The avg line is 41 for the NFL. 51% of the time, the final score is below the total. Not enough to make money betting on all unders. But are there situations when it’s more likely to be an under based on the opening line? Since setting the line is all about perception, what happens when a low line is released? How does the public react, and how do the games usually end?
For this study, I am only looking at opening lines, and I am looking at all games from the 2000-2001 season onward. I’ll start w/ the notion that the public loves an Over. And it’s true. Overs and Favorites, the public will eat them up.
See my prior work on underdogs, and you’ll see that betting dogs (smartly) will net you some cash, and betting unders (smartly) will do the same.
But here I’d like to share a sports wagering slogan you may have heard before: "Take the Under on a low total and the Over on a high total".
Think about that for a second. Wouldn't it be the opposite? Well, contrarian thinking goes a long way in sports betting.
Now, let’s crunch the numbers to see if it works out: Taking unders in games with a 41 point total or below: (Note – first note that these are opening lines, not closing. If snow was predicted and the line dropped from 40 down to 35, the O/U would show up based on the opening line of 40 in my calculation.)
As you can see, games where the opening number is avg (41) or right around there, between 39 and 41, you are already hitting over 52% (the magic number where you can break even despite the juice) if you take the unders. But once you get lower, between 35 and 38, you see more overs hitting. However, once you cross over into the very low totals of 31 and 32, you are hitting very high % on the unders. Everyone sees a 31 or 32 and would take the over, but that is not a sharp play.
Of course, if you look at the # of games that actually post totals that low, you’ll see that only 18 games in the last 7 years have had an opening total of 32 or below. That’s just over 2.5 per season. However, if you took the under on all those games, you would have won 67% of them, which is a solid, solid profit.
Now lets take the overs in games w/ a 42 point total or higher:
As you can see, from 42 points all the way up until 52 point totals, you have to pick your spots if you want an over, as more than half the time the game will go under. Which is why finding those unders may be easier than finding the overs. However, once you get to point totals that open at 53 or higher, you’re in a prime market for making some good $ by taking the overs.
Again, like w/ very low totals, you don’t see totals 53 or higher that much, just over 4.25 times per season. But take heed when you do see them…
Once again, the public sees an extreme number, and will generally go to the other side.
So the lessons here:
Opening numbers of 32 and below, don’t be scared to take the under
Opening numbers of 53 and higher, don’t be scared to take the over
In between, pick your spots. Unders hit more than overs, but don’t be scared to take either if you have done your homework.
Last but not least – don’t think that 35 and 36 are so low that it will go under, and don’t think that 50, 51, and 52 are so high that it will go over. Based on historical information, 35 and 36 point totals are more likely to go over than any total less than 52. Likewise, 51 and 52 are more likely to go under than any point total greater than 32. So don’t get carried away and think that “52 is high, take the over”.
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
This is elementary to some, but must know info for everyone.
The average total in the NFL is 41, and has been for some time. As we know, the public loves the overs. But how has the over/under fared over time?
I posted lessons on underdogs earlier, so here’s one on Totals.
The avg line is 41 for the NFL. 51% of the time, the final score is below the total. Not enough to make money betting on all unders. But are there situations when it’s more likely to be an under based on the opening line? Since setting the line is all about perception, what happens when a low line is released? How does the public react, and how do the games usually end?
For this study, I am only looking at opening lines, and I am looking at all games from the 2000-2001 season onward. I’ll start w/ the notion that the public loves an Over. And it’s true. Overs and Favorites, the public will eat them up.
See my prior work on underdogs, and you’ll see that betting dogs (smartly) will net you some cash, and betting unders (smartly) will do the same.
But here I’d like to share a sports wagering slogan you may have heard before: "Take the Under on a low total and the Over on a high total".
Think about that for a second. Wouldn't it be the opposite? Well, contrarian thinking goes a long way in sports betting.
Now, let’s crunch the numbers to see if it works out: Taking unders in games with a 41 point total or below: (Note – first note that these are opening lines, not closing. If snow was predicted and the line dropped from 40 down to 35, the O/U would show up based on the opening line of 40 in my calculation.)
As you can see, games where the opening number is avg (41) or right around there, between 39 and 41, you are already hitting over 52% (the magic number where you can break even despite the juice) if you take the unders. But once you get lower, between 35 and 38, you see more overs hitting. However, once you cross over into the very low totals of 31 and 32, you are hitting very high % on the unders. Everyone sees a 31 or 32 and would take the over, but that is not a sharp play.
Of course, if you look at the # of games that actually post totals that low, you’ll see that only 18 games in the last 7 years have had an opening total of 32 or below. That’s just over 2.5 per season. However, if you took the under on all those games, you would have won 67% of them, which is a solid, solid profit.
