[pip2]

Looking at these query results side by side:

season=2013 and 20 < Wizards:Nene:minutes

season=2013 and 0=Wizards:Nene:minutes

WSH appears to score 2 points more in the first quarter when he plays. Hopefully the books don't factor that into the quarter lines...

Loss...

[pip2]

Trying again:

playoffs = 1 and series game > 3 and -6 < line < -2 and p:W and pp:L and ppp:W and total < 200

SU: 14-10 (1.25, 58.3%)
ATS: 10-14-0 (-2.60, 41.7%) avg line: -3.9
O/U: 6-18-0 (-4.73, 25.0%) avg total: 184.7

[emceeaye]

OK as a total rookie, not likely I am getting this correct, but here is my stab:

quarter scores P1 >= 1.20 * Average(P1@team and season) and quarter scores P2 >= 1.20 * Average(P2@team and season) and quarter scores P3 <= Average(P3@team and season)

Or the way I wrote it, before killer sports translated it:

P1>=1.20*Average(P1@team and season) and P2>=1.20*Average(P2@team and season) and P3<=Average(P3@team and season)

SU: 607-274 (6.49, 68.9%)
ATS: 579-280-22 (5.18, 67.4%) avg line: -1.3
O/U: 707-160-14 (12.23, 81.5%) avg total: 196.1

Hi Pip2,

Thanks for your help. I'm realizing that your and my original queries were not only including games wherein the 1st and 2nd scores were each 20% above average for those quarters, but also only those games in which one team was responsible for the above average scoring. So I added the below terms to the query.

P1>1.19*Average(P1@team and season) and o:P1>1.19*Average(o:P1@team and season) and P2>1.19*Average(P2@team and season) and o:P2>1.19*Average(o:P2@team and season)

U:64-74 (-0.67, 46.4%)ATS:59-76-3 (-0.09, 43.7%) avg line: 0.6O/U:135-3-0 (26.52, 97.8%) avg total: 200.9

This one is just adding to the query the third quarter totals in which a team and their opponent both had scores below average for those quarters...I think.

P1>1.19*Average(P1@team and season) and o:P1>1.19*Average(o:P1@team and season) and P2>1.19*Average(P2@team and season) and o:P2>1.19*Average(o:P2@team and season) and P3<average(p3@team and="" season)="" o3<average(o3@team="" season)

SU:	10-10 (-1.70, 50.0%)
ATS:	10-10-0 (-0.82, 50.0%)	avg line: 0.9
O/U:	20-0-0 (19.82, 100.0%)	avg total: 196.9

</average(p3@team>

[pip2]

Hi Pip2,

Thanks for your help. I'm realizing that your and my original queries were not only including games wherein the 1st and 2nd scores were each 20% above average for those quarters, but also only those games in which one team was responsible for the above average scoring. So I added the below terms to the query.

P1>1.19*Average(P1@team and season) and o:P1>1.19*Average(o:P1@team and season) and P2>1.19*Average(P2@team and season) and o:P2>1.19*Average(o:P2@team and season)

U:64-74 (-0.67, 46.4%)ATS:59-76-3 (-0.09, 43.7%) avg line: 0.6O/U:135-3-0 (26.52, 97.8%) avg total: 200.9

This one is just adding to the query the third quarter totals in which a team and their opponent both had scores below average for those quarters...I think.

P1>1.19*Average(P1@team and season) and o:P1>1.19*Average(o:P1@team and season) and P2>1.19*Average(P2@team and season) and o:P2>1.19*Average(o:P2@team and season) and P333@team="" season)

SU:	10-10 (-1.70, 50.0%)
ATS:	10-10-0 (-0.82, 50.0%)	avg line: 0.9
O/U:	20-0-0 (19.82, 100.0%)	avg total: 196.9

Right, the P1 is just for one team! How about S1, which seems to be for the combined scoring?

S1>1.19*(Average(P1@team and season) + Average(o:P1@team and season)) and S2>1.19*(Average(P2@team and season) + Average(o:P2@team and season))

That yields no results, so I better take more time to think about it...

[pip2]

OK, so I think using S1 and S2 sucked because S2 is the total of the first two quarters scoring. There wasn't much point to using S1 and S2 anyways because you already had what you wanted...

