70% system 2010-2011

[barts185]

Patrick, thanks for your response. Also, not my thread this year, just trying to contribute when I can.

[Welt446+]

barts185

This is my opinion and this is your thread, so I would not disagree with you were you to PASS on this play. In fact, to keep things simple and free of debate it would probably be best to PASS and follow the systems rules objectively. Anyone playing/following this system can decide for themselves if they would personally play this or pass.

We could keep a separate record of plays such as this where a recently injured player is doing well.

- we could call it the negligible injury record

[Welt446+]

There is nothing that qualifies for Thursday....I already investigated it.

[smallbluedonkey]

OKC and NOH both covered today (I played them both, because I am reasonably lenient on my interpretation of the injury filter).

Also, from tracking this system for the second half of last season, I can say that the part of the system that involved playing the other team when the calculated number comes out less than -1 was nowhere near as profitable as only taking #s 10 or higher.

[sneak-a-peak]

OKC and NOH both covered today (I played them both, because I am reasonably lenient on my interpretation of the injury filter).

Also, from tracking this system for the second half of last season, I can say that the part of the system that involved playing the other team when the calculated number comes out less than -1 was nowhere near as profitable as only taking #s 10 or higher.

I was able to cash on OKC but by the time I got home last night NO was -10 at all my books so I stayed away.

Guys, the injury filter is always over analyzed here but you can be a little bit more liberal because this system is about picking good teams in good spots ATS and good teams usually have a good coaching staff, a good bench and a good mix of stars and role players and those qualities of a good team should not be underestimated. Just stay away from obvious suffocating injuries to a team IMO.

BOL to everyone

[PatrickBateman]

I propose that we join our minds together and discuss the plays through this thread. Keeping a track record is worthless and will only lead to debate since we all will have differing opinions on the rabble rousing "injury filter issue" (All other filters seem straighforward and clear) Instead, each day we can band together to determine which plays "qualify" despite injuries. Then from there discuss the injury in question. (i.e.- see the Durant injury last night, which seemed to have no effect on the OKC)

I believe doing things this way will enable people to determine for themselves the success or failure of this system. Keeping a "thread record" will only insight unnecessary debate on the "true record." If the system is successful in how you are using it, then that is great, if it is not, then no need to continue visiting this thread. We shall propose plays and whether or not it is your determination to play it is purely up to each and everyone of us. Otherwise I feel that this thread will fall prey to the typical heated argument that it becomes over what injuries constitute plays and vice versa.

Anyone disagree?

[Welt446+]

I propose that we join our minds together and discuss the plays through this thread. Keeping a track record is worthless and will only lead to debate since we all will have differing opinions on the rabble rousing "injury filter issue" (All other filters seem straighforward and clear) Instead, each day we can band together to determine which plays "qualify" despite injuries. Then from there discuss the injury in question. (i.e.- see the Durant injury last night, which seemed to have no effect on the OKC)

I believe doing things this way will enable people to determine for themselves the success or failure of this system. Keeping a "thread record" will only insight unnecessary debate on the "true record." If the system is successful in how you are using it, then that is great, if it is not, then no need to continue visiting this thread. We shall propose plays and whether or not it is your determination to play it is purely up to each and everyone of us. Otherwise I feel that this thread will fall prey to the typical heated argument that it becomes over what injuries constitute plays and vice versa.

Anyone disagree?

I don't really care either way. I'll go with whatever the consensus is. When things pass the numerical filter and b2b filter, I'll post the plays and what injuries might be of concern. Durant was doing fine upon his return so I can see the argument to include the play in the system. The nice thing about doing an altered injury filter record is that we can see the impact at the end of the season though.

[barts185]

We managed to keep it civil last season. In the end, I agree, everyone uses it how they see fit, but I like Welt446+s idea that we could have mutltiple records:

1) No injury questions at all - definitely a play
2) Some injury / sickness question - possible play, but use your own judgement

Also, since someone suggested that the fades off negative numbers did worse than the plays off of the ones that are 10+, I'd be willing to keep a record that looks like this:


Definite plays 0-2
12/06 UTA (10+) loss
12/07 DET (fade HOU at -1 or worse) loss


Possible plays 2-0
12/08 NOR (10+) win - David West missed 1 game due to flu, 2nd game back.
12/08 OKC (10+) win - Kevin Durant missed 2 games due to knee, 3rd game back, played well in the 2 games he's been back.

