eagle defense shoud allow them to do just that. My play of the week, boys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 The under the Eagles/Packers game is very appealing. This is could be a slow starting game. Do people like the Eagles side in this one as well? Also, I really want to take the points with Buffalo. I think they open the season up nicely at home against Denver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steeltown Dre Posted September 7, 2007 Author Share Posted September 7, 2007 I'll read Swammi's post and get some feedback on that hopefully today. But I was working on a follow-up post and wanted to throw it in here, then I'll get back to it. I saw Goopster took advantage of this idea, but I didn't get a chance to post on it last night. Anyhow, have a read: I wanted to follow up on some key information on O/U betting when totals reach 50… Since 1995 there have been 79 games where the total was set at 50 points or higher. In 59% of those games, the under hit. But as you know from my prior post, the majority of the overs occurred once the total gets to 53 and increases as the totals get higher. Of the 46 games that went under, 34 of these occurred when the total was between 50 and 52.5. This means that unders hit at 68% on average when the total is between 50 and 52.5. But, here’s another strategy question: What do you do when the game gets off to a slow start, such as we had last night? Is it more likely to go under/over the total? What about the halftime line? Here’s your answer: Last night’s game had a halftime total of 20 points. Of the 79 games w/ totals of 50 or higher, 18 of them had halftime scores of 20 or fewer points. Roughly a couple games a year will have a very slow start and a high total. If you had the over in the game, you better start looking to recoup your losses at the half, and you can do that. Because, 17 of those 18 games did not make it over the total. In other words, a low 1st half equated to a Under for the game. Makes sense, of course. On average, they fell 11 points below the total. So the answer to the first question: If you have a very low scoring 1st half, it will most likely go under the total. The second question: What about the halftime lines? Well, here’s your shot to add money if you had the under in the game, or to recover your losses (not chase, but make an intelligent play) if you had an over bet on the game. The average 1st half score (total) for games that had halftime scores of 20 or less was 15 points. Vegas will set the 2nd half line based on what they saw in the 1st half and what they think the mood of the public is. In last night’s case, the 2nd half line was 24.5 On average, in these games, the 2nd half score is over 26 points. In other words, the 2 teams combined in the 1st half to only put up 15. But in the second half, they put up 26. That is, they scored about 75% MORE points in the 2nd half than they did in the 1st half. Is this suprising? Well, Yes, it should be. The reason is, in games where the total is less than 50 points, more points are actually scored in the 1st half than in the 2nd. The 2nd half score is usually about 3% less than the 1st half score. How did Vegas adjust last night? The 2 teams scored 20 in the 1st half. Vegas put the line at 24.5, which is 23% higher than the 1st half. So the line was not like a typical game line, which may have a similar number of points scored in the 1st and 2nd halves. They can’t afford to take that big of a hit, knowing what the opening line was. You could have too many people middle the game quite easily. In reality, the 2 teams scored 31 points in the 2nd half, 55% more than they scored in the 1st half. And the game went over the 2nd half line. Granted, it wasn’t easy – that Indy TD int at the end. You couldn’t predict that, but you also couldn’t predict that NO wouldn’t put up a single point in the 2nd half either, so all in all, I would have felt very comfortable heading into the 2nd half w/ a play on the Over 24.5. Again, you won’t win every time, but you will in the long run. So what is the lesson: Do not be afraid to take the 2nd half over in a game that was originally thought to be high scoring, but had a low scoring 1st half. You won’t always win blindly (nothing is that easy), but you will have a good shot. But remember, the game has to have had a very high total (over 50) and they have to have been lackluster in the 1st half. Of course, watching the game always helps w/ 2nd half betting. I don’t bet 2nd halves in games that I am not watching. But I do take advantage of 2nd half betting, and I really love live betting when I know how things should play out, and they go dramatically opposite to start the game. You really can get some great reduction of juice doing it that way. For instance, you have the Colts last night and the Saints march down and get the lead early. The live line will react and you could possibly get the Colts at a pickem at that point, and save yourself all the juice you would have lost if you took them on a ML play an hour before the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 Great read Dre. Are there any totals you are specifically targeting this weekend? