[arpeggiomeister]

I know that chasing is super controversial. I had the good fortune of corresponding with Justin7 and he pointed me in the path that the pros use. While his logic makes perfect sense to me, I am still fascinated by the corrective quality of chasing.

I have spent the last couple of years studying different systems and scenarios. I recently studied a scenario that I believe is a game changer. First I will explain the main argument, the scenario, and then the theory (or perhaps it would be more appropriate to call it a hypothesis at this point).

These sites can be vicious so let me just state that I do not think I am a genius, or any such foolishness. I am just an average guy who finds it entertaining to think about this stuff. These are my thoughts, nothing more, nothing less.

Whether you call it chasing, the progressive system, or the Martingale System the main argument is the same.

The main argument:
“Progressive betting is not a legitimate money management device, but many fraudsters try sell systems using forms of progressive betting... ...no system can turn a negative EV scenario into a positive one.”
- “Conquering Risk” by Elihu D Feustel and George S Howard pg. 43

The main foundation for this argument is that the results are random, such as a coin toss, spin of the roulette wheel, or the roll of dice at the craps table. The theory I am proposing is that sportsbetting is not random. It may appear to be but it is anything but random. The spread is determined by public opinion. In order to maintain a 50/50 split on underdogs and favorite it is necassary for public opinion to switch from undervalued to overvalued, and back. I call this variance the "Pendulum Cycle".

I first discovered it by studying the 2007 Patriots season. This season was an abberation. They beat the spread on the first 8 games. They were clearly undervalued by the public. As each game progressed the point spreads increased in size. This was not completely linear, but close. The Bengals and the Colts upset the pattern because they were considered to be stronger opponents then the others.

The Patriots lost ATS in the Colts game by 1 point. I suggest that if they had beat the spread in that game that the Bills game that followed would have had a spread over -20 rather then -16. Instead this did not happen until the Eagles at -24. This was the crux event. Had you stuck with the underdogs for the rest of the season you only would have lost once with the Steelers.

This was clearly a bubble phenomenon... ...just like the stock market. What were the odds of the Patriots actually being able to beat a -24 spread against the Eagles in that game. 50/50??? Hell no!. I am not a statistician, but if I had to guess I would say they had less then a 20% chance of covering the spread in that game. Did this streak end with the Eagles? No! With only one exception, the underdogs prevailed for the rest of the season.

This season was an abberation. It is not the norm. Typically speaking, most teams should go 3 to 4 games max before losing ATS. Anything beyond this is abberant behavior and a backlash isn't just likely, it's inevitable.

With each game that the Patriots beat the spread, the next game would have a spread that was more difficult to overcome. This does not fit the negative EV model presented in the main argument against systems. With each successful cover the next game falls further and further from 50%... ...which means that the underdogs chances in these games are increasing well over 50%. This is creating a positive EV scenario if you use a chase system. You can't be certain when the streak will break, just that the odds of it continuing are not random. The gambler's fallacy actually applies in this scenario.

There are two approaches that you can use this information with if you are into chase systems. When you find an abberation you can ride a favorite until they lose ATS and then switch to their opponents. A chase system would have served you well in the case of the Patriots. This was an extreme case, but far from the only one. I used a similar approach on the Lions and 49ers for 2011. I played them for the first 8 and switched to their opponents for the second. The results were killer. I did the same thing with the Packers. Though it came out in positive territory, it would have been better to stick with the Packers for the entire season.

This idea is in its infancy. I believe with enough study I will eventually be able to chart this information and literally be able to use technical analysis to pick teams. The problem is that there are two teams that must be accounted for. They are each in separate cycles. I have not yet figured out how to chart this in a manner that is a usable forecasting tool, but the thought is intriguing.

It is too simple to just say "fade the public". They are right 50% of the time. The entire point spread system depends on this fact. It is the frequency between them being right vs wrong that is the key factor. Some teams remain in short cycles while others go on abberant streaks. Both pieces of information are useful. You can chase a team in a short cycle, or you can wait to buck the trend of a long streak.

I humbly present the idea that results ATS are not random but cyclical. This negates the negative EV scenario argument for each successful game ATS increases the EV of the next game for the opponent, and vice versa. (aka not random) By understanding the cycles it is theoretically possible that chase systems are a legitmate tool.

I have been backtesting an idea to test the random theory. I have a very deep chase system, many would consider impractical at 7 levels, but those are my perameters. It pulls an average return of 10% to 15%. Not super exciting until you realize how simplistic my filter was for choosing teams.

In order to make things random I went to NFL.com and chose the first Sunday game listed in the regular season for all 17 weeks. I chose the last Sunday game because it would be played at 8:00 pm. This gives enough time for the chaser to see the results of the first game and place a wager for the late game. I then chose the Monday night game. If there was more than one I took the first. (There was at least one scenario where there was more than one Monday nighter, but it was rare) This gave me 50 games for the regular season. There is no Monday night game in week 17. I left out the Thursday games and the occasional Saturday games. I did this simply because 50 is a nice round number. I chose to bet strictly on the favorites using my seven tier chase. I then used the same games for the underdogs. I have done this for 5 seasons; 2007-2011. I hate to sound like Jon Morrison but the success rate is 100%. This is very time consuming, but I want to take this all the way back to 1993. So far I have only made it to tier 7 once. Since I have used both favorites and underdogs this is a total of 500 trials. If I make it to 1993 without a failure it would hardly be conclusive evidence, but it should be enough to convince people that maybe this chasing thing warrants a little investigation.

I hope somebody finds this as interesting as I do. May you always win more than you lose.

[jolmscheid]

PM'ed you

[jolmscheid]

There was 12-game ATS streak in 1992..

[arpeggiomeister]

There was 12-game ATS streak in 1992..

There are a couple ways to play this. If you were lucky enough to get in on this streak from game 1 you ride the streak until it breaks. You would have 12 wins and one loss. If you are laying $55 to pick up $50 you win $600 and lose $55 for a profit of $545. You can switch tactics and chase opponents or cut your losses and declare victory for the season. I would take the money and run.

