Posted:
#326
Sorry gang I took a nap. Based on old formula I don't see this as being a play either way.
Chicago 17
Atlanta 21
GL
0
New YPPT Method
Thanks Roughshod
Posted:
#335
The Total Dudley YPP Method
This system is quite similar to the Dudley Formula, in that it also uses a four-game average, but uses a team's defensive YPP rating in predicting the outcome of games. We'll use the same teams and statistics from the earlier example.
- The first step is to add Minnesota's offensive yards gained to Detroit's yards allowed and Minnesota's points scored to Detroit's points allowed. This will give us 2,855 (1,345+1,510) and 202 (91+111).
- The second step is to add Detroit's yards gained to Minnesota's yards allowed and Detroit's points scored to Minnesota's points allowed. This gives totals of 2,643 (1,291+1,352) and 164 (86+78).
- The third step is to create an adjusted offensive YPP for both teams. For Minnesota, divide 2,855 by 202 to get 14.13. For Detroit, divide 2,643 by 164 to get 16.12.
- The fourth step is to change our yardage figures into a per-game average. Simply divide Minnesota's offensive yardage figure (2,855) by eight to get 356.88, which is Minnesota's predicted yards gained. Detroit's expected yards gained of 2,643 divided by eight is 330.38. (Remember we're using eight because we have both four games of offensive yards and four games of defensive yards.)
- The final step is to divide Minnesota's predicted yards of 356.88 by its adjusted offensive YPP of 14.13 to get a predicted score of 25.26. Dividing Detroit's predicted yards of 330.38 by its adjusted offensive YPP yields a predicted score of 20.49.
As you can see, the Vikings rate nearly two points better with this method and the predicted score is several points less. These are because of the inclusion of Minnesota's defensive YPP rating, which is well above average.
Most bettors using these, or any YPP system, generally look for a difference of at least five points between the predicted outcome and the point spread before making a play.
Remember, there is no correct way or incorrect way to use YPP numbers. You can use them short-term, as these two systems do, or use season statistics. Both will give the football bettor a different method of looking at the teams playing a particular game.
0
Posted:
#338
Quote Originally Posted by DaRaiders:
Late to this party. Whats the difference between new system and old system?
his new system has something to do with an improved SOS multiplier, I think. I don't understand his logic behind it yet, cause he hasn't explained much... but he's just trying to see what works best. But his old system is so far so good.
Roughshod &VGPOP = genius(s)
lovin the system boys, trying to find time to put this into excel and modify it a little bit...
0
Posted:
#340
Quote Originally Posted by NorCal94536:
The Total Dudley YPP Method
This system is quite similar to the Dudley Formula, in that it also uses a four-game average, but uses a team's defensive YPP rating in predicting the outcome of games. We'll use the same teams and statistics from the earlier example.
- The first step is to add Minnesota's offensive yards gained to Detroit's yards allowed and Minnesota's points scored to Detroit's points allowed. This will give us 2,855 (1,345+1,510) and 202 (91+111).
- The second step is to add Detroit's yards gained to Minnesota's yards allowed and Detroit's points scored to Minnesota's points allowed. This gives totals of 2,643 (1,291+1,352) and 164 (86+78).
- The third step is to create an adjusted offensive YPP for both teams. For Minnesota, divide 2,855 by 202 to get 14.13. For Detroit, divide 2,643 by 164 to get 16.12.
- The fourth step is to change our yardage figures into a per-game average. Simply divide Minnesota's offensive yardage figure (2,855) by eight to get 356.88, which is Minnesota's predicted yards gained. Detroit's expected yards gained of 2,643 divided by eight is 330.38. (Remember we're using eight because we have both four games of offensive yards and four games of defensive yards.)
- The final step is to divide Minnesota's predicted yards of 356.88 by its adjusted offensive YPP of 14.13 to get a predicted score of 25.26. Dividing Detroit's predicted yards of 330.38 by its adjusted offensive YPP yields a predicted score of 20.49.
