6 UNDER trends to consider for TEX v TAMPA tn

[pocketlint]

The total has gone UNDER in 6 of Tampa Bay's last 7 games
The total has gone UNDER in 4 of Tampa Bay's last 5 games on the road
The total has gone UNDER in 5 of Tampa Bay's last 7 games when playing Texas
The total has gone UNDER in 5 of Tampa Bay's last 7 games when playing on the road against Texas
Texas is 4-1 SU in its last 5 games at home
Texas is 4-1 SU in its last 5 games
The total has gone UNDER in 14 of Texas's last 18 games at home
The total has gone UNDER in 18 of Texas's last 25 games

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

I'm taking the Rays 10u on the ML

What do you guys think of the OVER / UNDER?

[pocketlint]

If these trends mean nothing at the end of the day ( meaning the game is a HUGE OVER) can a STAT-HEAD among you tell me HOW YOU WOULD HAVE INTERPRETED these very same stats going into this game ?

In other words can someone conclude very different things from the very same trends?

this can be very instructive to some of us!!

[jayc88]

trends are for suckers

[Chi_archie]

regression to the mean

[Rich Boy]

Unfortunately these stats mean nothing.

Just because a team has played 10 straight unders or 20 straight overs has nothing to do with tonight's game.

[DwightShrute]

it's such an under that it's an over

[Chi_archie]

the "trend" I like is that the Rangers are averaging 2 hr's a game over the last 6 games....

seriously though, unless you have a strong "angle" as to why a trend is happening, and why it would CONTINUE to happen it means nothing. its not like IF trends were meaningful, the Books wouldn't have had access to more of the relevant ones BEFORE making the line.... it would already be factored into the line.... for instance OVERS in yankee stadium.... the "trend" was the over in the beginning of the year... the books adjusted. where are with now with o/u's in yankee stadium?

[pocketlint]

trends are for suckers

Well this sucker of a game seems to be following the trend, tail-between-the-legs.

Nice low-hanging fruit. I'll tap that, thank you.

[Rich Boy]

8 hits and 7 runs, this under is getting screwed.

[Axis]

^^
In 5 innings.

Like someone said, certain trends you may look at to follow, but there has to be a reason for it...not just because they went under 5 of the last 7 against Texas...what if their top 2 pithcer threw 6 of those games? and they have a rookie throwing tonight?

Just to many things...if anything trends can give you an angle to look into

[pocketlint]

^^
In 5 innings.

Like someone said, certain trends you may look at to follow, but there has to be a reason for it...not just because they went under 5 of the last 7 against Texas...what if their top 2 pithcer threw 6 of those games? and they have a rookie throwing tonight?

Just to many things...if anything trends can give you an angle to look into

This explanation is more like it.

Just to clear up, I think everyone tends to think (at least until the system that they use keeps working) that certain trends are more worthy of consideration than others.

Some trends are seen as surface-skimmers meaning they are perceived to be very arbitrary --- that they don't pick up some key undercurrent (of a pattern) that is really driving the observed run of wins or losses.

Whereas other trends that account for some arcane statistic that is a computed composite of two or more stats, look like they have more meat to them.

All systems (that rely on historical modeling) incorporate some sort of trending (sometimes unbeknown to them ).

Unless you wager based on line movement you most certainly fall into this category.

[ Even line-movements follow some trend .... not that anyone has ever studied them ]

And most importantly this has nothing to do with how knowledgeable you are about the SPECIFIC SPORT....you could TREND baseball just as effectively as
IRISH ROAD BOWLING !!! ]

[pocketlint]

Amen !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Chi_archie]

nice hit pocket...


again, I feel like you can't just bet blindly on a trend....unless you have some solid rationale/numbers behind it...

for instance, I love the fade the west coast teams playing at 1:00 on the east coast in the NFL.... there is a very good reason that this trend has done well........

but in other cases, i'm more apt to fade a trend that is eeking closer and closer to outside of 2 standard deviations of variability.... as regression to the mean will likely occur.... for instance if albert pujols is in the midst of a 4-40 slump with 3 singles and 2 rbi's..... he is likely gonna turn it around and go on a tear... he won't hit .100 for too long....

[InTheHole]

[jjgold]

You can find trends on every game every day to the side of your liking that is why they are meaningless

Most trends favor both sides if you keep looking

Anyway good call