I thought it was an interesting question so I looked up the results over the last 15 years
These are results against the point spread, not SU wins and losses
All Favorites ( -24 to -50 ) 874 Wins 875 Losses
All Home Favorites ( -24 to -50) 762 Wins 774 Losses
All Visiting Favorites ( -24 to -50 ) 102 Wins 89 Losses
Since most of these huge favorites are at home, it looks like break even on big favorites at home.
There may be some subsets ( like specific coaches, teams. etc) where there is an advantage but the smaller sample size might pose a problem.
This is not the exact question you were asking but these are interesting results regardless
I thought it was an interesting question so I looked up the results over the last 15 years
These are results against the point spread, not SU wins and losses
All Favorites ( -24 to -50 ) 874 Wins 875 Losses
All Home Favorites ( -24 to -50) 762 Wins 774 Losses
All Visiting Favorites ( -24 to -50 ) 102 Wins 89 Losses
Since most of these huge favorites are at home, it looks like break even on big favorites at home.
There may be some subsets ( like specific coaches, teams. etc) where there is an advantage but the smaller sample size might pose a problem.
This is not the exact question you were asking but these are interesting results regardless
I thought it was an interesting question so I looked up the results over the last 15 years
These are results against the point spread, not SU wins and losses
All Favorites ( -24 to -50 ) 874 Wins 875 Losses
All Home Favorites ( -24 to -50) 762 Wins 774 Losses
All Visiting Favorites ( -24 to -50 ) 102 Wins 89 Losses
Since most of these huge favorites are at home, it looks like break even on big favorites at home.
There may be some subsets ( like specific coaches, teams. etc) where there is an advantage but the smaller sample size might pose a problem.
This is not the exact question you were asking but these are interesting results regardless
I thought it was an interesting question so I looked up the results over the last 15 years
These are results against the point spread, not SU wins and losses
All Favorites ( -24 to -50 ) 874 Wins 875 Losses
All Home Favorites ( -24 to -50) 762 Wins 774 Losses
All Visiting Favorites ( -24 to -50 ) 102 Wins 89 Losses
Since most of these huge favorites are at home, it looks like break even on big favorites at home.
There may be some subsets ( like specific coaches, teams. etc) where there is an advantage but the smaller sample size might pose a problem.
This is not the exact question you were asking but these are interesting results regardless
Your post made me think about service academies as double digit underdogs. Did some checking and here is the clarification
Army, Navy, Air Force going back to 2006 as Double Digit Underdogs Wins 48 Loss 47
Service academies as Visiting DD Dogs - Wins 38 Loss 30
Service academies as Home DD Dogs Wins 5 Loss 11 Push 2
As you stated, service academies are good plays as DD dogs but only on the road. Not at home. Interesting data.
Your post made me think about service academies as double digit underdogs. Did some checking and here is the clarification
Army, Navy, Air Force going back to 2006 as Double Digit Underdogs Wins 48 Loss 47
Service academies as Visiting DD Dogs - Wins 38 Loss 30
Service academies as Home DD Dogs Wins 5 Loss 11 Push 2
As you stated, service academies are good plays as DD dogs but only on the road. Not at home. Interesting data.
That;s what it looks like to me. But there may be some winning data buried deep in that 874/875 group. I will let you know if I uncover any tidbits around that. My gut tells me something good is in there but I don't know what it is yet.
That;s what it looks like to me. But there may be some winning data buried deep in that 874/875 group. I will let you know if I uncover any tidbits around that. My gut tells me something good is in there but I don't know what it is yet.
That;s what it looks like to me. But there may be some winning data buried deep in that 874/875 group. I will let you know if I uncover any tidbits around that. My gut tells me something good is in there but I don't know what it is yet.
That;s what it looks like to me. But there may be some winning data buried deep in that 874/875 group. I will let you know if I uncover any tidbits around that. My gut tells me something good is in there but I don't know what it is yet.
Your post made me think about service academies as double digit underdogs. Did some checking and here is the clarification
Army, Navy, Air Force going back to 2006 as Double Digit Underdogs Wins 48 Loss 47
Service academies as Visiting DD Dogs - Wins 38 Loss 30
Service academies as Home DD Dogs Wins 5 Loss 11 Push 2
As you stated, service academies are good plays as DD dogs but only on the road. Not at home. Interesting data.
Your post made me think about service academies as double digit underdogs. Did some checking and here is the clarification
Army, Navy, Air Force going back to 2006 as Double Digit Underdogs Wins 48 Loss 47
Service academies as Visiting DD Dogs - Wins 38 Loss 30
Service academies as Home DD Dogs Wins 5 Loss 11 Push 2
As you stated, service academies are good plays as DD dogs but only on the road. Not at home. Interesting data.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.