So now I'm trying to see where you are going with this. If you caught one of these games beforehand, at those odds you could make a killing. But by the time the game gets to the third quarter, and both teams have scored so much, aren't the live-in-play totals going to have gotten larger as well?

[emceeaye]

OK, so I think using S1 and S2 sucked because S2 is the total of the first two quarters scoring. There wasn't much point to using S1 and S2 anyways because you already had what you wanted...

So now I'm trying to see where you are going with this. If you caught one of these games beforehand, at those odds you could make a killing. But by the time the game gets to the third quarter, and both teams have scored so much, aren't the live-in-play totals going to have gotten larger as well?

Hi pip2,
Still playing around with various combinations of higher or lower than average quarter totals as a function of one of the two teams and as a function of both teams in a game and seeing its effects on OU and SU/ATS.

For example, below is a query of a situation similar to the Warriors/Clippers game last night in which one team scores around 35% above average for the first quarter while the other team scores around 8% lower than the average for that quarter.

P1>=1.30*Average(P1@team and season) and P1<=1.3479*Average(P1@team and season) and o:P1<=.93*Average(o:P1@team and season) and o:P1>.90*Average(o:P1@team and season)

SU: 50-24 (4.80, 67.6%)
ATS: 42-30-2 (4.11, 58.3%) avg line: -0.7
O/U: 46-27-1 (6.17, 63.0%) avg total: 194.4

So, after only one quarter of play, you can get some predictive value of the whole game. Will the books modify the link e immediately at the end of the first quarter to account for it, I'm not sure. But I would like to investigate and see if an edge could be gained.

You can still play with single quarter points besides the first one and favoring one side over the other in twrms of points scored by differing degrees and then seeing what results we can get that might help...

[dmitean]

Under trend I like:
playoffs==1 and (site=='home' and line >0) and seed in [5 , 6 , 7 , 8] and series game>=6

Bottom seed playing at home as dog in Game 6 or Game 7.
I would like to add that if memory serves me right, than at least two of the three Over results were when the dog was in elimination spot and not the favorite, like it is for Oklahoma and Indiana.

[emceeaye]

P1>=1.13*Average(P1@team and season) and P1<=1.20*Average(P1@team and season) and o:P1>=1.13*Average(o:P1@team and season) and o:P1<=1.20*Average(o:P1@team and season) and total>=200

SU: 74-78 (-0.51, 48.7%)
ATS: 72-74-6 (-0.35, 49.3%) avg line: 0.2
O/U: 103-48-1 (5.12, 68.2%) avg total: 208.9

[JMon]

D and tA(o: points) >= 103 and opo: points >= 110 and op2o: points >= 110 and op3o: points >= 110

10-0ATS/8-2 SU month of april

[green7]

playoffs = 1 and series game = 6 and tS(ou margin, N=5) >10 and p:TPP>35 and HD

SU:	1-6 (-10.57, 14.3%)
ATS:	2-5-0 (-7.79, 28.6%)	avg line: 2.8
O/U:	0-6-1 (-15.86, 0.0%)	avg total: 184.7

versus Hawks, Grizzlies, Warriors

UNDER Hawks, Grizzlies, Warriors

[green7]

playoffs = 1 and series game = 5 and tS(ou margin, N=5) >10 and HF and po:TPP>35 and p:TPP>35 and p:AL

SU:7-3 (5.20, 70.0%)
ATS:3-7-0 (-1.95, 30.0%)
avg line: -7.2
O/U:4-6-0 (-2.95, 40.0%)
avg total: 198.6

versus Rockets

[green7]

playoffs = 1 and series game = 5 and tS(ats margin, N=5) >10 and AD and p:HL

SU:	2-14 (-14.94, 12.5%)
ATS:	3-13-0 (-8.19, 18.8%)	avg line: 6.8
O/U:	9-7-0 (-1.66, 56.2%)	avg total: 189.2

versus Mavs

[pip2]

Hi pip2,
Still playing around with various combinations of higher or lower than average quarter totals as a function of one of the two teams and as a function of both teams in a game and seeing its effects on OU and SU/ATS.

For example, below is a query of a situation similar to the Warriors/Clippers game last night in which one team scores around 35% above average for the first quarter while the other team scores around 8% lower than the average for that quarter.

