NBA Stituational Bet, SDQL

[Wojo]

Especially when eliminating that large chunks of games doesn't have anything to do with improving or playing to the foundational core logic of the play, which in this case is fading a team coming home after two successful away games. Doesn't matter if they're a dog or fav because the logic stands that the team and linemakers and public are now aligned the other direction on the team's next home game, overconfident/trap/etc, and the line is potentially full of value going the other way against them.

I always aim for the largest samples, over the most amount of seasons, as possible when I tinker with strings.

I agree that the larger the sample the better. Also, I believe that normally, it is better to have a longer period of time than just the last 2+ seasons. However, there are trends that are best to trust early as the linemakers & the public evolve more rapidly every season.

I wasn't "throwing out 36 games", I was just stating the fact that if the team we are betting against is a dog, it has a more successful record. That is even more evident in a larger data sample going back to 2008 on where the >=0 is 5-32 SU, 10-27 ATS while the favorite is 38-32 SU, and 29-41 ATS.

I prefer fewer qualifiers in trends as compared to what you see many pro touts doing. I do consider D or F to be a very valuable qualifier.

GL2A!

[FortySix]

Fellas have you locked in any plays for today at all? If so can you please advise. Love this thread. Thank you

[FistOfFreedom]

Fellas have you locked in any plays for today at all? If so can you please advise. Love this thread. Thank you

&2.

[JMon]

I wasn't "throwing out 36 games", I was just stating the fact that if the team we are betting against is a dog, it has a more successful record. That is even more evident in a larger data sample going back to 2008 on where the >=0 is 5-32 SU, 10-27 ATS while the favorite is 38-32 SU, and 29-41 ATS.

I prefer fewer qualifiers in trends as compared to what you see many pro touts doing. I do consider D or F to be a very valuable qualifier.

GL2A!

This is one the most important things I do when looking a particular situation. Especially when the situation is open to D/F and H/A etc. Thus: similarity in a given situation with the game that is active within it. I like to see , perhaps, a replica of what's going to happen (with what happened in the past)...hopefully.

I think your statement was misunderstood.

[JMon]

Modified the sdql from posts #3 and #4 giving it a larger sample size extending more than just a few months.
Anyone have any other sdql's to compliment or contradict the plays produced below?
Good luck.

H and line>-6 and p:AW and pp:AW and season>=2011

nope...luv grizz, laying off bulls

[JMon]

Learning time.....I'll give the translation....can anyone, except Mako or slick guy, give the SDQL... a play that I am on tonight...

1. playing at home
2. after a loss by 10 points or more
3. against oppt. off 4 straight losses of 10 points or more

[b1slickguy]

So it makes no difference to you if a team is a dog or is favored?
Good luck.

Can be a dog or a favorite if not more than -5.5.
Favorites laying 6 or more are filtered out, as they are only hitting at a 50% clip in the given sdql.
Good luck.

[Don_rayf]

kings

[Wojo]

Learning time.....I'll give the translation....can anyone, except Mako or slick guy, give the SDQL... a play that I am on tonight...

1. playing at home
2. after a loss by 10 points or more
3. against oppt. off 4 straight losses of 10 points or more

H and p:margin<-9.5 and op:margin<-9.5 and opp:margin<-9.5 and oppp:margin<-9.5 and opppp:margin<-9.5

What do I win?

Go Kings!
(thanks for sharing that trend and your prior comments regarding my post)

[cofaga]

Learning time.....I'll give the translation....can anyone, except Mako or slick guy, give the SDQL... a play that I am on tonight...

1. playing at home
2. after a loss by 10 points or more
3. against oppt. off 4 straight losses of 10 points or more

H and p:margin<=-10 and op:margin<=-10 and opp:margin<=-10 and oppp:margin<=-10 and opppp:margin<=-10

that's some good odds, thanks for the info

[Mako-SBR]

H and p:margin<=-10 and op:margin<=-10 and opp:margin<=-10 and oppp:margin<=-10 and opppp:margin<=-10

that's some good odds, thanks for the info

Got it, nice job. Good one too, long history of consistent performance over the years. Thanks J

[JMon]

nicely done fellas,,,wtg

[cofaga]

How do you guys feel about this sdql for the over?

line<-11 and p:margin<8 and p:W and pp:W and ppp:W and H and op:W

[figue]

guys what is the sdql here please :

fade a team off a win for 25 o more and next game the line is less than last game.

