Posted:
#101
Will work now moo.
Please repost if you can.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
My Bowl Picks 2010
Posted:
#102
Van -- Yes, I've been a Dr. Bob advocate for 3 years or so now. I wouldn't have had a clue if not for him. I've asked him countless questions and he's been kind of enough to guide me through some things. I've also tested a few various theories I had on my own (that he did not incorporate). He also does not buy into the success rate point of view, but I've found that when the succ rate % and the math model % agree, the % has been 5.5% higher over the last 2 years. My math models are more accurate in my opinion than his as I have actually gone through each play (with a co-worker) and deducted plays we see fit to give a more accurate picture of how successful the teams have been. I will deduct plays for as much as an entire quarter or any plays within the 5 yard line (as these drag down ypp).
I am in the process of buying the database that he uses from Tom Stryker (espn magazine article on him recently & his database). I am finalizing the purchase this week & then I should improve my skills in the offseason. So as of now, I just rely on Doc for the situational motivators for the most part, but as of next week I will have it at my own discretion.
I would recommend Doc Bob to anyone and believe he is probably the only handicapper I'd really be willing to pay for. I believe he does not use regression like he should however and I am a true believer that it must be used, especially early in the season (especially in basketball.) I can come up with my math model and thoughts on Wisconsin/TCU sometime tonight if I get a chance. I am positive my math model will favor TCU and will likely bet on them.This coming from a Wisconsin alum. Wisconsin does however have a very good success rate that the math model does not incorporate. I am hoping this will come down close to pickem near kickoff, although I'm not sure it will.
0
Posted:
#104
Also, on the subject of Dr B....
I am a fan of anyone with a method. I dont care how successful it is, I put anyone with a well thought out plan ahead of anyone without one - for starters.
So one can argue nuances of anyones stat model - what matters - what doesnt - but I respect anyone (you, Dr B, anyone else) who isnt a "crystal ball" handicapper. Lets face it, crystal ball handicappers are one in a hundred thousand (not exaggerating), so anyone that incorporates logic gets my attention and respect immediately.
I am always trying to learn, and incorporate new ideas. Im like that NFL coach that travels down to a community college coach to study and steal his new idea - I always want to learn. My biggest fear is that I am running 7 year old software and old ideas that are not necessarily indicative of results in todays age - so I am constantly tweaking - to the point of neurotic.
So if someone tells me that white jerseys beat colored jerseys, and can show me how and why and how it makes sense - I am listening. So I am appreciative to have like minds here to discuss these things, just another reason I post here.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Posted:
#107
Quote Originally Posted by gcnmoo:
I am in the process of buying the database that he uses from Tom Stryker (espn magazine article on him recently & his database).
I just got reading that article yesterday,,, pretty cool... I love the old Mac computer the guy stuck with through all the years...
0
Posted:
#111
Hey moo, love your system!! Tulsa had a good night, giving them the ball 6 times helped,... other tidbits of info which would have been good to know before the game was some players were benched for steroids, a bunch got benched for women and alcohol in their rooms (waikiki), and a few ineligible for grades (grades rumor can't be confirmed),... Hawaii had their heads in their asses before the game even started,... still following your system though,... gl, Merry Holidays! aloha
0
Posted:
#112
Really like this theory, seems on point....ofcourse no one could have seen Tulsa getting that many turnovers tonight, so I definitely still think this theory works better than most...
although Tulsa did lead C-usa in INT, and when i saw that on the stats it scared me for a sec then after looking at Moniz stats i noticed he hadnt thrown many, boy was I wrong
0
Posted:
#113
I think bowl games are little different than regular games. I will tell you guys which teams are strong at bowl games.
Strong teams - VT, Iowa, Georgia, Nebraska, USC, Kentucky, Connecticut, Tulsa, South Florida,and Northwestern, etc.
Weak tames - GT, Nevada, Hawaill, S Carolina, BC, Missouri, and Oaklahoma St etc.
0
Posted:
#115
ROSE BOWL:
TCU -3 (2 units) over Wisconsin: It might shock you to hear me say this, but TCU might be the 2nd best team in the nation behind Boise. Hard to fathom that two schools that get mid-level recruits and play in mid-level conferences could come up with the two best teams in the nation. I doubt we will ever see it again.
TCU has been as consistent as a team can get over the past two years.
