Feel bad for the Lions though their future looks bright, you never know when you'll have the all the pieces together at the right time. Obviously for betting purposes having them go for it on fourth and goal when I had them at +6.5 was pretty great. I thought they were better than the 49ers.....for whatever reason they didn't run it outside the tackles much at all in the second half. If they could do better than Goff as a quarterback they should...though for obvious reasons a coach and a general manager's future is tied to who quarterbacks your team....in this case the Lions' organization will almost certainly play it safe and do the status quo......I would trade up to get the LSU quarterback and give up whatever it takes to get him, but then your dick is on the line if you're the GM.....I'd put it on the line, because the Lions can be a top four team with Goff, but they won't win it with him.
I use killersports or gimmethedog, online databases....the playoff history goes back to 2002 and their regular season data goes back to 1989.
A) Play on the superbowl team with the lesser winning percentage.......16-2 ATS (+6.67), 12-6 straight up (+3.72), 6-12 o/u (-3.31)....average line/total +2.9/49, average score.....24.7-21.0......ON Chiefs
B) Play on the superbowl team with the lesser record the previous season.....14-8 ATS....ON 49ers
C) When those two angles above are combined, the team with the lesser record this year, and the higher winning percentage last season, those teams have gone 6-1 ATS (+2.86).......6-1 straight up (+5.29)......2-5 o/u.....(-4.86).....average line/total......-24.1/48.1.....average score.....24.3-19
Play:
1) ****Chiefs pik, even
4
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
16-5 for the playoffs.
Feel bad for the Lions though their future looks bright, you never know when you'll have the all the pieces together at the right time. Obviously for betting purposes having them go for it on fourth and goal when I had them at +6.5 was pretty great. I thought they were better than the 49ers.....for whatever reason they didn't run it outside the tackles much at all in the second half. If they could do better than Goff as a quarterback they should...though for obvious reasons a coach and a general manager's future is tied to who quarterbacks your team....in this case the Lions' organization will almost certainly play it safe and do the status quo......I would trade up to get the LSU quarterback and give up whatever it takes to get him, but then your dick is on the line if you're the GM.....I'd put it on the line, because the Lions can be a top four team with Goff, but they won't win it with him.
I use killersports or gimmethedog, online databases....the playoff history goes back to 2002 and their regular season data goes back to 1989.
A) Play on the superbowl team with the lesser winning percentage.......16-2 ATS (+6.67), 12-6 straight up (+3.72), 6-12 o/u (-3.31)....average line/total +2.9/49, average score.....24.7-21.0......ON Chiefs
B) Play on the superbowl team with the lesser record the previous season.....14-8 ATS....ON 49ers
C) When those two angles above are combined, the team with the lesser record this year, and the higher winning percentage last season, those teams have gone 6-1 ATS (+2.86).......6-1 straight up (+5.29)......2-5 o/u.....(-4.86).....average line/total......-24.1/48.1.....average score.....24.3-19
It's really not that hard.. they went wide 9s to funnel everything into the middle gibbs can't run between the tackles and is a liability in general. And limits Montgomery.. lions were JV team playing a title contender second half.. no reason to feel sorry they aren't a great team and they don't have a bright future ... you seen the division they will be the third best team in the division with Ben Johnson gone
0
@Indigo999
It's really not that hard.. they went wide 9s to funnel everything into the middle gibbs can't run between the tackles and is a liability in general. And limits Montgomery.. lions were JV team playing a title contender second half.. no reason to feel sorry they aren't a great team and they don't have a bright future ... you seen the division they will be the third best team in the division with Ben Johnson gone
What is it about betting forums that there is a severe lack of civility?....for the most part my threads have been wonderful with a good exchange between me and those reading my threads.....now we have two people that seem to think that the normal procedure is to bring disparaging remarks about having an opinion.
How sad!
I'll take your bet if you want to put money on it that Detroit will finish third or worse in the division next season, regardless of who is coordinating their offense.
I shouldn't feel bad for a team that took a tough loss?.....I suppose having that emotion or not is really up to me, wouldn't you say?
6
What is it about betting forums that there is a severe lack of civility?....for the most part my threads have been wonderful with a good exchange between me and those reading my threads.....now we have two people that seem to think that the normal procedure is to bring disparaging remarks about having an opinion.
How sad!
I'll take your bet if you want to put money on it that Detroit will finish third or worse in the division next season, regardless of who is coordinating their offense.
I shouldn't feel bad for a team that took a tough loss?.....I suppose having that emotion or not is really up to me, wouldn't you say?
You have lots of positive support indigo… let the other roll of your back like water off a duck…. Literally … many appreciate your efforts…. Including me. … I have learned over the years to handicap…. The handicappers…. God knows I cannot do the sports…. So I have tried a diff method…. Great job … wish I had access during season. I think I friended you.. but am not sure. The negative/hateful/hurtful….. like water…. Gone … in one second. And when it’s gone….. it’s gone.