[cofaga]

guys what is the sdql here please :

fade a team off a win for 25 o more and next game the line is less than last game.

p:margin>=25 and line>p:line and season>=2013

[figue]

p:margin>=25 and line>p:line and season>=2013

thanks cofaga, so tomorrow fade clippers.

[husky]

I know Jmon said that he doesn't usually play the sdql plays blindly. So Jmon, what filters do you use, or how do you decide to play a given sdql play?

[JAnthony]

thanks cofaga, so tomorrow fade clippers.

This is one of those SDQL's which doesn't really have much of a logic behind it and one of the best SDQL's posted here by Mako indicates that Clippers is the play tomorrow. Also this pick is backed by other two minor SDQL's.

[tonywayne]

I don't know if my prior question wasn't clear, but I'm having trouble coming up with the query language for 2H scoring comparisons/trends.

Specifically, I'd like to look at 2nd half scoring when the first half goes over a certain threshold. For instance, if the first half of a game goes over, say, 120 points, what's the 2nd half scoring trend?

[Mako-SBR]

This is one of those SDQL's which doesn't really have much of a logic behind it and one of the best SDQL's posted here by Mako indicates that Clippers is the play tomorrow. Also this pick is backed by other two minor SDQL's.

So we won on the Kings and Lakers and lost on the Washington under. 2-1, I'll take it.

Will be on the Clippers tomorrow as you mentioned J, probably one other play as well but the line isn't on the board yet, we'll see.

I don't know if my prior question wasn't clear, but I'm having trouble coming up with the query language for 2H scoring comparisons/trends.

Specifically, I'd like to look at 2nd half scoring when the first half goes over a certain threshold. For instance, if the first half of a game goes over, say, 120 points, what's the 2nd half scoring trend?

That's actually a good question, I've been curious about a few halftime bets but haven't gotten to them yet on the list of scenarios to research. There must be some solid gems as the halftime lines in just about any sport usually contain far more value than the full game lines due to a lack of time for the books to set them.

[19th Hole]

thanks cofaga, so tomorrow fade clippers.

This is one of those SDQL's which doesn't really have much of a logic behind it and one of the best SDQL's posted here by Mako indicates that Clippers is the play tomorrow. Also this pick is backed by other two minor SDQL's.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~


So it's FADE the Clippers

[JMon]

I know Jmon said that he doesn't usually play the sdql plays blindly. So Jmon, what filters do you use, or how do you decide to play a given sdql play?

see post's 204 and 249. I also like to have a situation favoring one team and a situation against the other. You need to know, I have been at sdql for over 3 years. So it seems like it come naturally to me. And it will to you eventually, if practiced.

[tonywayne]

That's actually a good question, I've been curious about a few halftime bets but haven't gotten to them yet on the list of scenarios to research. There must be some solid gems as the halftime lines in just about any sport usually contain far more value than the full game lines due to a lack of time for the books to set them.

Can we use operands in the query language? Maybe we can do something with 1Q+2Q scoring compared to 3Q+4Q scoring? I keep getting errors when I try to use parentheses & plus/minus, but maybe I'm just entering things incorrectly.

[Enjoi]

Any good spot plays for today Jmon?

[husky]

see post's 204 and 249. I also like to have a situation favoring one team and a situation against the other. You need to know, I have been at sdql for over 3 years. So it seems like it come naturally to me. And it will to you eventually, if practiced.

Thank you for the reply JMon. It is greatly appreciated.

[tonywayne]

Is this too specific a query to consider? I was curious about "what does it take to get them back on track ATS"...

team = Pacers and ats streak <= -3 and rest = 1 and H and season >=2004 and o:WP >= .600

It's still pretty strong (both ATS for and Under) even factoring in away games for the Pacers.

Thoughts?