2010: OFF: +1.29 YPPL, DEF: +1.85 YPPL, OVERALL: +3.14 YPPLY, SUCC Rate%: 63.6 vs SOS -2.27
2009: OFF: +1.29 YPPL, DEF: 1.83 YPPL, OVERALL +3.12 YPPL, SUCC RATE%: 62.4 vs SOS -1.68
No matter how I cut up the season, last 6 games, against tougher opponents, overall results from this year, 2009 results, TCU has been about +1.3 yards per play better than average on offense. Their defense showed marginal improvement over the last 6 games (+2.00 yppl) and also was better against the two best offenses they played (utah, baylor). They absolutely shut down Utah's offense, allowing 7 points and 2.95 yards per play to a team that would average 6.71 yards per play vs the average defense at home. Against Baylor, they allowed only 10 points and 4.43 yards per play (average team would have allowed 7.03 yards to baylor at home). In other words, TCU should be able to contain a very explosive Wisconsin offense.
Wisconsin was +1.15 yards per play better than average on offense overall on the season. Obviously, they got better as the season progressed. Perhaps because of Jon Clay's absence or perhaps they just got better as the season went on. Either way, I'm not sure Jon Clay being healthy is exactly good news. Both White and Ball were more efficient on a compensated yards per carry basis. Anyways, over the last 6 games of the season, Wisconsin was +1.77 ypply better than average. Against the 4 toughest defenses they faced (ASU, MSU, OSU, Iowa), they were +1.2 ypply on offense. Against Ohio St & Iowa, they were +1.58 yards per play better than average. At the end of the year they were piling up the yards vs the defensive stalwarts of michigan, northwestern, and indiana. Not exactly a good indicator of what we will see against one of the best defenses in the country (better than ohio st & iowa). Meanwhile, on defense Wisconsin was not all that much better than average (+0.34 yppl) & +0.56 yppl over the last 6 games.
Both teams defenses were slightly worse vs the run than the pass, so that will benefit both offenses slightly in this game, although TCU still had a top notch run defense, just not quite as good as their #1 pass defense. TCU also has superior special teams and I have them running 11.5 more plays than Wisconsin will. Wisconsin has a good success rate (57.4% against a schedule 0.73 pts easier than average), although that is still nowhere near TCU's (63.6% vs -2.27 SOS).
I have no reason to see a reason to stay away from my math model in this game as I see no such situations that Wisconsin would benefit from. If anything, they would be the team to lack a little focus after hearing the media talk about how they will take care of an underssized team that didnt play anyone nearly as good as Wisconsin did. My math model favors TCU by 13.34 points and even if I use wisconsin's last 6 games and throw out the rest of the games (which is silly in my opinion), I would still get TCU at -9.88. From a PPG model (adjusted for SOS obviously), I get TCU -9.26.
I was hoping that this line would come down as the public will hammer Wisconsin close to gametime, but I'm not sure the books will want to move this off 3 as they may get quite a bit of sharp money on TCU.
Math Model: TCU -13.34/53.62
0
Posted:
#117
Quote Originally Posted by PhiTau-NOLES:
Hmm figured you would go with tcu, while i like Wisconsin's running game I don't think they have played a really good defense, dont think Ohio state was that good,
Hmm figured you would go with tcu, while i like Wisconsin's running game I don't think they have played a really good defense, dont think Ohio state was that good,
My question, play this now, or wait and hope the line drops more when the general public tries to take the bigger name?
How about both?
0
Posted:
#118
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
Also, on the subject of Dr B....
I am a fan of anyone with a method. I dont care how successful it is, I put anyone with a well thought out plan ahead of anyone without one - for starters.
So one can argue nuances of anyones stat model - what matters - what doesnt - but I respect anyone (you, Dr B, anyone else) who isnt a "crystal ball" handicapper. Lets face it, crystal ball handicappers are one in a hundred thousand (not exaggerating), so anyone that incorporates logic gets my attention and respect immediately.
I am always trying to learn, and incorporate new ideas. Im like that NFL coach that travels down to a community college coach to study and steal his new idea - I always want to learn. My biggest fear is that I am running 7 year old software and old ideas that are not necessarily indicative of results in todays age - so I am constantly tweaking - to the point of neurotic.