2
You have lots of positive support indigo… let the other roll of your back like water off a duck…. Literally … many appreciate your efforts…. Including me. … I have learned over the years to handicap…. The handicappers…. God knows I cannot do the sports…. So I have tried a diff method…. Great job … wish I had access during season. I think I friended you.. but am not sure. The negative/hateful/hurtful….. like water…. Gone … in one second. And when it’s gone….. it’s gone.
D) Taking the team with the least amount of wins their past 10 games of each team has gone 16-3 ATS in the Super Bowl......
The Fortyniners have lost only to the Ravens and then the Rams in their last game out the last 10 games they've played to go to 8-2.
The Chiefs had a rough December, losing to the Raiders, Bills and Packers to go to 7-3 their last 10.
The query text for this angle is below....
playoffs=1 and tS(W, N=10) and not C
When angles A and D are combined...the lesser full season winning percentage plus the least amount of wins out of their past 10 games in relation to their present superbowl opponent the against the spread record has been 13-1 ATS.
playoffs=1 and tS(W, N=10)<oS(W, N=10) and tA(W)<oA(W) and not C
Keep in mind that these angles are not foolproof....Marc Lawrence, another technical handicapper, had a 27-0 angle going on the 49ers in their game against the Lions, that obviously lost (barely).....I, at one time had a 27-0 ATS NFL angle that lost two times in a row in consecutive weeks quite a few years ago,....don't bet the farm or your house.
1
D) Taking the team with the least amount of wins their past 10 games of each team has gone 16-3 ATS in the Super Bowl......
The Fortyniners have lost only to the Ravens and then the Rams in their last game out the last 10 games they've played to go to 8-2.
The Chiefs had a rough December, losing to the Raiders, Bills and Packers to go to 7-3 their last 10.
The query text for this angle is below....
playoffs=1 and tS(W, N=10) and not C
When angles A and D are combined...the lesser full season winning percentage plus the least amount of wins out of their past 10 games in relation to their present superbowl opponent the against the spread record has been 13-1 ATS.
playoffs=1 and tS(W, N=10)<oS(W, N=10) and tA(W)<oA(W) and not C
Keep in mind that these angles are not foolproof....Marc Lawrence, another technical handicapper, had a 27-0 angle going on the 49ers in their game against the Lions, that obviously lost (barely).....I, at one time had a 27-0 ATS NFL angle that lost two times in a row in consecutive weeks quite a few years ago,....don't bet the farm or your house.
The one loss in that 13-1 ATS angle was the debacle in which the Falcons had a HUGE lead versus the Patriots, but failed to cover when the Patriots scored a touchdown in overtime to negate a cover for the three point dog Atlanta Falcons.
Obviously because I have such vivid memories of that game, I was on the Falcons.....there was a 3rd and 2 situation where they could have kicked a field goal, that instead turned into a sack and then a penalty that took the Falcons out of field goal position very late in the fourth quarter.....the Patriots drove it right down the field to tie the game on a touch and then a two point conversion.
2
The one loss in that 13-1 ATS angle was the debacle in which the Falcons had a HUGE lead versus the Patriots, but failed to cover when the Patriots scored a touchdown in overtime to negate a cover for the three point dog Atlanta Falcons.
Obviously because I have such vivid memories of that game, I was on the Falcons.....there was a 3rd and 2 situation where they could have kicked a field goal, that instead turned into a sack and then a penalty that took the Falcons out of field goal position very late in the fourth quarter.....the Patriots drove it right down the field to tie the game on a touch and then a two point conversion.
The query for angle D was not correct as often in covers the highlighted text is not copied completely, and I missed the non-completeness of the angle I produced....it is below
tS(W, N=10)<oS(W, N=10) and not C and playoffs=1
The query text should read, "A non-conference (Superbowl) playoff game in which a team has won less games out of their last ten games than their present opponent."
0
The query for angle D was not correct as often in covers the highlighted text is not copied completely, and I missed the non-completeness of the angle I produced....it is below
tS(W, N=10)<oS(W, N=10) and not C and playoffs=1
The query text should read, "A non-conference (Superbowl) playoff game in which a team has won less games out of their last ten games than their present opponent."
You have lots of positive support indigo… let the other roll of your back like water off a duck…. Literally … many appreciate your efforts…. Including me. … I have learned over the years to handicap…. The handicappers…. God knows I cannot do the sports…. So I have tried a diff method…. Great job … wish I had access during season. I think I friended you.. but am not sure. The negative/hateful/hurtful….. like water…. Gone … in one second. And when it’s gone….. it’s gone.
Yes, you accepted my friend request correctly...I wrote a brief note to you of which you should be notified from covers that you have a message on the top right hand corner of your page when you log on to covers.
