Login Search
Sportsbook Review
SBR Odds
SBR Picks

NBA Stituational Bet, SDQL

Last Post
#1141

Default

Quote Originally Posted by JAnthony View Post
You took there only half of my point about 4th quarters. Like I said, it can be the sloppiest and it can be the toughest of the quarters. For example, yesterday in MEM v. OKC game both teams scored 65 points combined in 4th quarter, which honestly made no much sense considering these both teams, today also look at the points scored in TOR v. BKN game in 4th quarter and look at IND v. ATL. What conclusions exactly can you draw from that?
I haven't looked closely at those games yet. They could be anomalies or instead reflective of the influence of very objective factors that have yet to be identified. but if they were anomalies in some way as you're implying, it wouldnt matter much in the big picture because they only account for a small fraction of a much much larger sample of games in a season and therefore inconsequential in the long run. What conclusions can I draw from what seem to you to be anomalies/random but which may in fact turn out to be very predictable? None yet, because I haven't had a chance to do the research to determine the answer. Why don't you go ahead and use those examples not as a way to support your hypothesis that what you observed was random, but rather explore what variables/systems, if any, can account for it? Go take a statistics class and discover how a t-test, multiple regression or statistical modeling can help you figure that problem out.

Quote Originally Posted by JAnthony View Post
And hitting 51% won't get you anywhere. That is a fact.
Actually, that depends on how much money you are wagering. That is the fact
Last edited by emceeaye; 04-23-14 at 11:05 AM.
Give Points
Reply with Quote
#1142

Default

Quote Originally Posted by emceeaye View Post
I haven't looked closely at those games yet. They could be anomalies or instead reflective of the influence of very objective factors that have yet to be identified. but if they were anomalies in some way as you're implying, it wouldnt matter much in the big picture because they only account for a small fraction of a much much larger sample of games in a season and therefore inconsequential in the long run. What conclusions can I draw from what seem to you to be anomalies but which may in fact turn out to be very predictable? None yet, because I haven't had a chance to do the research to determine the answer. Why don't you go ahead and use those examples not as a way to explore what variables/systems, if any, can account for it? Go take a statistics class and discover how a t-test, multiple regression or statistical modeling can help you figure that problem out.


Actually, that depends on how much money you are wagering. That is the fact
You don't have to take any statistics class to conclude, that score does not increase linearly throughout the quarters. What anomalies? Can you show me at least 10 games in which score progression is somewhat the same throughout the quarters?

The conclusion you can draw is, that you don't have to search hard and far to prove that those scores are more or less random in a sense, that you won't be able to predict final score after 3 quarters.

Bookmakers are doing exactly what you are trying to do - modelling possible total outcome. Yes, 15 years ago it was pretty much the way you are trying to convince that it is. Then those who noticed could take advantage of the second half lines, because bookies basically divided pre-game total in half and did not account for possible foul game and other factors towards the end of the game. But all those angles are long gone.
Last edited by JAnthony; 04-23-14 at 11:07 AM.
Give Points
Reply with Quote
#1143

Default

Quote Originally Posted by JAnthony View Post
You don't have to take any statistics class to conclude, that score does not increase linearly throughout the quarters. What anomalies? Can you show me at least 10 games in which score progression is somewhat the same throughout the quarters?
Yeah, of course not. Just to clarify, I wanted to use that formula just to provide a crude index of what it is in addition to something more precise akin to what Green suggested to take into account the margin. And, that linear equation is not what you learn from a statistics class that you can bring to bear here. You would learn stats tests to run on this data to discover new powerful predictive equations and to verify these trends.[/QUOTE]

Quote Originally Posted by JAnthony View Post
The conclusion you can draw is, that you don't have to search hard and far to prove that those scores are more or less random in a sense, that you won't be able to predict final score after 3 quarters.
No, again, they are not random. You just don't have the tools to use to create models to account for the different variables that influence the outcome frequently enough to make a profit.

Quote Originally Posted by JAnthony View Post
Bookmakers are doing exactly what you are trying to do - modelling possible total outcome. Yes, 15 years ago it was pretty much the way you are trying to convince that it is. Then those who noticed could take advantage of the second half lines, because bookies basically divided pre-game total in half and did not account for possible foul game and other factors towards the end of the game. But all those angles are long gone.
Yes, the bookmakers likely are using sophisticated modeling techniques to better predict outcomes. Does that mean they they figured everything out already? Probably not--and Im sure there are plenty of people out there who have discovered their own models for predicting outcomes at a high enough rate to yield a profit using stats they learned in stats classes. You aren't going to hear about it, because those individuals aren't going to publish their findings. Your perspective sounds surprisingly defeatist given you are on this forum trying to better predict outcomes of games using these trends.
Last edited by emceeaye; 04-23-14 at 12:38 PM. Reason: clarity
Give Points
Reply with Quote
#1144

Default

Quote Originally Posted by emceeaye View Post
Yeah, of course not. Just to clarify, I wanted to use that formula just to provide a crude index of what it is in addition to something more precise akin to what Green suggested to take into account the margin. And, that linear equation is not what you learn from a statistics class that you can bring to bear here. You would learn stats tests to run on this data to discover new powerful predictive equations and to verify these trends.