So if someone tells me that white jerseys beat colored jerseys, and can show me how and why and how it makes sense - I am listening. So I am appreciative to have like minds here to discuss these things, just another reason I post here.
Van,
This is why your threads are always a MUST read. I don't always agree with your sides, but your opinion always garners immediate respect. Well said and thanks for all the great posts.
0
Posted:
#119
Quote Originally Posted by gcnmoo:
ROSE BOWL:
TCU -3 (2 units) over Wisconsin: It might shock you to hear me say this, but TCU might be the 2nd best team in the nation behind Boise. Hard to fathom that two schools that get mid-level recruits and play in mid-level conferences could come up with the two best teams in the nation. I doubt we will ever see it again.
TCU has been as consistent as a team can get over the past two years.
2010: OFF: +1.29 YPPL, DEF: +1.85 YPPL, OVERALL: +3.14 YPPLY, SUCC Rate%: 63.6 vs SOS -2.27
2009: OFF: +1.29 YPPL, DEF: 1.83 YPPL, OVERALL +3.12 YPPL, SUCC RATE%: 62.4 vs SOS -1.68
No matter how I cut up the season, last 6 games, against tougher opponents, overall results from this year, 2009 results, TCU has been about +1.3 yards per play better than average on offense. Their defense showed marginal improvement over the last 6 games (+2.00 yppl) and also was better against the two best offenses they played (utah, baylor). They absolutely shut down Utah's offense, allowing 7 points and 2.95 yards per play to a team that would average 6.71 yards per play vs the average defense at home. Against Baylor, they allowed only 10 points and 4.43 yards per play (average team would have allowed 7.03 yards to baylor at home). In other words, TCU should be able to contain a very explosive Wisconsin offense.
Wisconsin was +1.15 yards per play better than average on offense overall on the season. Obviously, they got better as the season progressed. Perhaps because of Jon Clay's absence or perhaps they just got better as the season went on. Either way, I'm not sure Jon Clay being healthy is exactly good news. Both White and Ball were more efficient on a compensated yards per carry basis. Anyways, over the last 6 games of the season, Wisconsin was +1.77 ypply better than average. Against the 4 toughest defenses they faced (ASU, MSU, OSU, Iowa), they were +1.2 ypply on offense. Against Ohio St & Iowa, they were +1.58 yards per play better than average. At the end of the year they were piling up the yards vs the defensive stalwarts of michigan, northwestern, and indiana. Not exactly a good indicator of what we will see against one of the best defenses in the country (better than ohio st & iowa). Meanwhile, on defense Wisconsin was not all that much better than average (+0.34 yppl) & +0.56 yppl over the last 6 games.
Both teams defenses were slightly worse vs the run than the pass, so that will benefit both offenses slightly in this game, although TCU still had a top notch run defense, just not quite as good as their #1 pass defense. TCU also has superior special teams and I have them running 11.5 more plays than Wisconsin will. Wisconsin has a good success rate (57.4% against a schedule 0.73 pts easier than average), although that is still nowhere near TCU's (63.6% vs -2.27 SOS).
I have no reason to see a reason to stay away from my math model in this game as I see no such situations that Wisconsin would benefit from. If anything, they would be the team to lack a little focus after hearing the media talk about how they will take care of an underssized team that didnt play anyone nearly as good as Wisconsin did. My math model favors TCU by 13.34 points and even if I use wisconsin's last 6 games and throw out the rest of the games (which is silly in my opinion), I would still get TCU at -9.88. From a PPG model (adjusted for SOS obviously), I get TCU -9.26.
I was hoping that this line would come down as the public will hammer Wisconsin close to gametime, but I'm not sure the books will want to move this off 3 as they may get quite a bit of sharp money on TCU.
Math Model: TCU -13.34/53.62
Nice job Moo. Keep up the great posts. 
0
Posted:
#120
Quote Originally Posted by gcnmoo:
ROSE BOWL:
TCU -3 (2 units) over Wisconsin: It might shock you to hear me say this, but TCU might be the 2nd best team in the nation behind Boise. Hard to fathom that two schools that get mid-level recruits and play in mid-level conferences could come up with the two best teams in the nation. I doubt we will ever see it again.
TCU has been as consistent as a team can get over the past two years.
