Posted:
#76
DSN 150 -- Thanks for your questions.
1) About streaks, no I do not factor these at all. My spreadsheet takes all subjectivity like this out of any equation. However, my numbers usually naturally compensate for a team's efficiency that comes out or usually leads to a winning streak.
2) I feel you. It's hard to eyeball a game and figure out if there's value. I'm not sure I'm going to be betting the Giants much if at all, at least not early. To me, they are still getting way too much credit. The books are going to eventually figure out to make them big dogs and hopefully there will be value here eventually but I don't see it yet. Lincecum is a badass, but you have a so-so pen and almost no offense behind him. It depends on the line tomorrow.
3) I don't blame you for trying to stay away from faves. As a general rule of thumb, if you don't do serious research, you would be better off making a mistake betting a dog than a fav.
1) About streaks, no I do not factor these at all. My spreadsheet takes all subjectivity like this out of any equation. However, my numbers usually naturally compensate for a team's efficiency that comes out or usually leads to a winning streak.
2) I feel you. It's hard to eyeball a game and figure out if there's value. I'm not sure I'm going to be betting the Giants much if at all, at least not early. To me, they are still getting way too much credit. The books are going to eventually figure out to make them big dogs and hopefully there will be value here eventually but I don't see it yet. Lincecum is a badass, but you have a so-so pen and almost no offense behind him. It depends on the line tomorrow.
3) I don't blame you for trying to stay away from faves. As a general rule of thumb, if you don't do serious research, you would be better off making a mistake betting a dog than a fav.
0
(+1.37 UNITS)
(-2 UNITS)
Hot Forum Topics
