Dollars2Donuts Daily NBA, NHL and NFL wagers

[Dollars2Donuts]

What is your thoughts on Monday Night football?

I would prefer more in depth questions if you don't mind....as follows:

The Saints have been looking better the last couple of weeks and their run DF has improved considerably of late. To compete in this game I believe that the Saints will need to score 24+ points and to win they will likely need 27+.

People are talking about the weather here, but frankly it isn't cold out right now (I live two hours from Seattle) and there is not a lot of wind and there is not a cloud in the sky right now.

With two DBs out, Seattle is going to be a little weaker than normal. I think the bigger thing to watch will be how well the Saints can run the ball....Seattle will be briniging extra help back to stifle Brees and I think this will open up the game for Pierre Thomas and the short passing game for Sproles and Graham.

Now, would I bet the ML here? Not a chance....I still like Seattle to win here 60++% of the time....but those 6 points, coupled with Brees' abilities, the weather, Seattle's injuries.....it is just too hard to refuse.

ALSO....if you just want to bet the total you will want to be on the over. The reason I am not betting the over, is that in this game the result and the total will much be the same. If Seattle covers, there is a good chance the game goes under....and if N.O. can win with the +6 the game is likely going to be over....I would bet one or the other here, but not both.

GL tonight everyone.

D2D

[frugalgambler]

Nice write up on the MNF, D2D. If you think that the over and NOR covering are strongly correlated would not it make sense to parlay them as well ? GL on your plays, as always.

[Dollars2Donuts]

Nice write up on the MNF, D2D. If you think that the over and NOR covering are strongly correlated would not it make sense to parlay them as well ? GL on your plays, as always.

I don't parlay. Statistically it has never made any sense to me. I bet enough games and am not interested in bringing variance back into play and more than it already is. Parlays just make for bigger swings....and I am not a fan of swings.

I understand that you are saying that it makes sense in this particular case, but as we all probably know, when i make a wager I am not saying 'this is going to happen', I am saying 'this is going to happen more than 52.5% of the time'. The size of my bet is an indication to you what percentage I believe the edge to be. IE, you will see me bet between $50 and $400, $50 being a small edge and $400 being an edge that I may see once every ten days.

[High3rEl3m3nt]

There's a reason that any book worth its weight, does not allow correlated parlays. If you have a low tier book that allows you to place them, prepare to get the boot or worse.

[frugalgambler]

Have to disagree with you, higherelement: pretty much all books allow ATS and game-total NBA/NFL parlays unless the spread is close to 30 and the total is set at ~50, i.e. unless they are obviously correlated. I am not a big fan of parlays myself, but I occasionally dabble. I did parlay NOR +6.5 and over for 0.2 units, based on the D2D's write up. Let's see how it goes.

[tto827]

There's a reason that any book worth its weight, does not allow correlated parlays. If you have a low tier book that allows you to place them, prepare to get the boot or worse.

This play would not be correlated by a standard books definition. There may be value parlaying the side/total due to correlation even if a book allows it. It's just that you truly need to understand value and have a discernible edge, and people who can do that surely aren't a dime a dozen.

[2178ice]

Good to see you back D2D! BOL tonight Brotha

[Dollars2Donuts]

This play would not be correlated by a standard books definition. There may be value parlaying the side/total due to correlation even if a book allows it. It's just that you truly need to understand value and have a discernible edge, and people who can do that surely aren't a dime a dozen.

Yep, those guys are rare as shit!

Good to see you back D2D! BOL tonight Brotha

Good to be back my friend.

[Dollars2Donuts]

Adding:

Caught another half point and the more and more I think the more I like this play. That is usually a recipe for disaster....so be warned!

213986708-1

12/2/13 8:16pm

$103.00

$100.00

Pending

12/2/13 8:40pm Reduced Football 449 New Orleans Saints +6½ -103* <small>vs</small> Seattle Seahawks

[fitguy67]

I can see an argument against including pushes, but at the same time, I challenge your idea that they are statistically insignificant. In reality, winning and losing percentages are numbers that are touted as being more important than they really are--unless you strictly flatbet at -110 and the winning percentage tends to communicate the unit amounts won or lost.

A push is as real of an outcome as a loss or win, especially when betting football and playing 3 or 7. In fact, the potential for a push is the reason that many people would advise you to buy off 3.5 or 7.5. In short, a winning percentage represents your frequency of winning, given the the total outcomes, which includes pushes. If someone were to ask, "What is D2D's winning percentage? Losing percentage? or push percentage?" each answer relies on factoring in the occurence of the others.