As you can see, the Vikings rate nearly two points better with this method and the predicted score is several points less. These are because of the inclusion of Minnesota's defensive YPP rating, which is well above average.
Most bettors using these, or any YPP system, generally look for a difference of at least five points between the predicted outcome and the point spread before making a play.
Remember, there is no correct way or incorrect way to use YPP numbers. You can use them short-term, as these two systems do, or use season statistics. Both will give the football bettor a different method of looking at the teams playing a particular game.
I knew about this system. The only thing I didn't know is fourth step that it uses a "four game average"?
It divides total yards by eight?
What happens when more games are played? Is it still divided by 8? Result will be too big of yardage.
Or each game is worth "2"?
0
Posted:
#341
Quote Originally Posted by skan:
Here're some food for thought. Did some digging on HFA and find a formula
HFA*R1*(1-R2)/(HFA*R1*(1-R2)+(1-HFA)*R2*(1-R1))
basically HFA can increase a chance from 3% up to 11% on the predicted score for the home team. Not exactly sure how to incorporate this into the spreadsheet but I'm sure it's possible.
Here're some food for thought. Did some digging on HFA and find a formula
HFA*R1*(1-R2)/(HFA*R1*(1-R2)+(1-HFA)*R2*(1-R1))
basically HFA can increase a chance from 3% up to 11% on the predicted score for the home team. Not exactly sure how to incorporate this into the spreadsheet but I'm sure it's possible.
What R1 and R2 stands for?
I guess we need to come up with something like: HFA=......., right? If yes, will HFA be in %, yds or pts?
0
Posted:
#343
For those of us who do not have exel, I found the easiest way to do the math for this is to just add or minus the total yards for each team and then do the same for yppt. Rushing, passing, rushing allowed passing allowed and any +/- differences and then divide by 2. I was doing the rushing,passing and differences separately before, but doing the total yardage and then dividing by 2 gets them same answer. Of course you must add in the sos for each team after that.
0
Posted:
#347
This morning I made some minor adjustments to the original YPPT formula from 10/11.
Whats New
Adjustment for HFA of 3.5 Pts. -1.75 Away/+1.75 Home
Take into account average number of plays both OFF/DEF.
Take into account average yards per play both OFF/DEF.
These changes alter the projected outcomes very little from original YPPT formula.
Tonights Projected Outcome Using these Changes.
Denver 389 Total Yds. 16.76 YPPT (23.21 PTS)
San Diego 288 Total Yds. 26.79 YPPT (10.75 PTS)
Adjusted Projected Score
Denver 23.21 - 1.75 HFA = 21.46 21
San Diego 10.75 + 1.75 HFA = 12.50 13
GL
0
Posted:
#349
I have downloaded the Openoffice program. This may take me a while if I ever DO figure it out. I did, as someone suggested to copy and paste the statfox files to the spreadsheet but they did not come out very organized. I guess I have lots of reading to do...lol This is a nice little program for free though.
0
Posted:
#350
Quote Originally Posted by roughshod31:
This morning I made some minor adjustments to the original YPPT formula from 10/11.
Whats New
Adjustment for HFA of 3.5 Pts. -1.75 Away/+1.75 Home
Take into account average number of plays both OFF/DEF.
Take into account average yards per play both OFF/DEF.
These changes alter the projected outcomes very little from original YPPT formula.
Tonights Projected Outcome Using these Changes.
Denver 389 Total Yds. 16.76 YPPT (23.21 PTS)
San Diego 288 Total Yds. 26.79 YPPT (10.75 PTS)
Adjusted Projected Score
Denver 23.21 - 1.75 HFA = 21.46 21
San Diego 10.75 + 1.75 HFA = 12.50 13
GL
Glad to see the HFA applied to your system roughshod31. You always seem to be tinkering to get it just right...that's a good thing!
Good luck!
0
Hot Forum Topics