2010: OFF: +1.29 YPPL, DEF: +1.85 YPPL, OVERALL: +3.14 YPPLY, SUCC Rate%: 63.6 vs SOS -2.27
2009: OFF: +1.29 YPPL, DEF: 1.83 YPPL, OVERALL +3.12 YPPL, SUCC RATE%: 62.4 vs SOS -1.68
No matter how I cut up the season, last 6 games, against tougher opponents, overall results from this year, 2009 results, TCU has been about +1.3 yards per play better than average on offense. Their defense showed marginal improvement over the last 6 games (+2.00 yppl) and also was better against the two best offenses they played (utah, baylor). They absolutely shut down Utah's offense, allowing 7 points and 2.95 yards per play to a team that would average 6.71 yards per play vs the average defense at home. Against Baylor, they allowed only 10 points and 4.43 yards per play (average team would have allowed 7.03 yards to baylor at home). In other words, TCU should be able to contain a very explosive Wisconsin offense.
Wisconsin was +1.15 yards per play better than average on offense overall on the season. Obviously, they got better as the season progressed. Perhaps because of Jon Clay's absence or perhaps they just got better as the season went on. Either way, I'm not sure Jon Clay being healthy is exactly good news. Both White and Ball were more efficient on a compensated yards per carry basis. Anyways, over the last 6 games of the season, Wisconsin was +1.77 ypply better than average. Against the 4 toughest defenses they faced (ASU, MSU, OSU, Iowa), they were +1.2 ypply on offense. Against Ohio St & Iowa, they were +1.58 yards per play better than average. At the end of the year they were piling up the yards vs the defensive stalwarts of michigan, northwestern, and indiana. Not exactly a good indicator of what we will see against one of the best defenses in the country (better than ohio st & iowa). Meanwhile, on defense Wisconsin was not all that much better than average (+0.34 yppl) & +0.56 yppl over the last 6 games.
Both teams defenses were slightly worse vs the run than the pass, so that will benefit both offenses slightly in this game, although TCU still had a top notch run defense, just not quite as good as their #1 pass defense. TCU also has superior special teams and I have them running 11.5 more plays than Wisconsin will. Wisconsin has a good success rate (57.4% against a schedule 0.73 pts easier than average), although that is still nowhere near TCU's (63.6% vs -2.27 SOS).
I have no reason to see a reason to stay away from my math model in this game as I see no such situations that Wisconsin would benefit from. If anything, they would be the team to lack a little focus after hearing the media talk about how they will take care of an underssized team that didnt play anyone nearly as good as Wisconsin did. My math model favors TCU by 13.34 points and even if I use wisconsin's last 6 games and throw out the rest of the games (which is silly in my opinion), I would still get TCU at -9.88. From a PPG model (adjusted for SOS obviously), I get TCU -9.26.
I was hoping that this line would come down as the public will hammer Wisconsin close to gametime, but I'm not sure the books will want to move this off 3 as they may get quite a bit of sharp money on TCU.
Math Model: TCU -13.34/53.62
Thx moo - about where I was - TCU is going to be a big one for me...
GL - merry Christmas.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Posted:
#121
Quote Originally Posted by HolyBull:
Van,
This is why your threads are always a MUST read. I don't always agree with your sides, but your opinion always garners immediate respect. Well said and thanks for all the great posts.
THX Holy Bull - No coal for your stocking this Christmas!
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Posted:
#123
I know we're talking about the Rose Bowl, even though Little Caesars Bowl is looming tomorrow, but any lean on tomorrows game? I've been trailing most the cappers on here, but mostly gcnmoo 
and vanzack and would love some insight on tomorrow. Is everyone going to stay away from the game after the news of the point shaving scheme came out or do you think that they rooted out most of the problem? Thanks again. 
P.S. Nice thread...I'm on this all day 
0
Posted:
#125
Quote Originally Posted by stevewolve:
Most computer and math model system will side with the favorite. So if the first 5 games won by the favorite, Naturally this is a great system, but when the dogs start barking, then it's a 50-50 system, who do u think run the vegas sportsbook, computer nerds or you know who?
Most computer and math model system will side with the favorite. So if the first 5 games won by the favorite, Naturally this is a great system, but when the dogs start barking, then it's a 50-50 system, who do u think run the vegas sportsbook, computer nerds or you know who?
Fail.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Hot Forum Topics
