Will trends that dn take lines into account always lose?

[Jaug]

Let's say we find a situational trend for NBA:

Bet a team that has not covered in their last 4 games vs a team that did cover their last game which has hit 55% over last 3 seasons (not true but just for educational purposes). This trend would not take into account the actual line on the game, so will the trend revert to mean every time? If that is the case there is no value in betting on such a trend.

[Justin7]

Yes. Any technical analysis that is blind to the spread is hokey-pokey, and will lose long-term.

[Jaug]

Yes. Any technical analysis that is blind to the spread is hokey-pokey, and will lose long-term.

What is a technical analysis?

This is very interesting because every trend is almost made like this.

Examples:

Pistons are 18-38 ATS in their last 56 when their opponent scores 100 points or more in their previous game.

Warriors are 35-16-2 ATS in their last 53 when their opponent allows 100 points or more in their previous game.

[reno cool]

disagree. Certain qualities can be overvalued or undervalued by linesmakers/gamblers. Line setting is not mandatory to a winning strategy.

[reno cool]

What is a technical analysis?

This is very interesting because every trend is almost made like this.

Examples:

Pistons are 18-38 ATS in their last 56 when their opponent scores 100 points or more in their previous game.

Warriors are 35-16-2 ATS in their last 53 when their opponent allows 100 points or more in their previous game.

that kind of stuff is unlikely to be worthwhile, however

[roasthawg]

It all depends... if you find something that works then odds are not a lot of people know about it. You'll probably get negative feedback on a forum like this as it won't be widely known.

[Peep]

I think you can look for your trend first (teams win 67% after being blown out as a home dog), match your lines in later to check for profitability.

[Arilou]

There is no reason such a "trend" couldn't be profitable, with the justification for that profitability being a misevaluation of some factor by the line, however the line is created. If no one takes into account that the Pistons play better on Thursdays, and the lines are exactly the same as they would be otherwise, and you're convinced that they will be 1.5 points better on Thursdays than other days, you can blindly bet on them at the best price you can find and expect to be successful. And, as it turns out, no one thinks they do better on Thursdays, because even if this happened to be historically true it would be deeply silly to think it wasn't random, just like the other more realistic examples. They're almost always the result of random fluctuations, which is what Justin was saying, but that doesn't mean there aren't real spots where you can do this. Then of course you have to watch out for people noticing such an error, which makes the error go away or even reverse itself; if anyone realizes you're betting money blind, and it's enough money that they care, you are in big, BIG trouble.

[durito]

There are trends that aren't random, but markets will correct themselves and if you are betting without regard to price you won't know when this happens.

Look at home teams in game 3 of NBA playoff series that lost the first 2 games. They used to do very well ATS for quite a while. The reasons aren't terribly important (probably the refs trying to extend the series so the NBA makes more $) but the gambling market caught on and those lines are now adjusted for that trend (ie the home team gets an extra point or so of HCA).