Critique My Method

CWS over TOR @ 140

I meant no disrespect

None taken!  I try to be as precise in my responses as possible and explain my motivations thoroughly and sometimes it sounds like I am an ass, which I guess I am, but the thread is called 'Critique My Method' for a reason, so keep the ideas coming.

I think you'll have a great Sepetember....all the data I have shows September and July are the best months for dogs....the late season call ups and unpredicatbility of some of the teams who are out of it create a great climate for the dog. 

another good call...

thanks

I think your on too something here.

TEX over OAK @ 125

Question with formula 1 I come up with OAK favored by .4 ppg? So how do you compare and calculate that to the ML to decide if it has value?

I'm looking for both formula 1 and 2 to agree (both positive or both negative) or for there to be very little opposition between the two.  Games that have this characteristic make it to the 2nd step, where I evaluate the ML relative to those figures.  For example, two dogs with similar results from the formulas, but one is a 140 and the other is a 120, I will probably go with the 140.

If you read through my posts above I think you'll see I've tried to explain my approach in detail.  Keep in mind the ML is as much about the book balancing public betting as it is a measure of win probability.

Thank you I ran your formulas again and now it all clicks.

Thanks for all this info I'm following you to the end of the season.

.91 units on Texas at +110 Red Rock casino Las Vegas

Thanks for great picks. Starting to get the hang of your formula too.

so today should be
1. Mil +183
2.Tor +137

Sorry I'm trying to see if I'm doing this right.

WAS over FLA @ 180

The bet on 9/10 was a win, so you would have bet 1 unit on 9/11.  You only modify the bet size after a loss.

Sdiinc,

I got TEX over OAK yesterday with my formulas, but just by a hair. Today I have FLA over WAS in every way I look at it except one, in which I think the stats are skewed. Might you and I email to iron this out. I'm not saying your pick's wrong and I like your system, but I'd like to put our minds together.

Thanks,

Phil

Phil, you're more than welcome to email me, but I'm getting an awful lot of email about my formulas so I try to keep things on the forum for public consumption. 

One disclaimer; I am operating off a db that was created for me in 2007, and from feedback I've gotten from others it's obvious there are some minor differences between my DB and public data.  I'm still working on getting a Excel version of my PHP programming.

BTW, the only other game that looked good to me today was STL over PIT @ 120.  What do your numbers show?

I guess I'm betting a little different then I bet to win 1 unit. You are betting 1 unit?

With WAS I got a positive and a negative number how is this a play?

We always bet one unit unless we are chasing a loss.  In that scenario we bet enough to offset the cumulative loss.

WAS was a play because formula one produced a result that was substantially in favor of the dog and formula two produced a result that was marginally positive.  That plus a substantial value in the ML made it a better statistical opportunity than the next best opportunity, STL, which was also a loser today.

Please go back and read the thread for detailed discussion on both subjects.

it was a very close game given the moneyline

No game for today.  I think this is the first day in a few months where we didn't have a play.

SFO over SDO @ 110

sdiinc: "BTW, the only other game that looked good to me today was STL over PIT @ 120.  What do your numbers show?"

For 9/12, I had STL over PIT, but they changed the starter later in the day and the numbers shifted to PIT. My numbers liked TEX over OAK that day for the underdog.

Today I have no underdogs to win, but TEX over OAK is a close one.

Phil

sdiinc, thx for posting. Is there any growth stocks you really like right now. I have some solar stock - FSLR (First Solar) and BEZ (Baldor Electric).