If that's too convoluted, let me know and I won't do it. Not looking to make issues, just trying to see if keeping a record would work out better to see if certain plays actually did better.

Take Care,
Bart

[sneak-a-peak]

We managed to keep it civil last season. In the end, I agree, everyone uses it how they see fit, but I like Welt446+s idea that we could have mutltiple records:

1) No injury questions at all - definitely a play
2) Some injury / sickness question - possible play, but use your own judgement

Also, since someone suggested that the fades off negative numbers did worse than the plays off of the ones that are 10+, I'd be willing to keep a record that looks like this:


Definite plays 0-2
12/06 UTA (10+) loss
12/07 DET (fade HOU at -1 or worse) loss


Possible plays 2-0
12/08 NOR (10+) win - David West missed 1 game due to flu, 2nd game back.
12/08 OKC (10+) win - Kevin Durant missed 2 games due to knee, 3rd game back, played well in the 2 games he's been back.

If that's too convoluted, let me know and I won't do it. Not looking to make issues, just trying to see if keeping a record would work out better to see if certain plays actually did better.

Take Care,
Bart

Looks good

Ya the only thing everyone agrees on about the injury filter is that it is not a exact science and that everyone should pick and choose for themselves- which is good enough.

Also to have discussions amongst us about particular current injuries is a good idea too.

[PatrickBateman]

barts and welts,

Agree with what you guys have said...keeping track should help us see what works and what does not. Good idea, I will read everyday.

[Welt446+]

We managed to keep it civil last season. In the end, I agree, everyone uses it how they see fit, but I like Welt446+s idea that we could have mutltiple records:

1) No injury questions at all - definitely a play
2) Some injury / sickness question - possible play, but use your own judgement

Also, since someone suggested that the fades off negative numbers did worse than the plays off of the ones that are 10+, I'd be willing to keep a record that looks like this:


Definite plays 0-2
12/06 UTA (10+) loss
12/07 DET (fade HOU at -1 or worse) loss


Possible plays 2-0
12/08 NOR (10+) win - David West missed 1 game due to flu, 2nd game back.
12/08 OKC (10+) win - Kevin Durant missed 2 games due to knee, 3rd game back, played well in the 2 games he's been back.

If that's too convoluted, let me know and I won't do it. Not looking to make issues, just trying to see if keeping a record would work out better to see if certain plays actually did better.

Take Care,
Bart

Looks good to me

[Welt446+]

The plays look like:

Knicks -2.5

Rockets +4

The Rockets are an away team and they have a tied record with the Bucks. There was controversy last year in the thread about what to do about about this situation. I played it a year ago and it won.

[barts185]

Just making sure I understand what you are doing, just from a calculation perspective, not getting into any injury issues:

The line moved from Bucks -3.5 to Bucks -4. At -4, the calc would come out to -1.0 for the Bucks, so the play is the Rockets. If you had used Rockets as the selected team, calc would have come out to +1.0, so no play.


The other game in this situation (tied record) is Suns / Trailblazers. If you do the calc using the Suns as the selected team, it comes out to -2.5, but Trailblazers are on back to back, so no play. If you do the calc using Trailblazers as the selected team, it comes out to +2.5, no play.


So if teams have a tie record, you're doing it for both sides as the selected team and seeing if either qualifies?

[pm4e]

good luck with the play(s) today gentlemen.

[barts185]

Are we only using starting lines this season, or taking line changes into account?

I just realized that the line on Dallas moved to -9.5 last night, which would have put them into the possible category, with Tyson Chandler coming back after missing one game with the flu.

Not mentioning this just because it won, I just happened to notice it when going over some things.

[dirtybird98]

New to this! Is there an official play tonight??

[DuncHen22]

I had a question about this system, particularly the part where it says if it's -1 or less, play the other ATS.

