There is 2 possible plays using her recent form numbers:
Loyola-Chicago +5 and Illinois-Chicago +15.
There are zero plays using her overall ratings. Hopefully she posts some other games because I don't have much of a feel for either of those teams. Although 15 points is a lot, so that play looks pretty solid.
0
There is 2 possible plays using her recent form numbers:
Loyola-Chicago +5 and Illinois-Chicago +15.
There are zero plays using her overall ratings. Hopefully she posts some other games because I don't have much of a feel for either of those teams. Although 15 points is a lot, so that play looks pretty solid.
Hi Guys.. I'm learning this as go along.. please correct me as i'm wrong. but seem line base on Shirley's line.. 2 strongest official play tonite that fall in the 4 points different official bet is Loyola-Chicago & Illinois Chicago. Also Wic-Green Bay is on the 3 point difference which also could be considerable play.
The Rest of the line are NO PLAY since the variance are small..
is this right? Thanks KJ
yes, from what i can see those are the strongest plays. the others are no plays since the difference in actual and projected lines are so small.
Shirley, are these lines derived from the use of entropy/randomization at all? Looking at your record it would seem like you have a very strong formula used to calculate these and I was wondering to what degree of randomization/possible outcomes you use?
0
Quote Originally Posted by karjacker:
Hi Guys.. I'm learning this as go along.. please correct me as i'm wrong. but seem line base on Shirley's line.. 2 strongest official play tonite that fall in the 4 points different official bet is Loyola-Chicago & Illinois Chicago. Also Wic-Green Bay is on the 3 point difference which also could be considerable play.
The Rest of the line are NO PLAY since the variance are small..
is this right? Thanks KJ
yes, from what i can see those are the strongest plays. the others are no plays since the difference in actual and projected lines are so small.
Shirley, are these lines derived from the use of entropy/randomization at all? Looking at your record it would seem like you have a very strong formula used to calculate these and I was wondering to what degree of randomization/possible outcomes you use?
Why did someone else confirm these were the plays?
here are Shirley's numbers:
Overall ratings Recent form
Wright State -4.50 -2.20 Detroit -4.90 -0.60 Cleveland St. -12.80 -10.70 Florida -6.60 -7.90 Purdue -6.30 -12.80 Ok St -2.40 -3.70 Neb -0.90 -0.70 Ohio State -6.70 -3.70
If they only looked at the second column, then they'd say PSU is a play. You can choose to only look at the 2nd column, but like shirley said (i think) it'd be more beneficial to look at both of them and see what lines match for both instances.
Purdue is not a play unless you're putting 100x more stock into their last 8 games than you are in their season as a whole. It could win, but according to her system/numbers, it is not a safe play, nor is it smart
0
Quote Originally Posted by SirBetzAlot:
Why did someone else confirm these were the plays?
here are Shirley's numbers:
Overall ratings Recent form
Wright State -4.50 -2.20 Detroit -4.90 -0.60 Cleveland St. -12.80 -10.70 Florida -6.60 -7.90 Purdue -6.30 -12.80 Ok St -2.40 -3.70 Neb -0.90 -0.70 Ohio State -6.70 -3.70
If they only looked at the second column, then they'd say PSU is a play. You can choose to only look at the 2nd column, but like shirley said (i think) it'd be more beneficial to look at both of them and see what lines match for both instances.
Purdue is not a play unless you're putting 100x more stock into their last 8 games than you are in their season as a whole. It could win, but according to her system/numbers, it is not a safe play, nor is it smart
I agree - looks like Illinois-Chicago is the strongest play to me - Penn state may be close to a play but I find it hard to bet against OSU in this spot. Nebraska isn't a play but I like them a lot tonight as an unranked team favored at home against a ranked team. Any thoughts?
0
I agree - looks like Illinois-Chicago is the strongest play to me - Penn state may be close to a play but I find it hard to bet against OSU in this spot. Nebraska isn't a play but I like them a lot tonight as an unranked team favored at home against a ranked team. Any thoughts?
Wright State -4.50 -2.20 Detroit -4.90 -0.60 Cleveland St. -12.80 -10.70 Florida -6.60 -7.90 Purdue -6.30 -12.80 Ok St -2.40 -3.70 Neb -0.90 -0.70 Ohio State -6.70 -3.70
If they only looked at the second column, then they'd say PSU is a play. You can choose to only look at the 2nd column, but like shirley said (i think) it'd be more beneficial to look at both of them and see what lines match for both instances.
