No best bet for me today as well...
-
Comment -
NBA SDQL 'Best Bet' 2014-15
12-9-14 - 2:00p PST
Play: MIA (+4.5) PHX -110
SDQL:
AD and p:AL and WP<=50 and o:WP>=50 and ats streak<0 and o:ats streak=1 and division!=o:division and on:H and 59>=game number>=10 and line<=11 and season>=2006
English:
Contrarian play here, taking a team on the ropes: Playing the away dog coming off an away loss both straigth up and ATS, playing poorly for the season in general, against a team outside its own division that won its last game ATS, is playing well for the season in general, is laying fewer than 11 points and whose next game is also at home.
Notes:
Fits extremely nicely with dmitean's earlier OT query today thanks to the Clippers' heroics last night, and might also be a good spot for the Heat to bounce back after getting demolished by Memphis...
PS - I see everyone enjoyed the Wizards game yesterday as much as I did...FFS!!!
Last edited by Mako-SBR; 12-09-14, 05:26 PM.Comment -
Out of best bet for today... Ill be ready to get at it tomorrowComment -
This one is similar.. [90-59-2 (1.73, 60.4%)]It goes in waves for some reason, but the results are pretty clear:
HF and p
vertime=1 and rest=0
SU:44-41 (2.48, 51.8%)ATS:32-52-1 (-2.88, 38.1%) avg line: -5.4O/U:34-50-1 (0.09, 40.5%) avg total: 195.3
If the other team, had at least one day's rest, the result are much clearer:
HF and pvertime=1 and rest=0 and o:rest>0
SU:15-22 (0.89, 40.5%)ATS:11-26-0 (-4.19, 29.7%) avg line: -5.1O/U:17-20-0 (1.92, 45.9%) avg total: 198.1
opvertime>0 and o:rest=0 and A
If opponent's previous matchup went to OT and opponent has no rest and is playing away
What the heck is the 1.73 mean in those results?Last edited by Heart; 12-09-14, 06:36 PM.Comment -
the avg margin is supposeComment -
Playing around and found this one...
n:WP>75 and line>-2
ATS: 504-150-9 (6.42, 77.1%)
Next opponents win percentage is more than 75% and the line on current game more than -2 wins 77% of the time. Nice sample size and simple.. puts out about a game a day.
I'm trying to pin down the cause of this situation.. it just doesn't really click to me.. big game looming on the horizon and usually a dog so the team needs to make some kind of statement or considers current game a must win maybe? Any help?Comment -
oh yes that makes sense .. I knew it seemed to good
what the hell is n:WP then? The n there doesn't make sense then.. something strange about that query. What the heck do those results mean lmaoComment -
it means that your win percentage going into the next game is more than 75%. it's is likely ti have a huge win% like that when you win your games. so the likelihood of being a win increases and so does the chance of being an ATS winner.Comment -
Something's amiss though, just doing "WP>75 and line>-2" brings the ATS to 50%. I think I confused it by asking the WP of the team on the next game since it's in the future.
either way I think it's a bad queryComment -
ya.. either way I need a winner tonight??? you guys got one????Comment -
It is SDQL:
Pats lost 33-20 to the Dolphins week one, Belichick trying to avenge an earlier same season defeat against a division opponent? SDQL trend points (clearly) to the PATS with an ATS record of 11-1 and cover margin of 9.67 points per game.
team=Patriots and P
IV and P:season=season and P:L and season>=2000
ATS 11-1 (9.67)
With the first loss on the road and the PATS failing to cover and now are at home:
team=Patriots and PIV and P:season=season and P:AL and P:ATSL and H and season>=2000
ATS 7-0 (13.21)
SUP 6-1 (17.86)
Denver breathing down their neck for homefield should we not expect, to a degree that is far greater than we usually expect something, a solid effort from the Patriots?
Any thoughts on this game?
(Vitriol towards me for posting in the NBA thread also welcome, this thread more active than that other one and I wanted to impress as large an audience as possible with my ability to speak SDQL. Despite that being an illusion lol, and in actuality: an ability to copy&paste.)
I wondered ya'llz opinions considering the homefield earning facet + small sample size how strong an SDQL reading you'd call this, so I can store that in my brain re; sdql where this involves small sample size generally & also mainly in regards to NFL overall & lastly DIV matchups, specific scenarios.
In plain English: are there situations wherein small sample size is acceptable or further even totally not considered a "red flag"?....NE on revenge then further the 2nd thing "First loss on Road, Pats fail to cover & now at home...ATS 7-0 (13.21) SUP 6-1 (17.86) a good sized sample really. success of PATS since year 2000 taken into consideration....yes?
