Tough loss. Will get them next time. A lot of bad breaks early!! Especially with the botched punt early they should have been FSU's ball, but the refs screwed it up and just gave them a first down. With that being said, Wake was hands down the better team here and had better players at most pos. Kinda a no-brainer, but i still thought fsu u had a nice shot. Good work though, i still believe your system was accurate here, just didnt get the right breaks we needed. Will hopefully get it back on saturday! Can't wait...have a lot of games!
Tough loss. Will get them next time. A lot of bad breaks early!! Especially with the botched punt early they should have been FSU's ball, but the refs screwed it up and just gave them a first down. With that being said, Wake was hands down the better team here and had better players at most pos. Kinda a no-brainer, but i still thought fsu u had a nice shot. Good work though, i still believe your system was accurate here, just didnt get the right breaks we needed. Will hopefully get it back on saturday! Can't wait...have a lot of games!
Neural, I actually think this card looks pretty good. I'm against you on just a few plays, but with you on some as well.
I had Wake Forest +5.5 --- But you made FSU a small play, so that's good.
Virginia Tech -13.5 --- System play leans toward VT. Number at -18
Texas Tech -8.5 --- Smaller play. System number says TT -14
Notre Dame +14.5 58% --- I have BC here. System says line should be around 30 --- But that is just more of an indicator, not a spread.
LSU -9 64%--- With you on this one. System number says 25. That's a large play.
Gamecocks -6 59.4% --- System plays says 'line' at -11.
Cal Bears -13.5 64% --- I have Oregon St. on this game. Not by a big margin though. That 64% scares me!
Both of our systems are on:
1. Va Tech (nice lean) 2. Texas Tech (nice lean) 3. LSU (bigger lean) 4. South Carolina (bigger lean)
I'm interested in seeing what happens when we match up. Last week was a mess for me, as the system pulled in 2006 stats (long story). It's 100% fixed this week. --- Good Luck!
Neural, I actually think this card looks pretty good. I'm against you on just a few plays, but with you on some as well.
I had Wake Forest +5.5 --- But you made FSU a small play, so that's good.
Virginia Tech -13.5 --- System play leans toward VT. Number at -18
Texas Tech -8.5 --- Smaller play. System number says TT -14
Notre Dame +14.5 58% --- I have BC here. System says line should be around 30 --- But that is just more of an indicator, not a spread.
LSU -9 64%--- With you on this one. System number says 25. That's a large play.
Gamecocks -6 59.4% --- System plays says 'line' at -11.
Cal Bears -13.5 64% --- I have Oregon St. on this game. Not by a big margin though. That 64% scares me!
Both of our systems are on:
1. Va Tech (nice lean) 2. Texas Tech (nice lean) 3. LSU (bigger lean) 4. South Carolina (bigger lean)
I'm interested in seeing what happens when we match up. Last week was a mess for me, as the system pulled in 2006 stats (long story). It's 100% fixed this week. --- Good Luck!
neuralman - how does your software consider nonstatistical things like teams emotion/motivation factors (bounce back, letdown, lookahead, rivalry, etc), scheduling dynamics, personnel and coaching changes as it affects the first few games of each year, weather, injuries and several other intangibles?
neuralman - how does your software consider nonstatistical things like teams emotion/motivation factors (bounce back, letdown, lookahead, rivalry, etc), scheduling dynamics, personnel and coaching changes as it affects the first few games of each year, weather, injuries and several other intangibles?
neuralman - how does your software consider nonstatistical things like teams emotion/motivation factors (bounce back, letdown, lookahead, rivalry, etc), scheduling dynamics, personnel and coaching changes as it affects the first few games of each year, weather, injuries and several other intangibles?
GL this week
It doesn't because box scores and common opponents don't show the things you mention. That's where the operator, me, has to make the decision on the things you cite above.I am so close to pulling ND and losing the juice. If my network could ever take into account the things you mention, it would probably be over 70%, but I do not know how it could learn that without some data. I guess I could apply numbers to the spread based on revenge, look ahead, weather, etc. How do you input emotion??
