Some volume-success was present here last Saturday (11-7, .611) – pumping up a dismal full-season record (38-36-1, .514). However, assessing them all as usual, the box has a warm & fuzzy for these:
1) BowlingGreen(-6.5)/SacramentoSt
2) ArkansasSt(-2.5)/SoAlabama L
3) Temple(-3.5)/Connecticut
4) Troy(-10)/SoMississippi W
5) Liberty(-13.5)/SamHouston W
6) SanJoseSt(-4.5)/ Wyoming L
7) Missouri(-3)/TexasA&M
8) Utah(-14.5)/Kansas
9) AirForce(-7.5)/NoIllinois
10) Houston(+2.5)/KansasState
11) USC(+1.5)/PennState
12) GeorgiaTech(+7)/Duke
13) JamesMadison(-7.5)/GeorgiaSouth
14) Tennessee(-13.5)/Arkansas
15) BoiseSt(-6.5)/FresnoSt
16) OklahomaSt(-9.5)/CentralFlorida
The algorithm adjustment took place on week #3 (9/19). And since then? Recognizing rank-value as a worthy attribute -- the system top-nine has posted a 21-6 (.778) record. Respectable, though certainly not sustainable.
Taking a momentary side road. As a tech guy, I don’t know the first thing about fundamental handicapping. Nor do I know anything about pro capping. However, convinced that the college game offers the more-forgiving path, I was recently asked to quantify that opinion. Indeed (???). Besides the large volume diff, my general supposition would be this. The Man (similar to financial markets) abhors instability. So, what might be one measure of football wagering stability?
How about point spread magnitude? My one-time DuckDuckGo search yielded an average NFL spread of 5.6. The average for my 2013-25 college database (8332 games) is 11.6. Some quick math on that suggests the pro game is twice as stable as the college game -- which might be not-good for the Sunday investor. The disparity (2x) is very-likely not that dramatic, but at least we can call it........food for thought.
58 on the board; two more than last week. The forever good news is.........volume = opportunity.
Good luck,
TheKingfish
“When you’re through changing, you’re through.”
Martha Stewart
Hot Forum Topics