I'm fascinated by the concept of SDQL and if I hadn't been given a brain this time around thats allergic to numbers I'd be all up in it, totally. That may be why I'm fascinated by it cuz I presently suspect it as a way for numerically challenged such as me to USE numbers while still maintaining a very healthy distance from them lol.
May be that or not. eventually I'll know for sure but THOUGHTS ON THIS GAME AND THE PERTAINING SDQL posted???? please. i.e "just too tiny a sample size to have real value? SQDL + NFL, due to not enough data + the HUGE CHANGES TO THE GAME OF late, increase in PI calls, ruffing NFL actively seeking to create more offense, more exciting games thus more viewers + protect players"???
Has the evolution of the NFL rendered SQDL for NFL not worth pursuing?
Altogether or just greener pastures re: sdql lie in NBA, NHL and.....elsewhere? lastly where (in what sports) do we see the best success? And the least?
Last edited by buddha; 12-09-14, 09:43 PM.Comment -
Fading SAC tonight.
Good luck.
AD and line<=6 and rest=0 and o:rest>0 and p:site streak>=4 and o:WP<wp< html=""></wp<> < WPLast edited by b1slickguy; 12-09-14, 10:09 PM.Comment -
Team wants to get on their game, get their shyt together have it together before facing the powerful team they have on deck. Possibly not even something they're consciously thinking about, on deck is a spot where they have to not suck so, perhaps subconsciously even, this game prior they're already treating as that spot which they can't afford to suck in.
I'd personally suspect this, (awesome seeming find by the way) can be explained by effort not consciously made by players and thus teams but a subconscious phenomenon which has at its foundation "ego" and is specific to NBA even. This because of the backgrounds that players come from, small number of players on the court (actively involved in the outcome of the game at any given moment, and on the whole) and mashing those 2 things together: the desire (both conscious and otherwise) to not get "shown up". Large % of NBA players have come from impoverished backgrounds, overcome incredible odds to get where they are. This has carved into their psyches the mentality of FIGHTER. They're, IMO, not deciding to RISE in the spot your formula isolates, they have no choice in the matter the same as the rest of us breathe, without thinking about it.Comment -
Clarifying: "the desire to not get "shown up (and for this example a SUBCONSCIOUS ENGRAVED IN THEIR "DNA" form of that)" I meant in regards SPECIFICALLY to this scenario: Dog -2 or greater with matchup on deck for them with the powerhouse team.
As opposed to an overall desire to not be shown up, on an ongoing basis. Clarification necessary because its my theory here that in this situation a uniquely HIGH level of desire to "not get shown up" becomes present. Yes, NBA players want to not get shown up as normal operating procedure, they don't succeed to a 77% click in avoiding that though so why do they succeed to that large of an extent in this scenario? What might explain damn impressive 77% success rate in this spot?
I propose that its largely accidental lol, blind (but talented as a searcher) squirrel finding a nut...
....rather than the result of stuff done cuz players are thinking about it individually and/or as team unit...
....cuz the conscious mind would think saving energy for the bout vs. the power team on deck the best approach and your results totally annihilate any chance that prevails in this Dog of -2 or greater with powerteam on deck situation. The opposite happens. They play hard. So what exactly is overpowering their instinct to conserve themselves for the tough matchup on deck? We seek the path of least resistance, as a species.The Waking Mind "wants" to locate the path wherein the least work is required, especially IN THE MOMENT. Which, in this spot, would be to go less hard.
Totally justifiably to the waking mind cuz of the tough matchup on deck. Human would TOTALLY choose that option if he could. Why doesn't he though....in this situation?
I propose that the conscious mind is completely OVER-RULED by the subconscious. Team/Individual players placed in underdog role on the eve of matchup vs. Powerteam get their switch flipped to INTENSELY MOTIVATED without them even realizing it cuz this game here? They're being disrespected, line saying they're gonna lose combined with the powersquad next up. They Rise. Whether they intended to rise or not lol.
tl;dr: Team on eve of matchup vs. powerteam & a chance to overcome, beat the odds (what many of them having been doing their entire lives) is told they ain't even gonna prevail in this spot let alone that one, getting told (once again) they ain't good enough here let alone there....that next game. So it becomes a "warmup challenge" to the tough battle on deck, a special "hunger" is awakened within them and they rise. Very possibly without even knowing why they rose but what they DO KNOW is now they're ready. Or at least "more ready" to face that very good team thats next.
SDQL is great stuff. This kinda thing demonstrates that.
Whats the SU win #'s on this? Especially with lines of -4 or smaller? You might have stumbled onto an attractive +moneyline deal as well.
Where do the numbers go if the line is bracketed 'tween, like, -2 to...say -5? Whats the % there?