You raise a very good point and one I have though about without a solution.
neuralman - how does your software consider nonstatistical things like teams emotion/motivation factors (bounce back, letdown, lookahead, rivalry, etc), scheduling dynamics, personnel and coaching changes as it affects the first few games of each year, weather, injuries and several other intangibles?
GL this week
It doesn't because box scores and common opponents don't show the things you mention. That's where the operator, me, has to make the decision on the things you cite above.I am so close to pulling ND and losing the juice. If my network could ever take into account the things you mention, it would probably be over 70%, but I do not know how it could learn that without some data. I guess I could apply numbers to the spread based on revenge, look ahead, weather, etc. How do you input emotion??
You raise a very good point and one I have though about without a solution.
Yeah, that would be tricky or impossible for certain things. Also someone like LSU or top team playing with revenge or bounce back is a much different than a bad team playing for revenge or bounce back, where nearly every game is a revenge spot after going 1-10 or 2-9 and they don't have the talent to do anything about it. I guess one could have a special variable assigned for emotion/motivation or other items for only isolated games where it was deemed significant enough (still would require interpretation and user decision though). Similar for new injuries to key player or cluster of injuries at one position, special variable that would only be applied in isolated cases.
Yeah, that would be tricky or impossible for certain things. Also someone like LSU or top team playing with revenge or bounce back is a much different than a bad team playing for revenge or bounce back, where nearly every game is a revenge spot after going 1-10 or 2-9 and they don't have the talent to do anything about it. I guess one could have a special variable assigned for emotion/motivation or other items for only isolated games where it was deemed significant enough (still would require interpretation and user decision though). Similar for new injuries to key player or cluster of injuries at one position, special variable that would only be applied in isolated cases.
My bad with that FSU line, I wasn't thinking clearly. Turns out Wake won anyway though, so I guess FSU -5 was a no play ;) (Just kidding)
Neural, when playing with a system you should always go full out - that's how people lose, is when they look at a system and then go "ehhh but that one doesn't look good so I'll take it out."
The only time when you should go against your system is when it can't compute certain data. For example, if the numbers say Cal -13.5, but all of a sudden you found out that DJ and Nate weren't playing, then obviously the system isn't accounting for that so you need to manually adjust numbers.
I don't know what inputs you have, but in the Notre Dame case, that win at UCLA might be overvalued since UCLA was playing with a 3rd string QB... other than that however, I assume you're inputting yards and stuff like that, ND has been horrific and numbers accurately reflect that.
Perhaps it has more to do with BC's recent struggles with terrible teams, BGSU excluded...
My bad with that FSU line, I wasn't thinking clearly. Turns out Wake won anyway though, so I guess FSU -5 was a no play ;) (Just kidding)
Neural, when playing with a system you should always go full out - that's how people lose, is when they look at a system and then go "ehhh but that one doesn't look good so I'll take it out."
The only time when you should go against your system is when it can't compute certain data. For example, if the numbers say Cal -13.5, but all of a sudden you found out that DJ and Nate weren't playing, then obviously the system isn't accounting for that so you need to manually adjust numbers.
I don't know what inputs you have, but in the Notre Dame case, that win at UCLA might be overvalued since UCLA was playing with a 3rd string QB... other than that however, I assume you're inputting yards and stuff like that, ND has been horrific and numbers accurately reflect that.
Perhaps it has more to do with BC's recent struggles with terrible teams, BGSU excluded...
what happens when lines move away from you....Mizzou +10.5....now you can get 12-13?? what do you do when you can get a better line and you have already put a play in?
what happens when lines move away from you....Mizzou +10.5....now you can get 12-13?? what do you do when you can get a better line and you have already put a play in?
Neural, I hope you didnt let emotion diussuade you on the ND pick. If you believe in the software's long term rate, you have just got to let it do it's thing. It sees something in the game that doesnt register for us carbon based neural nets. you didnt even need the hook!
Neural, I hope you didnt let emotion diussuade you on the ND pick. If you believe in the software's long term rate, you have just got to let it do it's thing. It sees something in the game that doesnt register for us carbon based neural nets. you didnt even need the hook!
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.