HE and D2D,

Consider the following W-L-P record: 67-59-7

Ask anybody seriously involved with sports-betting to give you the single-best figure of THE Win% (aka. THE hit-rate, or THE strike-rate) of the above record, for performance-evaluation purposes, and you will get 53.17% = 67 / (67 + 59) = W / (W + L) as the answer almost unanimously

seldom would anyone in the industry give you 50.37% = (67 + 59 + 7) = W / (W + L + P) as that would never be called THE Win% unmodified...if 50.37% were quoted at all it would definitely be clearly-modified in some way as the "pushes-included" version of the Win%".

HE, It's interesting that i should find this in D2D's thread today...i actually noticed it last night, and was too tired to fly off an email then to you, HE...telling yout that I thought you had INADVERTENTLY quoted the far-less-useful and thus far-less-quoted figure...is it a Win% you're displaying there?...yes...and it has it's place in some considerations...but for your task at hand, the FAR BETTER version to use is that which answers the key question "of plays that have an effect on my bankroll (ie. of non-pushed plays) what % are Wins, according to the track-record? "...

I really hope you ammend your presentation of the Win% to reflect the orthodox "pushes ignored" formulation (W / W + L)...no harm in retaining the figure you presently feature...but you should clearly modify it with "pushes ignored" in parentheses...personally, i would just change the formula (by removing the pushes from the formula) to bring it into line with standard convention...anyone really wanting to know what % of "all plays, including the pushed ones" can easily figure it out...

If you found out that a tout were including "both wins AND pushes" in his "success rate" , you'd go ballistic on him...
but by the formulation you're using now, you're making exactly the same mistake, this time unfairly to the capper's detriment...by, in effect, counting "both losses AND pushes" as part of his failures (ie. 100% -whatever win% is displayed)

[High3rEl3m3nt]

I appreciate your thoughts and taking the time to write this...maybe I should eliminate the pushes, which is not that hard.

[tto827]

Fitguy is arguably the best poster around anywhere nowadays

D2D and Higher up there as well... this thread's got some serious potential this go around

[High3rEl3m3nt]

I am seeing that my view of win % is not fair to what m

[Dollars2Donuts]

HE and D2D,

As a matter of convention, given the following W-L-P record: 67-59-7

N= number of effective (literally "having an effect") plays
N*=number of plays, pushes included (includes all plays: effective=W,L...and ineffective=P)

so N= 126 = 67 + 59 (while N* = 133 = 126 + 7)

Quite frankly, for the purpose of generating statistics for performance, pushes are FAR less "indicative" of it than the Wins & Losses. As a result, the most useful performance statistics are based on the "pushes excluded" or "effective plays only" versions of formulas...those that use N (and not N*) . (There is a place, however, for comparing some "pushes included" formulas with their "effective plays only" counterparts...but the latter (pushes ignored) are far more generally quoted, understood and used (and definitely the forms to be assumed, should "pushes included" not be specifically stated, or indicated, such as with an asterisk or subscript attached with the variable's name.)

Thus, ask almost anybody involved with sports-betting what THE Win% (aka. THE hit-rate, or THE strike-rate), of the above record is and you will get 53.17% = 67 / (67 + 59) = W / (W + L) = W / N as the answer...

NOT 50.37% = (67 + 59 + 7) = W / (W + L + P) = W / N.p as that would never be called THE Win% unmodified...if 50.37% were quoted at all it would definitely be clearly-modified in some way as the "pushes-included" version of the Win%".

HE, It's interesting that i should find this in D2D's thread today...i actually noticed it last night, and was too tired to fly off an email then to you, HE...telling yout that I thought you had INADVERTENTLY quoted the far-less-useful and thus far-less-quoted figure...is it a Win% you're displaying there?...yes...and it has it's place in some considerations...but for your task at hand, the FAR BETTER version to use is that which answers the key question "of plays that have an effect on my bankroll (ie. of non-pushed plays) what % are Wins, according to the track-record? "...

I really hope you ammend your presentation of the Win% to reflect the orthodox "pushes ignored" formulation (W / W + L)...no harm in retaining the figure you presently feature...but you should clearly modify it with "pushes ignored" in parentheses...personally, i would just change the formula (by removing the P from the denominator) to bring it into line with standard convention...anyone really wanting to know what % of "all plays, including the pushed ones" are likely to win can easily figure it out...

If you found out that a tout were including "both wins AND pushes" in his "success rate" , you'd go ballistic on him...

but by the formulation you're using now, you're making exactly the same mistake, this time unfairly to the capper's detriment...by, in effect, counting "both losses AND pushes" as part of his failures (ie. 100% -whatever win% is displayed)

I had no idea anyone would support my simplistic argument...but I certainly am impressed by not only your support, but by the in depth answer that you provided. I try not to speak in such technical terms in public forums....but it was very well done.