[JAnthony]

Is this too specific a query to consider? I was curious about "what does it take to get them back on track ATS"...

team = Pacers and ats streak <= -3 and rest = 1 and H and season >=2004 and o:WP >= .600

It's still pretty strong (both ATS for and Under) even factoring in away games for the Pacers.

Thoughts?

The main problem with this kind of trend is that teams do not play ATS. The thing is that the line bookies set has no real psychological or any other impact on the game itself. And 20 game sample over 10 years is not mathematically very promising either.

[tonywayne]

The main problem with this kind of trend is that teams do not play ATS. The thing is that the line bookies set has no real psychological or any other impact on the game itself. And 20 game sample over 10 years is not mathematically very promising either.

I absolutely agree with what you're saying. I don't believe spreads or over/unders have any real impact on games or actual outcomes.

I was mostly looking at the spread results, as a representative of the margin, because I do believe that the numbers can tell us a story. While teams are not "competing against the spread", they are trying to win games and, often, win them decisively. Having larger leads usually means in-game rest for starters and opportunities for bench players to stay fresh.

So, for a team like the Pacers, who are gearing up for a playoff run, they might be thinking "we've gotta close games out better" or "we need to keep a nice cushion/lead, so we can rotate our guys more effectively". That's the main reason I was wondering "well, they've won 5 in a row, but they are all fairly close games, surely Indiana wants to start getting the job done a little more easily".

Food for thought...

[Mako-SBR]

The main problem with this kind of trend is that teams do not play ATS. The thing is that the line bookies set has no real psychological or any other impact on the game itself. And 20 game sample over 10 years is not mathematically very promising either.

I absolutely agree with what you're saying. I don't believe spreads or over/unders have any real impact on games or actual outcomes.

I was mostly looking at the spread results, as a representative of the margin, because I do believe that the numbers can tell us a story. While teams are not "competing against the spread", they are trying to win games and, often, win them decisively. Having larger leads usually means in-game rest for starters and opportunities for bench players to stay fresh.

So, for a team like the Pacers, who are gearing up for a playoff run, they might be thinking "we've gotta close games out better" or "we need to keep a nice cushion/lead, so we can rotate our guys more effectively". That's the main reason I was wondering "well, they've won 5 in a row, but they are all fairly close games, surely Indiana wants to start getting the job done a little more easily".

Food for thought...

You're both right.

Which is why the SDQL isn't some sort of automatic golden goose, and why none of the various touts that base their picks off of it running hundreds of scenarios aren't above 55% lifetime, and why most non-touts spend hours building high win-rate scenarios in the database and then see them go 0-7 or 1-10, etc, etc, very quickly...despite those scenarios being "75%+ ATS lifetime".

It's a lot like any computer-based effort: garbage in, garbage out. Which is to say that it's only as good as the person mining it for results in terms of how effective it is.

All you can do is create a basis of what's important to you in terms of what you feel truly affects the potential outcome of a game. Once you have that base, you can do research to build systems and scenarios that confirm or deny your beliefs. After confirmation from previous results it's about playing the systems for multiple seasons (fewer seasons if the amount of plays per season are larger) and then whittling down the herd to the true 'winners'.

And even then as years pass the winning systems will eventually require updates or changes as the game itself changes (NFL is a good example, few systems from prior to 2003 are worth anything because the scoring and offense/defense has changed dramatically over that time).

Test test test, and keep your bankroll conservative and in the long run the SDQL becomes a great tool to help identify EV plays in a big way.

That being said, I like none of my picks today, especially because the past few weeks I've been on a higher than normal win rate and I expect to regress to the mean at any time. 76ers, Clippers, Pelicans, none of which I would have put money on today if left to my own opinions, all brutal. But that's the game if you truly are trying to confirm whether your SDQL scenarios are 'real'...or not. Gotta play the stinkers.

[tonywayne]

JAnthony & Mako, I truly appreciate this kind of conversation. I'm still learning & developing as a bettor, so I'm pretty open to molding & re-molding my methods.

