NBA Stituational Bet, SDQL

[JAnthony]

H and 102<=tA(points)<=110 and 93<=oA(o: points)<=96 and total<=193 and playoffs=0

[dmitean]

To be honest, expected to find Under tendency, so don't think I will follow, but here two good defensive teams playing each other in April:

total<=195 and season>=2012 and WP >= 55 and o:WP >= 55 and month=4

O/U:20-12-0 (10.38, 62.5%) avg total: 184.2

Please note that this includes playoffs...

If we exclude the playoffs, we get different picture:
total<=195 and season>=2010 and WP >= 55 and o:WP >= 55 and month=4 and playoffs=0

O/U:44-56-0 (-0.36, 44.0%) avg total: 186.4

[Wojo]

any query for nba team who are fighting for one spot for playoffs ??

I don't see how that can be done to any degree of accuracy. I use winning percentages and you could use the parameters of wins and losses to come somewhat close to teams who are probably in, or out of, the playoffs.

[JAnthony]

tS(L, N=5)>=4 and op:LHF and op:margin<=-10 and rest>0 and o:rest>0 and A and total>=200

[JMon]

A and ats streak<=-6 and 60>=WP>=51 and o:WP>50

[JMon]

Also there are two other trends which have been posted here earlier in favour of OKC, seems like it's a play tonight, though I have been in a slump these past 2 days backing teams supported by 2-3 strong trends.

Yes, as with any other gambling method, sdql users go through the dreaded slump as well. I have not had the best of week either. The grind goes on

[Mako-SBR]

Yes, as with any other gambling method, sdql users go through the dreaded slump as well. I have not had the best of week either. The grind goes on

Same, but it's more MLB that's killing me versus NBA, can't get a feel for baseball yet...

[dmitean]

I believe that there are times where trends apply more and times where they apply less - the problem is that it's very hard to know in advance when is this time...

I do believe that trends are much stronger in the first half of the season (especially in the beginning of it) then the end.

[green7]

Though I am not a big fan of his, some of his reading material is interesting, I am talking of Dr. Bob.....on the topic of "must win" games, it is a definite go against when a team must win to get into the playoffs, etc. I would put a caveat on this and say that when an opponent has already clinched it's playoff position that I would look at playing a must win side. Great effort doesn't translate to results ATS-wise. Better to play relaxed than try too hard.

[green7]

For future playoff reference

playoffs=1 and tA(points-ooints)>5 and HF and round

playoffs=1 and tA(points-ooints)>5 and AD and round

<oa(o:fgp) and="" hf="" round

playoffs=1 and tA(FGP-o:FGP)>oA(FGP-o:FGP) and HF and round

playoffs=1 and tA(FGP-o:FGP)>oA(FGP-o:FGP) and AD and round



Round two will be when lower seeded teams will cover as home favorites,...very likely the Clippers, the Rockets, the Nets and the Raptors, all of whom could win their round 2 series against a higher seed.


</oa(o:fgp)>

[pip2]

OK, let me try again from another angle:

AF and line=-5 and op:rest=0 and season>2010

That yields an 11-4 win rate betting on the favorite. That's better than if you go through all the seasons, which yields more like a 58% win rate for the favorite. But anyway, my question would be, if that situation arose (team playing away, favored by 5 against another team playing the back end of B2B, would those results justify a bet? And if so would it be a tiny bet, a small bet, a medium bet, or what?

[Wojo]

OK, let me try again from another angle:

AF and line=-5 and op:rest=0 and season>2010

That yields an 11-4 win rate betting on the favorite. That's better than if you go through all the seasons, which yields more like a 58% win rate for the favorite. But anyway, my question would be, if that situation arose (team playing away, favored by 5 against another team playing the back end of B2B, would those results justify a bet? And if so would it be a tiny bet, a small bet, a medium bet, or what?

Just my opinion, but your trend is too specific by just using "line=-5".

[pip2]

Just my opinion, but your trend is too specific by just using "line=-5".

OK. So if this situation actually came up (doesn't come up that often because as you say, it's pretty narrowly constructed), would it be worth any kind of bet?

I did try to widen it out a bit by querying any line between -3 and -7, but then the disparity between W's send L's started to even out...

[Wojo]

OK. So if this situation actually came up (doesn't come up that often because as you say, it's pretty narrowly constructed), would it be worth any kind of bet?

I did try to widen it out a bit by querying any line between -3 and -7, but then the disparity between W's send L's started to even out...

Your final statement is why I would not be wagering on your original statement. I do use 3-point ranges on lines.

I also don't understand why you are using the parameter "opponent's previous rest" as a standalone qualifier.

I would not place a wager on that trend.

