can we talk some bball and make some $

#1
It might just be me but it seems going back the conference tourney's that favs are not just winning but covering at a very high rate, i know there are your nc states and a few others who have been covering, but large inpart dogs are getting the shit kicked out of them. I'm not counting the NIT cuz that shit is a crap shoot anyways, with motivation deciding alot. Just the conf tourny's and the early start of the NCAA Tourney...

I am not saying we should all turn in to squares or anything but this is a def trend that i think needs to be accounted for at this point. I am considering adjusting alittle for this. I'm starting to get the feeling this is the year lesser teams(illini,stanford,TT) maybe that dont quite belong or mid majors, just get the shit
kicked out of them...Look what Vandy is doing GW as we speak.

a few similar games and teams going forward that fit this mold.

The list i have would include:

Central Conn
VCU
Holy Cross
Miami Ohio
Wright State
X-man- Sorry but i think fading the A-10 is a money maker right now...

Fuck i hate to say start laying chalk everywhere but that fact is favs are covering, period...Thoughts?


Seems like this is the first year dogs arent doing well in awhile and the first year i've have seem SO MANY people backing dogs? Think the Books are one step ahead of us here...
 

UofM2003

EOG Addicted
#2
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

I am pretty new to sports betting, but I agree here. Part of it may be the idea that a large number of people may be over-valuing dogs. They are so accustomed to seeing the Gonzaga's and George Mason's (last year) that they may be putting too much weight on these mid-majors that it might pay to play the favorites. Just looking at brackets alone, independent of spreads, and it almost seems logical to now take the #1 and/or #2 seeds simply because of the value that comes with them when a large number of people may have them losing due to OVERvaluing smaller and lesser teams. I think that idea may have some application with respect to ATS. Just my $0.02.
 
#3
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

great point with the G Mason call. That makes alot of sense. I can see now why you wanted to see past point spreads. Could be we arent getting enough points with these Dogs, Vegas knows the public fell in love with mid major after last year and they are not giving quite as many points with the dogs as usual because they know the pub will be playing on the dogs this year....
 

UofM2003

EOG Addicted
#6
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

Yea...unfortunately, I couldn't finish my research in time. I got too fucking tired last night, but on the surface, I think it makes some sense. Just look at how many people picked OD, or better yet, are looking for that #12-#5, #13-#4 upsets. I talked to a few people in this pool that I'm in, and it seems like everybody has the same sort of upsets. Again, I'm not sure how much application this has in regards to ATS, and it is very early in the tournament, but there's gotta be some of angle that works against this cinderalla-hungry public...
 

Bobby Bacala

EOG Senior Member
#8
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

We are only 8 games into this tourney.......so far the favs are 8 for 8 but we all know the dogs will show up......they always do! (I got Wright St and VCU tonight so I hope they do)
Micelli is correct, if you go square :hung
 
#9
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

Again i am not saying go square completely?
and i'm not strictly speaking of the first few games of the tourney BUT...
going back the COnference's tourney's fave's were killing it then too. I pretty sure i'm stating fact here?

I would just be real careful with VCU's(who i fucking love) and your Wright St.'s of the world...I would love to see both cover and i won't be laying the points, but gotta be a little nervous with these dogs...
 

munson15

I want winners...
#10
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

Shady, you are just saying in the borderline calls, maybe the fave is the way to go, especially w/ solid, big conference teams? An old saying I remember said "when in doubt, take the points", but no rules can apply across the board, every year.

The George Mason point is very interesting because even people who don't cap the sport on a regular basis want to feel smart by picking underdog winners in this tournament. Could that be a factor in pointspreads?

I saw a post a couple of nights ago that stated that dogs were covering at a pretty high percentage over a span of a couple of YEARS, so this 0-8 start is definitely a trend-breaker. I almost bet it that way, I do have stats showing dogs to be money-makers, too.
 

UofM2003

EOG Addicted
#12
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

The George Mason point is very interesting because even people who don't cap the sport on a regular basis want to feel smart by picking underdog winners in this tournament. Could that be a factor in pointspreads?
This is what I was going for...it seems like everybody, pool-wise, is seeking that cinderella story, so there might be some value in taking favorites, not in general (i.e. random game at any given time), but in this situation where parameters are somewhat set (within conference or ncaa tournament).

