Posted:
#26
Excellent thread here
0
NFL Primer - Key Numbers and how they have changed over the years and why it is important....
Posted:
#30
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams:
Sharp research; thanks. They have discussed this on Daily Wager, so I already knew about the declining importance of 4. What really shocked me was that 15 was more common than 14 last season. Any margins combined with any other parameters (away/home, favorite/dog, off a win/loss) can be researched at Killer Sports as long as you know SDQL.
Sharp research; thanks. They have discussed this on Daily Wager, so I already knew about the declining importance of 4. What really shocked me was that 15 was more common than 14 last season. Any margins combined with any other parameters (away/home, favorite/dog, off a win/loss) can be researched at Killer Sports as long as you know SDQL.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Posted:
#31
Quote Originally Posted by unplucked_gem:
So I play mostly alternate lines using a proven stat model that I pay for. I recall an earlier post wherein you stated (loosely) "gotta spend money to make money" and if you're spending money ensure they are smarter than you. However, exactly to your point when value is indicated via the model (I look for +150) I am always cognizant of these new key numbers and usually bump a line accordingly to leave the push as a safety valve out very specifically the -6 vs. -7. The gain from +150 to +165 is not worth the risk given the new data (bravo). For me, the 2 / 3 number is rendered moot as anything indicated +3, I generally will play on the money line and anything -3 or less is too thin for my likings if I cannot bump. As always, BOL and learn all you can.
So I play mostly alternate lines using a proven stat model that I pay for. I recall an earlier post wherein you stated (loosely) "gotta spend money to make money" and if you're spending money ensure they are smarter than you. However, exactly to your point when value is indicated via the model (I look for +150) I am always cognizant of these new key numbers and usually bump a line accordingly to leave the push as a safety valve out very specifically the -6 vs. -7. The gain from +150 to +165 is not worth the risk given the new data (bravo). For me, the 2 / 3 number is rendered moot as anything indicated +3, I generally will play on the money line and anything -3 or less is too thin for my likings if I cannot bump. As always, BOL and learn all you can.
Yeah, I pay to have guys who are way smarter than me develop software (mostly excel) that boils certain things out for me. It is my instruction and design, but execution is done elsewhere. And they usually have great suggestions also.
Investment.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Posted:
#32
Quote Originally Posted by wolfeman3:
@dimndimn Appreciate you finding this gem… +/- 2pts is the new 3… Not quite, but Books aren’t taxing it like 3 or 7 when buying a half point around key numbers. This season in particular, moving off +1.5 to +2 has helped save me with some fortunate pushes (which is insurance imo). At the same time -1.5 over -2 has become important. Books are also placing a lot of -2.5’s out there making you believe you’re getting a helluva half pt….. With XP’s as shady as ever, and coaches gambling with the going for 2 and with success, the 1-2 pt winning results will continue to be the Norm imo. thanks again DimnDim
@dimndimn Appreciate you finding this gem… +/- 2pts is the new 3… Not quite, but Books aren’t taxing it like 3 or 7 when buying a half point around key numbers. This season in particular, moving off +1.5 to +2 has helped save me with some fortunate pushes (which is insurance imo). At the same time -1.5 over -2 has become important. Books are also placing a lot of -2.5’s out there making you believe you’re getting a helluva half pt….. With XP’s as shady as ever, and coaches gambling with the going for 2 and with success, the 1-2 pt winning results will continue to be the Norm imo. thanks again DimnDim
2 is a key number, but the books and bettors dont treat it like it is yet. Lines are easily moved off of 2, as opposed to say 3. Which is great while it lasts.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Posted:
#35
There has been a lot of discussion here about the 2/3 margin of victory numbers, but to me, the bigger takeaway are the 6/7 numbers. As Van pointed out early in the thread, 6 now has a greater chance of hitting than 7, (using the 2021 data). So that -6.5 line you are getting make not look so attractive now, in fact it's a liability. That would shock most people. Conversely, +6.5 looks pretty good nowadays. (for simplicity sake, I am assuming standard -110 line in the discussion).
