Collected 3-4 years worth of MLB data but can't seem to

CappinTerp · 08-06-14, 09:29 AM

Good luck pal, but IMO computer systems do not work. Many intangibles to consider........price action, psychology............ect.

usma1992 · 08-06-14, 10:22 AM

I think all the experts... have a computer based model they refer to...

it is almost mandatory in this day and age.

Dave

magyarsvensk · 08-06-14, 10:32 AM

Along with each team's ability to score runs and how hot they are, the pitchers and the ballpark are very important factors.

What makes over/unders so hard in baseball is that one random event can blow a game open, but those events are relatively rare.

My algorithm seems to think that unders are considerably easier to predict than overs. That being said, I do not take pitchers or ballparks into account.

magyarsvensk · 08-06-14, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by CappinTerp

Good luck pal, but IMO computer systems do not work. Many intangibles to consider........price action, psychology............ect.

Computers can do anything that humans can do and a million times faster. Saying that computers don't work is tantamount to saying that nothing works -- which may be true. Baseball is a tough game to predict, hence why the vig is lower than any other sport.

emceeaye · 08-06-14, 10:38 AM

Yes me too! Lag with database is horrible!!

EXhoosier10 · 08-06-14, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by usma1992

figure out the game of baseball. I am trying to develop a system that predicts over/unders similar to my football/basketball systems.

Can't seem to nail down the key metrics that dictate the score...

Any input would be appreciated...

Dave

Definitely doable. I'm hitting 63% over ~ 150 bets with weighted average lines of -108. Considering I haven't heard a single other person use the stats I do, I'm not really willing to share what that is.

Emancipator · 08-06-14, 11:07 AM

Home dogs tend to go under more than average. Same can be said for non division games where teams arent as familiar with each other.

CappinTerp · 08-06-14, 11:26 AM

Originally posted by magyarsvensk

Computers can do anything that humans can do and a million times faster. Saying that computers don't work is tantamount to saying that nothing works -- which may be true. Baseball is a tough game to predict, hence why the vig is lower than any other sport.

Some things the computer can not pick up on,but agree anything poss. if programmed right. one of my points is this: Lets say Kershaw is home pitching vs Astros # 4 starter and the line opens up at LAD -145 and stays there. Do you load up on this incredable " value" or do you say what is up with this game.?? The computer will say LAD....all day.....?

CappinTerp · 08-06-14, 11:28 AM

Originally posted by Emancipator

Home dogs tend to go under more than average. Same can be said for non division games where teams arent as familiar with each other.

For myself in gen. I prefer to go over on NL games and under on AL games...........85% of my total bets are on the under.

magyarsvensk · 08-06-14, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by CappinTerp

Some things the computer can not pick up on,but agree anything poss. if programmed right. one of my points is this: Lets say Kershaw is home pitching vs Astros # 4 starter and the line opens up at LAD -145 and stays there. Do you load up on this incredable " value" or do you say what is up with this game.?? The computer will say LAD....all day.....?

Computer programs can and should compare the line to the stats when evaluating a game. They have no emotions, so they would be better suited to evaluate whether the books "know something" or whether it is just an over-reaction to small samples of data. Micro sampling seems to be the rage among cappers on SBR, so I would think that extends to the books.

Humans have a built in bias toward feeling that they predicted an outcome with a high degree of certainty, usually by way of overlooking past failures and focusing in on recent successes.

upscope · 08-06-14, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by EXhoosier10

Definitely doable. I'm hitting 63% over ~ 150 bets with weighted average lines of -108. Considering I haven't heard a single other person use the stats I do, I'm not really willing to share what that is.

Would you mind sharing some of your losing models then?? Nothing I enjoy more than losing all my money to sport books.

Thanx kindly~

usma1992 · 08-08-14, 12:07 PM

I agree that baseball is a little tough on over/unders because... one singular event.

can disrupt everything. I am going to continue to collect data, but I fined tuned 2011-2013 than tried those same parameters on my 2014 data and got results less than 45% so I have obviously not figured out what is important. I believe I have 3 systems NFL, NCAAF, and NCAAB that work, but I would like to bet during the summer...

Anyway thanks for the feedback...