I enter the info for Charlotte and Indy. Charlotte is 8-13, Indy is 10-10. Charlotte gets -3 for being on the road and the spread for them is +4. The Number I get is -2.45 so it says play other (Indy) ATS

However let's switch it and make Indy the selected team. They get +3 and their spread is -4. The number is 2.45 so it says "no play".

How does that work? Am I missing something here?

[DuncHen22]

The plays look like:

Knicks -2.5

Rockets +4

The Rockets are an away team and they have a tied record with the Bucks. There was controversy last year in the thread about what to do about about this situation. I played it a year ago and it won.

I didn't see the Rockets as a play. Knicks look good though. Line is up to -3 but it's still playable.

[DuncHen22]

Also, from tracking this system for the second half of last season, I can say that the part of the system that involved playing the other team when the calculated number comes out less than -1 was nowhere near as profitable as only taking #s 10 or higher.

I think I realized why. See my concern on #52

I'm pretty sure it's supposed to say less than -10, NOT -1. That makes way more sense.

[barts185]

Not sure where you are entering the info.

Or for that matter, where you are seeing a line of 4 on the Charlotte / Indy game. Line opened 6 and either stayed there or moved to 6.5


The team with the higher win percentage is the selected team.
Indy has the higher win percentage, they are the selected team. Indy .500 Charlotte .381

500-381=119

119/20=5.95

+3 for home = 8.95

Add (or in this case subtract) the line of Indy favored by 6
8.95 + (-6) =2.95


So no play.


Less than or equal to -1 play the other side

Greater than or equal to 10 play the indicated side.

Anything from -0.99 to +9.99 no play.

Good Luck,
Bart

[DuncHen22]

Not sure where you are entering the info.

Or for that matter, where you are seeing a line of 4 on the Charlotte / Indy game. Line opened 6 and either stayed there or moved to 6.5

Oops! I had the wrong line in there. And I didn't realize the selected team HAD to be the team with the higher win%. I just thought you could choose. Sorry.

[DuncHen22]

Okay, so here is an example of why I am confused:

Houston vs Milwaukee: both 8-13 = .38%
Select either team, in this first case we'll select Houston.

380-380 = 0
-3 for Road team
+4 for the spread
= 1 (no play on Houston)

Now let's try Milwaukee:
380-380 = 0
+3 for Road team
-4 for the spread
= -1 (play Houston)

???

It just seems like it would work better if you make the cutoff +10 for selected and -10 for other. That way you could input either team as selected. Besides, it was said earlier that playing the -1 picks didn't seem to be profitable last year and I'm thinking this may be why.

[barts185]

Okay, so here is an example of why I am confused:

Houston vs Milwaukee: both 8-13 = .38%
Select either team, in this first case we'll select Houston.

380-380 = 0
-3 for Road team
+4 for the spread
= 1 (no play on Houston)

Now let's try Milwaukee:
380-380 = 0
+3 for Road team
-4 for the spread
= -1 (play Houston)

???

It just seems like it would work better if you make the cutoff +10 for selected and -10 for other. That way you could input either team as selected. Besides, it was said earlier that playing the -1 picks didn't seem to be profitable last year and I'm thinking this may be why.

As with any system, you are allowed to use it however you wish. If you want to make the cutoff -10, and use both teams, go ahead.

Welt446+ said he tracked this last year doing it this way and it was profitable. I have no reason to doubt him. I didn't track this last year, I ignored the games when the record was the same (at least that's my recollection - if someone wants to go through last year's thread and see if that's incorrect, please let me know). Seems like I missed out on some winners.

Good Luck,
Bart

[smallbluedonkey]

Knicks covered, despite a terrible 1Q. Nice!

[barts185]

Definite plays 1-2
12/06 UTA (10+) loss
12/07 DET (fade HOU at -1 or worse) loss
12/10 NYK (10+) win

Possible plays 2-0 or 3-0 if 12/09 game is included, didn't see any responses.
12/08 NOR (10+) win - David West missed 1 game due to flu, 2nd game back.
12/08 OKC (10+) win - Kevin Durant missed 2 games due to knee, 3rd game back, played well in the 2 games he's been back.
12/09 DAL (10+) win - line moved down to -9.5, Tyson Chandler first game back after missing 1 game with flu.

