Super Bowl losers

If you believe 'line of scrimmage play' is undervalued in determining how teams' does ats wise as I do.

Vegas sets their lines based mainly on the hype narratives of the teams' alpha players.

How the big guys in the trenches fair versus their opponents (off vs def AND def vs off) will over time be very

helpful imho.

Two way differential sdql querys is a way of monitoring any imbalances,often before the market makes adjustments.

There are many many stats that can be used in this manner. For example:

tA(points/rushes)>oA(o:points/o:rushes) and tA(o:points/o:rushes)<oA(points/rushes) and A,D,F,H

For defensive stats there is a difference in your directions (>,<),they must be reversed, for example:

tA(qb hits)<oA(o:qb hits) and tA(o:qb hits)>oA(qb hits) and A,D,F,H

Then depending on how far back you want to go,you use (season>=?) For me I prefer modern data so

I use 2023/24. These above queries measure line of scrimmage (trench) on BOTH sides of the ball rather than

(total yardage and margin of win) which will be affected by 'noise'.

Combined with 3 week rolling averages,one can really front run evolving or devolving situations which is +EV

Just looked at Marc Lawrence's website....perhaps I'm a bit bored, will do so to see if I might glean some useful information, or more commonly find handicappers that postulate certain ideas that are erroneous that can be used to fade the public.

To his credit, he lists the records of his stable of handicappers, 16-20 of them,  over the past 30 and 90 days.....I looked at all of their records over the past 90 days.  Now, most of them are putting out baseball and WNBA picks, and he lists their records, NOT their plus/minus units for that timeframe, which is a pity, and probably a protective exercise to in an attempt to salvage their reputation....we'll assume that over 90 days they have split their favorite and underdog picks equally.

The results?.....one was profitable, 2 were marginally profitable....2-3 were breakeven (around 52%) and 11 were losers over the last 90 days and four of them were inactive.

You would have made money on those 11 by fading them, but of course you would have had to pay money for the privilege of doing so.

Fading a group of "experts" remains one of the very best handicapping angles one can do.

"The parameters are  league-wide and not specific to a Super Bowl re-march"

Can you list the parameters?

@Indigo999

 For whatever it is worth - complete list of when last year's Super Bowl loser gets that revenge opportunity vs the Super Bowl winner the following year

1970 Minnesota -4 vs KC W

1976 Minnesota +4.5 vs Pittsburgh L

1979 Dallas +3 @ Pittsburgh L

1993 Buffalo +5.5 vs Dallas W

1997 New England -1.5 vs Green Bay L

2014 Denver +4.5 @ Seattle L

2016 Carolina -3 @ Denver L

2017 Atlanta +3 @ New England L

2023 Philadelphia +3 @ KC W

2024 SF -1.5 vs KC L

2025 KC +1 vs Philadelphia L

Listen, I've never once interacted with you, you tell me you're not a query guy....AND, I've given out 28 different angles on this site, and you want to give you another one??!!

Why don't you contribute something useful to this site or to the world at-large?

The answer is "NO".

.

I have this game as a very unique situation and am laying off taking either side. Seeing someone that says they have 2400 games that are similar to that one is extremely interesting to me.

You post endless queries but you won't give more details on this one? That doesn't make sense.

Just my 2 bahts worth.

Any trend that hits 63% over a sample size of 2400 is GOLD

And you who has contributed nil to this community expects more info.

Any idea the amount of time required to suss out that kind of query?

I did not think so.

Although I disagree here because in that sample size very few would have changed their OC and lost their

SuperBowl MVP in the first game of the season, it remains a MONSTER historical trend.

It doesn't make cents is correct.

If/when I make quite a bit of money with this, which also works on college football and college basketball, perhaps I'd share, unless you wish to pay me 5 figures for the angle.

It ain't money for nothing and your chicks for free.....

I will place a bet on this game.

It sets up very nicely for a Wong 2 team teaser (-120) with a compromised early season offense

who install a new system with a new OC and try to get a rookie RB up to speed (his first game will be very hard)

especially pass blocking.A new offense is also very limiting to the timing,so I expect a very rush heavy scheme.

The revenge angle is highly over imagined imho

wager:

2 team 6 pt teaser -120

NE+9.5 to UNDER 50.5  (-3.0 % to win 2.5%) of bankroll.

"Any trend that hits 63% over a sample size of 2400 is GOLD."

Then why are you taking the Patriots???

"Although I disagree here because in that sample size very few would have changed their OC and lost their SB mvp RB for the new season.

Maybe reading comprehension is not your strong suit

Yeah these are two big changes for the offense, especially losing their star running back.

Of course differing opinions are what make a market....I've started using this angle as a test in the CFL with the idea that I would utilize other ideas and angles, that when both other angles and this one agreed on one side I'd play that side.

I found it hasn't worked as effectively as I had hoped, and that blindly following this without filtering would've worked better.  "Too many cooks spoiling the broth"....etc.

So, I won't filter based on other factors.

The idea that there is a new coordinator and new running back for the Seahawks would make sense to you and many others......the issue on a forum is when we expect everyone else to agree with our rationale.   I expect to be wrong frequently, but hopefully not more than 43% of the time.......for me,  I won't be going off the Seahawks.

We'll agree to disagree this particular time, and over time with a large sample size we may well both be correct and profitable.

Why not lay off the game instead of making a teaser play on the Pats? I know I am.

I wouldn't pay anything for your angle because until you post the parameters, I simply don't believe you have a 2400 game sample size for the Pats/Seahawks Super Bowl rematch happening in week one.

"I wouldn't pay anything for your angle because until you post the parameters, I simply don't believe you have a 2400 game sample size for the Pats/Seahawks Super Bowl rematch happening in week one."

You needn't worry, I won't be giving  or selling it to you.....run along.

Why would I want it? Last year you finished 3-4, -2.2 units in week one. 

@bristolbob

Nice list there. I think Pats will be a popular play in this game but maybe not by much: the revenge angle will be overplayed, making a splash at receiver with AJ Brown and Romeo Doubs will attract some good Pats action too. Pats did improve their roster a bit naturally but so has their schedule. Pats had their share of struggles against good teams  Its going to take some time to gel. Meanwhile Seahawks lost some key guys and their OC but their roster is still solid despite losing some depth they have continuity in key positions.  My primary interest would be still on that Pats O-line vs Seahawks D-line. They were an average unit last year they got a decent guard with Vera Tucker but I'm not sold. Center and right side of the line remains weak. I think Seahawks defense will still bring pressure. Who knows if Drake Maye will get the ball off on time to AJ Brown. Game will probably be closer so the spread may be tight here. Won't be a blowout like the Super Bowl was so Seahawks by 3 or 4 maybe.

I might skip this one. Will have to see what the public consensus will align with.