As far as accessing me during the season, you're fortunate that you didn't....I had the worst NFL regular season of my life this season, after being up over 30 units the previous season. I also had the best college football season of my life so my results were mixed. I set up my own online forecasting business for this season and didn't post much here and it's only when I started posting again that I start achieving the desired results.....so I am trying to work out the message that the universe is trying to get across to me.....
sometimes those messages can be a bit obtuse!....lol.
1
As
Quote Originally Posted by Mskeets:
You have lots of positive support indigo… let the other roll of your back like water off a duck…. Literally … many appreciate your efforts…. Including me. … I have learned over the years to handicap…. The handicappers…. God knows I cannot do the sports…. So I have tried a diff method…. Great job … wish I had access during season. I think I friended you.. but am not sure. The negative/hateful/hurtful….. like water…. Gone … in one second. And when it’s gone….. it’s gone.
Yes, you accepted my friend request correctly...I wrote a brief note to you of which you should be notified from covers that you have a message on the top right hand corner of your page when you log on to covers.
As far as accessing me during the season, you're fortunate that you didn't....I had the worst NFL regular season of my life this season, after being up over 30 units the previous season. I also had the best college football season of my life so my results were mixed. I set up my own online forecasting business for this season and didn't post much here and it's only when I started posting again that I start achieving the desired results.....so I am trying to work out the message that the universe is trying to get across to me.....
sometimes those messages can be a bit obtuse!....lol.
And that brings up an interesting topic....who makes the best handicappers?....is it those that have expertise in the game, like ex-all pros, ex-quarterbacks and ex-coaches?
Those types that are asked by the television network to give their picks are almost always very good fades....your very best handicappers are more likely to be math nerds that were figuring out complex calculus on a Friday night in high school rather than the star quarterback that was trying to score with the high school cheerleading captain.
And proficiency in a certain sport doesn't mean one can coach it...there are a few coaches that never played college or high school basketball...Bruce Pearl was the manager of his college team when he was a student.....there are quite a few ex-hall-of-fame players that tried to coach and couldn't, one aspect of expertise often doesn't correlate with another ability in the same sport.
There is a very good book by Michael Konik, by the name of "The Smart Money"....which details his life as a runner for Billy Walters when Billy was the man in sports betting. Having won hundreds of thousands, even millions from the Las Vegas bookmaking empire, the bookies severely limited Walters' betting, so to get around the restriction he employed people to make his bets for him. The bookmakers became paranoid of any big bettor who won consistently with good reason....some of them were runners for Walters. Konig had to pretend he was an ignorant whale (a big bettor) who just happened to be on a hot streak, rather than placing bets for the Michael Jordan of sports betting that used the expertise of a computer group to make his bets.....it is a fascinating read!
Towards the end of book, Konig contacts an old acquaintance from high school, a math nerd to see if he might come up with a similar way to beat the sports books. This math nerd had no idea about how a sports bet was even priced or made, so in the beginning Koenig had the explain to him the generalities of sports betting. His friend eventually got ahold of 20 years of sports betting results and plugged it into a computer and after six months of trial and error he had enabled his computer to spit out winners in a reliable way....and eventually he was able to do it in the other sports like baseball and basketball...this math nerd eventually quit his job as a university PhD math professor to become a successful sports bettor full-time.
Konik, stressed out to the max at the life he was leading, of fooling the sports bookmakers, of handling millions of dollars for the temperamental and choleric Walters, while having difficulties with his then girlfriend at the time, eventually gave it all away, while at the very end of his sports betting odyssey, figured out that teasers offered his best chance of winning.
Sports bookmakers evidently have agreed with that assessment as now here in Vegas the price is prohibitive to place teaser bets....it is around -135 now to place a two team teaser bet.
2
And that brings up an interesting topic....who makes the best handicappers?....is it those that have expertise in the game, like ex-all pros, ex-quarterbacks and ex-coaches?
Those types that are asked by the television network to give their picks are almost always very good fades....your very best handicappers are more likely to be math nerds that were figuring out complex calculus on a Friday night in high school rather than the star quarterback that was trying to score with the high school cheerleading captain.
And proficiency in a certain sport doesn't mean one can coach it...there are a few coaches that never played college or high school basketball...Bruce Pearl was the manager of his college team when he was a student.....there are quite a few ex-hall-of-fame players that tried to coach and couldn't, one aspect of expertise often doesn't correlate with another ability in the same sport.
There is a very good book by Michael Konik, by the name of "The Smart Money"....which details his life as a runner for Billy Walters when Billy was the man in sports betting. Having won hundreds of thousands, even millions from the Las Vegas bookmaking empire, the bookies severely limited Walters' betting, so to get around the restriction he employed people to make his bets for him. The bookmakers became paranoid of any big bettor who won consistently with good reason....some of them were runners for Walters. Konig had to pretend he was an ignorant whale (a big bettor) who just happened to be on a hot streak, rather than placing bets for the Michael Jordan of sports betting that used the expertise of a computer group to make his bets.....it is a fascinating read!