Another strategy would be to let the streak continue for half a season. You want 8 regular season games to be played. You then fade the team. In this case you would have to go 5 levels deep before scoring a win. That's expensive and scary once you get that deep. I have studied this with a 7 tier system and it hasn't failed yet. That is not to say that it will not, but so far the results have been amazing.

This is called the "Gland Martingale" system. It is based on the Gambler's Fallacy which is the idea that the more times a particular result occurs, the less likey it is that it will occur the next time. This is completely false with a game like roulette, but in sports this is not the case. The public will catch on and push the spread. The higher the spread is the more likely it is for the underdog to cover. The public will continue to push until the pattern breaks. Once the pattern does break there usually is a smaller opposite streak. The pendulum will swing back and forth until balance is once again reached.


With the Gland Martingale you wait for a certain number of trials to occur. In this case, 8 trials in a row. You then employ a chase system and fade the streak. If the team is favored like the 2007 Patriots you take the underdogs. I did this with the Lions last year. They were not always favorites, but I rode them for the first half of the year and then took their opponents for the second half. It worked with the 49ers too.

[jolmscheid]

Thanks...so you wait for a streak of say 6+ ATS wins or losses in a row and then chase the other side?

How did you decide to wager on the lions and 49ers last season?

Interested in talking more..

[Scorpion]

can you give us the short version??

[arpeggiomeister]

Thanks...so you wait for a streak of say 6+ ATS wins or losses in a row and then chase the other side?

How did you decide to wager on the lions and 49ers last season?

Interested in talking more..

[QUOTE=jolmscheid;15142926]Thanks...so you wait for a streak of say 6+ ATS wins or losses in a row and then chase the other side?

How did you decide to wager on the lions and 49ers last season? With a team I consider to be an "abberation" I would wait 8 games ATS. That is half the regular season. On their 9th game I would fade them using a chase system.

I will reply to the question on the Lions and 49ers momentarily. That is a seperate circumstance based on the same theory.

[arpeggiomeister]

can you give us the short version??

My apologies, I will do my best.

I use a 7 tier Martingale System to chase the NFL. I use the "Pendulum Cycle" as my key factor for choosing a team to bet on. The spread is created by public opinion and behaves similar to stock prices. At any given time I consider a spread to be "overvalued" or "undervalued" by the public. When a team wins several times against the spread the public starts to overvalue that team.

I am constantly looking for a team that is overvalued to fade, or undervalued to bet on. The chase system allows me a margin of error. Hopefully that explanation is a little better. If not, I'll keep trying to refine it.

[arpeggiomeister]

How did you decide to wager on the lions and 49ers last season?

Interested in talking more..

I spoke with a friend who told me he thought these teams were due to break out. His reasoning was that these teams were acquiring a lot of talent because they have been able to draft high for years. The staple of my approach is to find teams that are out of line with the public expectations of them. My friend's argument made sense so I gave it a shot.

Sure enough these teams were winning ATS. My theory is that when this happens public opinion will catch up to them and the pendulum will eventually swing to the opponents until balance is found. I played them for 8 regular season games and then faded them for the second half. Worked like a charm. I was only 5 tiers deep. I now prefer a 7 tier system, but it worked nonetheless.

I am not ready to pull the trigger just yet, but I believe the Rams are a team to watch for this. Sam Bradford is a talented QB. If they can strengthen the Offensive Line and give the guy some weapons that team could shock some people. Will it happen this year? I don't think so, but I think it is coming soon.

I used the same strategy with the Packers. It came out profitable, but the second half when I faded them was not nearly as successful. The pendulum did not swing like I expected it too. I chose the Packers simply because they are a strong team. I often find that strong teams are undervalued early in the season.

I am looking at the Patriots again this year. The schedule is relatively weak and they have made improvements to their defense. The offense is still top tier. I have a few question marks but not many. I still think the secondary will be weak, but an improved pass rush should help them out. Will Solder be able to step up? He has some big shoes to fill, but he is a big guy. How much longer can Vince Wilfork perform at a high level? I am looking for the Patriots to crush the Titans in the opener. I don't place bets this early and don't even know if there are lines available. If there are no major injuries and the line is -10 or less I am all over that game.

[Scorpion]

makes sense
your system is for all leagues or only NFL?

[jolmscheid]

I think your approach could work for all sports....however I think based on your strategy, it should not matter what team you play on / against. Based on your strategy, it sounds like you just should wait for a team to Win 5 in a row ATS and then fade them for a chase. The same on the other hand..if any team loses 5 in a row ATS, play on them for a chase...

Is that pretty much what you do?

[arpeggiomeister]

I believe it should work for all sports, but the NFL is what I am familiar with. I want to develop it in one sport before I branch out to others. The idea is simple enough, but the problem is that you have two teams that are in their own cycles. You need to have an idea how each team would perform against a theoretical "average" team. I then need to account for any imbalances that may exist; for example, if one team has a strong running game and the other team has a weak run defense, that is an imbalance. It is a matter of figuring out which pieces are important for forecasting, and which pieces I can filter out.

The number one important stat is how heavy is the public leaning on a particular team. Has it been for one game or several? If it is several then a reversal is inevitable. The reversal will form its own streak, smaller then the original, but still imbalanced. The Pats won 8 straight ATS in 2007. They lost ATS to the Colts by 1 point. I don't believe that game was the official reversal of the pendulum. I would call that game "at expectatio" because it was very close to the spread. The official reversal came when they played the Eagles at -24. They won the game by 3 points. The spread against the Ravens was -19. They nearly lost that game. They won by 3 points in at the very end. This pattern continued for the rest of the season.

The pendulum is very hard to track most of the time. It appears random. The 2007 Patriots give us the purest look at this bubble mentality of the public. The spread is just like the over-inflated stock prices of the dotcom craze, and comes craching down in the exact same manner. People are feeding money into the frenzy long after they should have gotten out.