Tied record plays
12/10 HOU (HOU/MIL same record, ran both ways, fade of MIL at -1 or worse after line move to MIL -4) loss

[DuncHen22]

Looking toward tomorrow, Boston looks like a play against Charlotte at -6 right now, but Shaq is questionable and J. O'Neal is out. Are other people playing it?

I know it's up to the individual on how to play injuries, but I'm just looking for others' input.

[barts185]

Looking toward tomorrow, Boston looks like a play against Charlotte at -6 right now, but Shaq is questionable and J. O'Neal is out. Are other people playing it?

I know it's up to the individual on how to play injuries, but I'm just looking for others' input.

J. O'Neal isn't relevant - hasn't played since 11/08

Shaq missed last game, definitely a starter, so I don't think they qualify, definitely not if he doesn't play.

Also, Rondo missed a game on 12/05 with his hamstring.

Here's what the starting lineup has looked like over the last 4 games, looks like a pass.


19 Fri, Dec 3, 2010 Chicago Bulls W 104 92 15 4 R. Allen ▪ K. Garnett ▪ S. O'Neal ▪ P. Pierce ▪ R. Rondo
20 Sun, Dec 5, 2010 @ New Jersey Nets W 100 75 16 4 R. Allen ▪ K. Garnett ▪ S. O'Neal ▪ P. Pierce ▪ N. Robinson
21 Wed, Dec 8, 2010 Denver Nuggets W 105 89 17 4 R. Allen ▪ K. Garnett ▪ S. O'Neal ▪ P. Pierce ▪ R. Rondo
22 Thu, Dec 9, 2010 @ Philadelphia 76ers W 102 101 18 4 R. Allen ▪ S. Erden ▪ K. Garnett ▪ P. Pierce ▪ R. Rondo

[Welt446+]

Just making sure I understand what you are doing, just from a calculation perspective, not getting into any injury issues:

The line moved from Bucks -3.5 to Bucks -4. At -4, the calc would come out to -1.0 for the Bucks, so the play is the Rockets. If you had used Rockets as the selected team, calc would have come out to +1.0, so no play.


The other game in this situation (tied record) is Suns / Trailblazers. If you do the calc using the Suns as the selected team, it comes out to -2.5, but Trailblazers are on back to back, so no play. If you do the calc using Trailblazers as the selected team, it comes out to +2.5, no play.


So if teams have a tie record, you're doing it for both sides as the selected team and seeing if either qualifies?

One interesting thing to note is that the Rockets would have still been a play if they had a slightly worse record than the Bucks

[Welt446+]

The Cavs should be a fade at +8.5 for Saturday night. I looked to see how the fades did last year but can't find it at the moment. When I get a chance, I'll post the record.

[barts185]

While the Cavs don't have injuries, they have been changing their lineup at lot - any concern over that?

[sneak-a-peak]

The Cavs starters and bench is kinda interchangeable at the moment which is not a concern for me here. Rockets played in Milwaukee last night so on b2b while the Cavs have had 2 days rest. Should be a good spot to take a shot with the dawg and the generous amount of points here.

GL

[smallbluedonkey]

SHAQ is out for today's game. Celtics are a NO PLAY.

[barts185]

For Cleveland, Daniel Gibson, having just been giving the starting role, is questionable with the flu bug that's going around the league. He didn't fly with the team yesterday, was expected to fly out today.

The same is true for Ryan Hollins, but he's not a starter and is playing less than 15 minutes a game.

[barts185]

Looks like 3 possible plays for Sunday from the early lines.

NOR PK, value 12.9
SAS -8, value 12.1

ORL -7, value 11.75

No injury / lineup issues for NOR or SAS

For ORL
Jameer Nelson missed 3 games with flu, latest 12/06, 3rd game back
Dwight Howard missed 2 games with flu, latest 12/04, 4th game back
As of 12/10 Bass started instead of Richardson, not injury related.


Would appreciate confirmation if anyone else did the calculations.

[DuncHen22]

I got the same numbers as you for NO and SA, Bart. I haven't seen an ORL line yet, but if it is -7, my number is actually 12.2, since LAC lost earlier today (5-19 record).