You are right - Pitt and Minn should qualify under Low Scoring Dog but aren't there.
TB was a fav on Saturday so doesn't qualify. Had to be a dog and win while scoring 3 or less and dog today.
Need to have Degen take a look.
Under the 6 hit system I had Pitt, TB, Minn. Did you run the update after entering the number of hits allowed in column L?
What I do for last games of series is look at every team that won the previous day and enter the number of hits allowed, then run update.
Under the 6 hit system I had Pitt, TB, Minn. Did you run the update after entering the number of hits allowed in column L?
What I do for last games of series is look at every team that won the previous day and enter the number of hits allowed, then run update.
Degen is the spreadsheet guy, I'll leave any changes to him.
After today's games I will include a breakdown on each system for w/l record and units. As you can see teams can qualify for more than one system so I track each system seperately but for posting on here it's just one play for overall w/l and units. So when you add up the total record and units it will not match the system play totals. I hope that makes sense.
Degen is the spreadsheet guy, I'll leave any changes to him.
After today's games I will include a breakdown on each system for w/l record and units. As you can see teams can qualify for more than one system so I track each system seperately but for posting on here it's just one play for overall w/l and units. So when you add up the total record and units it will not match the system play totals. I hope that makes sense.
Man do I suck.....another good catch guys - found another error in the formula that prevented it from producing any plays for low scoring dogs. Fixed it - and uploaded V6 - same link.
I hate it when I make dumb mistakes like that. Sorry about that
Man do I suck.....another good catch guys - found another error in the formula that prevented it from producing any plays for low scoring dogs. Fixed it - and uploaded V6 - same link.
I hate it when I make dumb mistakes like that. Sorry about that
Thanks Buckeye....I plan to update some of the excel spreadsheets for 2013 - it's on my to do list. But I have been focusing on some other things. Looking at some Sabermetrics stuff. To be honest I hate chases with high juice. That's why betting on dogs has intrigued me and i'm looking into that - to be honest i'm just a horrible capper, but i'm great with excel - so I automate things try it out for awhile - sometimes it works for awhile - sometime they tank. Super Systems worked for awhile and then it started to tank so I stopped and kept some profits - but those were mostly chases with heavy juice.
So at the moment i'm looking at some other dog systems - some Sabermetrics stuff and i'll get those B2W and maybe super systems spreadsheets up and running for 2013 at some point - hopefully.
Just downloaded the new and improved one. Looks good. Thanks for the quick fix.
Also, I'm 3 weeks into testing last year's system for the MLB Dog system (Tony Stoffo system). I started on 4/16 to mirror this year. I'm not able to filter out the top 20 pitchers but this will still give a decent idea on how it did. First week down 7.69 units, week 2 +4.94, week 3 +4.72 (was up over 12 until the final day). Overall +1.97 after 3 weeks. I'll post again when I get further.
Danrules - I think Sagarin ranks by NPERA which is normalized predicted ERA - he goes into some detail on how it's calculated - but I think it would be difficult to replicate. The metric is derived using the Markov Chain algorithm which is a rigorous statistical methodology. It's probably too difficult to calculate. What you could do is just rank the pitchers by ERA at that time up to the date your checking and eliminate any games where the pitcher is in the top 25 or 30
This would just be an approximization probably but maybe it's good enough for a rough ROI
DG
When I run the update on the spreadsheet I post on here and then don't look at it again. If Philly goes from a dog to a fav even better. Nothing wrong with getting + odds on a fave, no?
If you run the update later than I do and the odds changed such as the Philly game, I guess that would be your call on whether to bet it or not. I'm not betting any of these yet, just testing and tracking.
I use the posted odds on the spreadsheet for tracking purposes. Your book may differ a bit. I bet at the Red Rock and there is usually a slight difference in those lines but not a big deal as I'm just tracking for now.
DanRules,
I uploaded a new version of the spreadsheet (V7 - same link). I added 2 columns for "Dog Efficiency" that may be useful.
Another covers member brought this angle to my attention that may be useful in filtering out plays.
Basically, the Dog Efficiency for a team is their W/L records as dogs. So if they played 10 games all as dogs and went 5-5, they would be .500
I took it a step farther and also added their "Dog Efficiency" using the current odds they are given for today's matchup.
So for example a team may be 5-5 overall as a dog but what if 5 of those Wins they were dogs between +100 and +120 and all the losses they were dogs between 140 and 160. And let's say today's matchup they are dogs of +145. So their efficiency overall may be .500 but as a +145 dog they are 0-5
Well just something to give insight and maybe be used as a filter in the future - you may want to record their Dog Efficiency as well with a W or L - maybe it's something that can improve our ROI in the future
DanRules,
I uploaded a new version of the spreadsheet (V7 - same link). I added 2 columns for "Dog Efficiency" that may be useful.
Another covers member brought this angle to my attention that may be useful in filtering out plays.
Basically, the Dog Efficiency for a team is their W/L records as dogs. So if they played 10 games all as dogs and went 5-5, they would be .500
I took it a step farther and also added their "Dog Efficiency" using the current odds they are given for today's matchup.
So for example a team may be 5-5 overall as a dog but what if 5 of those Wins they were dogs between +100 and +120 and all the losses they were dogs between 140 and 160. And let's say today's matchup they are dogs of +145. So their efficiency overall may be .500 but as a +145 dog they are 0-5
Well just something to give insight and maybe be used as a filter in the future - you may want to record their Dog Efficiency as well with a W or L - maybe it's something that can improve our ROI in the future
Looks great. For Efficiency using odds, did you use groups of 20? Something like 100-120, 121-140, etc..
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