I believe this behavior can literally be fed into a charting device such as candlesticks and technical analysis can be applied to sports the same way they do the stock market. It is all about the movement of money. I am not saying to ignore the teams, but ultimately it is the movement of public opinion that is the determining factor. It is public opinion that keeps the balance between favorites and underdogs very close to 50/50. I believe our focus should be on crowd psychology.

[arpeggiomeister]

I think your approach could work for all sports....however I think based on your strategy, it should not matter what team you play on / against. Based on your strategy, it sounds like you just should wait for a team to Win 5 in a row ATS and then fade them for a chase. The same on the other hand..if any team loses 5 in a row ATS, play on them for a chase...

Is that pretty much what you do?

That is one strategy, but you are leaving a lot of money on the table if you restrict yourself to just that strategy. There are only 17 weeks to the regular season.

What you have left out of the picture are the teams that are playing very close to public expectation. Take the Baltimore Ravens for last year. I was not on this team but it was perfect for a chaser. They would win a couple ATS then lose. The oscillation was very very tight. The biggest streak this team had was 3 losers ATS. They had 9 wins ATS. A 4 level system is all you needed to bring home the bacon with this team. 4 levels is way too risky in my opinion, but if you had the nuggets to do this than you would have netted roughly a 50% return.


This is not the only team you could have done this with. You could have done this with the Bills, the Raiders, the Chiefs, the Cardinals (5 deep), the 49ers, the Seahawks, the Panthers, the Bears (5 levels), the Bengals (5 levels), The Cowboys (5 levels), The Broncos (5 levels), the Packers, the Texans, the Jaguars (5 levels), the Dolphins, the Vikings (5 levels), the Patriots, the Saints, the Giants, the Eagles, and the Steelers. As you can see, I just named more than half the teams in the NFL that you could have successfully chased last year. I am not sure if this pattern holds up from year to year, but if it does you have better then 50% at just shooting a dart at the wall and picking a team you can just chase with virtually no handicapping research whatsoever. I do not recommend that, but the odds seem to be in your favor if you do.

I think it is better to try and ride a streak than it is to wait for it to break. The Saints went 9 straight ATS last year. If you waited for 5 games to pass and then tried to fade them you would have waited for 5 weeks, lost for 4 weeks and finally won a single unit in their least game. If you had rode the streak you would have won 9 straight and then lost one unit. You do not even need to bother to chase the last unit because you are sitting on a nice profit. It is a much better approach.

Ride the streak until you lose... ...then fade them. The idea behind the pendulum cycle is not to be contrarian or to go with public opinion. You are looking to see where the momentum is at and ride it. To track this momentum you must know how each team has performed ATS in their last several games. Those games are largely responsible for the current spread. The current spread is rarely accurate. If it were accurate then every game would be a push or damn close to it. Since we know that is the case less then 10% of the time then the spread is either overvalued or undervalued. The momentum of each team helps to give us a clue as to which it is.

Take a look at the Saints performance ATS for the end of the last year. They kept winning ATS but the spreads were not growing like they did with the Patriots. This is a strange anomaly. They should have been growing but they didn't. Somehow they flew under the radar. Why fight something like that? Ride it!!!

[jolmscheid]

Good points...so basically do you look at ATS streaks and when a team has won a couple in a row, do you chase it until a win? And then go the opposite? I am just having trouble understanding how you know when to ride a team and when to fade a team?

[arpeggiomeister]

Good points...so basically do you look at ATS streaks and when a team has won a couple in a row, do you chase it until a win? And then go the opposite? I am just having trouble understanding how you know when to ride a team and when to fade a team?

Okay brother, I know I am a bit like a mad scientist. lol I think maybe it will be easier to understand if we focus on the upcoming season. The number one thing I am looking for is "value". Is the line too high or too low?


I start by taking a stand. The opener this year is the Cowboys vs Giants. This is a rivalry match. These games are highly unpredictable and often result in shootouts. I would watch for the over on this game. If the over is less then 50 I would take it. This is the first game of our chase for the new season. (if you are uncomfortable with any game it is not a crime to pass on it. Nobody ever lost money by not betting.)

We have several choices for our second game in week 1. I believe that heavy favorites are actually undervalued early in the season. I have my eye on 3 teams to perform well ATS early this year. This is just a guess on my part. I have my eye on the Eagles, the Patriots, and the Packers.

Of the 3 I believe the Eagles are the sleeper of the group. The Eagles were supposed to be the dream team last year. They showed some sparks of greatness, but generally speaking they were a disappointment. The talent is still there which makes me believe they will be grossly undervalued. They are facing the Browns. If the public is sleeping this line will be less then -10. If they are expecting the same thing I am then this line should be over -15. This is my top match. The Eagles are an elite team and they are facing a weak opponent. They want to prove that last year was a fluke so they will beat up on the Browns without mercy.


The Patriots are facing the Titans. The Patriots have made a huge effort to improve their pass rush. Their secondary is still questionable but if they have a pass rush than it will help. Their offense is elite. The Titans are a middle of the road team at best. Expect some fireworks in this one.

The Packers are essentially the same powerhouse team they were last year. I need to check and see what they have done to improve their defense, but since their offense is so strong they would be insane if they did not focus on improving their D in the offseason. They are facing the 49ers. The 49ers are a team on the rise. This will not be an easy game, but the Packers have homefield.

We have 2 road favorites and a home favorite. My decision will sit with the spread that I feel is the most out of whack with what I think will happen. I will give a hypothetical:

PHI -14 vs CLE
NE -6 vs TEN
SF vs GB -4

I just pulled these spreads out of my butt, but if this was what they looked like I would take the Patriots. I expect the Patriots to beat the Titans by at least 2 touchdowns. If the line were -16 instead of -6 I would then take Green Bay. I expect this game to be close but the Packers have homefield.