You know more about this stuff than I do. Definitely play around with this one, I suspect you've tapped into an identifier of a maybe really interesting thing.Last edited by buddha; 12-09-14, 11:13 PM.Comment -
Woops, nevermind lmfao. SEEMED SO GREAT THOUGH and would be totally "in tune" with the human mind lol. I expect theres "something" there though, to this angle: Dog prior to tough matchup so encourage you to continue pursuit of such things....teams AFTER facing that 75% W squad? As Faves? Seems like there should be something useful SDQLwise on one or both sides of a tough matchup. Forgive the novella posts above, I should read whole threads 'stead of Premature Replycation.Comment -
NBA SDQL "Best Bet" 2014-15
Overall Group Record - 63-55-2 53.3% (+4.59) (max wagered -to win 1 unit)
Yesterday's recap 1-0-1 (+1.00) Mako..on a mini heater after breaking his bad run.
Official Entries: Max 10 of 10:
1. JMon - 11-10 (+.90)
2. pip2 - 11-10 (+.38)
3. nash13 - 6-4 (+1.82)
4. Ronald S. - 9-9 (-.60)
5. hyahya - 6-4-1 (+1.55)
6. Mako-SBR - 9-10 (-2.00)
7. dmitean - 0-1 (-1.00)
8. Consigliere - 8-3-1 (+4.84)
9. GolfAddict - 3-4 (-1.30)
10. open spot
Comment -
Wow, pushing on the under 206 in TOR/CLE was a minor miracle. I picked up the in-game under at 219.5 and 217.5. Takes some of the sting out of the beats we'd been taking in the previous couple of daysComment -
LAC x2
LAC/IND over
LAC/IND under x3
PHI/ATL under
WAS x4
WAS/ORL over x2
WAS/ORL under
BOS x2
BOS/CHA over
MIN x2
POR/MIN under
POR/MIN over
HOU/GS over
BOS/CHA over
NO/DAL overComment -
170 2 Clippers -6.5
163 170 126 Under 199.5 in Indiana
108 Over 199.5 in Indiana
163 Under 194.5 in Orlando
106 Over 194.5 in Orlando
147 87 Over 204.5 in Charlotte
138 Warriors -11
16 Rockets +11
134 Mavs -7
132 Under 203.5 in Oakland
75 Over 203.5 in Oakland
131 100 Minny +11
113 Under 202.5 in Atlanta
104 33 16 13 3 Wizards -4.5
96 10 Celtics +2.5
87 Over 206 in Minny
59 Under 206 in Minny
87 Over in 209 Dallas
84 Hawks -13Comment -
Didn't have the time to go over them, don't know if any are good or bad. A bit short on time today.
If someone can put them in the file and go over them, to see which ones are good and which aren't, it would be great!Comment -
NBA SDQL 'Best Best' 2014-15
12-10-14 - 2:14p CT
Play LAC -6.5 -110
SDQL: H and 9.5 >= line >= 3.5 and p:margin <= -10 and op
oints >= 100 and oppoints >= 100 and opppoints >= 100 and 2009<=season and playoffs = 0 and o:rest<2
English: Since 2009, in reg season fade a home dog from 3.5 to 9.5 off a loss of 10 or more; against an oppt that scored 100pt or more three straight and is on less than 2 days rest.Comment -
where's Consigliere? I need a WINNER!!!!!Comment -
NBA SDQL 'Best Bet' 2014-15
12-10-14 - 12:30p PST
Play: LAC (-6.5) IND -110
SDQL:
H and 10.5>=line>=3 and p:HL and p:margin<=-12 and opoints>=101 and oppoints>=101 and opppoints>=100 and playoffs=0 and o:rest<2 and month!=3 and season>=2006
English:
Fading a home team here that got beaten down like a dog in their last home game losing by 12 or more, against a hot offensive team scoring 100+ points in their last three straight games, getting between 3 and 10.5 points, in all months besides March.
Notes:
Nice query from JMon previously, simple, makes sense, and it's certainly not hard to go with the Clippers at this point after their recent performances. They are due for a let down though, wouldn't be surprised if it happens here despite the Clips being a good road team this season. BOL all!
PS - Hahaha, I see JMon just posted it also, that's funny...was my favorite query out of six being active on my sheet, thanks buddy, let's get it!Comment -
I don't know. I know that the query isn't based on Pacers weakness, but still... This is a very different team than it was last season and even all this season long, till their recent road trip.
It's only their second home game with their "true" team...
Hope you hit it!