Now lets take the overs in games w/ a 42 point total or higher:
As you can see, from 42 points all the way up until 52 point totals, you have to pick your spots if you want an over, as more than half the time the game will go under. Which is why finding those unders may be easier than finding the overs. However, once you get to point totals that open at 53 or higher, you’re in a prime market for making some good $ by taking the overs.
Again, like w/ very low totals, you don’t see totals 53 or higher that much, just over 4.25 times per season. But take heed when you do see them…
Once again, the public sees an extreme number, and will generally go to the other side.
So the lessons here:
Opening numbers of 32 and below, don’t be scared to take the under
Opening numbers of 53 and higher, don’t be scared to take the over
In between, pick your spots. Unders hit more than overs, but don’t be scared to take either if you have done your homework.
Last but not least – don’t think that 35 and 36 are so low that it will go under, and don’t think that 50, 51, and 52 are so high that it will go over. Based on historical information, 35 and 36 point totals are more likely to go over than any total less than 52. Likewise, 51 and 52 are more likely to go under than any point total greater than 32. So don’t get carried away and think that “52 is high, take the over”.
As for the Indy/NO total, I got the idea for this analysis from RobertoFiory. I ran my own numbers using different data, but came up with the same conclusions:
Both the Colts and Saints were “high scoring” teams from last year. Colts scored the 2nd most per game at 26.69 and the Saints scored 5th most at 25.81 points per game.
I looked at teams that score better than half the league. Last year, half the league averaged more than 20 points, and half averaged fewer than 20 points.
These teams are (to the public) known to be able to put points up on the board. So the totals for games where two teams meet that averaged 20 points or more should be high.
I wanted to look just at week 1, because a lot of new bettors get in on these games to start the season, and the thing that resonates most in their mind is how productive (offensively) these teams were last season. So I looked at Week 1 meetings between 2 teams who each scored 20 ppg in the prior season, and the total is 45 points or higher.
The under in these games has gone 16-4.
I then looked at teams who allow a fair number of points. I stuck w/ 20 points again as my split, although 20 teams allowed 20 or more ppg last season (not a 50/50 split). The Colts allowed 22.5 and the Saints 20.12 ppg.
So looking at Week 1 meetings between 2 teams who each allowed 20 ppg or more in the prior season, and the total is 45 points or higher.
The under in those games went 12-4.
Now, the final step is to combine the two. There have been only 9 meetings between 2 teams who each scored 20 ppg and allowed 20 ppg in Week 1 since 1995.
The under in those games has gone 8-1.
So as you can see, the under here is looking mighty good, based only on these historical trends.
Looking at all teams, regardless of what they did the prior season:
Since 2000, in all the Week 1 games where the total was at least 45 points, the under has gone 19-5. In those 24 games, the avg line was 46.7 points, and on avg, the final score was 35.6 points. That’s over 10 points fewer than the line. So on avg, the final didn’t come very close to the total.
Now, the reason this relates to my prior post is this:
The total in this game opened at 51 (50.5 at Pinny, but 51 at most other outlets). It's now at 53 and I've even seen some 53.5s.
When games open at 50 or 51, as my prior post showed, only 43% of those games go over. That's 57% on the under.
Combine that w/ some of these trends for Week 1 games going under, and I see myself leaning towards the under. In my mind I see a 27-24 type game. However, with such a high total, 27-24 would still give us 51 and an under.
Usually I want to see more than generic "historical trends". I like to see hardcore data on the teams playing. I use a fair amount of stats from prior games in the season in my system, and I have much more confidence in those stats and my system then I do in blind trends.
That said, I'm still leaning on these trends for this play, and will go for the Under.
Note: This game is not based on my system. I need a couple weeks of regular season stats in the database before I start getting confidence in system plays.
0
As for the Indy/NO total, I got the idea for this analysis from RobertoFiory. I ran my own numbers using different data, but came up with the same conclusions:
Both the Colts and Saints were “high scoring” teams from last year. Colts scored the 2nd most per game at 26.69 and the Saints scored 5th most at 25.81 points per game.
I looked at teams that score better than half the league. Last year, half the league averaged more than 20 points, and half averaged fewer than 20 points.
These teams are (to the public) known to be able to put points up on the board. So the totals for games where two teams meet that averaged 20 points or more should be high.
I wanted to look just at week 1, because a lot of new bettors get in on these games to start the season, and the thing that resonates most in their mind is how productive (offensively) these teams were last season. So I looked at Week 1 meetings between 2 teams who each scored 20 ppg in the prior season, and the total is 45 points or higher.