I have taken a stand with these teams. I could be right or wrong. The next step is to wait for the results. If the Eagles beat the spread and the other two failed I would look to ride the Eagles for week 2. If they continue to beat the spread I will stay with them until the streak fails. The decision to fade them depends on how lopsided the spreads have become. The 2007 Patriots started their streak at -6 and the reversal occured at -24. The 2011 Saints were not nearly as lopsided. This means that any reversal would not be as extreme. You need to trust your gut at this point. If you feel strongly that a reversal is imminent than give chase, start fading them. If you are unsure, you may have better opportunities available.

I am still learning as i go so I do not have all the answers. My approach was very mechanical last year. I played 8 games on my chosen teams and then faded them for 8 games. It worked well with the Lions and 49ers, not so well with the Packers. After observing the streak with the Saints I decided it was better to ride a streak and wait for the reversal to happen than it was to try and anticipate it.

This is still not coming out clear. Let me pull up the stats and post them. Maybe that will better demonstrate what I am talking about. I will show you what I call "at expectation" and "abberant behavior". You can make money from both when chasing. I'll go yank some stats from goldsheet.com.

[arpeggiomeister]

Okay, this first example is what I call "at expectation". According to my Pendulum Cycle Theory the public will undervalue a team and they will beat the spread. The public has a knee jerk reaction and then overvalues a team for the next game and they lose ATS. When a team is at expectation this oscillation is very rapid. Any streak is very small. This behavior is pure gold for a chaser!!!!

These are the stats for the Ravens ATS last year. This is a very tight oscillation. The largest losing streak is 3. This means your chase system only needs to go 4 levels deep. You end with a win ATS in the AFC championship game against the Patriots. You have 9 wins, 8 losses, and one push.


Here is a 4 level deep chase system with $25 as a single unit. I have compensated for 11/10 odds.

1. $27.50
2. $58
3. $121.50
4. $255
   
   Excuse the font change, I cut and paste my bankroll guide and it changed the fonts.
   
   
   Your total bankroll comes out to $462. You have 9 wins, and most importantly, you end with a win. 9 x $25 comes to $225 for the season. That is a 48.7% ROI. No special thought went into this. You simply chased the Ravens from beginning to end. You literally could have done this with more than half the teams in the NFL last year. You would need 5 levels for some of them, but the main point is that you could have used a chase system to profit with zero handicapping! Not advisable, but it is a good starting point.
   
   
   

BALTIMORE (AT)
(SUR: 13-5 PSR: 9-8-1 O-U: 9-9)
S.11 PITT. W -1' 35-7 o37
S.18 Tenn. L -6 13-26 o38
S.25 St. Louis W -5 37-7 o42
O.02* NY JETS W -4' 34-17 o43
O.09 Bye
O.16 HOU. W -7 29-14 u44'
O.24* J'ville L -9' 7-12 u39
O.30 ARIZ. L -12 30-27 o43
N.06* Pittsburgh W +3' 23-20 o42
N.13 Seattle L -7 17-22 u40
N.20 CINCY N -7 31-24 o40'
N.24* S. FRAN. W -3' 16-6 u39'
D.04 Cleve. W -6' 24-10 u38
D.11 INDY L -16 24-10 u41'
D.18* S. Diego L -2' 14-34 o44'
D.24 CLEVE. L -12 20-14 u38
J.01 Cincy W -2' 24-16 o38
J.15 HOU. L -7' 20-13 u37
J.22 N. Eng. W +7 20-23 u49'

This is the at expectation example. Ultimately the majority of teams should function like this. This is how the spread keeps things at 50/50. There is nothing random about it. Onto the next example.

[arpeggiomeister]

This is the 2007 Patriots. It is the purest example of abberant behavior that I have seen. It ultimately led to my discovery of the Pendulum Cycle. I am sure I am not the first, but anyways.




NEW ENGLAND (FT)(SUR: 18-1 PSR: 10-9 O-U: 12-7)

S.09 NY Jets W -6' 38-14 o41
S.16* SD W -3' 38-14 o46
S.23 BUFF. W -16' 38-7 o41
O.01* Cincinnati W -7' 34-13 u53'
O.07 CLEVE. W -16 34-17 o48'
O.14 Dallas W -5' 48-27 o53
O.21 Miami W -16 49-28 o51
O.28 WASH. W -15' 52-7 o47'
N.04 Indy L -5 24-20 u56'
N.11 Bye
N.18* Buffalo W -15' 56-10 o46'
N.25* PHILA. L -24 31-28 o51
D.03* Baltimore L -19' 27-24 o48
D.09 PITT. W -10' 34-13 u47'
D.16 NY JETS L -21 20-10 u42'
D.23 MIAMI L -22 28-7 u45
D.29* NY Giants L -13 38-35 o46'
J.12* J'VILLE L -13' 31-20 o50
J.20 SAN DIEGO L -13' 21-12 u47
F.03 NY Giants L -12' 14-17 u54'(Super Bowl XLII at Glendale, Az)

Look at the first 8 games. You start with -6 and go up to -16. The first loss ATS comes at the hands of the Colts.The spread was -5. What do you think the spread would have been against the Bills in the next game had the Patriots beat the Colts by 10 points or more? They did not so the pendulum swings backwards a little. The spread is -15 against the Bills. The Pats crush them 56 to 10.

What happened next is what I call the crux event. This is when public opinion clearly over reacts. The Eagles are not a weak team like the Bills yet the spread goes to -24. The Eagles have homefield!!???!!! This spread is completely out of line. I would venture to say that the Eagles had a better than 80% chance of covering the spread. So does things return to normal after this game? No. The teams are starting to catch on to how to play the Patriots but public opinion is still expecting blowouts. The spreads slowly deflate as the underdogs start winning ATS.

This is a bubble phenomenon. The public pushed the spread too far. When it finally popped in the Eagles game they still kept shovelling money into a losing position.

DO you see what I see??? The oddsmakers are not geniuses with crystal balls. It is the public that keeps things 50/50. They over react to circumstances. When they are wrong things do not immediately snap back into balance. A streak opposite to the original occurs. This should continue until balance is eventually found. Balance is what I showed you with the Ravens.

