NBA Stituational Bet, SDQL

Originally Posted by Mako-SBR

Agree, to the point that this week I went through and purged all of the over/under queries I had that only addressed the scenario for one team.

From this point forward I'll only personally play O/U trends that have parameters for both teams in the query, i.e., are addressing both of their situations simultaneously in the same game.

Obviously it's the perfect storm, but I can't agree that it's a must to have a good hit percentage.
Bookies look at both teams, setting the total and if one team has a reason for the total to be different then their usual stats/ what bookies or public think - it should hit as well.

I remember, back when Bogut was in Milwaukee, I bet almost all of their games totals, with one simple logic. Over when he was injured (and that was a lot), Under when he played. It resulted in 70+% hit rate.

When Perkins was traded to the Thunder and was healthy (he came injured), I took Unders in all their games, till books adjusted.
Chandler in the Knicks - Under with him, Over without him - wasn't even close to Bogut's bets hit rate, but still - made some logic and profit (55% if I remember correct - in certain spots that I picked).

My point is that I believe that one team can influence the total and even more, one player, anchor on defense or offense can influence the total. Just need to find the right spots imho.

Hey there, guys! Was completely messing around with SDQL and found this -
ppp:L and pp:L and p:HL and rest=1 and p:O and p2:O and p3:O and p4:O

Maybe someone is willing to give it a shot.

Eliminating heavy dogs helps a bit.

ppp:L and pp:L and p:HL and rest=1 and p:O and p2:O and p3:O and p4:O and line<=5

Originally Posted by JAnthony

Hey there, guys! Was completely messing around with SDQL and found this -
ppp:L and pp:L and p:HL and rest=1 and p:O and p2:O and p3:O and p4:O

Maybe someone is willing to give it a shot.

Eliminating heavy dogs helps a bit.

ppp:L and pp:L and p:HL and rest=1 and p:O and p2:O and p3:O and p4:O and line<=5

Here is kind of an insane riff off of that:

playoffs=0 and p:O and p2:O and p3:O and p4:O and season > 2007 and oA(dpa) > 0 and P:W and rest > 0 and day in [Monday,Tuesday,Wednesday] and team not in [Jazz,Pelicans,Timberwolves,Grizzlies,Lak ers,Hawks,Kings,Trailblazers] and o:team not in [Grizzlies,Thunder,Nuggets]

Originally Posted by pip2

Here is kind of an insane riff off of that:

playoffs=0 and p:O and p2:O and p3:O and p4:O and season > 2007 and oA(dpa) > 0 and P:W and rest > 0 and day in [Monday,Tuesday,Wednesday] and team not in [Jazz,Pelicans,Timberwolves,Grizzlies,Lak ers,Hawks,Kings,Trailblazers] and o:team not in [Grizzlies,Thunder,Nuggets]

And what is the rationale behind taking only seasons higher that 2007? Just to boost the result?

If we start to eliminate teams, months (sometimes we could exclude november or april months cause it's start and end of the regular season... but to exclude december to march months is just pushing the query) and even days of week in every query we will hit 90% of the time. But this 90% are just hardly pushed situational only in the past... forget the same percenatage to hit in the future

excluding time frames and teams only make sense if there is something connected to it. not randomly. for example if you only want to look at so called slow paced teams, then it is good to exclude the fast ones. or if you want to exclude a shortened season or lock out season, then it is good too.

Originally Posted by JAnthony

And what is the rationale behind taking only seasons higher that 2007? Just to boost the result?

This query might be a good discussion point. Yes, the rationale would definitely be to inflate the percentage, but at the same time, results dating back to 2007 aren't totally flimsy by themselves. I see a lot of queries that seem to either have been really hot up to that 2006/2007/2008 time frame, and then cooled way down, or vice versa. Its as if there was some kind of major change in the game that took place around that time period, though I could not do a good job speculating as to what that change would be, exactly.

But as others have pointed out, there are worse gimmicks in the query than the time frame. I actually think the day gimmick might be justifiable. My (vague) justification for those three days is that, to me, those are the business-as-usual days of the week. The other influences stipulated in the query might be subtle enough that they can be outweighed by the excitement generated by a Thursday night or weekend game, which I am assuming will be associated with an increased number of howling rabid fans and perhaps a national tv audience.

The team thing, I really can't even vaguely justify except by wondering if maybe there might be something in the nature of those teams that causes them to be less affected by the other (more legitimate) parameters of the query...

One problem with this query as an example is that if you strip off the team stipulations, it is still hitting at 73%. And if you further strip off the day stipulations, it is running at 57% (with a sample size of 150). So this query could win a reasonable number of units, more in spite of the inflationary embellishments I added than because of them.

Also, re-reading my original post, I am wondering if "insane" might have been a poor choice in words because some people might be using the word nowadays to mean "good" or "great". In this case, I just meant "crazy"...