[Mako-SBR]

OK, let me try again from another angle:

AF and line=-5 and op:rest=0 and season>2010

That yields an 11-4 win rate betting on the favorite. That's better than if you go through all the seasons, which yields more like a 58% win rate for the favorite. But anyway, my question would be, if that situation arose (team playing away, favored by 5 against another team playing the back end of B2B, would those results justify a bet? And if so would it be a tiny bet, a small bet, a medium bet, or what?

No, for the reasons Wojo mentioned.

Since we can't post links on the site, go Google "sportsinsights the dangers of overfitting your sports betting" and read the blog post that comes up that matches. Ignore the talk about their "Bet Labs" software, basically it's a newbie version of what SDQL provides for free...but definitely focus on the actual content of the post, the message of protecting yourself.

In fact everyone in the thread who hasn't been betting large sums of money using situational scenarios of the sort we talk about daily in this thread and the MLB thread should do the same to protect themselves from losses due to small sample size situations.

As we've talked about before, there are a variety of touts and tout services using SDQL to provide 'picks' to clients, and not one of them is above 52.4% lifetime in any sport where there are 200+ picks provided. Not a single one.

And the reason for that is due to the exact set of circumstance the SportsInsights article talks about, where small sample sizes and seemingly "bulletproof" scenarios mislead us, and can cause bettors to waste a lot of money, time, and effort chasing the noise instead of the actual signal.

Keep working though pip, only though constant experimentation and feedback can newer users get better to the point where they're seeing consistent 60%+ returns using very tight SDQL-based queries pointing to reliable situations.

[Tillos]

Mako -

[pip2]

No, for the reasons Wojo mentioned.

Since we can't post links on the site, go Google "sportsinsights the dangers of overfitting your sports betting" and read the blog post that comes up that matches. Ignore the talk about their "Bet Labs" software, basically it's a newbie version of what SDQL provides for free...but definitely focus on the actual content of the post, the message of protecting yourself.

In fact everyone in the thread who hasn't been betting large sums of money using situational scenarios of the sort we talk about daily in this thread and the MLB thread should do the same to protect themselves from losses due to small sample size situations.

As we've talked about before, there are a variety of touts and tout services using SDQL to provide 'picks' to clients, and not one of them is above 52.4% lifetime in any sport where there are 200+ picks provided. Not a single one.

And the reason for that is due to the exact set of circumstance the SportsInsights article talks about, where small sample sizes and seemingly "bulletproof" scenarios mislead us, and can cause bettors to waste a lot of money, time, and effort chasing the noise instead of the actual signal.

Keep working though pip, only though constant experimentation and feedback can newer users get better to the point where they're seeing consistent 60%+ returns using very tight SDQL-based queries pointing to reliable situations.

Thanks very much Mako, and Wojo as well...

[JMon]

Some good situations that have already been posted going tonight ! gl fellas

[cofaga]

WP>=65 and op:WP<=40 and month=4 and rest>0 and o:rest>0 and op: points<100 and opp: points<100

[JMon]

WP>=65 and op:WP<=40 and month=4 and rest>0 and mo:rest>0 and op: points<100 and opp: points<100

nice. We have some situations on these two. Very solid from 2000 with a nice Su right record. Wonder why it was so of in1996 and '97

[figue]

208 >= total >= 201 and tS(ou margin, N=5) >= 30 and 60 >= WP >= 51 and 2009 <= season and site = home

pistons

[figue]

Some good situations that have already been posted going tonight ! gl fellas

208 >= total >= 201 and tS(ou margin, N=5) >= 30 and 60 >= WP >= 51 and 2009 <= season and site = home

pistons

[green7]

month=4 and tA(W)>.6 and oA(W)>.6 and HF and o:rest=0 and playoffs=0 and total>200 and rest>0


Query favoring the Clippers.

[JMon]

Hope everyone went 5-0 last night. Everything going last night has been posted in here.

[superbowl3056]

month=4 and tA(W)>.6 and oA(W)>.6 and HF and o:rest=0 and playoffs=0 and total>200 and rest>0


Query favoring the Clippers.

If its favoring the Clippers why aren't they showing up in the query?

[19th Hole]

Hope everyone went 5-0 last night. Everything going last night has been posted in here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Congrats and thanks for the warm wishes.
I certainly didn't see any queries, other than Figue's response, posted yesterday for Tuesday night.
Continued success to your clique.

[Cougs]

All the queries that were in play yesterday which resulted in 5-0 have been posted in this thread; you just have to go back, read all of them, and right them down so that you can perform daily searches.

[Mako-SBR]

All the queries that were in play yesterday which resulted in 5-0 have been posted in this thread; you just have to go back, read all of them, and right them down so that you can perform daily searches.

4-0 for me, not sure which one of the queries I previously disqualified for whatever reason. Great night.

Never, in 10+ years of sports betting, have I had as many 4-0, 5-0, 6-1, etc days as I have since we created this thread.

Great great work all, and thanks as always!

[evangelizelee]

By todays queries. It seems like pacers, nets, clippers over is the play.