Now let's look at the chase system applied to the Patriots. We will use the same 4 tier system, even though only 2 tiers were needed for this example... ...which is sick! My first theory was to ride the team for 8 games and then fade them for the next 8. I did not actually do this, my first attempt at it was last year with the Lions, Packers,and 49ers. I will show you the results of that next. The Patriots won the first 8 games. No chase is necassary. Game 9 you start fading them. This results in 6 wins and 2 losses for the second half of the season. That is 14 wins. You end with a win so any losses have been corrected by the chase system.
14 x $25 = $350. This is a 75.7% ROI.

How did I decide on 8 games and then fade the next 8? Look at the results of this season. The first loss ATS came in game 9. No genius here, I just took the model of this season and tried to apply it. Now let's see how that turned out.

[PAULYPOKER]

Marked...........

[a4u2fear]

interesting, may have to dive deeper into this.

[arpeggiomeister]

I chose the Packers to chase last year simply because they are a strong team and I thought they would be undervalued early in the season. I chose the Lions and the 49ers after talking with a friend I work with who thought they were due to break out. They had received a lot of high draft picks over the years and had assembled a lot of talent. The argument made sense to me so I thought I would try it. Chasing allows me some margin for error so I figured I would just abandon my position if it didn't work out. It turns out that these two teams did better then my number one choice. OOPS.


This was my first attempt. My plan was to ride the first 8 games with the team and fade them for the second half of the season. Here are the results.

Up first: Packers

GREEN BAY
(SUR: 15-2 PSR: 11-6 O-U: 12-5)
S.08* N. ORL. W -4' 42-34 o47'
S.18 Carolina L -10 30-23 o45'
S.25 Chicago W -4 27-17 u45'
O.02 DENVER W -12' 49-23 o46'
O.09* Atlanta W -6 25-14 u53'
O.16 STL W -14' 24-3 u47
O.23 Minn. L -9' 33-27 o47
O.30 Bye
N.06 S. Diego W -5' 45-38 o50'
N.14* MINN. W -13' 45-7 o49'
N.20 T. BAY L -14 35-26 o48'
N.24 Detroit W -5' 27-15 u55
D.04 Nyg L -6' 38-35 o53
D.11 OAK. W -11' 46-16 o51
D.18 K. City L -13 14-19 u46
D.25* CHI. W -12' 35-21 o42
J.01 DET. W +6' 45-41 o42
J.15 NYG L -7' 20-37 o53'


I only did the regular season. I will not chase into the postseason unless I ended with a loss. Even then I will abandon my position if I am happy with my profit. I was faced with a decision because Detroit and Green Bay were facing each other ata a time when I was supposed to be fading both of them. I went with Green Bay because they were the stronger team.

The season started out exactly the way I expected: heavy in the win ATS column. What I did not expect was that the pendulum did not over compensate. The second half of the season was very balanced between wins and losses ATS. I had 5 wins in the first half, and another 5 when I faded them.

What disturbed me was that my final win came by dumb luck. I chose to favor the Packers over the Lions. I was supposed to be fading them. I made $250 with the Packers but had this been a different opponent I would have faded the game. I still would have a profit, but two losses at the end of the season. My 8 game then fade idea needed refining.

Let's look at the Lions

DETROIT (AT)
(SUR: 10-7 PSR: 7-9-1 O-U: 11-6)
S.11 T. Bay W +1' 27-20 o43'
S.18 K. CITY W -8 48-3 o45
S.25 Minn.-OT N -3 26-23 o45
O.02 Dallas W +2 34-30 o46'
O.10* CHI. W -6 24-13 u47'
O.16 S. FRAN. L -4' 19-25 u46
O.23 ATLANTA L -4 16-23 u47'
O.30 Denver W -3 45-10 o42
N.06 Bye
N.13 Chicago L +2' 13-37 o43
N.20 CAR. W -7 49-35 o47'
N.24 G. BAY L +5' 15-27 u55
D.04 N. Orl. L +9 17-31 u54
D.11 MINN. L -10 34-28 o47
D.18 Oakland L -2 28-27 o47'
D.24 S. DIEGO W -2 38-10 u52'
J.01 G. Bay L -6' 41-45 o42
J.07* N. Orl. L +11 28-45 o59'

This team was picture perfect for my 8 game approach. Again there was a conflict of interest in week 6 the Lions faced the 49ers. I went with the Lions. Bad call, but the beauty of chasing is that it erases your bad calls. I had 11 wins total, but I credited 2 to the Green Bay chase, so I made $225 on the Lions.


Lets look at the 49ers



SAN FRANCISCO
(SUR: 14-4 PSR: 12-5-1 O-U: 8-10)
S.11 SEATTLE W -6 33-17 o38
S.18 DAL.-OT N +3 24-27 o41'
S.25 Cincinnati W +2 13-8 u39'
O.02 Phila. W +9' 24-23 o44
O.09 T. BAY W -2' 48-3 o41
O.16 Detroit W +4' 25-19 u46
O.23 Bye
O.30 CLEVE. W -9 20-10 u38'
N.06 Wash. W -4' 19-11 u37'
N.13 NYG W -3' 27-20 o42'
N.20 ARIZ. W -10 23-7 u40'
N.24* Baltimore L +3' 6-16 u39'
D.04 STL W -13' 26-0 u38
D.11 Arizona L -3' 19-21 o39'
D.19* PITT. W -2' 20-3 u37
D.24 Seattle L -2' 19-17 u37'
J.01 St. Louis L -12' 34-27 o35
J.14 N. ORL. w +3' 36-32 o47
J.22 NYG(OT) L -2' 17-20 u42

Again, the first half was very heavy with wins. Out of 8 games you had 7 wins and a push... ...accept I was a dumbass and went with Detroit, so I had 6 wins a push and a loss. This is exactly the model I was looking for. I started fading them after 8 games. I had a couple losses, but then the pendulum made its swing. I racked up 4 more wins by the end of the season. I did not go into the postseason. The 49ers brought in $250.

