[thegoal60]

I was thinking over the past few days about finding a team or a few teams and betting them each week over the season. I started to do a little research to see if its even worth looking at since obviously books adjust and injury happen. What I found was that ignoring injury and just betting the sides you could find some value!

I then started to break down whether the level of team mattered and of course it did just that. I found that if you took a team that was picked to finish in the top two - three in their conference you would finish with a negative bankroll a lot! and also seen that the bottom feeders put you in the negative as well, but what really surprised me was that I found middle of the road teams that where expected to finish anywhere from 5-7 to 8-4 or even 9-3 put you in the positive a lot of times. Now like I said above I just thought of this over the past few days and it would take a lot more data research to get real results so I may dig into this deeper as we rapidly approach the season.

Once I did some initial pencil pushing I started to think about one of the forbidden words in handicapping "Chase" and thought what would this mean to my ROI, What I seen was interesting so far and that is it looks like if you try to chase to long, it can get really dam expensive but if you limit your chase to say 2-3 games before cutting a loss and starting over you could potentially come back before the end of the season without a problem. I tried to limit my research to 3 game chases which meant if I lost 3 times in a row Id start over like it didn't happen. The reason I chose 3 was simply because I noticed that most of the time 2 losses where found but it was very seldom that 3 games where lost in a row ATS and almost never was 4 or more games in a row ATS losses. This does come out to 8.25 units if you lost 3 games in a row with -110 lines so yes it seems high and don't get me wrong if you have 3 or 4 teams you are doing this with and multiple games are being chased it could get expensive in a hurry so if this was something that you find to be worth looking into i wouldn't advise betting more than 1-2 % each game as a base just simply to keep from having so much on a single weekend chasing a couple teams on the 2-3rd week of the chase.

[HonestSite]

You seem fairly knowledgeable.I am new to SBR. I am looking for an honest site to get NCAAF/NFL betting tips, do you have any suggestions?

[thegoal60]

You have found a good one, their are some good handicappers on this site but outside of this I don't pay for picks I like the analytic to much to pay someone else.

[HonestSite]

So, do you post your picks "independently"? Who are some of the handicappers for NCAAF that you would recommend? Thank you in advance for your response.

[BigdaddyQH]

What you propose can be very difficult because it will take a few weeks for you to find a team that is going to be a consistent cover or fade. Last season Akron lost 5 out of their first 7 games, and then ran the table ATS. Arkansas finished 8-4 ATS but started 1-3. A team like Eastern Michigan is 7-41 in their last 4 years, but has only covered 15 times in that period. The big problem is that by time you spot the trend, it is normally too late.

[VeggieDog]

This would be tough with football because they play so few games. You might have better luck looking at basketball. That's my experience, at least. YMMV

[larojoes]

Was looking at some data last week to try to isolate a few such target teams to handicap over the season, in addition to the conferences I 'cap in their entirety. Been keeping records the past 2-3 seasons of the indicators Phil Steele uses to guage whether a team will improve its W-L record from one season to the next, e.g., turnovers, yards-per-point gained & allowed, net close wins & losses. My hypothesis is that, though there is greater correlation between wins and pointspread victories in the NFL, there should also be some correlation in the college games. I make a tally of the number of times a team is mentioned in any of the aforementioned categories and give that team a net score, or PS number, as I denote it. For example, if a team is mentioned twice on the positive side (expected improvement in W-L record) and once on the negative side (expected dropoff in W-L record), they get a PS number of +1. The theory is that teams with net positive PS numbers should be undervalued and looked at to back as dogs, and that teams with net negative PS numbers should be overvalued and looked at to fade or avoid as favorites. Unfortunately, the aggregate pointspread records of these teams last year did not consistently bear out the theory, though some of the results might be worth tracking in future seasons. I believe the somewhat disappointing results can be explained by a couple of things: Steele's categories include teams whose W-L records remained the same as well as those which improved from one year to the next--though one would need to do a study to confirm how these non-improving W-L teams do ATS. Also, many of the teams mentioned in Steele's categories are perennial bottom-feeders (Miami-OH and Eastern Michigan always end up on the +side), and improving from 3-9 to 4-8 will not necessarily or likely result in a shining ATS record. Lastly, the results are skewered further by the fact that they include games which often involve two teams with +PS numbers or two teams with -PS numbers.

Last year's results, for what it's worth, are summarized as follows. Thirty-six teams had net positive PS numbers going in to 2015, and 20 of them (55.5%) finished with profitable ATS records. However, as dogs, their overall combined ATS record was only 129-123-5 (51.1%). Teams with PS numbers of +2 performed the best, going 51-36-4 ATS (58.6%), (37-29-3 as dogs and 14-7-1 as faves). Teams with a PS number of +1 broke even as dogs (assuming standard odds) going 85-77-2 ATS (52.4%). Three teams had a PS number of +3 last year (the highest value for 2015), Kent St., San Jose St. and SMU, and they combined to go a miserable 7-17 ATS when getting points, blowing the theory out of the water. I just did a tally of these ATS records by conferences. Net +PS number teams from the Power 5 conferences plus two independents (BYU and Army) went 53-37-3 ATS overall when getting points, a profitable (58.8%); net +PS number teams from the Group of 5 conferences went only 76-82-3 overall (48.1%) as dogs.

