-
Comment -
Orlando +4
One last one I'll play small for some action. Has to do with teams playing 3rd game in 4 days.
However, this is much more solid when coming off a loss:48-64 (-2.28, 42.9%) 70-40-2 (2.33, 63.6%) avg line: 4.6 55-55-2 (1.95, 50.0%) avg total: 197.7
40-50 (-2.28, 44.4%) 59-30-1 (2.63, 66.3%) avg line: 4.9 44-44-2 (1.73, 50.0%) avg total: 197.9 And really good as a short dog coming off a loss8-14 (-2.27, 36.4%) 11-10-1 (1.09, 52.4%) avg line: 3.4 11-11-0 (2.82, 50.0%) avg total: 196.7
So since Orlando is coming off a win, this really shouldn't be a play but I'm just going small like I said for some action and also maybe Orlando has some confidence after getting their 1st win and will elevate their play at home against a Minnesota team that's been playing better than expected (4-0 ATS).29-18 (1.43, 61.7%) 33-14-0 (3.56, 70.2%) avg line: 2.1 25-21-1 (1.33, 54.3%) avg total: 195.7
And either way, will definitely be on the lookout for the above query with p:L as it's been very solid the last 5 yearsComment -
Maybe it is the best to have a google doc ongoing, where we collect trends and give them numbers. so we can talk about each one and keep record on a ongoing basis.
Separate it by sports and collect wins/losses, profit, ROI and contributors.
Maybe give rights to people who contribute and selective people who can edit.
I would love to help and contribute.Last edited by nash13; 11-07-14, 08:15 PM.Comment -
-
HF and line < -5.5 and p:AL and p:OT>0 and season >2008
((Can add line > -10 to prevent the heavy favs))
and fade:
team=Timberwolves and p:AL and po:FGP > 49.5 and A and season > 2008 team=Timberwolves and p:AL and po
oints>110 and A and season > 2008
((Can add 0 day rest factor,
can also look up the trips they do to Florida...
po:team=Magic and p:A and A and o:team=Heat))
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->Comment -
Small size sample, but still:
po:team=Jazz and p:A and A and o:team=TrailblazersComment -
rest=0 and p:A and A and po:team=Nuggets and p:W
O/U:19-32-3 (-2.89, 37.3%) avg total: 193.9
The logic is that teams that win in Denver, playing in thin air and need to play B2B, don't have the energy to run too much and therefore, the results are lower than expected.Comment -
Sounds great! Can you link an example? I was thinking going off the daily card -list the matchups of the day and someone would gather and organize queries to their particular matchup -as they come in. And list the name of who provided the query. Or something of that nature.Comment -
I have been recording a lot of the queries on here that made sense to me and appeared to have some reliable value, but I'm falling way behind after the flurry of queries over these past few days. The great thing about a google doc is that we can post the queries in there as links and if somebody wants to take a closer look at a query they can click on it once rather than cut, bring up a killersports window, then paste. One disadvantage of that would be having stuff split between two websites.
Another option would be to start a separate thread here, for queries only, one query per post. That way each query would have a name and a post# associated with it, and discussion could carry on in this thread referring to post #'s. It would be the same old cut-and-paste routine but everything would be on this site, We would need to get a moderator or something, to remove all the garbage posts that various sbr dudes would be putting in the query thread...Comment -
A and p:AFL and p:line>=-4 and season>2007
from nash showing mn covers vs mia ATS:154-94-4 (2.03, 62.1%) really nice except 50% in 2012
p
u margin>10 and rest <1 and P:L and season>2008
showing atl covers vs ny -- ATS:140-212-7 (-1.75, 39.8%) drops to 57% for game number <10, had a 48% season 2012
H and p:fouls<=14 and p:AD and 7 > line > -10
from nash -- por covers vs lac ATS: 91-158-7 (-2.05, 36.5%)Last edited by pip2; 11-08-14, 12:00 PM.Comment -
Port v. Lac-
SDQL favoring LAC, look and see how dogs do in this role.
