[max58]

GL with your plays

[a4u2fear]

Why are you on them? Bad team on B2B with a very poor history at Phx losing by 2 or more, more often than not

[max58]

good point / BJ are 4-1 in their last 5 saturday games so at those odds im in

[a4u2fear]

good point / BJ are 4-1 in their last 5 saturday games so at those odds im in

So, you'd rather play the jackets who are 4-1 in last 5 saturday games rather than PHX -1.5 who are 5-1 at covering the puck line the last 6 games at home vs the jackets?

you tell me which stat is more relevant.

[Rich Boy]

Pinny offering +183 now

[max58]

good point again you do have a case / but its seem to be contradicting

[JonahHFalcon]

So, you'd rather play the jackets who are 4-1 in last 5 saturday games rather than PHX -1.5 who are 5-1 at covering the puck line the last 6 games at home vs the jackets?

you tell me which stat is more relevant.

Neither. It makes me lol that people think these "trends" are even close to relevant in the NHL betting.

[a4u2fear]

Neither. It makes me lol that people think these "trends" are even close to relevant in the NHL betting.

check out my thread and my PL record. head to head matchups provide very good insight into which side to take, much more than other meaningless trends like B2B or 3 in 4 nights.

[JonahHFalcon]

check out my thread and my PL record. head to head matchups provide very good insight into which side to take, much more than other meaningless trends like B2B or 3 in 4 nights.

Previous games can be a factor in capping, I just don't really see the value in thinking games that happened last year has any outcome on on new games. This example...Phoenix going 5-1...is that a trend or standard deviation? I'll go with the latter.

Just something to think about.

[max58]

does histroy repeat itself

[a4u2fear]

Previous games can be a factor in capping, I just don't really see the value in thinking games that happened last year has any outcome on on new games. This example...Phoenix going 5-1...is that a trend or standard deviation? I'll go with the latter.

Just something to think about.

i don't think you know what standard deviation is. here's an example for you what standard deviation is:

you have a sample of games, say Buffalo Sabres last 100 games. The avg of the Sabres goals for is 2.5 in those 100 games and you find the standard deviation of their goals for is .75.

One standard deviation from the avg will give you a 68% confidence interval in where the data will fall. In this case, 68% of Buffalo's goals scored in that 100 games will fall in the range of (2.5-.75) and (2.5+.75), or 1.75 and 3.25 goals scored for.

Two standard deviations from the avg gives you a 95% confidence interval where the data will fall. Here, 95% of Buffalo's goals scored in the 100 games will fall in the range of (2.5 - 2*.75) and (2.5 + 2*.75) or 1 and 4.

[JonahHFalcon]

Sorry deviation should say variance

[max58]

would that be in fav

[JonahHFalcon]

would that be in fav

Not really sure what you are getting at. I am also on the Jackets at +165 but not because a trend went 4-1.

[max58]

not alone good

[a4u2fear]

Sorry deviation should say variance

Ok. This will be my last comment on this.

In their entire NHL history of Blue Jackets on road vs the Coyotes. Which would be 12 years worth of games and different players. The Coyotes have beaten the puck line 10/23 tries, or 43.5% rate.

I hit the puck line earlier at +165, which means I have a 5.8% edge if all things are equal.

If you want to talk variance, twelve years of differnt players and different style teams at different times of the year, all play in here.

If you look at the last 3-4 years, the numbers are even better for Phoenix.

Good luck all but I'm happily playing PHX -1.5

[Kpn]

Is hockey a good statistical standard distribution? based on how erratic it can be, getting within 2 units of standard deviation would (I'm guessing) allow for a large variance to have the proper confidence interval.

[max58]

what does that mean

[a4u2fear]

Is hockey a good statistical standard distribution? based on how erratic it can be, getting within 2 units of standard deviation would (I'm guessing) allow for a large variance to have the proper confidence interval.

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/hockey-bet...key-facts.html

Check that out just a bit to see how often things hit. I have plenty more just haven't uploaded them.

Trends in hockey are maybe more important than hitting a certain confidence interval because if you look at the goal totals set by Vegas, its almost always identical.

A huge myth in the NHL is that teams on back to backs fair poorly. Looking at the last 6 years of 6,000 games, I can tell you that is false.

