Profitable trend: team lost more than 2 in a row

chaseman · 07-22-10, 12:19 PM

That's interesting, thanks curious!

peterpan19 · 07-22-10, 12:46 PM

GL
But I did a quick backtest and didnt doesnt look like it is profitable

bigsmitty · 07-22-10, 01:08 PM

I'll try it out and see-thanks Curious. Ciao

curious · 07-22-10, 03:37 PM

Originally posted by peterpan19

GL
But I did a quick backtest and didnt doesnt look like it is profitable

Then you don't know how to backtest.

peterpan19 · 07-22-10, 03:50 PM

Originally posted by curious

Then you don't know how to backtest.

I know how to do it and just betting every fav tha lost more than 2 games and bet against every dog that lost more than 2 is not profitable long term... the antidog not much since 2004 and the fav lost money...

Pegasus · 07-22-10, 04:18 PM

Do you have the results for these trends for the past few years?

curious · 07-22-10, 05:56 PM

Originally posted by peterpan19

I know how to do it and just betting every fav tha lost more than 2 games and bet against every dog that lost more than 2 is not profitable long term... the antidog not much since 2004 and the fav lost money...

Why is it that every time I put good information out some crackhead crawls out from their mother's basement and spouts off some nonsense?

I said I was tracking a trend LATELY. I could care less what happened 4 years ago, but THIS YEAR, backing favs and fading dogs with > 2 game losing streaks is a money maker.

The Sports Data Query Language — SDQL 2 documentation

https://www.sportsdatabase.com

season=2010 and streak < -2 and line > 0 and site=home
season=2010 and streak < -2 and line < 0 and site=home

curious · 07-22-10, 06:35 PM

typo

Originally posted by curious

Why is it that every time I put good information out some crackhead crawls out from their mother's basement and spouts off some nonsense?

I said I was tracking a trend LATELY. I could care less what happened 4 years ago, but THIS YEAR, backing favs and fading dogs with > 2 game losing streaks is a money maker.

The Sports Data Query Language — SDQL 2 documentation

https://www.sportsdatabase.com

season=2010 and streak < -2 and line > 0 and site=home
season=2010 and streak < -2 and line < 0 and site=home

Leave off the site=home

peterpan19 · 07-23-10, 01:35 AM

well I used the same site and yes this year it is profitable, but read my post I said since 2004 !!

curious · 07-23-10, 01:17 PM

Dodgers won
Cardinals lost

1-1 -.65

today only the Dodgers qualify
Dodgers -120

dolphan34 · 07-23-10, 01:32 PM

Good luck with this. Sounds promising.

sweethook · 07-23-10, 01:37 PM

looks good GL. ..be carefull of one team that goes on a losin strek

MUHerd37 · 07-23-10, 01:41 PM

This is interesting. What happened over the past few years is irrelevant. This year MLB is different in that so many starting pitchers are dominating. This isn't the long ball era anymore.

SolidDala · 07-23-10, 01:46 PM

First, this sounds like it fits into sweep/avoiding sweep scenario for SOME plays, would the data up the units if one do not play against team to avoid sweep..

Second, peterpan brings a valid point, sure its profitable so far this season, but that is not what matters, its what happens rest of the season that does, and to get better idea of this, having data from 2004 instead of apr 2010 brings you closer to that. It will make you see:

is avg around -120 , -140 -160 is the % only 55% and not profitable, when applying variable as; not bet against team avoiding sweep, do not play gm2 if gm 1 is won what happen then etc

My point is simply, do not do a lot of hard reseach for one season cause you need to start over again the next one...

SolidDala · 07-23-10, 01:57 PM

for most systems... this is not about yours its a general think for starters, but since I started my thought I may as well elaborate:

2 outcomes for an event, system tells you to pick outcome A... after 50 events A is on a roll an leading 35-15 against outcome B.. so the bettor see a great money maker thing happening and starts betting.. after 100 events A is struggling but still leads 60 to 40.. After 500 events A realize that he is a dudes head on peace of metal...