Purdue is not a play unless you're putting 100x more stock into their last 8 games than you are in their season as a whole. It could win, but according to her system/numbers, it is not a safe play, nor is it smart
I got Purdue at -8.5 so would that be a play at 4.3
0
Quote Originally Posted by boomersooner13:
here are Shirley's numbers:
Overall ratings Recent form
Wright State -4.50 -2.20 Detroit -4.90 -0.60 Cleveland St. -12.80 -10.70 Florida -6.60 -7.90 Purdue -6.30 -12.80 Ok St -2.40 -3.70 Neb -0.90 -0.70 Ohio State -6.70 -3.70
If they only looked at the second column, then they'd say PSU is a play. You can choose to only look at the 2nd column, but like shirley said (i think) it'd be more beneficial to look at both of them and see what lines match for both instances.
Purdue is not a play unless you're putting 100x more stock into their last 8 games than you are in their season as a whole. It could win, but according to her system/numbers, it is not a safe play, nor is it smart
I got Purdue at -8.5 so would that be a play at 4.3
Why did someone else confirm these were the plays?
Purdue is -9.5, her line is Purdue -12.8. That is a difference of 3.8. Only a difference of 4 warrants a definite play. If it was a 3.8 difference favoring the underdog, it would be a stronger play.
As for Penn St., there is a 2.8 difference.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SirBetzAlot:
Why did someone else confirm these were the plays?
Purdue is -9.5, her line is Purdue -12.8. That is a difference of 3.8. Only a difference of 4 warrants a definite play. If it was a 3.8 difference favoring the underdog, it would be a stronger play.
I got Purdue at -8.5 so would that be a play at 4.3
ONLY IF you're looking at "recent form". If you're looking at both of the columns, it's not a smart play. Decide for yourself if you want to look at one or both.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SonnySixKill:
I got Purdue at -8.5 so would that be a play at 4.3
ONLY IF you're looking at "recent form". If you're looking at both of the columns, it's not a smart play. Decide for yourself if you want to look at one or both.
ONLY IF you're looking at "recent form". If you're looking at both of the columns, it's not a smart play. Decide for yourself if you want to look at one or both.
Boomer, is the "recent form" the same as standard deviation?
0
Quote Originally Posted by boomersooner13:
ONLY IF you're looking at "recent form". If you're looking at both of the columns, it's not a smart play. Decide for yourself if you want to look at one or both.
Boomer, is the "recent form" the same as standard deviation?
Boomer, is the "recent form" the same as standard deviation?
I think of it more as a smaller amount of entropy. The recent forms are less random, as the sample size for the results is so much smaller. Standard deviation would give us more of an average per-say, and i think, from what i understand, that Shirley has a calculated randomization value for this.
Like I said, the sample size for "recent form" is 1/3 (roughly) of that for the "overall form", and it is at your discretion on which to look at more closely and put more stock in to. Like in Shirley's example, K State would have 0 takers if they had played Texas in December or early January instead of last night. But due to their recent form, a lot of people took them.
It's really kind of complicated and I'd actually like to hear Shirley's explanation on all of this just because I think I'm on the right track as far as entropy and randomization values, but until Shirley comes back and tells us what's going through that head, we'll never know
0
Quote Originally Posted by SonnySixKill:
Boomer, is the "recent form" the same as standard deviation?
I think of it more as a smaller amount of entropy. The recent forms are less random, as the sample size for the results is so much smaller. Standard deviation would give us more of an average per-say, and i think, from what i understand, that Shirley has a calculated randomization value for this.
Like I said, the sample size for "recent form" is 1/3 (roughly) of that for the "overall form", and it is at your discretion on which to look at more closely and put more stock in to. Like in Shirley's example, K State would have 0 takers if they had played Texas in December or early January instead of last night. But due to their recent form, a lot of people took them.
It's really kind of complicated and I'd actually like to hear Shirley's explanation on all of this just because I think I'm on the right track as far as entropy and randomization values, but until Shirley comes back and tells us what's going through that head, we'll never know
If you read what Shirley posted, "As we approach tournament time, recent form is the name of the game here. What we did, and how we played in Nov/Dec, has little impact on games played in March. I will leave it up to each individual to choose which line they prefer. If both lines are leaning in one direction, then certainly it's a no brainer (play the game if you like it). If just the overall rating (line 1) is leaning towards a wager, and not the most recent form projection (line 2), it might be better to lay off. However, if the overall projection is neutral (line 1), and the most recent form numbers (line 2) are leaning towards a play, I'm inclined to use these in my selection process."