Towards the end of book, Konig contacts an old acquaintance from high school, a math nerd to see if he might come up with a similar way to beat the sports books. This math nerd had no idea about how a sports bet was even priced or made, so in the beginning Koenig had the explain to him the generalities of sports betting. His friend eventually got ahold of 20 years of sports betting results and plugged it into a computer and after six months of trial and error he had enabled his computer to spit out winners in a reliable way....and eventually he was able to do it in the other sports like baseball and basketball...this math nerd eventually quit his job as a university PhD math professor to become a successful sports bettor full-time.
Konik, stressed out to the max at the life he was leading, of fooling the sports bookmakers, of handling millions of dollars for the temperamental and choleric Walters, while having difficulties with his then girlfriend at the time, eventually gave it all away, while at the very end of his sports betting odyssey, figured out that teasers offered his best chance of winning.
Sports bookmakers evidently have agreed with that assessment as now here in Vegas the price is prohibitive to place teaser bets....it is around -135 now to place a two team teaser bet.
. Over the last 22 years, the team that was the bigger favorite on average over the course of the season is 3-19 ATS (13.6%)
That's interesting....just to be clear on this , you mean the team that over the course of the season had the higher average line in comparison to their Super Bowl opponent?
The Chiefs average line was -5.7 for their entire season and the 49ers average line was -8.4, so according to this you would play the Chiefs?
2
Quote Originally Posted by IntenseOperator:
. Over the last 22 years, the team that was the bigger favorite on average over the course of the season is 3-19 ATS (13.6%)
That's interesting....just to be clear on this , you mean the team that over the course of the season had the higher average line in comparison to their Super Bowl opponent?
The Chiefs average line was -5.7 for their entire season and the 49ers average line was -8.4, so according to this you would play the Chiefs?
This text is using the most negative number as obviously an indicator of the stronger team during the course of a year, and/or perhaps of an easier schedule as well.....as mentioned the Chiefs' average line was -5.7 this season and the 49ers' average line was -8.4.
It is indeed 19-3 ATS favoring the Chiefs (+8.18), 15-7 straight up (+5.50) and 10-12 o/u.
Average line/total +2.7/49......average score.....27.1-21.6
Thanks to Intense Operator for providing this!
2
The query text for post #20 above is this....
not C and playoffs=1 and tA(line)>oA(line)
This text is using the most negative number as obviously an indicator of the stronger team during the course of a year, and/or perhaps of an easier schedule as well.....as mentioned the Chiefs' average line was -5.7 this season and the 49ers' average line was -8.4.
It is indeed 19-3 ATS favoring the Chiefs (+8.18), 15-7 straight up (+5.50) and 10-12 o/u.
Average line/total +2.7/49......average score.....27.1-21.6
Majority of angles lndicate the UNDER, but it's doubtful I would play the UNDER in this game. I think the Chiefs would like to slow the game down, however the total was skewed last week due to Lamar throwing an endzone interception and also the fumble on the Chiefs' one yard line.......I think both teams get at least into the 20s and in the Super Bowl when both teams score at least 20 points the OVER has gone 18-6.
In the regular season when both teams score at least 20 points the OVER hits at a 90.9% rate.
points>19 and o:points>19 and H
1
Super Bowl play:
1) Chiefs **** pik, even
Majority of angles lndicate the UNDER, but it's doubtful I would play the UNDER in this game. I think the Chiefs would like to slow the game down, however the total was skewed last week due to Lamar throwing an endzone interception and also the fumble on the Chiefs' one yard line.......I think both teams get at least into the 20s and in the Super Bowl when both teams score at least 20 points the OVER has gone 18-6.
In the regular season when both teams score at least 20 points the OVER hits at a 90.9% rate.
Interestingly also, when both teams score at least 20 points the favorite has only covered 35% of regular season games, 33% of the playoff games, and predictably they've gone 4-8 ATS in the Super Bowl.
If you believe both teams can score at least 20 points, history says that you take the OVER and the dog.
Dogs that score at least 20 points in that game cover 75% of the time in the regular season, 76% during the playoffs, and they've covered 14 out of 18 times in the Super Bowl.
0
Interestingly also, when both teams score at least 20 points the favorite has only covered 35% of regular season games, 33% of the playoff games, and predictably they've gone 4-8 ATS in the Super Bowl.
If you believe both teams can score at least 20 points, history says that you take the OVER and the dog.
Dogs that score at least 20 points in that game cover 75% of the time in the regular season, 76% during the playoffs, and they've covered 14 out of 18 times in the Super Bowl.
Hot Forum Topics