102>=tA(points)>=98 and oA(ooints)>=102 and pooints<=90 and ppooints<=90 and 2008<=season and rest>0
Comment -
-
Home favorites playing 4th game in 5 days broken down by month:
HF and rest = 0 and p:rest = 1 and pp:rest = 0 and month=11,12,1,2,3,465 29-36-0 (0.48, 44.6%) -6.4 23-39-3 (-3.40, 37.1%) 192.4 46-19 (6.89, 70.8%) month = 1 41 19-22-0 (0.46, 46.3%) -6.6 20-19-2 (-0.96, 51.3%) 191.0 29-12 (7.05, 70.7%) month = 2 68 29-38-1 (-2.08, 43.3%) -6.4 37-29-2 (0.51, 56.1%) 193.5 43-25 (4.35, 63.2%) month = 3 79 33-45-1 (-1.90, 42.3%) -6.2 47-32-0 (2.67, 59.5%) 193.8 51-28 (4.34, 64.6%) month = 4 54 35-19-0 (3.56, 64.8%) -6.1 26-28-0 (0.74, 48.1%) 190.2 46-8 (9.70, 85.2%) month = 11 49 23-24-2 (-1.23, 48.9%) -5.2 27-22-0 (1.76, 55.1%) 193.6 33-16 (3.96, 67.3%) month = 12
Every month in the 40's except November in the 60's! Just reinforcing the theory that teams are fresher early in the season so the scheduling doesn't affect them as much as later on!
So play the team in November, and fade in every other month. Now Chicago qualifies as a play today BUT:
32-5 (9.84, 86.5%) 29-8-0 (5.81, 78.4%) avg line: -4.0 18-19-0 (-0.20, 48.6%) avg total: 189.3 It looks like favorites better than -7 have a tough time covering while anything less than is the complete opposite. Bulls are currently -9.5 so might be worth a fade but no play for me. But will definitely be on the lookout for this trend the rest of the month with spread 7 or less!14-3 (9.41, 82.4%) 6-11-0 (-1.32, 35.3%) avg line: -10.7 8-9-0 (2.79, 47.1%) avg total: 192.0 Comment -
H and rest=0 and o:rest=0 and pvertime>0
Comment -
OK I have beaten on this a lot and am not finding anything wrong with it. I even modified it a bit and it still seems to work: 102>=tA(points)>=98 and oA(ooints)>=102 and tA(ooints)<=91 and 2008<=season . I think the Nash query is very good, but it isn't as pointed right at today's situation as yours seems to be.
On the other hand, I am a bit of a Clippers fan, and there just seems to be something wrong with them so far this year, so I guess I will just back away from this until halftime...Comment -
o:rest + op:rest + opp:rest < 2 and AF and playoffs = 0 and season >=2009 picks up a couple teams tonight. looks pretty solid both cross conference and within and in the line ranges for the matchupsComment -
If you add road teams in to the formula, you obviously reduce the sample size, but Over also looks pretty good:
O/U:17-10-0 (3.65, 63.0%) avg total: 203.0Comment -
You guys are killing it this week, and actually JMon (and others) are right, the thread has enough participation now that we need a "master" database of knowledge that the main contributors can access and use to instantly add queries to that are permanently saved.
Look at today alone, here it is barely Noon Pacific time and there have already been enough queries posted that there's roughly an hour's worth of work to do (archive, test, apply our own standards of play/no-play, etc) before getting to the actual wagering...on today's games!
There's hardly even time to recognize yesterday's winners, like the queries that pointed to both the Cavs and the Mavericks, both of whom easily won and covered without a problem.
It's amazing to see this effort get to this point, really really great job guys. We are now the leading community in terms of size and volume related to SDQL, including the Google Group itself...last year at this time there was hardly any mention, at all, of SDQL in the history of SBR, or any other forum for that matter.