Using confidence intervals to consistently beat the closing goal totals? Haven't figured that one out yet. But it may be worth looking into betting the (total+1 goal) or (total-1 goal), like betting over 6.5 or over 4.5 for a 5.5 game since you know those lines will be less accurate.

[JonahHFalcon]

Ok. This will be my last comment on this.

In their entire NHL history of Blue Jackets on road vs the Coyotes. Which would be 12 years worth of games and different players. The Coyotes have beaten the puck line 10/23 tries, or 43.5% rate.

I hit the puck line earlier at +165, which means I have a 5.8% edge if all things are equal.

If you want to talk variance, twelve years of differnt players and different style teams at different times of the year, all play in here.

If you look at the last 3-4 years, the numbers are even better for Phoenix.

Good luck all but I'm happily playing PHX -1.5

I think we are a little off base here. I am not saying Phoenix is the wrong play, nor am I saying anything about your personal way of capping games (you are a winner, and you've done that on your own by taking and ignoring advice as it comes, you have to do what works for you). I'm simply saying I personally don't believe a lot of trends used to cap games are relevant in the slightest, and if they are relevant, 6 is definitely not a sufficient sample size to base it off of.

[a4u2fear]

I think we are a little off base here. I am not saying Phoenix is the wrong play, nor am I saying anything about your personal way of capping games (you are a winner, and you've done that on your own by taking and ignoring advice as it comes, you have to do what works for you). I'm simply saying I personally don't believe a lot of trends used to cap games are relevant in the slightest, and if they are relevant, 6 is definitely not a sufficient sample size to base it off of.

Correct, it's not the best sample size. But in this case it still holds over the entire existence of the team at another. Watching teams for many years, I've seen recent history play a large part in the outcome of the game. When the Sabres were one of the best teams in the league, they still lost consistently to the same shit teams. Similarly right now the Bruins are a dynamite team, but still have a lot of trouble with the Sabres who have been a fairly poor team lately. Some teams that play defensive or trap like styles give the Sabres and their coach fits (like NJ/Florida/Columbus etc).

Good luck !

[JonahHFalcon]

Correct, it's not the best sample size. But in this case it still holds over the entire existence of the team at another. Watching teams for many years, I've seen recent history play a large part in the outcome of the game. When the Sabres were one of the best teams in the league, they still lost consistently to the same shit teams. Similarly right now the Bruins are a dynamite team, but still have a lot of trouble with the Sabres who have been a fairly poor team lately. Some teams that play defensive or trap like styles give the Sabres and their coach fits (like NJ/Florida/Columbus etc).

Good luck !

I agree with this post 100%. I was under the impression you were basing the pick purely on a win loss record of previous matchups of these two teams. Using this information as an indicator as you are combined with team strategies and other motivating factors, is a much more respectable betting strategy.

Best of luck with your Saturday bets!

[Omaga]

Correct, it's not the best sample size. But in this case it still holds over the entire existence of the team at another. Watching teams for many years, I've seen recent history play a large part in the outcome of the game. When the Sabres were one of the best teams in the league, they still lost consistently to the same shit teams. Similarly right now the Bruins are a dynamite team, but still have a lot of trouble with the Sabres who have been a fairly poor team lately. Some teams that play defensive or trap like styles give the Sabres and their coach fits (like NJ/Florida/Columbus etc).

Good luck !

Points Awarded:
Omaga gave a4u2fear 2 SBR Point(s) for this post.




Dam bro...you know NHL

I've check out some of your threads
http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/hockey-bet...key-facts.html
http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/hockey-bet...11-season.html

[JonahHFalcon]

GL with your plays

This line is murdering us. Time to throw another unit or two!

[Rich Boy]

Line closed at +190 at Pinny

+165 is a terrible price

[JonahHFalcon]

Line closed at +190 at Pinny

+165 is a terrible price

Sure is. Managed to get three units throughout the day for an average of +179 though so not quite as bad.

[max58]

with all this said do have a shot to win

[Rich Boy]

Blue Jackets manage to win a period. Will see if they can finish this game. I doubt it.

I snagged them at +190 @ Bodog right before the game started