P1>=1.30*Average(P1@team and season) and P1<=1.3479*Average(P1@team and season) and o:P1<=.93*Average(o:P1@team and season) and o:P1>.90*Average(o:P1@team and season)

SU: 50-24 (4.80, 67.6%)
ATS: 42-30-2 (4.11, 58.3%) avg line: -0.7
O/U: 46-27-1 (6.17, 63.0%) avg total: 194.4

So, after only one quarter of play, you can get some predictive value of the whole game. Will the books modify the link e immediately at the end of the first quarter to account for it, I'm not sure. But I would like to investigate and see if an edge could be gained.

You can still play with single quarter points besides the first one and favoring one side over the other in twrms of points scored by differing degrees and then seeing what results we can get that might help...

As you experiment, are you getting any kind of feel for the best way to segment these point averages? I'm wondering if it's possible that a team can score, let's say, 8 percent more than normal, and it doesn't affect its expected ATS percentage much. But then if the same team scores 9 percent more than usual, it's ATS percentage suddenly doubles or something...

[sunshine11]

Blah blah blah just get to the plays.

[emceeaye]

S2>=1.197*Average(S2@team and season) and S2<=1.237*Average(S2@team and season) and o:S2>=1.023*Average(o:S2@team and season) and o:S2<=1.063*Average(o:S2@team and season)

SU: 131-42 (6.18, 75.7%)
ATS: 114-53-6 (4.49, 68.3%) avg line: -1.7
O/U: 133-34-6 (11.33, 79.6%) avg total: 196.5

This is what it was at half time of rockets blazers game. Avge total game points for games like these is 207.8 which we can use as new accurate line to compare against what books give us, right?

[pip2]

Sorry I'm not picking up on where you are getting the 207.8
Oh wait a minute now I see you just added up the team and opponent average scores for that list of games...
I'm not sure it works well to use that average against what the books provide, because there appears to be so much variation between the individual numbers in the list of games. But I am no statistics expert...

[emceeaye]

Pip,
Yeah you might be right there, especially given that the total in this last quarter is going higher than average for the 4th quarter in the list of games. So yes, there's variation which may not be predictable. However, when we compare the fourth quarter total points to the average 4th quarter points for the sizeable number of games yielded by the query above, this 4th quarter may be a bit of an outlier of a score. If we knew the standard deviation for fourth quarter scores and if 4th quarter scores were normally distributed (which they may not be), then we can see how likely or unlikely it would be to get a fourth quarter point total that is shaping out here.

[emceeaye]

Ha, actually I take that back. Towards the beginning of the 4th, it was looking to be higher scoring than what it actually ended up being. 207 was pretty close to the outcome here, which although doesn't prove anything, is at least consistent.

This is fun, but the challenge is writing and entering the query and making the bet before the end of the commercial break.

[emceeaye]

Sorry I'm not picking up on where you are getting the 207.8
Oh wait a minute now I see you just added up the team and opponent average scores for that list of games...
I'm not sure it works well to use that average against what the books provide, because there appears to be so much variation between the individual numbers in the list of games. But I am no statistics expert...

Could be true, but if the sample size is large enough for a particular situation, then adding the average team and opponents total points seems like it may be a reliable enough reflection of what the total points will be in the game. Adding total>=200 or <=200 has been helping with giving more reliable results. I'm finding so far that sometimes the book's total line is practically identical to what you get when you add the average total points scored by the two teams in the results of the query and sometimes its different to differing extents. Still playing with this to see if any edge can be gained. I'm mostly looking at O/U, but also looking for ATS edge.

[green7]

A and series game = 6 and round<4 and t:series wins = 3 and p:TPP>35 and p:HW

A and series game = 6 and round < 4 and t:series wins = 3 and p:TPP > 35 and p:HW
SU: 14-11 (1.08, 56.0%) ATS: 13-12-0 (1.24, 52.0%) avg line: 0.2 O/U: 6-18-1 (-5.48, 25.0%) avg total: 190.4 UNDER Spurs, Raptors

[green7]

playoffs=1 and o:series wins=3 and H



If one adds "and series game=7" you'll see a high past history of home and UNDER success which may bode well for the Clippers, Thunder and Pacers.....linesmaker is enticing people to take the visiting teams.

In all other series games except game 7s, past history favors the visiting team and UNDER in this situation.

