Recent Posts

Thread Author BetCrimes1984 Post Entries
hustle_man
hustle_man
2nd Round & onwards of playoffs

All Elimination Games: U/O 61-48-1

Elimination Games being game 4 or 5 of a Series: U/O 17-25
Elimination Games being game 6 or 7 of a Series: U/O 44-23-1


Since 2003-04 from the 2nd Round onwards, games 4 & 5 that have doubled as elimination games have gone o/u 
25-17. Those bettors actually aware of the stats KNOW that Overs are the play in one-sided series which see the initial elimination games arrive 'early'. According to these recent historical stats, Over will again be the play for next game as well.

Hustle's ignorance to the fore again
Lippsman
Lippsman
Quote Originally Posted by LeRinkRat:

 Penguins @ Rangers

this series becomes only the fourth best-of-7 /NHL playoff series to follow a win/site order of LLWLWW @ HHVVHV through six games. In each of the previous three such instances, the team posting that win/site order won Game 7 at home. The last team to do so: The Washington Capitals over the New York Rangers in their 2009 NHL Preliminary-round series

Oilers @ Ducks

Considering win order; considering site order: The team tied LLWWWL with site order HHVVHV (Anaheim) has the following best-of-7 playoff series and games record through the 2017 NHL and Preliminary rounds:
Game 7 record, NHL only, all rounds: 4-5 (.444)
Game 7 record, NHL only, Quarterfinals round: 1-3 (.250)

Thanks for these, Rat. The history that matters to me first & foremost is the specific win order married to venue order, round irrelevant. 
jmag805
jmag805
Quote Originally Posted by jmag805:

Betcrimes, are you betting the under? According to your numbers the under is the play for the 2nd half.

I post at another site basically, so saw your post too late to respond re the 2h starting. I bet live, so looked for a good 2h under line live. 
jmag805
jmag805
the 2h pts scoring for 1h totals of 120 pts or more in the playoffs so far

1h ---2h
120 - 111
121 - 107
121 - 111 
123 - 105
123 - 110
123 - 111
125 - 92
130 - 96
famaroneinc
famaroneinc
The Indians conceded only 3 total runs in their 4 LCS wins. Since the LCS went to the best-of-7 format in 1985, there have only been 10 other teams (out of 61) who conceded 6 total runs or less in their 4 LCS wins. Of those 10 teams, 4 achieved the feat in the same year as their opposite LCS winner thus met in the WS which nullifies their stats (obv. 1 had to be a WS winner & 1 had to be a WS loser). Of the remaining 6 teams? They went 0-6 in the WS. 


GL with Cleveland being the first team to win the WS when facing a team who conceded 7+ runs in their 4 LCS wins.
mrcoo168
mrcoo168
Quote Originally Posted by mrcoo168:

why?

It's because the previous commish was an idiot.
Algorithm
Algorithm

- Only 3 of the last 12 WS g1's have totaled less than 8 runs

- Only 3 of the last 16 WS g1's have totaled less than 7 runs.

- Since 1991 only 2 of 15 WS g1's played in an AL park have totaled less than 7 runs.


Recent history is with your bet, GL
scheer_bets
scheer_bets

- Only 3 of the last 12 WS g1's have totaled less than 8 runs

- Only 3 of the last 16 WS g1's have totaled less than 7 runs.

- Since 1991 only 2 of 15 WS g1's played in an AL park have totaled less than 7 runs

Recent history is with your total bet. GL
Pandalicious
Pandalicious
In the history of the modern era of the NFL (1980 onwards, 36 completed seasons), there has never been a season before now in which the MNF time-slot saw its initial 7 games of the new season come & go without featuring at least 1 game in which a losing team put up a team total between 17-31 pts. The 7 MNF losers so far this season have put up scores of 16, 0, 14, 32, 10, 14 & 3 pts. 

To put this 17-31 pt loser scoring range in some sort of context: 42.8% of all losers from the other primetime games (TNF & SNF) this season have put up scores within this range & 49.0% of all losers from all non-MNF games played so far this season have put up scores within this range.

The picture painted from all of the above is rather clear: this is a highly unusual 'drought' to be taking place. The most obvious option this relates to for the coming game is the Texans TT: lined @14.5, this drought ending precludes the under option cashing. With the full game total lined 40.5 there's slightly more scope for the under to come in, but only at the very lowest end of the loser's score range (17-19 pts). The Texans have conceded plenty in their 2 losses (27 & 31 pts) while the Broncos have conceded at least 17 pts in 3 of their 4 wins (the only exception vs. a non-conference opponent).

Just food for thought, take it fwiw.
undermysac
undermysac
Quote Originally Posted by BetCrimes1984:

Home team elimination game results
1995-2006: 23-19 SU 
2007-2016: 23-10 SU 

Home team results for Game 6's specifically
1995-2006: 6-8 SU (2-4 when off a g5 win)
2007-2016: 8-3 SU (3-1 when off a g5 win)

It should be noted that these are LCS results, they do not include LDS or WS results.
undermysac
undermysac
Quote Originally Posted by Hoyasaxa:

I'm a Dodger fan and this Cub team could have folded a few times already like others plus we have bullpen issues. Objectively looking at the Cubs, you should get it done and have earned it. But one guy who could blow it all is Chapman. The Dodgers have hit him all Series.