The approach worked well for me, but Green bay did not fit neatly into the pattern I was looking for. New Orleans was an abberation as well. After backtesting I decided to make some changes in my approach. I have upped my system from 5 tiers to 7. This is super expensive and the ROI is not very attractive to most people... ...roughly 10 to 15% for a successful season.

The second change is an experiment I have been backtesting that has been wildly successful so far. I choose a 1:00 sunday game, the 8:00 Sunday game, and the Monday night. For purposes of backtesting I simply take the first sunday game listed on NFL.com. This ensures complete randomness. I then choose all favorites, or all underdogs. The idea is that the Pendulum Cycle will keep these games tight enough to chase with very little to no thought. I have backtested 5 seasons so far and I have made it to tier 7 only once.

I am not sure that I am ready to back this idea with real money yet. If I screw up I will be out $4,477. There is refining to be done, but the quest is to discover a system that can be applied with minimal research. I do not mind doing a few hours per week, but the amount of research it takes to maintain a 57% win rate or better like the pros is far beyond anything I am willing or able to commit to.

With chasing my win percentage can remain right at 50% and I make a good profit as long as a losong streak does not wipe me out. The Pendulum Cycle is the key to avoiding that streak.

[arpeggiomeister]

interesting, may have to dive deeper into this.

If you are interested I'll keep you updated as I dive deeper into this. I haven't been slammed by the chase haters yet, so I'll keep posting. If they come out I will take this thing underground. I am hoping to find enough people that are interested to discuss and expand the idea.

This idea is in it's infancy. I strongly believe I am onto something. The logic is simple and easy to follow... ...even if I'm not. lol It can be taken to a higher level, and that is what I hope to accomplish by sharing this with you guys. There are a lot of really sharp people on this site.

[jolmscheid]

I like your theory...I just am a little leary about trying to pick teams that one "thinks" is going to do well....

So let's say you pick a few teams to tail ATS right out of the gate...if they lose right away, do you still chase them until they cover, or do you look for a different team?

I think you are really on to something here...

[arpeggiomeister]

I like your theory...I just am a little leary about trying to pick teams that one "thinks" is going to do well....

So let's say you pick a few teams to tail ATS right out of the gate...if they lose right away, do you still chase them until they cover, or do you look for a different team?

I think you are really on to something here...

It depends largely on how I feel about the team. I am looking to tail the Patriots, the Eagles, and the Packers in the upcoming season. If they lose the first game I will reassess how I feel about them. I would most likely chase them into a second or even a third game. If you lose a third game STOP!!!!

Something is not working and you will dig yourself into a hole if you continue. There is no such thing as a "Lock", but at this point you will be looking for a game that you think of as a lock to get you out of the hole.

I know exactly where you are coming from. Putting your trust into a single team is contrary to everything we have ever learned about "sharp betting". However, to understand where a team is at in the Pendulum Cycle you must follow them. Having real money on them intensifies your awareness.

I would not abandon your arsenal of handicapping tools, but rather combine them with this idea.

[arpeggiomeister]

The latest study has been a random experiment. I call it "Darts at the Wall". I am not recommending actually betting in this manner, but the idea is to see if public opinion will keep the teams in line enough for a chase system to work effectively at random.

My hypothesis is the pendulum action between favorites and underdogs should be tight enough to allow a chase system to work. The results remain close to 50/50. It is the losing streaks that will make or break the system. A 50% win rate is plenty to make a profit as long as there is not a losing streak of 7+ in a row. If the games are truly random then this experiment should eventually fail with enough trials. So far my success rate is 100%. I had one season where I made it to the 7th tier. I want to go further with this study, but it is extremely time consuming.

I have chosen the games in a manner that would be completely feasible for a chase system. I have an early Sunday game, the late Sunday game, and the Monday Night game. I took the first game listed on NFL.com.

I have done 5 seasons of these backtests on both the favorites and the underdogs. The results have convinced me that this is worth checking out.

Darts At the Wall 7

Here is the 2011 season. This is a 7 level chase system. In order to keep things random I chose the first Sunday game on the schedule, the last Sunday game, and the Monday game. This keeps the results real because you would have had the actual time to execute this in real life. I exclude Thursday night games and Saturdays. This gives us 50 games. I have bet the favorite in each game. I believe these experiments are conclusive evidence of the validity of the chasing strategy. It is impossible to fake or “cherry pick the results”.
The 7 level chase looks like this:

1. $27.50
2. $58
3. $121.50
4. $255
5. $535
6. $1,123
7. $2,357

total cost $4,477

Week 1
PIT 7 vs BAL (-1) 35 win
DAL 24 vs NYJ (-6) 27 loss
NE (-7) 38 vs MIA 24 win

Week 2
KC 3 vs DET (-8) 48 win
PHI (-2) 31 vs ATL 35 loss
STL16 vs NYG (-6) 28 win



Week 3
JAC 10 vs CAR (-3) 16 win
PIT (-10) 23 vs IND 20 loss
WAS 16 vs DAL (-3) 18 loss

Week 4
BUF (-3) 20 vs CIN 23 loss
NYJ 17 vs BAL (-4) 34 win
IND 17 vs TB (-10) 24 loss

Week 5
TEN 17 vs PIT (-3) 38 win
GB (-6) 25 vs ATL 14 win
CHI 13 vs DET (-6) 34 win

Week 6
BUF 24 vs NYG (-3) 27 loss
MIN 10 vs CHI (-2) 39 win
MIA 6 vs NYJ (-7) 24 win

Week 7
DEN 18 vs MIA (-1) 15 loss
IND 7 vs NO (-13) 62 win
BAL (-9) 7 vs JAC 12 loss

Week 8
MIA 17 vs NYG (-9) 20 loss
DAL 7 vs PHI (-3) 34 win
SD (-3) 20 vs KC 23 loss

Week 9
NYJ 27 vs BUF (-2) 11 loss
BAL 23 vs PIT (-3) 20 loss
CHI 30 vs PHI (-8) 24 loss

Week 10
BUF 7 vs DAL (-5) 44 win
NE 37 vs NYJ (-2) 16 loss
MIN 7 vs GB (-13) 45 win