You will see that the "recent" numbers are most relevant, and is currently the way to go. That is why I listed PSU & Purdue as plays in my earlier post.
0
Boomer -
If you read what Shirley posted, "As we approach tournament time, recent form is the name of the game here. What we did, and how we played in Nov/Dec, has little impact on games played in March. I will leave it up to each individual to choose which line they prefer. If both lines are leaning in one direction, then certainly it's a no brainer (play the game if you like it). If just the overall rating (line 1) is leaning towards a wager, and not the most recent form projection (line 2), it might be better to lay off. However, if the overall projection is neutral (line 1), and the most recent form numbers (line 2) are leaning towards a play, I'm inclined to use these in my selection process."
You will see that the "recent" numbers are most relevant, and is currently the way to go. That is why I listed PSU & Purdue as plays in my earlier post.
If you read what Shirley posted, "As we approach tournament time, recent form is the name of the game here. What we did, and how we played in Nov/Dec, has little impact on games played in March. I will leave it up to each individual to choose which line they prefer. If both lines are leaning in one direction, then certainly it's a no brainer (play the game if you like it). If just the overall rating (line 1) is leaning towards a wager, and not the most recent form projection (line 2), it might be better to lay off. However, if the overall projection is neutral (line 1), and the most recent form numbers (line 2) are leaning towards a play, I'm inclined to use these in my selection process."
You will see that the "recent" numbers are most relevant, and is currently the way to go. That is why I listed PSU & Purdue as plays in my earlier post.
when given two sets of data it's always best to take into account both of them. that's scientific procedure, and I'm sure Shirley would agree with me.
I'm not trying to tell you to stay away from it, I personally like some of the games that only look good in recent form and could play them without really considering Shirley's numbers. If the recent form column is working then by all means grab it by the horns and ride it for all it's worth!
0
Quote Originally Posted by jennado:
Boomer -
If you read what Shirley posted, "As we approach tournament time, recent form is the name of the game here. What we did, and how we played in Nov/Dec, has little impact on games played in March. I will leave it up to each individual to choose which line they prefer. If both lines are leaning in one direction, then certainly it's a no brainer (play the game if you like it). If just the overall rating (line 1) is leaning towards a wager, and not the most recent form projection (line 2), it might be better to lay off. However, if the overall projection is neutral (line 1), and the most recent form numbers (line 2) are leaning towards a play, I'm inclined to use these in my selection process."
You will see that the "recent" numbers are most relevant, and is currently the way to go. That is why I listed PSU & Purdue as plays in my earlier post.
when given two sets of data it's always best to take into account both of them. that's scientific procedure, and I'm sure Shirley would agree with me.
I'm not trying to tell you to stay away from it, I personally like some of the games that only look good in recent form and could play them without really considering Shirley's numbers. If the recent form column is working then by all means grab it by the horns and ride it for all it's worth!
Boomer, what do you make of this predictor system. Do you subtract the standard deviant number from the current line and try to get 4 points like shirley.
https://www.thepredictiontracker.com/predbb.html
0
Boomer, what do you make of this predictor system. Do you subtract the standard deviant number from the current line and try to get 4 points like shirley.
do you know of a thread or any other message where Shirley talks about method? because based on just he numbers at the top, something seems off with what's counted. I've never seen this website before and I kind of really want to play around with the numbers (i'm working on getting into med school so i've got chemistry, physics, high maths, etc., so that explains it) and see where exactly the outcomes come from, and I also see a lot of useful information there that could turn out to be, if manipulated correctly, quite telling of a teams future performance.
0
do you know of a thread or any other message where Shirley talks about method? because based on just he numbers at the top, something seems off with what's counted. I've never seen this website before and I kind of really want to play around with the numbers (i'm working on getting into med school so i've got chemistry, physics, high maths, etc., so that explains it) and see where exactly the outcomes come from, and I also see a lot of useful information there that could turn out to be, if manipulated correctly, quite telling of a teams future performance.
