CFL week 5

UNDERs and dogs in CFL historically have done very well the first five weeks in the CFL, which is the basis of my picking, as what has happened before tends to happen again.  I am a technical handicapper, which means 90% of the time I use history and a database to make my decisions, always league-wide queries.  It is a left brained way of picking winners.  I used an example in my explanation of  a couple of reasons why I liked the Roughriders this week when I found that home regular season non conference dogs were 57-33 ATS in my database, and winless home dogs were 12-2. Whether Sask's second string qb didn't play well last week, Ottawa was looking so strong, Sask's defense has been pathetic doesn't factor into my handicapping....if anything it is of benefit that my PLAY ON team has been bad as it creates a favorable line for the present game.

Technical handicapping  is pretty opposite to being a fundamental handicapper, who may use his "gut", who likes the coaching matchup, who likes one quarterback/hates the other qb, or looks at a line and says "this line is off, team A should not be a 7 point favorite".....these are all right brained ways of picking winners.  The most right brained thing I've done in the CFL is to basically hate the Blue Bombers and to very leery of putting my money on them, and  to actually look to go against them, but if there wasn't solid history of reasons to go against them, I would have not played against them this week.   

Everyone should feel comfortable with how they make picks and telling someone else they should do it a "better" way (the way they themselves make their decisions) is futile.  However, one should look at their past success and their bankroll to determine if what they do works, OR NOT.  If it hasn't worked, then one should change/improve their methodology or decide that they won't or can't spend the time necessary to get an edge and either quit or follow someone who is successful.  

Both of my plays coming up, Hamilton +5, and Montreal +6 are out of public favor, getting 40% and 42% of the public's picks....taking less  than 50% of the public teams tends to add to the success rate of my plays....I don't like playing on public (greater than 50%) dogs, so I use that as a filter to weed out plays.

There are people that access who the public is on through a football pool, having a bookmaker tell them, or knowing  a "mush" (non-successful bettor) and blindly go the opposite way, who are very successful. When you read the forums, there are stories of guys who will call their local bookie and on game day ask them, "who do you need?", in other words what games are they taking action on where there is unbalanced betting, for example 80% of his clients are on team A and their opponent team B there is only 20% of the betting. The one asking takes will bet on team B, or the ugly team, who more than likely has been playing not too well.  I use covers contests as a way to determine the percentage, as covers has no reason to fabricate their results as a bookmaker might or a betting website might to deceive people.  I want to know what Joe Sixpack is thinking.

An example of how that can be used in the future is in the NFL, when a team has lost their first four games, they have a very good percentage of hitting the rest of the season when they are on the road off a loss.  You won't find many of the public on a team such as that.

Once early in my career I placed a NFL playoff bet on Detroit as a home dog versus Philly, and I was the only one out of 170-odd bets to be on that side,.....everyone else had Philadelphia.  Detroit won 57-38. 

The most interesting game this week is the Tigercats/Eskimos playing today.....good fortune everyone.

What a game!

2)  Roughriders +6/6'  W

3)  Tiger Cats +5  W

4)  Montreal +6

Montreal is my favorite play of the week.  Am I betting more because I like this one more?  No, I haven't found in my career that my betting percentage on my top play is any better than my third, fourth, or fifth favorite game.

It took a while to realize that making the correct play led to better results than making a play I feel good about.  So, I ask myself before and after I make a play, did I follow my database to make this play?

Is the public off of this team?  Are there any  substantial reasons why I shouldn't play this game?  Conflicting results?  Is the team I am playing poorly coached (like Seattle and Chicago in the WNBA)?  Do they put forth poor efforts (like the Phoenix Mercury)?  Do they do dumb things with a loser mentality (like the Blue Bombers)?

If that is the case that I feel strongly about, I'll delete the play...rarely will I play a game solely  because:  

g)  I'm going to the game

h)  The head coach is backing the presidential candidate that I am backing.

An example of this is next week, Vegas is gonna be giving a truckload of points to the Bombers (probably +11ish) to entice betters to play on them, just like the supermarket that puts a huge markdown on bananas that are about to spoil.  The Bombers fall within my database's parameters to make a play on them.....I hate that team though...we'll see who wins out, my left brain, the good angel, or my right brain, the dark angel.  I want my good angel to be winning out 90% of the time....time will tell if it happens.

Public on the OVER 59% as of now.....same situation favors both Montreal and UNDER.

Thanks for the kind words....life is good when things go according to how you are figuring it should.

For example if I have a bookmaker who knows I'm betting against the public because the last three times I've called him up and asked him who he needs and I'm taking them....rather than be appreciate that I am balancing his action, he may double-cross me and give me false information because he doesn't like paying me.  Kind or like  British bookmakers who don't tolerate ANY winners.

I suppose it is my assumption that the vast majority of those covers are not PhDs in mathematics....

As they say though, they don't play the game on paper,.....we'll see if what we figured is what happens.