The 2/3 numbers are interesting as well, as 2 will statistically hit more often than years past. But it's also important not to lose sight of the fact that a 3 margin of victory will still hit more than 2.5x as often as a 2. In other words, don't too caught up with the 2 number.
0
Nice to see you again too.
Posted:
#38
Quote Originally Posted by Rush51:
There has been a lot of discussion here about the 2/3 margin of victory numbers, but to me, the bigger takeaway are the 6/7 numbers. As Van pointed out early in the thread, 6 now has a greater chance of hitting than 7, (using the 2021 data). So that -6.5 line you are getting make not look so attractive now, in fact it's a liability. That would shock most people. Conversely, +6.5 looks pretty good nowadays. (for simplicity sake, I am assuming standard -110 line in the discussion). The 2/3 numbers are interesting as well, as 2 will statistically hit more often than years past. But it's also important not to lose sight of the fact that a 3 margin of victory will still hit more than 2.5x as often as a 2. In other words, don't too caught up with the 2 number.
There has been a lot of discussion here about the 2/3 margin of victory numbers, but to me, the bigger takeaway are the 6/7 numbers. As Van pointed out early in the thread, 6 now has a greater chance of hitting than 7, (using the 2021 data). So that -6.5 line you are getting make not look so attractive now, in fact it's a liability. That would shock most people. Conversely, +6.5 looks pretty good nowadays. (for simplicity sake, I am assuming standard -110 line in the discussion). The 2/3 numbers are interesting as well, as 2 will statistically hit more often than years past. But it's also important not to lose sight of the fact that a 3 margin of victory will still hit more than 2.5x as often as a 2. In other words, don't too caught up with the 2 number.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Posted:
#40
Quote Originally Posted by Rush51:
There has been a lot of discussion here about the 2/3 margin of victory numbers, but to me, the bigger takeaway are the 6/7 numbers. As Van pointed out early in the thread, 6 now has a greater chance of hitting than 7, (using the 2021 data). So that -6.5 line you are getting make not look so attractive now, in fact it's a liability. That would shock most people. Conversely, +6.5 looks pretty good nowadays. (for simplicity sake, I am assuming standard -110 line in the discussion). The 2/3 numbers are interesting as well, as 2 will statistically hit more often than years past. But it's also important not to lose sight of the fact that a 3 margin of victory will still hit more than 2.5x as often as a 2. In other words, don't too caught up with the 2 number.
There has been a lot of discussion here about the 2/3 margin of victory numbers, but to me, the bigger takeaway are the 6/7 numbers. As Van pointed out early in the thread, 6 now has a greater chance of hitting than 7, (using the 2021 data). So that -6.5 line you are getting make not look so attractive now, in fact it's a liability. That would shock most people. Conversely, +6.5 looks pretty good nowadays. (for simplicity sake, I am assuming standard -110 line in the discussion). The 2/3 numbers are interesting as well, as 2 will statistically hit more often than years past. But it's also important not to lose sight of the fact that a 3 margin of victory will still hit more than 2.5x as often as a 2. In other words, don't too caught up with the 2 number.
Yes, 6 is hitting a lot more.
Yes, 6 hit one time more than 7 last year — 20 to 19.
But I would watch it more to say that 6 is more likely to hit than 7 after just one year.
In the last 3 years 6 hit 57 times, 7 hit 72 times.
2 has increased slightly. About once more per year on average in the last six years, compared to the five years before. 11.7 times to 10.6
What is more important trend-wise to me is the decrease that landed on 4 and the increase in the number that landed on 5. The increase in 8 is also interesting.
But I agree with your point that in the NFL the KEY number is 3 and it is not that close. 7 is still a distant 2nd to 3.