Week 11
OAK 27 vs MIN (-2) 21 loss
PHI 17 vs NYG (-5) 10 loss
KC 3 vs NE (-16) 34 win

Week 12
MIN 14 vs ATL (-9) 24 win
PIT (-10) 13 vs KC 9 loss
NYG 24 vs NO (-7) 49 win

Week 13
NYJ (-3) 34 vs WAS 19 win
DET 17 vs NO (-9) 31 win
SD (-3) 38 vs JAC 14 win

Week 14
NE (-7.5) 34 vs WAS 27 loss
NYG 37 vs DAL (-4) 34 loss
STL (-3) 13 vs SEA 30 loss

Week 15
TEN (-6) 13 vs IND 27 loss
BAL (-2) 14 vs SD 34 loss
PIT 3 vs SF (-2) 20 win




Week 16
DEN (-3) 14 vs BUF 40 loss
PHI 20 vs DAL (pk) 7 loss PK chose the home team
ATL 16 vs NO (-7) 45 win

Week 17
NYJ 17 vs MIA (-2) 19 push
DAL 14 vs NYG (-3) 31 win

The Results
We have 24 wins, 1 push, and 25 losses. We end on a win so we do not have to subtract any losses from our winnings. The largest losing streak is 5. $25 x 24 = $600. We have a return of 13.4% on a 7 tier chase. We could have managed this season on a 6 tier chase for a return of 28.3%.
If we switch to underdogs we have 25 wins, 1 push, and 24, losses. The longest losing streak was 4. We have two losses at the end of the season so we must subtract $85.50 from our profits. $25 x 25 = $625.$625 - $85.5 = $539.50. We would have a return of 12% for the season on the 7 tier system. We could have managed on a 5 tier system for a return of 54.1%

[arpeggiomeister]

the cut and paste came out ugly, let me see if I can edit it so it looks better... ...okay, that's better.

[arpeggiomeister]

Notice how close to 50/50 the split is between favorites and underdogs. 24 wins, 25 losses, and one push. This is the point spread doing exactly what it was designed to do.

What is important to us is how the point spread manages to keep this split so close. It is the public over-reacting to game results. The very mechanism designed to keep things random and prevent us from having an edge can be exploited with a deep enough chase system. The point spread system is tailor made for chasing.

These games were chosen at random. In order to refine the system I must develop a way of knowing in advance when a team is overvalued. I am working on devolping such a model. I have started with a system for creating your own point spreads designed by Dan Gordon, author of "Beat the Sports Books". I've implemented his letter power rankings. I then created a crude power ranking of my own to detect imbalances. I have rated each quarterback, over-all offense, running game, passing game, over-all defense, run defense, pass defense, interceptions/turn-overs, and points allowed. There is more stuff I could include, like sacks, and special teams stats, but this gives me a basic idea.

I have rated each category with a letter. A is the best, and D is the worst. I can quickly reference this to see a potential matchup problem. If a secondary is weak, and the opponent has a strong passing game this is a very important clue on how a game might turn out. I may use this to bet the spread, or the over/under.

By creating my own point spreads and then searching for imbalances I believe I should be able to spot when the value of a game is out of whack. This is a work in progress. My spreads have often been out of whack with Vegas which tells me I have a lot of work to do. Even if my lines are trash, the process that goes into creating them allows me to form an opinion about the match that is about to take place. That is really what I am after anyways.

The final piece of the puzzle will be to look at the recent history of both teams relative to the spread. Have they been beating the spread? If so by how much? If they have been losing ATS then by how much? If they are close to the spread then they are performing at expectation and the game could go either way. If they are out of line with the spread by more then 10 points and there is a streak of these results then a reversal is likely.

That is as far as I have gotten with this. My ultimate goal is to create a charting device and apply technical analysis just like trading a stock. I'm not sure if I can pull it off, but the idea is very intriguing.

[Scorpion]

hey pal, look at SA pointspread results after 1/29
when would you start betting against SA?

http://www.statfox.com/nba/nbateam.a...son=2012&log=1

[arpeggiomeister]

hey pal, look at SA pointspread results after 1/29
when would you start betting against SA?

http://www.statfox.com/nba/nbateam.a...son=2012&log=1

The only sport I have ever seriously looked into is the NFL. I am a little out of my element so bare with me.

Here is what I see. If you were to chase the Spurs as favorites for the entire season you would have made a killing. You have three really large streaks. The one starting on 1/29 for 8 wins ATS, another streak of 5 starting at 3/25, and finish the season with a huge streak of 10.

The thing that really stands out to me is the performance ATS after the streak breaks. You are not seeing a smaller streak in the opposite direction. It returns to a balanced position. Look at what happens starting on 2/21. You could have played checkers with the results. Loss, win, loss, win, loss, win, etc. That is not a reversal. A reversal would be a streak of losses, but it doesn't happen.

During these streaks the spread is not being blown out. At no point did I see the spread beat by 20+ points. That may account for why there is no sharp reversal.

I am afraid I would have more questions than answers for you at this point. Based solely on what I see here I would not fade them period. I would wait for a streak of 3 losses to develop before I would begin fading them. This happens early in the season. Using that theory you would go into the stretch of 8 on 2/29 fading them. After 3 wins in a row you then pick them to win. No streak of 3 losses occurs after this so you would remain on the Spurs for the rest of the season. Would this work consistently? I would have to backtest it to see. It does work for this particular circumstance.

How common are these streaks in the NBA? Do you often see a streak of 10+, winning or losing? What are the results after such a streak? Is there an opposite streak that occurs or a checkered pattern like we see here. The only way to know this is to backtest all the teams for several years to see the patterns that occur.

The Spurs performance ATS is amazing. 43-19-4. If you take out the 4 pushes than the win rate is almost 70%. If you can maintain a win rate that phenomenal you are better off to straight bet 5% of your bankroll then to try and chase. Hindsight is always 20/20. That is extremely lopsided.

