Posted:
#51
My only play i am tailing is COLTS ML. Good lucc fellas
0
WEEK 13
Posted:
#52
I think the five full quarters played here is different than the Seahawks cardinals cuz that was a tie whereas the chiefs rallied twice to tie and wins at the buzzer, plus the fact they already had one look ahead clunker game against Tampa bay prior to the Denver game. Kc moneyline here but agree with Jacksonville and Indianapolis. Great work you do mate 
0
Posted:
#54
Quote Originally Posted by footballsmart:
Action, I totally agree! Teams play one game at a time and don't start game planning until the previous one is over. That's an example of a,silly cliche, or wives tale, that has somehow,stuck in our thinking. But its,pure fluff.
Action, I totally agree! Teams play one game at a time and don't start game planning until the previous one is over. That's an example of a,silly cliche, or wives tale, that has somehow,stuck in our thinking. But its,pure fluff.
Bill Parcels and Jimmy Johnson talked about this over and over again coaching teams in the 80's and 90's.
The Bronco defensive backs just talked about it after the SB win.
Other players haved as well.
Web sites have research such things as sandwhich games and proven it over years of research.
It's very real that teams do not put as much importance to every game.
0
Posted:
#55
Quote Originally Posted by ActionMagnet:
Biggest game of season? How is the Raider game any bigger to KC than the Atlanta game? Does a win vs the Raiders equate to 2 wins? I don't see it. All games are big with 5 games left. ATL is a punk team that will drop into a fetal position when the game gets physical. Those guys ain't ready for the Chiefs. We shall see.
It does count for 2 games because a KC win and a Raiders loss and it has far more importance in meaningful tiebreakers for a bye team and divsion winner then the Falcon game.
0
Posted:
#56
It's an interesting theory, but I would love to see the research to back it up. Sometimes a popular notion, when studied carefully, simply fails to convince in the actual data. And if some effect is there, I'd almost be willing to say that it's a much smaller effect than popularly assumed. If anyone has some serious data on these so called "sandwich games" please share it. I am willing to evaluate the data statistically, but it has to be at least several hundreds of games analyzed, or we are back to the world of opinion and belief rather than verifiable evidence. The first hurdle would be how we clearly define what a sandwich game is, in a totally clear way, and once that is done we can compare the success rates of teams playing sandwich games versus a random sample of other games that are not sandwich games. I would almost bet that nobody has studied this properly, but if I am wrong, even better, because this would be terrific information. I don't care what some coach said. Peoples opinions are often dead wrong even when they are esteemed Super Bowl champions. Look at the horrible handicapping record long term of the mainstream media, and that is all you need to know to realize that knowledge of the game is not the same as a carefully conducted scientific analysis of a theory. And that is precisely how I built my system for NFL prediction, through many many carefully done statistical analyses with hypothesis testing and rigorous procedures that guaranteed that what I was finding was not due to chance or random effects. I would venture to say that we are in 2016 still in the early infancy of really knowing how to predict sporting events. The science simply hasn't been done yet, but I will predict that by the year 2030, the average super contest record will be much higher than it is today in 2016 after more serious research findings accumulate. OK enough preaching for now, and I am all ears to any serious articles on scientific studies on the effects of sandwich games or other serious theories, but please don't evoke Terry Bradshaw or Jimmy Johnson. They predict about as good as your next door neighbor's mistress. Might as well flip a coin. You will probably get a,better pick. Not to take anything away from great coaches, but they cannot handicap, and to be honest, over time, even the best supposed handicappers in the world are little,better than 50% over time!! Infancy folks. But it will change with careful studies!
0
Posted:
#57
You are not going to get 1000s of results.
A team off an away division win, now a non-divisional away dog, with a division game up next have been 40-41 against the spread since 1989.
In the month of December the results are 14-12 ATS
If the team in question (Chiefs) is a >500 team the results are 23-27 ATS, 7-8-1 in December.
There are times when what is going on in the future has an effect on a team's present performance....this isn't one of those situations.
0
Posted:
#59
Quote Originally Posted by Indigo999:
You are not going to get 1000s of results.A team off an away division win, now a non-divisional away dog, with a division game up next have been 40-41 against the spread since 1989.In the month of December the results are 14-12 ATSIf the team in question (Chiefs) is a >500 team the results are 23-27 ATS, 7-8-1 in December.There are times when what is going on in the future has an effect on a team's present performance....this isn't one of those situations.