I took LAC first quarter...Comment -
site=away and p:H and pp:A and ppp:A and pppp:A and ppppp:A and rest=0 and line>0
SU:25-104 (-9.02, 19.4%)ATS:52-74-3 (-1.74, 41.3%) avg line: 7.3O/U:52-76-1 (-3.71, 40.6%) avg total: 194.7
Nice one both for Under and Fade.
Interesting that if you do the same, but favorite, instead of dog, you get an Over trend:
site=away and p:H and pp:A and ppp:A and pppp:A and ppppp:A and rest=0 and line<0
SU:30-13 (5.21, 69.8%)ATS:21-21-1 (1.22, 50.0%) avg line: -4.0O/U:25-18-0 (2.05, 58.1%) avg total: 192.6
Also, this one is very nice:
conference = Western and o:conference = Western and p:H and pp:A and ppp:A and pppp:A and ppppp:A and line>0 and season>2008
SU:18-63 (-7.75, 22.2%)ATS:27-52-2 (-2.14, 34.2%) avg line: 5.6O/U:37-44-0 (-1.10, 45.7%) avg total: 203.6
And a variation of it:
conference = Western and o:conference = Western and site=home and p:H and pp:A and ppp:A and pppp:A and ppppp:A and season>2008
SU:57-42 (2.12, 57.6%)ATS:39-57-3 (-0.93, 40.6%) avg line: -3.1O/U:58-39-2 (1.92, 59.8%) avg total: 202.8
Comment -
NBA SDQL 'Best Bet' 2014-15
Play: Wizards -5 -104
SDQL: conference = Eastern and o:conference = Eastern and site=home and p:A and pp:A and ppp:A and pppp:A and line>0 and season>2008
English:
Fading a home team off a long road trip, playing their first home game as a dog.
Notes: There is always a huge discussion, what game is the best to fade the team in, first game off a long trip of the second one. I honestly don't know, because all the players and coaches always claimed it's the first game, but playing with the queries, the answer is not that clear and obvious, but one thing is sure - it's a good idea to look for the right spots to fade such teams.Comment -
NBA Best Bet
12/10/14 4:45 PM EST
Boston +3 -105 (@Charlotte) (5dimes)
AD and ats streak >= 5 and season >= 2010
ATS: 53-29-1 (2.66, 64.6%) avg line: 5.9
AD and ats streak >= 5 and season >= 2010 and 2.5 <= line <= 8
ATS: 43-14-1 (3.43, 75.4%) avg line: 5.3
Play the away team as a small to moderate underdog who have covered the spread in their last 5+ games.
The Sixers are also a play under this query but they fall outside the 2.5-8 pt underdog range (they are +13).Comment -
Here's something else that also seems to support Boston
21-20 (-1.05, 51.2%) 11-29-1 (-5.27, 27.5%) avg line: -4.2 24-15-2 (5.60, 61.5%) avg total: 200.9 Comment -
NBA Best Bet
12/10/14 4:45 PM EST
Boston +3 -107 (@Charlotte) (Pinny)
H and Average(margin@team and season) <= -6 and p:W and p:margin < 5
Fade the home team that has been losing by more than 6 points on average, previously won their last game but by less than 5.
I have watched a few Celtics games recently and although there record is bad, they are playing competitively and are well coached. They have the offensive weapons to compete against mediocre teams and win easily on any given night. They can also compete well with most teams in the East when healthy. I see this as a SU win for Celtics, probably by 3 or 4 but I took the points on this since they really seem to have a hard time holding on to leads in the fourth quarter. When Jeff Green gets locked in on in the 4th their offense starts to sputter. The Hornets have talent but haven't seemed to be able to put it together. They play fairly disjointed ball and really haven't established themselves as a guard or inside oriented team.
Also playing the wiz, clips and rockets tonight. Love the Rockets and Warriors matchup from a fan perspective. Two pretty decent trends supporting Twolves tonight with no contradictions but they are 0-9 so far on the trends from a team perspective so just can't bring myself to pull the trigger on them. Also like the Hawks play on the trends and haven't decided if I'm going to throw something on them, lot of points and Philly is playing hard but Hawks are on fire right now...tough one. Probably end up passing...best bets you make are the ones you don't.Last edited by Consigliere; 12-10-14, 06:20 PM.Comment -
Wizards burned me for the second straight time, winning, but failing to cover...
One nice query that I found, trying to use the fact that West is so much stronger than the East. Far far far more storng than bookies and public realize.
conference = Western and o:conference = Eastern and WP>60 and o:WP>60 and playoffs=0 and season>2010
SU:52-44 (2.54, 54.2%)ATS:56-38-2 (2.06, 59.6%) avg line: -0.5O/U:43-50-3 (0.77, 46.2%) avg total: 196.1
When good teams with similar records meet, bet the one from the West. Good rule that should never be forgotten...Comment