I like JMon and nash's example of what a DB entry would look like on say a Google Doc (posts #1475 and #1482), with the query string, the logic behind the query broken down (what the actual scenario is), and the originator of the query itself, along with the win/loss record for that given season. Would be happy to throw everything I have into it from my own spreadsheets.
Last edited by Mako-SBR; 11-08-14, 03:12 PM.Comment -
Ronald I appreciate how thorough you are in presenting your analysis, especially with this prodigious wave of new queries being posted, it saves a lot of bouncing around for me.Comment -
Houston 6-0 ATS this year and O/U is 0-6. Books undervaluing Rockets' defense? Total is 208.5 against the Warriors today. Do we play the under?Comment -
Agree with the thread getting a bit out of control. I will just sit back and see what you fellas do. ThanksComment -
I set up a spreadsheet, please shoot me a PM and i will give you rights to edit.
Comment -
It depends on what the other users want, I'd like to have active users in the sheet, but it is not my own, it depends on the users who are willing to share. I will let it open for a while and after everyone gives his opinion we can decide together. i will keep it open to edit for active members, but this is not a secret, but it would be a bit unfair to other very active guys like JMon or Mako if I decide who can watch edit or whatsoever. Let the democracy decide
I am thinking about a voting system after each play. If enough users are backing one trend it may qualify.
If anyone is not happy about sharing their emailadress, let me know about another way to invite you to be an editor.Last edited by nash13; 11-08-14, 08:47 PM.Comment -
excellent spreed sheet amigo
Comment -
I was bored and attempting to come up with the best query (even if I have to narrow it down). Focusing on football tomorrow but I can't wait to get to work on the NBA. The following is bizarre, especially considering the other months are "normal". Perhaps something is behind it and we will get a play this season. It looks like 10 opps. each year in 2012 and 2013.
A and p:W and pp:W and ppp:W and pppp:W and ppppp:W and rest = 0 and season > 2008 and line > -8.5 and ...19 1-17-1 (-5.61, 5.6%) -0.3 12-7-0 (6.03, 63.2%) 198.3 6-13 (-5.32, 31.6%) month = 12 22 1-20-1 (-8.30, 4.8%) -0.1 8-12-2 (-5.86, 40.0%) 194.9 3-19 (-8.23, 13.6%) month = 1 Comment -
I just removed a previous win and came up with this.
A and p:W and pp:W and ppp:W and pppp:W and rest = 0 and season > 2008 and line > -8.5 and ...27 5-21-1 (-3.59, 19.2%) 0.3 17-10-0 (4.78, 63.0%) 198.0 9-18 (-3.93, 33.3%) month = 12 39 8-28-3 (-6.27, 22.2%) 0.6 16-20-3 (-2.24, 44.4%) 195.9 8-31 (-6.82, 20.5%) month = 1
and removed another win and this came up (which still isn't bad)
A and p:W and pp:W and ppp:W and rest = 0 and season > 2008 and line > -8.5 and ...45 17-27-1 (-2.17, 38.6%) 0.3 28-17-0 (4.89, 62.2%) 197.4 19-26 (-2.44, 42.2%) month = 12 64 19-42-3 (-4.58, 31.1%) 1.0 22-38-4 (-3.59, 36.7%) 196.3 20-44 (-5.56, 31.2%) month = 1
even this isn't bad...
A and p:W and pp:W and rest = 0 and season > 2008 and line > -8.5 and ...86 34-49-3 (-1.57, 41.0%) 1.1 48-38-0 (2.93, 55.8%) 197.2 35-51 (-2.65, 40.7%) month = 12 104 34-66-4 (-4.39, 34.0%) 2.1 43-57-4 (-2.22, 43.0%) 196.7 32-72 (-6.45, 30.8%) month = 1
Please tell me if I am losing my mind.Last edited by SportsMind; 11-09-14, 04:31 AM.Comment -
-
Updated some of the queries, hope there will be more later. a lot of work to do.Comment