There was a bit more consistency in the data involving teams with negative PS numbers, though of course they are also small sample sizes. Teams with a PS number of -1 combined to go 93-87-1 ATS (51.6%) when laying points, but the four teams which had PS numbers of -2 or -3--Georgia, Memphis, Ohio State and TCU--went just 16-23-1 (41%) overall ATS as favorites. These same four teams went 4-1 as dogs, but the -1 teams went only 49-70-1 (41.1%) ATS as dogs. One cannot put much stock in these results for the reasons described above, but there may be some potential for more solid patterns to emerge over the long term.

[TheHaus]

I did this with Mississippi state few years back and we can do it again this year with maybe a BYU

[thegoal60]

Great feedback good and bad so I thank you guys for that. I have been doing my research and I tried to find 1 team from each of the power 5 conferences to do this with. I didn't find a team that met my parameters in the Big12 so I have 4 teams that I will be tracking for this. I will try to get the best number each week but will be doing the following. I will start with a base unit and since this is a total theory and not something I have done before the units will be substantially smaller than my usual games, I will keep track of them on this thread as well. I will chase the losing weeks for a total of 3 weeks before cutting a loss and starting the next week back at my base unit. For instance I will bet Team A week 1 for 1 unit, if a loss occurs I will bet Team A week two for 1 unit plus the loss of week 1 generally meaning with -110 it would be a bet of 2.31 units, and finally if two losses in a row I will bet Team A on week three for the total losses of weeks 1 and 2 plus 1 unit at a total bet of 4.85 units that week. now if Team A losses the third consecutive week I will be betting only 1 unit on week 4. That would unfortunately mean a total loss of 8.16 units. I hope this works for future seasons!

My four teams I like for this test are as follows:
Minnesota
Colorado
Louisville
Texas A&M

These teams are what I thought and totally just my opinion so if you disagree great! I am always up for discussion. Just excited to get the season going.

[lb49ers]

Just from a math perspective once you lost 3 in a row wouldn't be difficult to end the season on a positive note? If you played 50 games on these 4 teams and you hit 56% you would be 28-22. 28 units on the plus side -24.2 units on the negative side plus your chase (-4.86 units). Would it be better to just wager a unit consistently? Just trying to follow the logic. Thanks!

[thegoal60]

I totally understand what you are saying and I had ran that in my research as well, what I found was that as long as a team covers 1 out of every three games the chase will work, it is almost like never losing AS LONG AS there isn't a 4 week skid. I am going to look at a few more angles but by far the hinge point is if there are a 4 week stretch of not covering their spread. ie last season if I had followed Texas AM I would have lost considerably since they did not cover any of the last 6 regular season games. Like I said this is totally a theory and I will be playing extremely small units just to see what happens. Please feel free to back test it and let me know what you find. It may be better to do the single unit per game. Thanks for the feed back!

[luckyutah]

I bet on Utah every single game in 2004 where they went 12-0 and 11-1 ATS. This was back when Urban Meyer was coaching them. I made a lot of money on them that year. I haven't run any data, but I'm always looking for this same scenario. It's like trying to find a unicorn that shits rainbows. They are impossible to find, but when you do, you ride it for as long as you can.

[gojetsgomoxies]

i was wondering about the following:

perusing the returning starters list... generally high, but maybe look at low too...... i find high returning starters do well, but i find that high and low are more likely to have an extreme ATS performance that year than average team

then follow the first few weeks. then play the ones that are doing well.......... i found alot of these teams end up 8-4, 9-3 or 4-8, 3-9

tons of bettors play the high returning starters i think............. but i've never heard of people looking at low returning starters that start out very well. i think bettors are very slow to jump on these teams as they are still fading them from off-season work...washington 2015 was great example.

[thegoal60]

Good stuff gojetsgomoxies. I looked at returning starters as well as situations. For example Minnesota is a middle of the pack team in their division but they play with heart. Now heart doesn't mean a lot to most handicappers but if you look at them taking on overrated teams and public favorites maybe there is an edge and this doesn't mean they have to win the games we just need a cover! BOL all and may this dam 26 days fly by!

[thegoal60]

Minnesota
A 0-0
B 0-0
C 0-0

Colorado
A 0-0
B 0-0
C 0-0

Louisville
A 0-0
B 0-0
C 0-0

Texas A&M
A 0-0
B 0-0
C 0-0

I will be looking at lines closer to week 1 due to all the movement that usually goes on closer to that time.