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steeltown Dre Posted September 7, 2007 Author Share Posted September 7, 2007 Great stuff on the home dogs, Dre. I didn't remember the trend being significant one way or the other, and your data proved that to be correct, though it does lean slightly to the home dog. But while you aren't sold on the O/U trend for games in which there is a home dog, it makes some sense to me, if the situation bears it out: Home dogs are likely just that because of (1) perception of their opponent from prior year, (2) perception of themselves from prior year, (3) pre-season sentiment of the favorite to do well, and of course (4) the individual offensive and defensive match-ups. That being said, I absolutely love the under in the Ealges/Packers game. I think this game will be a dogfight for the favored Eagles, as they still will be looking to get in sync offensively agaisnt a much-improved Packers defense. While we certainly will see our share of the usual Mcnabb-led arial attack, it was reported this week that Marty Morningweigh(sp.?) will continue to handle playcalling duties for the Eagles. If everyone remembers last year, after McNabb went down, the Eagles went to a more run-oriented gameplan with Marty calling the shots. I see this continuing, especially early in the season as the Eagles look to protect McNabb while he gets his feet wet again. Look for a big dose of clock-controlling Westbrook, as the Eagles play away from the strength of the Packer's defense (strong CBs) and establish the run...and eat lots of clock. However, the Packers are under-ratedly strong up front, and this gameplan will find some tough going. I see the Eagles having some success, but just as many stalled drives... On the opposite side of the ball, the Packers appear to be thin at RB, with the unproven Brandon Jackson entering the game as the starting RB. While he may find success from time to time against a suspect Eagles run defense (led by 3 new starting LBs), the Eagles will eventually be able to stack the box and force Favre to throw into their strength, the secondary. With the Packers becoming one dimensional, the Eagles should be able to control the GB offense, or at least limit their production. I looked at this under a variety fo scenarios, and the highest total I came up with was 41 points (Eagles 24-Packers 17), just under the number. In the most likely scenario, I see a hard-fought 20-13, 20-16, 24-13 type of game....all totals well under the posted 43 O/U. Many pundits are picking the Eagles to make another run for the division crown, and perhaps advance deep into the playoffs, based on their hisotry of being a "west-coast, pile-up-points type of offense"....while this may be the case as the season progresses, it will take a few weeks for this Eagles team to re-aquaint iteself with one another, and for McNabb to get his mojo back. The strengthening Eagle defense shoud allow them to do just that. My play of the week, boys Good read and analysis. Breathe easy - You've got that 11-0 trend on your side! Humor aside, I think you have a good insight into the situation there. I'll run some numbers and get back to you if I can on this one. Again, if this was week 4 or 5, my system would have 4 weeks of data to crunch, and I'd be able to give you a "system feedback". Just as a recap, my system started last season 1Oct06. Without going into specifics, it calculates spreads and O/U projections on every single game. Again, without divulging too much, I have 3 versions and all of which are slight variations of one another. For ATS on the season: Version - Result 1 - Leaned 52% out of 150 games it leaned on (showed advantage). Picked 40 games for high wagering and hit 65%. 2 - Leaned 54% out of 127 games it leaned on. Picked 17 games for high wagering and hit 82%. 3 - Leaned 57% out of 147 games it leaned on. Picked 26 games for high wagering and hit 77%. For O/U on the season, I only have 1 version. This version runs Over Calcs and Under Calcs separately, which aid in showing me value for Overs games and separately, value for Unders games. It leaned 63% out of 131 games it leaned on for Unders, and leaned 61% out of 66 games it leaned on for Overs. Picked 37 Unders games for high wagering and hit 65%. Picked 22 Overs games for high wagering and hit 77%. Of course, no promise I'll hit these numbers again this season. Like any system, there are some weeks that are not so great. But you play to win $ daily, weekly, and yearly as I said earlier. Not many systems out there (that I've seen) can lean on such a high number of games and still hit a profitable percentage. On top of that, select the top plays and hit 63%, 65%, 77% and 82%. Again, it may be hard to duplicate that success, but we'll keep our fingers crossed. So Goopster, I can't give you specifics yet as to "which games seem most out of line" with where I see these teams playing to, as I trust my