[JAnthony]

as simple as it gets

playoffs=1 and series game=7 and H

[Mako-SBR]

Big chalk going to come through and put the universe back in order? We'll see...

HF and playoffs=1 and series game=7 and seed < o:seed and line<=-4.5

[JAnthony]

as simple as it gets

playoffs=1 and series game=7 and H

3-1 so far on totals and ATS

[Mako-SBR]

Big chalk going to come through and put the universe back in order? We'll see...

HF and playoffs=1 and series game=7 and seed < o:seed and line<=-4.5

Dodged the Portland loss today thanks to the -4.5 line modifier. Amazing how SDQL can be so accurate at times, wish it were always that way.

[JAnthony]

Dodged the Portland loss today thanks to the -4.5 line modifier. Amazing how SDQL can be so accurate at times, wish it were always that way.

What exactly are you talking about?

[Mako-SBR]

What exactly are you talking about?

Well my thought was that the bigger favs might perform differently in round one game sevens versus just blindly going with home favs as I'd normally do, so adding the -4.5 or more line parameter to my query luckily excluded Portland from being bet on as they were only laying 3...which prevented the betting loss on them today (i.e., didn't make the bet as Portland wasn't a big enough fav).

Looks like San Antonio is going to keep the scenario it going (hopefully), which means the query will finish at 3-1, losing only the Clippers game by 2.

Huge winning weekend when combined with MLB, gotta love SDQL.

EDIT: JAnthony corrected me, was referring to TORONTO in this post, not freaking PORTLAND lol.

[JAnthony]

well my thought was that the bigger favs might perform differently in round one game sevens versus just blindly going with home favs as i'd normally do, so adding the -4.5 or more line parameter to my query luckily excluded portland from being bet on as they were only laying 3...which prevented the betting loss on them today (i.e., didn't make the bet as portland wasn't a big enough fav).

Looks like san antonio is going to keep the scenario it going (hopefully), which means the query will finish at 3-1, losing only the clippers game by 2.

Huge winning weekend when combined with mlb, gotta love sdql.

portland?

[Mako-SBR]

portland?

Ha! I've been doing that all day, goddamnit, Toronto!

Sorry about that, my brain for some reason is dyslexic on those two teams.

Going to go to 20-6 if the Spurs win today, we'll have to remember to do this again next year. Too bad Round 1 game 7s are relatively rare.

SU: 23-2 (12.08, 92.0%) ATS: 19-6-0 (4.82, 76.0%) avg line: -7.3 O/U: 11-14-0 (-3.03, 44.0%) avg total: 187.5

[green7]

playoffs = 1 and 4 > round > 1 and series game = 1 and tS(W, N=5)<4 and H and p:series game>5


The "tS" is telling us how teams have done when winning less than 3 or less games out of their last 5.

When teams have been in long series (>=6 games) they tend not to play well in the first game of the series at home.

Versus Pacers, Spurs and Thunder.

[green7]

playoffs = 1 and 4 > round > 1 and series game = 1 and oS(W, N=5)<4 and A and p:series game>5

[green7]

playoffs = 1 and 4 > round > 1 and series game = 1 and p:series game=4 and op:series game=7 and HF

[FortySix]

Green, you are the man.. Thank you so much for your play-off SDQL's. Both Thunder and Pacers were horrible today playing more than 6 games in previous series and I hope the Spurs do the same thing tomorrow.. Keep it up buddy.

[green7]

Felt good about both plays yesterday going in....as point guards and head coaches are the most important factors in modern day NBA betting. Huge advantages in both categories for both Wiz and Clips. Both those teams should win their series within 5 or 6 games.

The SDQL query strongly favors Trailblazers tonight, but the coach and the point guard advantage are not there....so tread more carefully than last night.

The last query of a playoff home favorite off a sweep playing a team off a 7 game series is pretty significant as well.

A side note that teams in the top ten of PER offensive efficiency (as per ESPN stats) are 27-12 to the OVER in the playoffs.

Those top ten teams are the Clippers, Thunder, Spurs, Trailblazers, Mavericks, Rockets, Raptors and Heat.

Most good teams are pushing it, rather than waiting to face zone defenses and there has never been better shooting in the NBA than there is now. It's translating to overs.

Good fortune.

[Mako-SBR]

Yep, very good work green, and that write up you just did is on point as well. Thanks for the effort in the thread!