NBA Stituational Bet, SDQL

A and P:ats margin <=-10 and P:season=season and P:H and season > 2012

tomorrow buks,warriors.

Originally Posted by green7

HD and total>200 and division!=o:division and rest>0 and o:rest>0 and tA(W)<.4 and month

SU: 8-37 (-10.20, 17.8%)
ATS:14-31-0 (-3.83, 31.1%)
avg line: 6.4
O/U:20-24-1 (-1.40, 45.5%)
avg total: 212.3

tomorrow bobcats.

p:HFW and AD and division=o:division and rest=0 and o:rest>0 and month=4 and line<5


I am typing this with my fingers and toes crossed.....hope I don't put the hex on it.

Stole this off of Figue and added to it, expect that he won't mind.

A and P:ats margin <=-10 and P:season=season and P:H and season > 2012 and line>9

If we go back through the history of the database (back to 1995) and add "total>190 and division!=o:division and line>9 and rest" to Figue's query..........

it looks like the amount of rest makes a difference, as teams off no rest (Golden State) are 32-42 in this scenario, and teams off one day's rest (the stinking Bucks) are 45-31. Do we pick our poison or not?

I will say that the Heat have looked pretty bored throughout the season and as a side note, their median point difference at the half is being up 3 points where their median line has been -9 for the game.

So, if the Miami line is -17 and the half time line is -9,....Miami has been ahead by greater than 9 points 6 times (one time they were up exactly by 9,) and up by less than 9 in twenty six other games at the half.

question ??? how does sdql work for the playoffs ??? is there a breakdown for that, within the database ??? thanks

to do queries for the regular season playoffs=0

for play-offs playoffs=1

AD and P:ats margin <= -10 and P:season = season and P:H and month = 4 and line >= 9 and division != o:division and total > 190 and ...

games	ATS W - L- P (marg, %win)	Avg Line	OU W - L- P (marg, %over)	Avg Total	SU W - L (marg, %win)	SDQL
1	0-1-0 (-17.00, 0.0%)	14.0	1-0-0 (1.00, 100.0%)	204.0	0-1 (-31.00, 0.0%)	rest = 3
5	3-2-0 (-4.40, 60.0%)	10.4	3-2-0 (-3.70, 60.0%)	198.5	1-4 (-14.80, 20.0%)	rest = 2
21	11-9-1 (-0.67, 55.0%)	12.6	8-12-1 (-3.24, 40.0%)	201.4	0-21 (-13.24, 0.0%)	rest = 1
18	5-12-1 (-3.08, 29.4%)	12.1	11-7-0 (2.25, 61.1%)	200.1	1-17 (-15.17, 5.6%)	rest = 0

I got totally different answers to Figue's query with modifications today.....if we go to April games only in this scenario teams with no rest going back through the total history of the database, teams with no rest (Warriors) are 5-12 and teams with one days rest are 11-9 (Bucks). Overall teams are 2-42 straight up in this query.

Obviously the overnight line of Milwaukee was way off (the killersports guesstimate was 17 and it actually is 13) and I'll know better in the future to use that. For me, did I really want to go against San Antonio in the first place?

I tried to give the trends categories based on: Volume of plays, Overall Proft, ROI and Last 3 Years PErformance. Based on that I rated each category from 1 to 3 Points. And after that I calculated an Inex Score for the Total Rating of a Trend. Based on that I have

1 Star Rating Trends:
9 in MLB
14 in NBA
2 in NCAAF
3 in NHL
1 in NFL

2 Star Trends: stronger performance
8 in MLB
22 in NBA
8 in NHL
1 in NCAAF
3 in NFL

and 3 Star Trends:
15 in MLB
8 in NBA
1 in NCAAF
5 in NCAAB
6 in NHL

I will list the 3 Star trends I value the most and will look for your opinion. These are not all mine. Some are from here, others are from the google group. And others are from different sources. If anyone is not ok with that, I will delete them.

MLB 3 Star Trends:

p:SIP > 8 and rest <= 0

Sum(( line + 0 < 0 and o: points < points ) * 100 or ( 0 < 0 + line and points < o: points ) * ( -100 ) or ( runs is not None ) * ( line + 0 )@team and season and line < -105)[team and season -1 and line < -105] > 1200 and site = away and line >= -130

temperature < 67 and site == home and line > -105 and line < 180

S(points > o: points@team and season,N=15) >= 12 and WP >= 62

p:WOW and o:WP < 50 and WP > 50

D and p: D and p:W and p:runs <= 3 and P:LOB <= 13

p:margin = 1 and pp:margin = 1 and F

A and conference = AL and STDSERA < 3.5 and oA(SSO@o:starter and season) >= 5 and season >= 2009