What I find scary about this is the size of the streak at the end. If you find yourself on the wrong side of a streak that big while trying to chase you are screwed!!!! I did an experimental chase in the MLB that was 10 levels deep... ...not with real money mind you. with just a $5 unit this monster would cost over $10,000. The Spur's 43 wins would net $215. 10 levels is simply not practical. That would be around a 2% ROI for the season, and this is much heavier in the win column than you can expect normally.

Summary:

I would only reverse my position after losing 3 bets in a row. That is based strictly on what I see here. I'm not sure that if that is practical. Considering the size of the streaks it could be a death sentence under different circumstances. I would need to backtest to see how well the chase holds up under multiple trials.

I will look at a few more teams to see what kind of patterns occur.

[arpeggiomeister]

Using a 3 game streak to detect a reversal appears to be a death sentence. I only back tested 2 teams and already had a system failure. You need a way to break the streak.

After a losing streak of 3 you might switch to a different team, or just sit it out until things return to normal. I'm sorry I don't have a better answer for you, but it appears that streaks of 7+ are commonplace in the NBA. In order for a chase system to work you must be able to break a losing streak. That will take a lot of thought and research.

[arpeggiomeister]

Nba 2011 chase

I have written this in response to Scorpions inquiry on the Spurs. For this study I have used a 7 tier chase system, $25 as a single unit. I have compensated for 11/10 odds so the first bet must be $27.50 to win $25.

Since this is a back test any team with a SU record better than .500 I tailed for the entire season. I faded any team with a record of less than .500. The Pheonix Suns landed right at .500 so I calculated for both tailing them and fading them.

When a chasing system does not end with a win it is necessary to subtract the losses from any profits made. I have abbreviated losses incurred at the end of the season as “losses eos”. The chase system is so large that this caused a system failure despite not losing 7 times in a row. 1 win at the end would have turned this loser into a very profitable season.

I have posted the profit next to the teams. I have noted the teams that I faded with an "F".





Successful Chases

• Atlanta Hawks - $900
• Brooklyn Nets - $238 (4 losses eos)
• Charlotte Bobcats – F - $1,075
• Chicago Bulls - $950
• Cleveland Cavaliers – F $875
• Dallas Mavericks – $693 (3 losses eos)
• Denver Nuggets – $950
• Detroit Pistons – F - $739.50 (2 losses eos)
• Golden State Warriors – F - $750
• Indiana Pacers - $593
• LA Clippers - $363 (4 losses eos)
• Memphis Grizzlies - $263 (4 losses eos)
• Miami Heat - $714.50 (2 losses eos)
• Minnesota Timberwolves – F - $850
• NY Knicks - $900
• OK City Thunder - $668 (3 losses eos)
• Orlando Magic - $825
• Philadelphia 76ers - $850
• *Pheonix Suns - $643 (3 losses eos) – F - $800
• Portland Trailblazers - F - $822.50 (1 loss eos)
• San Antonio Spurs - $1,075
• Utah Jazz - $822.50

Out of 30 teams in the NBA I encountered 8 system failures. I noted the beginning of the losing streaks with the date, and the size of the streak. It is obvious that streaks are much larger in the NBA then in the NFL. I suspect it is due to more games, less time between games, and most importantly, a smaller general margin by which spreads are beat. Beating the spread by 20+ points is common in the NFL, but not so common from what I've seen in this study on the NBA.


System Failures

• Boston Celtics - 2/15 – 7
• Houston Rockets 2/28 – 8, and 4/11 - 8
• LA Lakers 3/23 - 7
• Milwaukee Bucks 3/05 - 8
• New Orleans Hornets 2/13 - 7
• Sacramento Kings – F 1/28 - 7
• Toronto Raptors – F 2/22 - 7
• Washington Wizards – F $875 6 losses eos $2,120 loss -$875 winnings = $1,245 loss for season

Out of the 8 teams with system failures it is interesting to note that 4 of them were the bottom of the barrel: the Kings, Wizards, Raptors, and Hornets. Two teams were in the middle of the pack: Bucks and Rockets. Two teams were dominant: Lakers and Celtics


Gland Martingale (fading a streak)


The largest streak I saw was 10 with the Spurs at the end of the season. I would avoid fading this late just in case the season ends before your reversal. If you see a streak of 6 or greater I think you can safely fade it with a chase that is at least 5 tiers deep.


Multiple Teams


I noticed that there were several teams with a very tight win/loss pattern ATS. If you find yourself in a losing streak of 3 stop betting. Abandon the team you are currently on and pick a team that is in one of these tight patterns. You can profit with less then 50% winners as long as you can break the losing streaks.


Of course there is a danger that the new team you pick could go into a skid as well but I think your chances are better if you can split it up instead of trying to gut it out with one team.


You could also try the Gland Martingale but if you have lost 3 bets then you only have 4 left to get you out of the skid.


Bubble Patterns


I did see the bubble pattern in several of the “system failure teams”. It is not as pronounced as the NFL though. The margin between the actual score and the spread is much more shallow which causes the swings to be more shallow. A streak of 8 wins should be followed by a streak of 5 or 6 losses. The margins are so shallow that it can return to a natural balance instead of over correcting like in the NFL. I saw both in this study. The Celtics had a classic bubble pattern. The Spurs are an anomaly.


I think the Pendulum Cycle Theory still applies but the swings are more shallow and longer. I imagine this would be the case with the MLB as well. I can't say for sure unless I dive into it. I prefer to stay focused on the NFL for now.

[arpeggiomeister]

I tapped my arsenal of Martingale variations and found something that sustains well for the NBA. It did not completely solve the system failures, but prevented completely blowing up your bankroll.

Instead of doubling every time you lose you raise the bet by one unit ($27.50 to win $25). You continue this until you have made up your losses +1 unit. It is slower than the Martingale, but it can sustain losing streaks that are much larger. If you calculate an exit point, say a 40% ROI, this increases the success rate exponentially. You can also have smaller bankroll. $1,000 is sufficient for most of the scenarios I have seen.

I may post a thread on Martingale variations. Each variation has advantages and disadvantages.