[19th Hole]

All the queries that were in play yesterday which resulted in 5-0 have been posted in this thread; you just have to go back, read all of them, and right them down so that you can perform daily searches.

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

Thank you kindly for the explanation.
Much appreciated rather than you simply gloating over a 5-0.

[JMon]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Congrats and thanks for the warm wishes.
I certainly didn't see any queries, other than Figue's response, posted yesterday for Tuesday night.
Continued success to your clique.

I am sensing a bit of animosity with your recent posts...perhaps it's just me. There is no clique here, not even close. Nothing but good vibe, just trying to learn a new methodology to capping. I have put my utmost effort in this thread (with my queries) alone to try and help those fend for themselves. Sdql is the bomb for sure, just takes the desire to learn it; it's not easy. Like I have said numerous times, I have been at this for over three years and still learning it. Perhaps my posts of 5-0 rubbed you the wrong way, it don't know, but like I said 'every singe one of them as been posted' in this learning, non posting thread (post 998)! As you can see many knew by the coin delivery and Mako's response, they were on the same games. We are all here to help, not spoon feed you. Perhaps you can make sense of the past posted situation with what I went 5-0 on yesterday, winning a K . Am I using them all tonight...no even close. That's the learning curves of what to play and not to play using sdql.

WON: 661 Pistons +7 (-110) risk 220.00 win 200.00 (NBA) Score: 102-95

04/08/14 17:38:56

$200.00

#29150400

WON: TOT UND 662 Hawks/Pistons under 210½ (-110) risk 220.00 win 200.00 (NBA) Score: 95-102

04/08/14 17:38:56

$200.00 WON: 655 Mavericks -7 (-110) risk 220.00 win 200.00 (NBA) Score: 95-83 04/08/14 17:38:56 $200.00 #29150400 WON: 657 Thunder -9 (-110) risk 220.00 win 200.00 (NBA) Score: 107-92 04/08/14 17:38:56 $200.00 #29150400 WON: 659 Rockets -9 (-110) risk 220.00 win 200.00 (NBA) Score: 145-130 04/08/14 17:38:56 $200.00 #29150400

[19th Hole]

I am sensing a bit of animosity with your recent posts...perhaps it's just me. There is no clique here, not even close. Nothing but good vibe, just trying to learn a new methodology to capping. I have put my utmost effort in this thread (with my queries) alone to try and help those fend for themselves. Sdql is the bomb for sure, just takes the desire to learn it; it's not easy. Like I have said numerous times, I have been at this for over three years and still learning it. Perhaps my posts of 5-0 rubbed you the wrong way, it don't know, but like I said 'every singe one of them as been posted' in this learning, non posting thread (post 998)! As you can see many knew by the coin delivery and Mako's response, they were on the same games. We are all here to help, not spoon feed you. Perhaps you can make sense of the past posted situation with what I went 5-0 on yesterday, winning a K . Am I using them all tonight...no even close. That's the learning curves of what to play and not to play using sdql.

WON: 661 Pistons +7 (-110) risk 220.00 win 200.00 (NBA) Score: 102-95

04/08/14 17:38:56

$200.00

#29150400

WON: TOT UND 662 Hawks/Pistons under 210½ (-110) risk 220.00 win 200.00 (NBA) Score: 95-102

04/08/14 17:38:56

$200.00 WON: 655 Mavericks -7 (-110) risk 220.00 win 200.00 (NBA) Score: 95-83 04/08/14 17:38:56 $200.00 #29150400 WON: 657 Thunder -9 (-110) risk 220.00 win 200.00 (NBA) Score: 107-92 04/08/14 17:38:56 $200.00 #29150400 WON: 659 Rockets -9 (-110) risk 220.00 win 200.00 (NBA) Score: 145-130 04/08/14 17:38:56 $200.00 #29150400

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jmon....
Thanks for the clarification.
This thread has been great about posting daily queries...especially
your daily posts.

I was lazy and didn't make a daily database and merely processed the daily posted
queries from this thread at KillerSports.

I am half way home...
I now know the value of storage.

Thank you for exposing me to SDQL.

I wish the best to everyone.

[Cougs]

almost played the clippers/thunder U today based on a query...and then lo and behold, another query (with similar sample size) popped up with the over...stayed off the game, and glad i didn't bet the under (at least based on halftime score...)

[JMon]

almost played the clippers/thunder U today based on a query...and then lo and behold, another query (with similar sample size) popped up with the over...stayed off the game, and glad i didn't bet the under (at least based on halftime score...)

I had a lot of conflicting queries last night as well. I played OKC and Hou; obviously not a winning day.

[Mako-SBR]

I had a lot of conflicting queries last night as well. I played OKC and Hou; obviously not a winning day.

Same, but I also had PHX and CHI and missed salvaging the night with a 2-2 finish by a half point on the PHX game...