I saw a post a couple of nights ago that stated that dogs were covering at a pretty high percentage over a span of a couple of YEARS, so this 0-8 start is definitely a trend-breaker. I almost bet it that way, I do have stats showing dogs to be money-makers, too.
That might have been me. Over the last 9 years, dogs between +0.5-+3.5 along with +11-+14 covered at about a 62% clip in the NCAA tournament. In the calculation that I did, this result had a 0.812% chance of being random. In other words, this percentage was significant and not due to chance. But again, as I mentioned above, I ran out of time and energy to find out how they did each year during that 9-year span. I will say that during the first 4 years of the span, it was barely above 50%. If the article that introduced the 62% rate was correct, then the underdogs within that range would have covered at a very high percentage over the last 5 years. But again, there might be very high variance within those 5 years, which I did not have time to look at...And I'm not sure where all this leaves us, but just thought I would mention it...
 
#13
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

Shady, you are just saying in the borderline calls, maybe the fave is the way to go, especially w/ solid, big conference teams? quote]


Yea i think so... If it's boderline go with the better team, even if they are both from big conference's...

i wasn't saying do this or do that, you should never do anything UNILATERALLY...Let's just say i am PRAYING that VCU covers tonight along with W St. and a few others(BYU), so we can get some normalicy back...
 
#17
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

Not liking Marq at all. Can i ask why you are on them Panther other than the +2 cuz that aint many points?
 

munson15

I want winners...
#19
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

Yeah Michigan, it was you, sorry for the lack of attribution, I was very close to playing all of them blind, but got talked out of it by someone I respect.
 

panther

EOG Dedicated
#21
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

I will explain when I have time

watching the games and and working on late play(s)

I type with one finger

the game would be over buy the time I explained

hope you have a great night

good luck

panther
 

UofM2003

EOG Addicted
#22
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

Yeah Michigan, it was you, sorry for the lack of attribution, I was very close to playing all of them blind, but got talked out of it by someone I respect.
Yea not a problem. I didn't play them either. Just too much risk and uncertainty involved with doing something like that.
 
#24
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

I agree Vans. I am not saying to be a square now, but we cannot be stuburn and stick with the dogs. Cannon's system has been failing since the conference tournaments started. I think the odds makers are assuming this year people want to bet dogs, and cheer for Cinderella. Just a thought.

Might play favorites untill the dogs start barking again.
 
#25
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

Be careful taking just favorites tomorrow. Go to yesterdays thread,
Big Dance First Round, info on three year history of favs in first round.
 
#27
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

I think this is one of those years when the NIT home teams kick ass ATS. Man I just hate laying chalk. I got some favorites in my stuff. I had 2 favorites and the rest dogs Thursday and it was ugly. I really thought dogs would go 11-7 ATS or better.
 
#28
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

there is absolutely nothing wrong with laying points. Can be alot of value in laying points. gotta pick your spots...
 

Bobby Bacala

EOG Senior Member
#29
Re: can we talk some bball and make some $

I Found this on another site.........I can't take credit for this research but:

In the last nine years:

In case you are wondering. This shows how you'd do if you just bet on the higher seed, i.e., (high means better....closer to 1) in each year, both su and ats. Su = close to 70%. ats ~50%

Year: Better Seed Straight Up Record, ATS Record
1998: 45-18(71.4%) SU, 29-32-1 (47.5%) ATS
1999: 38-23(62.3%) SU, 25-34-2 (42.4%) ATS
2000: 44-19(69.8%) SU, 26-23 (53.1%) ATS
2001: 42-21(66.7%) SU, 33-29-1 (53.2%) ATS
2002: 46-16(74.2%) SU, 30-29-3 (50.8%) ATS
2003: 42-21(66.7%) SU, 25-36-2 (41.0%) ATS
2004: 47-16(74.6%) SU, 36-27 (57.1%) ATS
2005: 43-19(69.4%) SU, 27-35 (43.5%) ATS
2006: 42-21(66.7%) SU, 25-36-2 (41.0%) ATS
<!-- / message -->
 
Top