NBA SDQL 'BEST BET' 2014-15

11/28/14 8:45am pst Reduced Basketball 714 Houston Rockets +3 -106* vs Los Angeles Clippers

SDQL:

playoffs=0 and season > 2007 and tS(W)-(tS(W)/1.3) < oS(W) and p:TPM*3/p:points + p:points in the paint/p:points > .76 and p:margin > 1 and day!=Sunday and conference=Western and month!=4 and o:rest < 2 and op:margin > -2

SDQL: English

Since 2007, if a team is not so superior to another team that just a fraction of its wins outnumbers the opponent's wins, and if the points the team scored in their latest game was more than three quarters composed of points in the paint and three-pointers, and if the team was rewarded by this point-scoring distribution with a win, and the team is in the Western conference, and the month is not April, and the day is not Sunday, and the opponent has had less than 2 days rest, and the opponent was beaten in their last game by more than 2 points, then play on that team to cover.

Overall Group Record - 46-34-1 57.5% (+9.81) (max wagered -to win 1 unit)

11-26-14 recap 2-4 (-2.52)

Official Entries: Max 10 of 10:

1. JMon - 6-6 (+.20)

2. pip2 - 7-3 (+3.85)

3. nash13 - 6-3 (+2.87)

4. Ronald S. - 6-6 (-.45)

5. hyahya - 5-3 (+1.65)

6. Mako-SBR - 5-5 (-.50)

7. FlyinAir - 1-2 (-1.45)

8. Consigliere - 7-3-1 (+3.84)

9. Sports Mind - 2-0 (+2.00)

10. GolfAddict - 1-3 (-2.20)

orl covers vs ind From J R ATS: 583-453-21 (1.37, 56.3%)
AD and WP < 50 and (o:rest=0 or rest=1) and ats streak<0 and 0 < o:ats streak < 3

atl/no UNDER From b1slickguy O/U: 18-50-1 (-4.38, 26.5)
210 > total > 199.5 and 60 >=WP >= 51 and Sum(ou margin@team and season, N=5) >= 36 and season > 2007 and playoffs =0 and H

sac covers vs sa From mako ATS: 105-51-3 (3.22, 67.3%)
AD and p:AL and p:margin <= -13 and tA(points)>=100 and o:WP >= 60 and o:rest > 0

mem covers vs por from hyahya ATS:17-51-0 (-4.96, 25.0%)
H and line > -6 and p:AW and pp:AW and season >= 2011

no covers vs atl From jmon ATS: 24-8-2 (6.57, 75.0%)
p:L and op:L and A and rest >= 1 and 0 <= line <= 3 and P:margin >= 5 and 2010 <= season and 3 > o:rest > 0

NBA Best Bet

11/28/2014 - 11:00a PST

Play: PHX (+1) DEN -110

SDQL:
A and tA(points)>=102 and oA(o:points)>=104 and p:W and p:points>=100 and pp:points>=100 and ppp:points>=100 and game number>=15 and season>=2006

SDQL English:
Hot scoring team on the road coming off multiple 100+ point performances in a row, up against a poor defending team that gives up a ton of points.

Notes:
This one is a coin flip to some extent, not because of a weakness in the scenario but because in this particular instance PHX also gives up a ton of points while DEN scores a ton of points, which the query doesn't address.

When I plugged those things into the query to see a more accurate snapshot the sample size dropped as you'd expect but the winning percentage only fell to 68%...so let's roll!

Hope everyone is recovering nicely from yesterday's feast, but guess what....leftovers time, yay! :cheers:

I think that teams exclusion can make sense many times.
For example, fatigue is important - but there are less coachable teams, that can be more influenced by fatigue or for example Chicago, that has a "crazy" coach, that demands his players to give 110%, no matter how tired they are.

The same for days of the week. Oklahoma for example, has Sunday as "church and game" day. Many religious people there and they go from the church to the game.
Also, Collisons (I think) told that Thunder players pray together each Sunday, so obviously they feel more special bond in that day.
Thursday is usually TNT day, so you got national TV coverage, especially for teams that rarely get such coverage as Toronto for example.
There are many examples (and I'm sure there are a lot of things we don't know of, but do matter), so I wouldn't throw away solid query, just because it exluided certain days, teams or something like that...

Few things if I may, about queries that I see here for tonight:

Suns - Nuggets is B2B type of game, where teams play each other home and home and in such spots, it's always better to bet the team that lost SU (especially if it lost ATS as well) than the other way around. Usually NBA teams have very short memory, but if a teams beat you, just the other day, you usually don't forget it after 24 - 48 hours and want to get back at them.
Having said that, Denver are 0 - 2 in such spots this season (Sacramento and Portlando), so that shows that they got zero pride, so it might be a good idea to fade them.

Rockets without Dwight and it really changes both the chances of the outcome and the line. Healthy Houston, would have been favorite at home, without a doubt even.

The Suns are in a bit of a situation that they haven't seemed to respond well to yet:
team=Suns and p:H and pp:A and ppp:A and pppp:A and ppppp:A

Dmitean, I appreciate your appraisals of the plays. It kind of brings all the numbers and queries back into perspective. I'm not really seeing (on a basketball analysis level) how Houston covers on this one, except the Clippers are playing their 6th game away, and my personal opinion of Dwight is that I think the points that they move the spread in reaction to his absence are probably worth more than he would be worth if he was playing, depending on his shot selection when pushing his way to the basket.