The under in these games has gone 16-4.
I then looked at teams who allow a fair number of points. I stuck w/ 20 points again as my split, although 20 teams allowed 20 or more ppg last season (not a 50/50 split). The Colts allowed 22.5 and the Saints 20.12 ppg.
So looking at Week 1 meetings between 2 teams who each allowed 20 ppg or more in the prior season, and the total is 45 points or higher.
The under in those games went 12-4.
Now, the final step is to combine the two. There have been only 9 meetings between 2 teams who each scored 20 ppg and allowed 20 ppg in Week 1 since 1995.
The under in those games has gone 8-1.
So as you can see, the under here is looking mighty good, based only on these historical trends.
Looking at all teams, regardless of what they did the prior season:
Since 2000, in all the Week 1 games where the total was at least 45 points, the under has gone 19-5. In those 24 games, the avg line was 46.7 points, and on avg, the final score was 35.6 points. That’s over 10 points fewer than the line. So on avg, the final didn’t come very close to the total.
Now, the reason this relates to my prior post is this:
The total in this game opened at 51 (50.5 at Pinny, but 51 at most other outlets). It's now at 53 and I've even seen some 53.5s.
When games open at 50 or 51, as my prior post showed, only 43% of those games go over. That's 57% on the under.
Combine that w/ some of these trends for Week 1 games going under, and I see myself leaning towards the under. In my mind I see a 27-24 type game. However, with such a high total, 27-24 would still give us 51 and an under.
Usually I want to see more than generic "historical trends". I like to see hardcore data on the teams playing. I use a fair amount of stats from prior games in the season in my system, and I have much more confidence in those stats and my system then I do in blind trends.
That said, I'm still leaning on these trends for this play, and will go for the Under.
Note: This game is not based on my system. I need a couple weeks of regular season stats in the database before I start getting confidence in system plays.
Yo Puff, love the rational and math analysis, takes alot of balls to consistantly play unders. After many disappointments, finally learned my lesson. Problem is: its not over till the fat lady sings! GL
0
Yo Puff, love the rational and math analysis, takes alot of balls to consistantly play unders. After many disappointments, finally learned my lesson. Problem is: its not over till the fat lady sings! GL
new to the football forum (baseball forum has almost died with
football's arrival), and this and Roberto's are the best posts I've
read so far - thx so much for all this great analysis.
Don't know a ton about capping football - got kind of lucky betting selected ML dogs (same as baseball) mostly last year. Was last year a statistically aberrant number for EV on betting ML dogs in the NFL? it seemed like it to me. Also appreciate that link to taking the points (except on those under 2 spots) - will look to do more of that this year.
0
Puff,
new to the football forum (baseball forum has almost died with
football's arrival), and this and Roberto's are the best posts I've
read so far - thx so much for all this great analysis.
Don't know a ton about capping football - got kind of lucky betting selected ML dogs (same as baseball) mostly last year. Was last year a statistically aberrant number for EV on betting ML dogs in the NFL? it seemed like it to me. Also appreciate that link to taking the points (except on those under 2 spots) - will look to do more of that this year.
Thanks guys. Hope to post more insights again this season. I don't have eye-catching titles or claims, just trying to share w/ the hardcore cappers out there who like to learn and see different analyses. We each can help each other, and hopefully make $$ while we're at it.
0
Thanks guys. Hope to post more insights again this season. I don't have eye-catching titles or claims, just trying to share w/ the hardcore cappers out there who like to learn and see different analyses. We each can help each other, and hopefully make $$ while we're at it.