My biggest lesson so far is: don't bet emotionally (which I'd heard plenty even before I started betting). My 2nd biggest lesson so far: don't rely on JUST the numbers. Although, I have to admit, I have a hard time not letting the numbers do the loudest talking - I won my very first season of fantasy hockey a few years ago doing nothing but playing numbers & percentages.

[b1slickguy]

You're both right.

Which is why the SDQL isn't some sort of automatic golden goose, and why none of the various touts that base their picks off of it running hundreds of scenarios aren't above 55% lifetime, and why most non-touts spend hours building high win-rate scenarios in the database and then see them go 0-7 or 1-10, etc, etc, very quickly...despite those scenarios being "75%+ ATS lifetime".

It's a lot like any computer-based effort: garbage in, garbage out. Which is to say that it's only as good as the person mining it for results in terms of how effective it is.

All you can do is create a basis of what's important to you in terms of what you feel truly affects the potential outcome of a game. Once you have that base, you can do research to build systems and scenarios that confirm or deny your beliefs. After confirmation from previous results it's about playing the systems for multiple seasons (fewer seasons if the amount of plays per season are larger) and then whittling down the herd to the true 'winners'.

And even then as years pass the winning systems will eventually require updates or changes as the game itself changes (NFL is a good example, few systems from prior to 2003 are worth anything because the scoring and offense/defense has changed dramatically over that time).

Test test test, and keep your bankroll conservative and in the long run the SDQL becomes a great tool to help identify EV plays in a big way.

That being said, I like none of my picks today, especially because the past few weeks I've been on a higher than normal win rate and I expect to regress to the mean at any time. 76ers, Clippers, Pelicans, none of which I would have put money on today if left to my own opinions, all brutal. But that's the game if you truly are trying to confirm whether your SDQL scenarios are 'real'...or not. Gotta play the stinkers.

^^THIS^^

Test, test, test. Makes you proficient with the language and keeps you thinking outside the box. If you think it, type it. There can never be a "wrong query" made. You won't find gold all the time, but when you do it's as satisfying as winning the units it may produce. Good luck.

[Wojo]

Some good conversation. Some people in this thread have misinterpreted what I have said in earlier posts, so perhaps I could be doing the same thing here.

I do believe that ATS records and even ATS game results are helpful to picking the point-spread winner in games. You want to find value in a line or total. Oddsmakers can over or under-value a team due to how they are performing against the spread, and obviously straight-up.

Evaluating a team's overall ATS trend over the past 10 years is fruitless when there have been major personnel changes and different head coaches, IMO.

As stated above, SDQL isn't perfect but it is a very valuable tool. It gives you an advantage over most other cappers, but only if you know how to use it. Some services provide systems and trends for a fee. There are some touts that follow those "systems" blindly, you see them quoted in tout's write-ups all the time. Unfortunately, those systems aren't always correct or they follow very flawed logic.

[Mako-SBR]

Test, test, test. Makes you proficient with the language and keeps you thinking outside the box. If you think it, type it. There can never be a "wrong query" made. You won't find gold all the time, but when you do it's as satisfying as winning the units it may produce. Good luck.

The funny thing is that while doing the research the vast majority of the scenarios will (and should) fail...either due to the numbers themselves not being there, or worse, getting the right numbers but the query still not passing whatever additional criteria you may be applying to filter out 'fake' systems from misleading you.

But it's important to remember that failing with SDQL is actually a good thing because you're not throwing money away on overfitted/datamined nonsense...though it certainly feels like a negative when you chase a few scenarios over the course of an hour only to disqualify or reject them.

[JMon]

Any good spot plays for today Jmon?

We want to fade a home dog on a same season road revenge game getting blown out by 30 or more; off a road loss. Good, but with taking away rest of more than two and high dogs of more than 8.5...we have something extraordinary since 2002.

[Mako-SBR]

We want to fade a home dog on a same season road revenge game getting blown out by 30 or more; off a road loss. Good, but with taking away rest of more than two and high dogs of more than 8.5...we have something extraordinary since 2002.

Nice shooting by the pick so far in that game, luckily there's still three quarters left.

A great scenario nonetheless J, passes nearly all of the major tests really well.

0-22-1 (-10.17, 0.0%) - 2004+