This is why it matters to see YEARS of trends for a specific happening, outcome A needs to know if he is a faceless goldbrick or just another dudes face on a coin!

BillAccpetor · 07-23-10, 02:41 PM

I do not like the involved juice... It may be better to play dogs to win (instead of to risk)...

curious · 07-23-10, 10:14 PM

Originally posted by SolidDala

First, this sounds like it fits into sweep/avoiding sweep scenario for SOME plays, would the data up the units if one do not play against team to avoid sweep..

Second, peterpan brings a valid point, sure its profitable so far this season, but that is not what matters, its what happens rest of the season that does, and to get better idea of this, having data from 2004 instead of apr 2010 brings you closer to that. It will make you see:

is avg around -120 , -140 -160 is the % only 55% and not profitable, when applying variable as; not bet against team avoiding sweep, do not play gm2 if gm 1 is won what happen then etc

My point is simply, do not do a lot of hard reseach for one season cause you need to start over again the next one...

Sigh. You know it alls gripe my ******* gourd. I said in my original post that this is a trend that I have been tracking LATELY. I don't give a flying **** what happened 6 years ago. RIGHT NOW this trend is a money maker. I did not say that you can bet this blindly from now to eternity.

Look, if you want to publish your overANALyzed formula feel free to start your own thread and go for it. I don't believe in overly complex formulas, I like to exploit simple ones that give an edge RIGHT NOW.

At some point this trend will break down and I will stop following it. That's why its called a trend.

SolidDala · 07-24-10, 06:23 AM

Was just making an input for your trend and how to get a better feel for it for the upcoming weeks nothing more. No overanalyzed formula it were YOUR trend I wrote about just over a longer period so chill! Its called FEEDBACK!

I get it you will ride the hot trend while its here fair enough, hope it goes on for a while.

patswin · 07-24-10, 06:31 AM

good info thanks for sharing it

PuckCoach · 07-24-10, 08:27 AM

1-2 so far, right?

curious · 07-24-10, 05:22 PM

Sat July 24th

Rangers -120

curious · 07-25-10, 09:51 AM

Sunday, July 25

Cardinals -125
Giants -145
Phillies -130
Padres -160

Cougar Bait · 07-25-10, 11:03 AM

GL curious

Nice to see guys thinking outside of the box

LiarGame · 07-25-10, 11:23 AM

Thanks for the current trend Curious

curious · 07-26-10, 09:18 AM

Originally posted by curious

Cardinals -125
Giants -145
Phillies -130
Padres -160

4-0 finallly had a good day

curious · 07-26-10, 09:18 AM

Monday July 26

Phillies -120

YTD 5-3

Cougar Bait · 07-26-10, 05:37 PM

Nice, keep the thread going, would love to see this take off

curious · 07-26-10, 08:23 PM

Originally posted by curious

Phillies -120

YTD 5-3

Phillies Win

YTD 6-3

curious · 07-27-10, 08:57 AM

tuesday, July 27

blue jays -220
Yankees -240
Nationals -140
Phillies -220
Rockies -205

curious · 07-28-10, 08:25 AM

Originally posted by curious

blue jays -220
Yankees -240
Nationals -140
Phillies -220
Rockies -205

3-2 ugh, i knew better than to take all this huge favs.

Cougar Bait · 07-28-10, 04:56 PM

What's your play tonight Curious?

curious · 08-03-10, 12:14 PM

Tue, Aug 3

Cubs -120
Rangers -145
Orioles -110
Reds -130

This play is based on a team who has won > 2 in a row
Indians RRL - 1 1/2 +365

curious · 08-03-10, 12:20 PM

Tigers 2nd game of double header

If the Tigers lose the 1st game of their double header and are still a fav in the 2nd game play the Tigers in the 2nd game.