I wanted to follow up on some key information on O/U betting when totals reach 50… Since 1995 there have been 79 games where the total was set at 50 points or higher. In 59% of those games, the under hit. But as you know from my prior post, the majority of the overs occurred once the total gets to 53 and increases as the totals get higher. Of the 46 games that went under, 34 of these occurred when the total was between 50 and 52.5. This means that unders hit at 68% on average when the total is between 50 and 52.5. But, here’s another strategy question: What do you do when the game gets off to a slow start, such as we had last night? Is it more likely to go under/over the total? What about the halftime line? Here’s your answer: Last night’s game had a halftime total of 20 points. Of the 79 games w/ totals of 50 or higher, 18 of them had halftime scores of 20 or fewer points. Roughly a couple games a year will have a very slow start and a high total. If you had the over in the game, you better start looking to recoup your losses at the half, and you can do that. Because, 17 of those 18 games did not make it over the total. In other words, a low 1st half equated to a Under for the game. Makes sense, of course. On average, they fell 11 points below the total. So the answer to the first question: If you have a very low scoring 1st half, it will most likely go under the total. The second question: What about the halftime lines? Well, here’s your shot to add money if you had the under in the game, or to recover your losses (not chase, but make an intelligent play) if you had an over bet on the game. The average 1st half score (total) for games that had halftime scores of 20 or less was 15 points. Vegas will set the 2nd half line based on what they saw in the 1st half and what they think the mood of the public is. In last night’s case, the 2nd half line was 24.5 On average, in these games, the 2nd half score is over 26 points. In other words, the 2 teams combined in the 1st half to only put up 15. But in the second half, they put up 26. That is, they scored about 75% MORE points in the 2nd half than they did in the 1st half. Is this suprising? Well, Yes, it should be. The reason is, in games where the total is less than 50 points, more points are actually scored in the 1st half than in the 2nd. The 2nd half score is usually about 3% less than the 1st half score. How did Vegas adjust last night? The 2 teams scored 20 in the 1st half. Vegas put the line at 24.5, which is 23% higher than the 1st half. So the line was not like a typical game line, which may have a similar number of points scored in the 1st and 2nd halves. They can’t afford to take that big of a hit, knowing what the opening line was. You could have too many people middle the game quite easily. In reality, the 2 teams scored 31 points in the 2nd half, 55% more than they scored in the 1st half. And the game went over the 2nd half line. Granted, it wasn’t easy – that Indy TD int at the end. You couldn’t predict that, but you also couldn’t predict that NO wouldn’t put up a single point in the 2nd half either, so all in all, I would have felt very comfortable heading into the 2nd half w/ a play on the Over 24.5. Again, you won’t win every time, but you will in the long run.
0
Thanks guys.
I wanted to follow up on some key information on O/U betting when totals reach 50… Since 1995 there have been 79 games where the total was set at 50 points or higher. In 59% of those games, the under hit. But as you know from my prior post, the majority of the overs occurred once the total gets to 53 and increases as the totals get higher. Of the 46 games that went under, 34 of these occurred when the total was between 50 and 52.5. This means that unders hit at 68% on average when the total is between 50 and 52.5. But, here’s another strategy question: What do you do when the game gets off to a slow start, such as we had last night? Is it more likely to go under/over the total? What about the halftime line? Here’s your answer: Last night’s game had a halftime total of 20 points. Of the 79 games w/ totals of 50 or higher, 18 of them had halftime scores of 20 or fewer points. Roughly a couple games a year will have a very slow start and a high total. If you had the over in the game, you better start looking to recoup your losses at the half, and you can do that. Because, 17 of those 18 games did not make it over the total. In other words, a low 1st half equated to a Under for the game. Makes sense, of course. On average, they fell 11 points below the total. So the answer to the first question: If you have a very low scoring 1st half, it will most likely go under the total. The second question: What about the halftime lines? Well, here’s your shot to add money if you had the under in the game, or to recover your losses (not chase, but make an intelligent play) if you had an over bet on the game. The average 1st half score (total) for games that had halftime scores of 20 or less was 15 points. Vegas will set the 2nd half line based on what they saw in the 1st half and what they think the mood of the public is. In last night’s case, the 2nd half line was 24.5 On average, in these games, the 2nd half score is over 26 points. In other words, the 2 teams combined in the 1st half to only put up 15. But in the second half, they put up 26. That is, they scored about 75% MORE points in the 2nd half than they did in the 1st half. Is this suprising? Well, Yes, it should be. The reason is, in games where the total is less than 50 points, more points are actually scored in the 1st half than in the 2nd. The 2nd half score is usually about 3% less than the 1st half score. How did Vegas adjust last night? The 2 teams scored 20 in the 1st half. Vegas put the line at 24.5, which is 23% higher than the 1st half. So the line was not like a typical game line, which may have a similar number of points scored in the 1st and 2nd halves. They can’t afford to take that big of a hit, knowing what the opening line was. You could have too many people middle the game quite easily. In reality, the 2 teams scored 31 points in the 2nd half, 55% more than they scored in the 1st half. And the game went over the 2nd half line. Granted, it wasn’t easy – that Indy TD int at the end. You couldn’t predict that, but you also couldn’t predict that NO wouldn’t put up a single point in the 2nd half either, so all in all, I would have felt very comfortable heading into the 2nd half w/ a play on the Over 24.5. Again, you won’t win every time, but you will in the long run.