1
Posted:
#42
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
Yes, 6 is hitting a lot more. Yes, 6 hit one time more than 7 last year — 20 to 19. But I would watch it more to say that 6 is more likely to hit than 7 after just one year. In the last 3 years 6 hit 57 times, 7 hit 72 times. 2 has increased slightly. About once more per year on average in the last six years, compared to the five years before. 11.7 times to 10.6 What is more important trend-wise to me is the decrease that landed on 4 and the increase in the number that landed on 5. The increase in 8 is also interesting. But I agree with your point that in the NFL the KEY number is 3 and it is not that close. 7 is still a distant 2nd to 3.
Yes, 6 is hitting a lot more. Yes, 6 hit one time more than 7 last year — 20 to 19. But I would watch it more to say that 6 is more likely to hit than 7 after just one year. In the last 3 years 6 hit 57 times, 7 hit 72 times. 2 has increased slightly. About once more per year on average in the last six years, compared to the five years before. 11.7 times to 10.6 What is more important trend-wise to me is the decrease that landed on 4 and the increase in the number that landed on 5. The increase in 8 is also interesting. But I agree with your point that in the NFL the KEY number is 3 and it is not that close. 7 is still a distant 2nd to 3.
Well said, Raiders.. In fact , after I posted yesterday, I wondered if 2021 might be a statistical anomaly in the 6/7 margin of victory discussion. But I don't think 2021 is an anomaly, but more of a trend as Van was originally pointing out. Your data also suggests a trend, as well. You had stated in the last 3 years, 6 hit 57 times, 7 hit 72 times. Here is the trend on 6/7, using yours and Van's data ;
2010 ; margin of victory of 7 hit 50% more often than 6 (18 to 12)
2019-2021 ; 7 hit 26% more often than 6 (72 to 57)
2021 ; 6 hit slightly more often 7 (20 to 19)
* The trend is clearly pointing out 6 has caught up with 7, and then some (slightly)
The big picture is that Van's original argument in this thread has lots of merit. Coaches use of the 2-point attempt, going for it more on 4th down, and missed XPs is changing the nature of the game and margin of victory.
0
Posted:
#43
@Rush51
I posted the numbers in another thread. I don’t want to clog this thread up with them. But I will follow this post up with the chart numbers.
His point about buying off of 2 is correct. But that is the same with the 4 and 5 or even 6 situation. But 3 is by far the most expensive to buy off of with good reason, followed by 7. These are simply the key numbers. Because of the scoring and because of the parity in the NFL, as opposed to the NCAA.
Yes, teams are going for 2 more often. But a team still has to score a TD in order to even have the option to go for 2. They still, overwhelmingly, will choose the PAT — in part, because the games in the NFL are so tight. Coaches are still hesitant to make the 2pt try the first option, even when it might should be.
What is more interesting to me is the 4/5 situation since the PAT has been moved back.
The last point is, until other numbers really show longterm disadvantage for books to buy off of other numbers they will see no need to charge more. These folks are sharp and realize the analytics behind the 2pt plays. They are not really losing money on these — yet. As I noted in the other thread, there have been many studies written on the increase in the 2 point play.
For example, how often is a line going to be set on 2 that you might want to buy off of, as opposed to lines being set on 3 that you might want to buy off of?
That is the key issue. Like I noted in the other thread, buying off all numbers (with the exception of -3.5) are not profitable.
So, buying points has to be entirely case by case and very situational. So, if you see an advantage with a game set on 2 is it really more profitable this year than one that was set on 2 some years ago?
For sure, last year may be an anomaly; or it may not be. It could very well be even more disparate this year — even though it doesn’t look to be.
0
Posted:
#45
@vanzack
good post, do you mind to share where can I find the stats for the NFL margin of victory year by year? I can only look for a range of years... say 2015 to 2019 or 2000 to 2020, I'd like to see year by year if there's a way to look at it, thanks.
https://cleanuphitter.com/nfl/stats/nfl_common_scores.php heres a site im looking at
0
Hot Forum Topics