The rest of todays Lines are listed below. As before, 2 lines are displayed, the first as the overall rating number, and the 2nd the most recent form number. For record keeping purposes, the 2nd number is what we are using on this site. The numbers are as follows:
Overall Ratings Recent Form
NC State -0.70 NC ST -8.50
Ohio -0.90 Akron - 2.70
C Mich -5.20 C Mich - 2.10
Kent -4.70 Kent - 5.20
Va Tech -6.50 V Tech - 7.70
Valpo -12.00 Valpo - 10.40
Ky -6.60 Ky - 6.90
SD St. -12.00 SD St. - 8.10
I actually triple checked the NC State numbers, and keep scratching my head on this game. If you decide to play that team, tread lightly because in this case you are simply taking the team that is less worse, not necessarily much better. There is a huge difference, as neither of these teams should quickly pop nto your head, when you think of the field of 64.
Shirley
0
The rest of todays Lines are listed below. As before, 2 lines are displayed, the first as the overall rating number, and the 2nd the most recent form number. For record keeping purposes, the 2nd number is what we are using on this site. The numbers are as follows:
Overall Ratings Recent Form
NC State -0.70 NC ST -8.50
Ohio -0.90 Akron - 2.70
C Mich -5.20 C Mich - 2.10
Kent -4.70 Kent - 5.20
Va Tech -6.50 V Tech - 7.70
Valpo -12.00 Valpo - 10.40
Ky -6.60 Ky - 6.90
SD St. -12.00 SD St. - 8.10
I actually triple checked the NC State numbers, and keep scratching my head on this game. If you decide to play that team, tread lightly because in this case you are simply taking the team that is less worse, not necessarily much better. There is a huge difference, as neither of these teams should quickly pop nto your head, when you think of the field of 64.
The recent form numbers are not standard deviation numbers. They are merely a more accurate assessment of a teams current form, after throwing out all early season non - conference games AND doubling the impact of the last 8 games played vs the usual 150% impact of these games.
There is a "new" season upon us. What we did in Nov/Dec vs non - conference opponents should be discounted to accurately (we hope) predict the future.
Although standard deviation numbers can be and are calculated, they are rarely displayed on these pages. What standard deviation numbers will tell you is how likely the predicted result fall into a specific range.
One standard deviation will encompass 68.26% of all results
Two standard deviation will encompass 95.44% of all results.
Three standard deviations will encompass 99.73% of all results.
If you feel uncomfortable using recent form numbers, then don't use them. Use only the first set of numbers. However, if you had, you would have accurately predicted the K State-Texas game, and the ND-Villanova result. Additionally, NC ATT was a really good selection yesterday.
I'm much more inclined to incorporate recent form numbers IN CONJUNCTION WITH other forms of handicapping everyone possesses. There are many good minds on this site, and some might have a specific reason to throw out recent form (injury to a key player, many more road games than home games, tough schedule, foul trouble by key players, level of competition in recent games, etc. The list is large and long, and the reasons can have vailidty.
Solving the puzzle to beat the book is certainly an interesting challenge.
Shirley
0
The recent form numbers are not standard deviation numbers. They are merely a more accurate assessment of a teams current form, after throwing out all early season non - conference games AND doubling the impact of the last 8 games played vs the usual 150% impact of these games.
There is a "new" season upon us. What we did in Nov/Dec vs non - conference opponents should be discounted to accurately (we hope) predict the future.
Although standard deviation numbers can be and are calculated, they are rarely displayed on these pages. What standard deviation numbers will tell you is how likely the predicted result fall into a specific range.
One standard deviation will encompass 68.26% of all results
Two standard deviation will encompass 95.44% of all results.
Three standard deviations will encompass 99.73% of all results.
If you feel uncomfortable using recent form numbers, then don't use them. Use only the first set of numbers. However, if you had, you would have accurately predicted the K State-Texas game, and the ND-Villanova result. Additionally, NC ATT was a really good selection yesterday.
I'm much more inclined to incorporate recent form numbers IN CONJUNCTION WITH other forms of handicapping everyone possesses. There are many good minds on this site, and some might have a specific reason to throw out recent form (injury to a key player, many more road games than home games, tough schedule, foul trouble by key players, level of competition in recent games, etc. The list is large and long, and the reasons can have vailidty.
Solving the puzzle to beat the book is certainly an interesting challenge.
these lines sure do make me scratch my head over NCSU and making Boston College look interesting -- still have to take into consideration ACC teams at home though.
0
these lines sure do make me scratch my head over NCSU and making Boston College look interesting -- still have to take into consideration ACC teams at home though.
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.
Good Luck today Shirley. 
Hot Forum Topics