So what is the lesson: Do not be afraid to take the 2nd half over in a game that was originally thought to be high scoring, but had a low scoring 1st half. You won’t always win blindly (nothing is that easy), but you will have a good shot. But remember, the game has to have had a very high total (over 50) and they have to have been lackluster in the 1st half. Of course, watching the game always helps w/ 2nd half betting. I don’t bet 2nd halves in games that I am not watching. But I do take advantage of 2nd half betting, and I really love live betting when I know how things should play out, and they go dramatically opposite to start the game. You really can get some great reduction of juice doing it that way. For instance, you have the Colts last night and the Saints march down and get the lead early. The live line will react and you could possibly get the Colts at a pickem at that point, and save yourself all the juice you would have lost if you took them on a ML play an hour before the game.
0
So what is the lesson: Do not be afraid to take the 2nd half over in a game that was originally thought to be high scoring, but had a low scoring 1st half. You won’t always win blindly (nothing is that easy), but you will have a good shot. But remember, the game has to have had a very high total (over 50) and they have to have been lackluster in the 1st half. Of course, watching the game always helps w/ 2nd half betting. I don’t bet 2nd halves in games that I am not watching. But I do take advantage of 2nd half betting, and I really love live betting when I know how things should play out, and they go dramatically opposite to start the game. You really can get some great reduction of juice doing it that way. For instance, you have the Colts last night and the Saints march down and get the lead early. The live line will react and you could possibly get the Colts at a pickem at that point, and save yourself all the juice you would have lost if you took them on a ML play an hour before the game.
I totally agree with that last point about in-game trading. I've been doing in-game trading (albeit small time) for a few years and your last point was one of the first winning strategies I learned - take advantage of over-reaction to first major piece of news. It also seems to me to be even more pronounced when a heavy fave scores first - perhaps the added fear of people not wanting to be on the wrong side of a blowout inflates that first initial increase in price. In football, the heavy fave is usually the home team, so the crowd is going nuts and it all looks very ominous for the dawg. If you have the stomach for it, it seems a great opportunity to back the dog.
Puff, have you noticed this as well? I don't have any hard data - its just my thoughts from watching a fair number of examples.
0
More great stuff - learning a ton here.
I totally agree with that last point about in-game trading. I've been doing in-game trading (albeit small time) for a few years and your last point was one of the first winning strategies I learned - take advantage of over-reaction to first major piece of news. It also seems to me to be even more pronounced when a heavy fave scores first - perhaps the added fear of people not wanting to be on the wrong side of a blowout inflates that first initial increase in price. In football, the heavy fave is usually the home team, so the crowd is going nuts and it all looks very ominous for the dawg. If you have the stomach for it, it seems a great opportunity to back the dog.
Puff, have you noticed this as well? I don't have any hard data - its just my thoughts from watching a fair number of examples.
Do any of you post your picks are do you just rant and rave about your systems and then say after the fact I told you so?
I'm not sure what you try to get out of this site.
I'm here to hone my handicapping skills, share knowledge, and learn from others.
Which is the point of this thread. My play (as I posted) was the Under in the game. I see no point to post it without showing how I got there. It's called teaching. If you post a play and say:
"That should be easy for the Saints considering they have probably the best RB tandem in the league with Deuce and Reggie Bush and the fact that Colts have a pathetic run-defence."
Then that's fine. I choose to look at my plays a little differently. To each his own. No need for you to pout in my thread after you lost your game last night, if that is what you are doing.
I'm here to learn and to help anyone who can learn from me. I'm not the smartest here and not the dumbest.
0
Quote Originally Posted by cr8zyc8nuck:
Do any of you post your picks are do you just rant and rave about your systems and then say after the fact I told you so?
I'm not sure what you try to get out of this site.
I'm here to hone my handicapping skills, share knowledge, and learn from others.
Which is the point of this thread. My play (as I posted) was the Under in the game. I see no point to post it without showing how I got there. It's called teaching. If you post a play and say:
"That should be easy for the Saints considering they have probably the best RB tandem in the league with Deuce and Reggie Bush and the fact that Colts have a pathetic run-defence."
Then that's fine. I choose to look at my plays a little differently. To each his own. No need for you to pout in my thread after you lost your game last night, if that is what you are doing.
I'm here to learn and to help anyone who can learn from me. I'm not the smartest here and not the dumbest.
Yes, I am the same guy. I visit both locations, enjoy both, so I want to share my plays at both.
that's cool i appreciate the info and i found it very useful...just wanted to make sure you were not stealing someone elses work cause that's not cool. thanks and GL to you sir
0
Quote Originally Posted by puffdawg:
Yes, I am the same guy. I visit both locations, enjoy both, so I want to share my plays at both.
that's cool i appreciate the info and i found it very useful...just wanted to make sure you were not stealing someone elses work cause that's not cool. thanks and GL to you sir
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.