LA has scored runs off Chapman in 1 of 3 appearances. In that instance he inherited a 6 run lead and therefore didn't have to f*k about whether he conceded runs or not. In his other 2 appearances, he's given up 1 hit against 8 batters faced. So no, LA has not done squat against Chapman "all series", they did so in 1 game in which it didn't matter a jot. 
undermysac
undermysac
Home team elimination game results
1995-2006: 23-19 SU 
2007-2016: 23-10 SU 

Home team results for Game 6's specifically
1995-2006: 6-8 SU (2-4 when off a g5 win)
2007-2016: 8-3 SU (3-1 when off a g5 win)
OGiant23
OGiant23
for those who are unaware, the first team to score 3 runs has never lost one of these 1-off WC games.
Mortgageguru
Mortgageguru
Quote Originally Posted by BetCrimes1984:

Since the ABA-NBA merger in 1976, there has been 6 previous occasions where the same two teams played each other in consecutive NBA finals. 

The record of the team who won the initial finals meeting in the second finals? 1-5. The one exception to avoid losing had Michael Jordan in its starting 5.

Q: Who won the initial finals meeting between these two teams last year?

Mortgageguru
Mortgageguru
Quote Originally Posted by Mortgageguru:

9 times NBA teams were able to erase a 3-1 deficit to win the series. Then in the next round those teams are 6-3 winning that series. More history that favors Dubs.

2 of those 6 teams to win their next series were only playing 2nd round opponents: a situation that has no historical resemblance to the Dubs situation (of playing a Conference champion caliber opponent), so naturally those 2 results are completely irrelevant.

Since the ABA-NBA merger, there have been 2 teams who erased a 3-1 deficit to win their Conference finals: those 2 teams then went 1-1 in the NBA finals proper. Specific history does not favour the Dubs.
Mortgageguru
Mortgageguru
Quote Originally Posted by bmiller1632:

Betcrimes so i take it you like the Cavs to win it?

Home teams have generally ruled this situation historically, but here there are things on the ground which undermine past stats.

Iggy is lame to what degree? 
Curry is lame to X degree thus his output has been inconsistent these finals. 
Bogut is so lame he isn't even present (in the 8 playoff games prior to this game 7 that Bogut has been unable to play at least 14 mins in, GS trailed at half-time: is Bogut going to play 14+ mins in this coming game?)
Barnes has gone completely AWOL on offense (2/22 L2 games).

In short, this isn't the same Warriors team that was firing on all cylinders to set a new reg. season record, it's an inferior version. If all these players were healthy & in the zone, GS would obviously be the no-brainer choice, but then if they functioning like that this series would not still be being played. The very fact it's still going on points to the Cavs having capitalized on said issues. So the question someone thinking about betting on this game is, why are they going to stop capitalizing on those issues in this next game? Is Bogut suddenly fit? Curry suddenly fully fit? Iggy suddenly free of back issues? Has Barnes suddenly found his stroke & no longer utterly AWOL?

Logic dictates that Klay Thompson & Draymond Green will be key figures in deciding where this game goes. If those 2 don't fire, GS could get not just beaten but buried. I'm going to have numerous options into this game with live betting at my book, so I can afford to wait and see the early going before making a commitment. But to those who fancy GS for pre-match betting, I suggest looking at Thompson & Green props, they'll pay a lot better than the GS ml & they can still win even if GS lose the game.
Mortgageguru
Mortgageguru
Since the ABA-NBA merger in 1976, there has been 6 previous occasions where the same two teams played each other in consecutive NBA finals. 

The record of the team who won the initial finals meeting in the second finals? 1-5. The one exception to avoid losing had Michael Jordan in its starting 5.

Q: Who won the initial finals meeting between these two teams last year?
LeRinkRat
LeRinkRat
For those dealing with live betting...

Since the lockout & rule changes that preceded the 05-06 season, SCF games that have had 0-0 1st periods - 14 in total - have seen the first scoring team win SU every time.

All 14 of these games were decided in regulation: none went to OT.
Beckley
Beckley
Since the lockout & rule changes that preceded the 05-06 season, only 1 of 13 road teams has won either of the first 2 games of the SCF that have been decided in regulation (roadies however have won 3 of 7 games that went to OT). 

History says have no confidence in the Sharks unless this game goes to OT.
lakerz
lakerz
I agree with AussieDownUnder. I believe this series will go 7/LA wins game 5 then puts in a throwaway effort in G6. NBA would no doubt like at least one Western Conf. series to go 7 (and this is basically the only realistic candidate), so expect some typical zebra hometown cooking for LA.

If I was the OP I wouldn't hedge away any LA profit at this point. Wait at least until game 5 is done. Those with any extensive experience of the NBA know that LA could easily end up winning this game by 12-16 pts & it would be no surprise.

Stats of the day: 

(1) Portland is 0-9 SU & ATS on the road in the playoffs since winning game 2 @Houston to go up 2-0 in their 2013-14 Round 1 series. Portland has failed to cover the spread in these 9 games by an average of 10.87 points.

(2) Portland's reg. season road record in the vs. their playoff road results, over the last 3 seasons

2013-14: 23-18 SU vs. 2-4 SU & ATS
2014-15: 19-22 SU vs. 0-3 SU & ATS
2015-16: 16-25 SU vs. 0-2 SU & ATS

The current iteration of this team has yet to win a road playoff game when they've finished the reg. season with a sub-.500 road record. 

None of the above is to say they can't win game 5, but there's little chance I'd back their current price/accept anything less than plus odds pre-game. Live bet when they're proving themselves capable = different story.
Desktop View: Switch to Mobile View