system numbers more than anything. Prior to October, I play based on trends and my capping knowledge, and do calculations when needed. Starting in October, I'm using everything I did in Sep, plus my systems. However, I hopefully will be able to give you some more leans or advice on sides and totals for this week closer to gametime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 So, for the experienced gamblers. What is your take on straight money bets vs. parlays vs. teasers ? What do you play most ? Just wanted to get some thoughts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gdawg Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 So, for the experienced gamblers. What is your take on straight money bets vs. parlays vs. teasers ? What do you play most ? Just wanted to get some thoughts. As for myself, I usually stay away from parlays, Menudo. The value obtained from betting parlays drops very quickly (as does the probability of winning!). I play one or two once in a while for fun, but never for more than a few $. I'm pretty conservative by nature with regard to betting, so I try not to get too crazy! Teasers, well I usually stay away from them too. Ironically I DID use a two team, seven point teaser last night (very small wager): IND +1.5, Under 60.5. Turns out I didn't need the seven points for either one I think they can be useful at times, but as with parlays you have to get them ALL right or you lose. Again, I'm conservative, so what works for me might not work for the next guy, but statistically I think it's the right call. Just my .02, hope it helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 So, for the experienced gamblers. What is your take on straight money bets vs. parlays vs. teasers ? What do you play most ? Just wanted to get some thoughts. I stayed away from that game because it's a divisional rival game week 1 and the Roethlisberger comment worries me.... I don't think Crennel is that bad of a coach and Edwards is healthy....they might be able to make it close ....I don't like this game bet-wise... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 I stayed away from that game because it's a divisional rival game week 1 and the Roethlisberger comment worries me.... I don't think Crennel is that bad of a coach and Edwards is healthy....they might be able to make it close ....I don't like this game bet-wise... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#40 Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 i know, brandon lang is a bum blah blah blah, but he is on a local philly show Daily News Live every football friday giving picks. take it or leave it. college and pro. Vandy +3.5 (outright win) Penn St -17 Buf +3.5 SD -6 Eagles -3 (they were his double down super secret shocker lock or whatever the he!! he called it) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 if I told you the Colts won 51-10 and mentioned Bush's stats this time yesterday, you would have said the same thing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 So, for the experienced gamblers. What is your take on straight money bets vs. parlays vs. teasers ? What do you play most ? Just wanted to get some thoughts. Early on I was big on parlays but they just get frustrating sometimes. I might do a teaser every once in a while but I normally just bet on straight sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 (edited) i know, brandon lang is a bum blah blah blah, but he is on a local philly show Daily News Live every football friday giving picks. take it or leave it. college and pro. Vandy +3.5 (outright win) Penn St -17 Buf +3.5 SD -6 Eagles -3 (they were his double down super secret shocker lock or whatever the he!! he called it) it makes me uneasy when I feel like the Eagles pick is the only one worth playing....(outside of the College plays because I don't do college) Edited September 7, 2007 by Avernus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 i know, brandon lang is a bum blah blah blah, but he is on a local philly show Daily News Live every football friday giving picks. take it or leave it. college and pro. Vandy +3.5 (outright win) Penn St -17 Buf +3.5 SD -6 Eagles -3 (they were his double down super secret shocker lock or whatever the he!! he called it) I like all those picks and would make them (yes, even the Chargers one against my Bears but I wouldn't bet against them of course) except the Vandy one. Don't know much about them. I expect PSU to destroy Notre Dame, should be fun for Dome haters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 maybe you shouldn't listen to me afterall... somehow I pulled out Parlays and Browns vs Steelers.....and then you being a Steelers fan... yeah I'm a big retard... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 if I told you the Colts won 51-10 and mentioned Bush's stats this time yesterday, you would have said the same thing... No, I didn't say your pick was bad, but, I'm not sure where it came from ??? I didn't mention the Steelers game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.