No, again, they are not random. You just don't have the tools to use to create models to account for the different variables that influence the outcome frequently enough to make a profit.



Yes, the bookmakers likely are using sophisticated modeling techniques to better predict outcomes. Does that mean they they figured everything out already? Probably not--and Im sure there are plenty of people out there who have discovered their own models for predicting outcomes at a high enough rate to yield a profit using stats they learned in stats classes. You aren't going to hear about it, because those individuals aren't going to publish their findings. Your perspective sounds surprisingly defeatist given you are on this forum trying to better predict outcomes of games using these trends.[/QUOTE]

What I'm trying to say that you are doing the same thing here, just speculating with some wild assumptions. Without any reasoning behind it. By saying "random" I meant sophisticated and random enough for putting it all in one pot, in this case - formula or algorithm.

The best in the world who work with models break it down to a single possession and add values to every player individually. Your approach is way too general to say the least.
Give Points
Reply with Quote
#1145

Default

Quote Originally Posted by JAnthony View Post
No, again, they are not random. You just don't have the tools to use to create models to account for the different variables that influence the outcome frequently enough to make a profit.



Yes, the bookmakers likely are using sophisticated modeling techniques to better predict outcomes. Does that mean they they figured everything out already? Probably not--and Im sure there are plenty of people out there who have discovered their own models for predicting outcomes at a high enough rate to yield a profit using stats they learned in stats classes. You aren't going to hear about it, because those individuals aren't going to publish their findings. Your perspective sounds surprisingly defeatist given you are on this forum trying to better predict outcomes of games using these trends.
What I'm trying to say that you are doing the same thing here, just speculating with some wild assumptions. Without any reasoning behind it. By saying "random" I meant sophisticated and random enough for putting it all in one pot, in this case - formula or algorithm.

The best in the world who work with models break it down to a single possession and add values to every player individually. Your approach is way too general to say the least.[/QUOTE]

What approach are you talking about? Same thing as what? I'm speculating, and I make no assumptions, wild or otherwise. Im trying to generate hypotheses--I would like to develop an approach like everyone in here but haven't done so yet. The best in the world will not tell you how they do it, but a good model I suppose would incorporate data on each player individually.

First you imply random by saying "random", and now you are saying you meant "sophisticated"... Its really confusing where you're going. But in any case, its certainly not random and unpredictable as you have been saying repeatedly. If you learn some stats, and have some faith that you can make some headway in predicting outcomes with those statistics, you'll be more successful with it. Good luck, buddy.
Last edited by emceeaye; 04-23-14 at 02:05 PM.
Give Points
Reply with Quote
#1147

Default

Quote Originally Posted by green7 View Post
Good fortune to those that want to look into this....there are some in other forums that have worked out second half systems that are predicated on the score of the first half. From observation and a cursory glance, it seems that second quarter scoring is higher than first quarter, and if the books have not studied this (highly unlikely that they haven't) then there would be an edge there.

For SDQL, the way to query results for the whole game with known results at the half, is "M2" or "margin at the half".

An example of a query would be

HF and playoffs=1 and total>200 and M2<0 and line<-3

HF and playoffs = 1 and total > 200 and M2 < 0 and line < -3
SU: 17-21 (-1.55, 44.7%)
ATS: 6-31-1 (-7.75, 16.2%) avg line: -6.2
O/U: 21-16-1 (2.49, 56.8%) avg total: 209.6
FG Pct FT Pct 3s Pct BLKS O-RBND RBND Fouls AST TOvers Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Final
Team 37.76 45.0 22.05 75.1 7.71 35.1 4.68 11.82 42.95 22.58 20.13 13.47 25.3 23.3 27.8 27.7 105.3
Opp 39.47 47.7 20.21 78.0 7.68 39.5 5.26 10.13 42.26 24.63 20.18 13.42 27.5 27.7 25.3 24.9 106.8


Keep in mind that the books will vary the total and side according to the first half results and as far as I know there is no place to access historical second half lines and totals, so to go back and do retroactive studies on this as I attempted may be problematic.

It'd be nice for you folks to come up with something good if you go ahead....I'll be rooting for you.
Nice green, I'm aware of the second half threads you referenced and have always wondered why we haven't seen more SDQL queries that point in a similar direction.
Give Points
Reply with Quote
Back to Forum