You are not going to get 1000s of results.A team off an away division win, now a non-divisional away dog, with a division game up next have been 40-41 against the spread since 1989.In the month of December the results are 14-12 ATSIf the team in question (Chiefs) is a >500 team the results are 23-27 ATS, 7-8-1 in December.There are times when what is going on in the future has an effect on a team's present performance....this isn't one of those situations.
Awesome Indego! As I figured, there,is,no evidence for this effect. It is,likely fluff!!!
0
Posted:
#60
Quote Originally Posted by Indigo999:
If you want hundreds, not thousands of results, become a baseball, basketball or ice hockey handicapper.
If you want hundreds, not thousands of results, become a baseball, basketball or ice hockey handicapper.
Indigo, true there are many more games,in other sports, but my analyses go back to the early 1980s, and I have over 8000 games,in my database, so football is indeed doable, but you have to analyze it properly.
0
Posted:
#61
Quote Originally Posted by footballsmart:
...And if some effect is there, I'd almost be willing to say that it's a much smaller effect than popularly assumed. If anyone has some serious data on these so called "sandwich games" please share it. I am willing to evaluate the data statistically, but it has to be at least several hundreds of games analyzed, or we are back to the world of opinion and belief rather than verifiable evidence.
...And if some effect is there, I'd almost be willing to say that it's a much smaller effect than popularly assumed. If anyone has some serious data on these so called "sandwich games" please share it. I am willing to evaluate the data statistically, but it has to be at least several hundreds of games analyzed, or we are back to the world of opinion and belief rather than verifiable evidence.
Sandwich game theories are hogwash IMO.
0
Posted:
#62
I may be biased since I am a Patriots fan and I know for a fact Belichick preaches 1 game at a time. Are there certain games that require more planning? Sure. But that is not to say the Patriots are going to prepare ANY LESS for a game due to their opponent 2 weeks from now, that is pure hyperbole.
0
Posted:
#65
Quote Originally Posted by suuma:
Guys a coach can preach "one game at a time" as much as he wants. Players don't prepare the same way for every game. Its not hogwash, it's simple human psychology. It's the same thing in every sport. In this game, 90% preparation instead of 100% can make a huge difference.
Guys a coach can preach "one game at a time" as much as he wants. Players don't prepare the same way for every game. Its not hogwash, it's simple human psychology. It's the same thing in every sport. In this game, 90% preparation instead of 100% can make a huge difference.
So these sandwich games, please preach on.
Does it just have to be the coach?
Do all 46 players fall victim to this curse?
Or only a simple majority of 24 players?
Does it matter which of the 24 players fall victim? What if only the backup players are looking ahead?
What is the exact definition of a sandwich game?
What is the ATS history tell us of sandwich games?
If you can't accurately define it nor can you back it up with historical stats, I'm sorry, it's hogwash.
0
Posted:
#67
Quote Originally Posted by Nycgags:
What is the ATS history tell us of sandwich games?
So these sandwich games, please preach on.
Does it just have to be the coach?
Do all 46 players fall victim to this curse?
Or only a simple majority of 24 players?
Does it matter which of the 24 players fall victim? What if only the backup players are looking ahead?
What is the exact definition of a sandwich game?
What is the ATS history tell us of sandwich games?
If you can't accurately define it nor can you back it up with historical stats, I'm sorry, it's hogwash.
Will come back to you tomorrow when Im at home.
0
Posted:
#71
A team off an away underdog overtime win, now an away non-divisional dog with a division game up next have been 6-1 ATS
1996 Oilers +1 Falcons 23-13 *
2002 Broncos +3 Patriots 24-16 *
2003 Patriots +4 Colts 38-34
2006 Giants +4 Seahawks 30-42 *
2007 Packers +1 Chiefs 33-22
2010 Lions +3- Dolphins 34-27
2011 Lions +2 Cowboys 34-30 *
* Previous away overtime win was versus a divisional rival.....a sandwich game.
0
Posted:
#75
Quote Originally Posted by Indigo999:
You are not going to get 1000s of results.
You are not going to get 1000s of results.
A team off an away division win, now a non-divisional away dog, with a division game up next have been 40-41 against the spread since 1989.
In the month of December the results are 14-12 ATS
If the team in question (Chiefs) is a >500 team the results are 23-27 ATS, 7-8-1 in December.
There are times when what is going on in the future has an effect on a team's present performance....this isn't one of those situations.
That is hardly evidence. It does not tell us the quality of the division opponents or the quality of the non division opp.
It is far to general to be meaningful.
0
Hot Forum Topics