DIV and D and p:W and 40 < o:WP < 50

tp:runs <= 2 and op:runs <= 2 and conference = AL

month = 4 and D and 2 < pp:SHRA + p:SHRA < 5 and pp:BPRA + p:BPRA < 6 and rest < 2 and -5 < streak < 6 and -9 < site streak < 8 and 40 < WP < 61

STR and o:STR and s:margin = -1 and s:streak = 2 and s:biggest lead < 3 and s:errors < 2 and -9 < p:M8 < 3 and p:M8 != -2 and -4 < p:M1 < 3

month = 4 and D and -6 < p:margin < 3 and 4 < p:SO < 8 and 4 < p:SIP < 8 and p:SHRA < 3 and p:HR < 3 and WP < 75 and -7 < streak < 4 and p:PU < 7 and 8 < p:LOB < 17 and o:STR and rest < 2 and p:errors < 3 and 1 < p:fly balls < 14 and -5 < o:streak and p:runs != 6 and p:runs != 5

tp:runs<=2 and op:runs<=2 and conference=AL and A

WP > 50 and H and 165 > line >= 100 and o:WP > 50 and SG < 4 and (month = 4 or month = 5 or month = 9 or month = 10)

If anyone is not ok with this please let me know, and i will delete anything.

NBA 3 Star Trends

AF and -3 <= ats streak <= -1 and 1 <= o:ats streak <= 2 and 1 <= rest <= 2 and 32 < WP < 78 and playoffs = 0 and season >= 2002

A and p:AFL and 1 <= rest <= 2 and season >= 2005

A and p:AFL and rest in [1 , 2 , 3] and 67 >= game number >= 21 and 48 <= WP <= 80 and P:ats margin < 0 and season >= 2000

A and F and p:A and p:L and total >= 198

p:dps > 13 and op:dpa > 13 and rest <= 1 and o:rest <= 1

p:margin < -15 and AF and season > 2005

A and rest <= 2 and line < 0 and p: points + p:line < po: points and opo: points < op: points + op:line and WP > 32 and WP < 78

H and p:AW and pp:AW and season > 2008

NCAAB 3 Star Trends

A and P:L and Po: points > 74 and WP >= 40 and WP <= 49 and o:WP > 29 and o:WP < 54 and rest > 0

H and total <= 116.5

166.5 >= total >= 156 and H

Average(points@team and season)<=64 and po: points<=60 and ppo: points<=60 and AD and line>5

p:AL and pp:AL and p:margin <= -8 and pp:margin <= -11 and WP <= 50 and rest <= 5 and not C and po: points >= 82

NCAAF 3 Star Trend

p: points > 49 and site == home and po: points < p: points and line > -32.5 and p:line < 0 and site == home and line < 0 NHL 3 Star Trends

H and F and p:A and p:F and p:W and date>=20111022

p:shots on goal >= 35 and op:goals = 3 and playoffs = 0 and (site = away or (site = home and p:site = away)) and 0 >= rest - o:rest >= -2 and F

D and streak > 3

Average(goals@team and season, N=6) < 3 and Average(shots on goal@team and season, N=3) >= 35 and D and -2 <= rest - o:rest <= 1 and rest > 0 and P:H

rest = o:rest and AD and rest = 1 and (P:AD or P:HF) and WP <= 60 and (130 >= line > 115 or line > 150) and P:rest - oP:rest <= 1

season >= 2011 and HF and p:A and p:W and p:line <= -115

season=2013 and team and date>20140101

The above query shows us how teams have done SU and ATS since the beginning of the year. It's interesting to note that the Clippers have a point differential of +8.56 and the Suns are +2.45. Adding 3 points for the home team and the line based on performance is Suns +3.11. The actual line is the Suns -3, obviously the linesmaker is trying to attract money on the Clippers because of the Griffith and Crawford injuries. It's been my experience that when a line is skewed like that, that the team who Vegas is trying to attract money to (in this case, the Clippers) loses about 55-57% of the time....in other words in a significant percentage of time when the statistical determining of a line is off, the winner is often the line disadvantaged team. In my personal experience for the NBA that is >=2.5 differential between what the line should/could be and the actual line that is significant. To sum it up, I think line value is a bunch of garbage and if one can think of what Vegas wants us to do and to the opposite we will be successful more often than not.

In this case, I am not playing the Suns, as I think Griffith is one of the top 2 or 3 over-rated players in the game (can't shoot, can't shoot free throws, etc). Point guards and head coaches are the most important pieces for success in the NBA and the Clippers have top 5 guys at both positions. Obviously, this year the Suns have two very capable people at the same positions and that is why they have made the improvement they have over last year.

Nice work nash.

Those of us who apply ranking criteria and grade filters to determine whether a random query or scenario we've stumbled upon is worth adding to our collection or not need to talk more about how we determine what goes into those evaluations. I did that briefly at the start of the thread but my own evaluation process has changed a bit since then and I'm going to revisit it soon.

Good job.