Playoffs....tech angles part III

I believe you're right & I'm wrong.  Buff/KC goes Under!!!

p:playoffs=1 and p:margin<7 and A and p:D and o;rest<10 and NDIV and 45>p:points>22 and total<60 and op:H and line<14.5

Under by -17, -10 & -20

Bills m/l & Under

Hahaha exactly. RiderX been getting taking to the cleaners all playoffs with those stats and trends 

superbowl 

p:playoffs = 1 and p:F and pp:F and o:conference!=t:conference and ats streak<7 and line<5 and p:points<45

thx spottie for this spectacular query.  (2-19)

thx spottie for this spectacular query.  (2-19)

Hey indi… would you or Jow do me a favor… in the next week…. if teasing 6-7 points… where would you take over/under on super bowl… what does math and history say.    Line is 49.5… game on turf indoors.     In no hurry.  Thanks.  

The Bills now hold the record for 22 straight games without losing the turnover battle.. Nice record for them to have 

Why is the Broncos-Seahawks Super Bowl (the 43-8 wipeout) listed as both a winning result and a losing result in this trend?

Great query.  Many fans and sports bettors will be shocked, despite the narrow point spread, if Jalen Hurts (the distinctly inferior QB) manages to knock off the virtually invincible and deified Patrick Mahomes.

Go PHL!

We need a Super Bowl query on matchups involving teams who reached the Super Bowl by winning their conference title game by a field goal or less who are facing an opponent who won their conference title game by 17 points or more.

The result will not be welcome news for Eagles fans.

Both teams satisfy all of the parameters and the line was less than 5 for both of them.

Can you spell that query out in English? Thanks. 

The narrow CONF winner was 2-0 in the Super Bowl matchup.  2-0 is a meaningless sample size, and I certainly would never act on a 2-0 query.  I think spottie2935's 2-19 query fading KC is MUCH more reliable.  Of course Steve Spagnuolo's 20-4 SU record in the playoffs is also worth considering.

Maybe KC will win by exactly one point satisfying both solid trends and making for exciting viewing.

playoffs = 1 --- It's a PO game

p:F --- Favored in the previous game

pp:F --- Favored in the game before that

o:conference!=t:conference --- Opposite conferences; this is a Super Bowl only query

ats streak < 7 --- The team has not covered 7+ consecutive games Against The Spread

line < 5 --- The team is a dog of 4.5 points or less, a Pick 'Em or favored

points < 45 --- The team scored 44 or less in winning the CONF championship

Spottie2935 is currently offline and deserves a lot of credit for coming up with that query.  I hope my explanation is adequate.

Yes, so we can throw out that Super Bowl and this trend becomes 1-18 ATS, with the Chiefs from just two seasons ago being the only team to overcome this negative situation. And they did it against....the Eagles!

Good point.  KC has continued to defy the odds.

While it is certainly reasonable to conclude that Saquon Barkley's rushing prowess gives PHL a fighting chance, this query says to fade PHL:

playoffs = 1 and p:playoffs = 1 and site = neutral and p:YPRA > 4.5

SU:   0-9 (-7.9,0.0%)

ATS:   1-8 (-12.2,11.1%)

Good luck everybody.

THX DBW

That looks golden to me

You're welcome.  Based on the wretched NFL season I am having, PHL is practically a "lock" LOL.

@MrBator

 I believe I ran this similar queries multiple times, looking for the best results.  I dint add "and F" that would eliminate small lines that include dog and favorite in the same game.  On the other hand it eliminates some other small dogs that should be included in the record.  Sometimes you have to double check the query results to eliminate what you have detected. 

p:playoffs = 1 and p:F and pp:F and o:conference!=t:conference and ats streak<7 and line<5 and p:points<45 and F

favorites in this situation 0-14 ATS 3-11 SU

even if there is a duplicate game the results are so strong it doesnt matter thru my lens. 

p:playoffs = 1 and p:F and pp:F and o:conference!=t:conference and ats streak<7 and line<5 and p:points<45

eliminating Seattle as a dog in that game makes the results 1-19 ATS, why eliminate the dog? because the majority of the losers are favorites in this case.  The basis of the query is fading "p:F and pp:F" heading into the superbowl.  This stands out to me as A strong situational mentality that a lot falsely trust.  Trend proven and huge results against this mentality.

@DogbiteWilliams

 Thanks DBW 

@MrBator

 One result and the favorite covered.  If you like the Chiefs these queries will most likely have limited results if one gets too specific.  This site only goes back to the early to mid 2000’s in some cases.  

@DogbiteWilliams

 Thx again DBW