[BigdaddyQH]

Your big problem is that last season, over 80 teams lost at least 3 games in a row to the spread, including all four of the teams you picked. That is a major loser.

[thegoal60]

Ok.

[Memento]

Your big problem is that last season, over 80 teams lost at least 3 games in a row to the spread, including all four of the teams you picked. That is a major loser.

I am sure you will be taking Miami ML Week 1.....guaranteed winner!

[daneblazer]

This will be hard. Have to find some under the radar team that the public either is down on or has no idea about. Cases like Utah are rare because the books just Jack the line up higher and higher each week ( see Boise state).

I suppose id look for some senior laden team in a small conference but would be quick to move away from this strategy if it's not working

i do like finding some team like Indiana or Boston College last year and taking the over or under every week

[thegoal60]

Week 1

Minnesota
A 0-0
B 0-0
C 0-0

Minnesota -13 -110 (A bet) vs Oregon St

Colorado
A 0-0
B 0-0
C 0-0

Colorado -7.5 -115 (A bet) vs Colorado St

Louisville
A 0-0
B 0-0
C 0-0

Louisville -40 -105 (A bet) vs Charlotte

Texas A&M
A 0-0
B 0-0
C 0-0

Texas A&M -3 -110 (A bet) vs UCLA

All lines found at SBR Sportsbook

[Grits n' Gravy]

A much better strategy would be to pick a few teams and bet on or against them every week depending on game. I could see all 4 teams you have selected ending up close to .500 against the spread for the season which would put you in the negative.

[ZINISTER]

I like to find a terrible team to bet against them. San Jose St. was a hot one for me a few years back. Not week in and week out but a lot of the weeks. Find a team with piss poor tackling(Indiana) a few years back comes to mind, when they play a solid running team with low percentage of mistakes(turnovers) lay the points and cash in. My advice find shytty teams and makes plays against em. Or when you have a coach on the hot seat and the year is not going so well for him early, bet against them if the players have quit on him or bet with them if the players like the guy. GL

[ZINISTER]

Eye test is my only means of handicapping. Not at all a numbers guy. See a shytty team play the first few weeks and fade em. I am already looking at Hawaii. Michigan is giving them a ton of points(like 41), but they can cover 28 of it easily in the first half. Hawaii can't tackle. Michigan(which I hate! go Bucs) will run it down their throats and by the second half the Rainbow will led you to the pot of GOLD!

[ZINISTER]

Some I have my eye on from seeing them last year North Texas, Hawaii, Cals D is soft, Maryland, Colorado St., New Mexico, UTEP.

[BigdaddyQH]

I would fade every one of those wagers except Louisville, and that would be a pass.

[BigdaddyQH]

I am sure you will be taking Miami ML Week 1.....guaranteed winner!

Wrong. First, Miami ius the home team and that does NOT play into my system. Second, you will have to look long and hard to get a ML spread. It is a nothing game. Will Miami win? Of course they will, or so thought everyone when Michigan played App State in 2007.

[thegoal60]

A much better strategy would be to pick a few teams and bet on or against them every week depending on game. I could see all 4 teams you have selected ending up close to .500 against the spread for the season which would put you in the negative.

If you had read the entire thread you would see that .500 would be great since its a 3 game chase. if they hit 1 out of every 3 I will finish in the black

[thegoal60]

I would fade every one of those wagers except Louisville, and that would be a pass.

Did I say you needed to bet these? Fade please

[thegoal60]

Guys you can say what you want, I literally have spelled out what I am following if you don't agree by all means fade them all.

[gojetsgomoxies]

i looked over the big ATS winning and losing teams of last year.......... non-BCS conference teams make up almost the entire top 10's at each end.

i would assume as NFL betting is far more efficient than NCAA, that BCS is more effiicient than non-BCS. even teams few care about like kentucky or illinois often playing a team people do care about. not true of non-BCS.

[Grits n' Gravy]

If you had read the entire thread you would see that .500 would be great since its a 3 game chase. if they hit 1 out of every 3 I will finish in the black

My bad. Good luck in your endeavor. Let us know how it turns out for you.

[gojetsgomoxies]

eastern michigan is interesting......... i may have lost touch as the season went on, but last year was probably their best chance for decent ATS season but they still didn't do it.

i think every single other horrible program has had its ATS moment in the sun - even if just 7-5 ATS - last 4 or 5 years but not eastern michigan.

[Memento]

...

[Memento]

Wrong. First, Miami ius the home team and that does NOT play into my system. Second, you will have to look long and hard to get a ML spread. It is a nothing game. Will Miami win? Of course they will, or so thought everyone when Michigan played App State in 2007.

Game is available at 5dimes right now at -999990 ML.....easy to find. Or for a bigger payday you can take Ok St. -215000 vs SELU at 5dimes. I know it doesn't fit your system, but nothing to lose right??

[thegoal60]

My bad. Good luck in your endeavor. Let us know how it turns out for you.

Its all good bro.