I appreciate your thoughts and taking the time to write this...maybe I should eliminate the pushes, which is not that hard.

I would appreciate it, but frankly this is your call.....

Fitguy is arguably the best poster around anywhere nowadays

D2D and Higher up there as well... this thread's got some serious potential this go around

I agree tto, for posters that are not posting picks, just commenting on the hobby in general....FitGuy is absolutely the #1 man on the board. Frankly I am just happy to be included in the conversation.

[High3rEl3m3nt]

I am seeing that my view of win % needs to reflect how most people interpret it...D2D, I am wrong and will adjust it tonight. Sorry.

[Dollars2Donuts]

I am seeing that my view of win % needs to reflect how most people interpret it...D2D, I am wrong and will adjust it tonight. Sorry.

Apologize one more time and you are fired!

[thunderous]

I had no idea anyone would support my simplistic argument...but I certainly am impressed by not only your support, but by the in depth answer that you provided. I try not to speak in such technical terms in public forums....but it was very well done.

I would appreciate it, but frankly this is your call.....

I agree tto, for posters that are not posting picks, just commenting on the hobby in general....FitGuy is absolutely the #1 man on the board. Frankly I am just happy to be included in the conversation.

Second that

[Coreos]

Fitguy is arguably the best poster around anywhere nowadays

D2D and Higher up there as well... this thread's got some serious potential this go around

Good to see some of the regulars from the last thread.

[Dollars2Donuts]

Good to see some of the regulars from the last thread.

No doubt...if we could recreate that, plus add a few other guys that never got into it before....it could work out pretty well for the rest of the winter.

[fitguy67]

I am seeing that my view of win % needs to reflect how most people interpret it...D2D, I am wrong and will adjust it tonight. Sorry.

HE, to be honest, i've been up and down like a yoyo on this "how to handle pushes" issue...and finally came to terms that they should be ignored (ie. eliminated) from almost all indicators that attempt to guage performance BUT that each and every pushed play should contribute to some key cumulative-totals. Why, because sooner or later, you'll wish you had the figures--eg. useful to know when deciding to take a bonus or not if you know your true $-rollover per time-period of ALL plays=W,L, or P...as most books count pushed plays toward rollover.

What I've settled on is to now keep running totals for every non-pushed play (#W,#L,/$-Risked, $-Targeted, $-Netted/$-Won, $-Lost)...with these 7 primary figures, ALL important performance indicators...such as ROI, avg-Odds, avg$Win, avg$Loss, avg$/play are quickly derivable...AND just in case, for all pushed plays i keep a few key tallies (#P, $-Risked, and $-Targeted...as the other figures are all trivial for pushes).

My basic "units (or $) Risked" and "units (or $) Netted" figs are all push-ignored...but many would include pushed units (or $) into the denominators of their ROI formulations (unfortunately and unfairly for the winning capper, imo)...but by having the Risked-but-pushed figure handy i can instantly convert between the two versions...ideally, if you aren't counting the pushes in Win% calculations, you shouldn't count their $-risked either...but i've noticed that the denominator of many ROI calculations is inflated with pushed-$/-units

[fitguy67]

No doubt...if we could recreate that, plus add a few other guys that never got into it before....it could work out pretty well for the rest of the winter.

Guyz...it's so hard to get a thread with the right kind of positive vibe...unfortunately that tends to eventually attract the wrong kind of negative shit-disturber...don't get me wrong...i'm not talking about disagreement about upcoming bets and betting do's & don'ts etc...i'm talking about someone who enters a thread with the sole intent of rattling cages, not to discuss anything...common name is troll..i call them SOORs = Sufferers of "Optical Rectitis" (that being a shitty outlook on everything)...or TWCDR (Twats With Chronic Diaper Rash)

anyhow, i was thinking if there's a protocol/culture/system/whatever that once in place could act as a troll-repellant...thot it'd be good to bring this up now, while free of infestation...anyhow, i outlined it in another thread (2dabanker's NFL)...and as long as most of the thread's alpha-contributors plug in...i think it could be an excellent approach to dealing with someone who wants only to disrupt the intelligent interactive thing we got going here...ok, here's the suggestion, cut-and-pasted directly from elsewhere

regarding your thread's persistent "pest control" issue...the "ignore" feature is brilliant but--like the "mute" button on a remote--easy to forget about...BUT, you'll have to get tough tho' with those who quote the shyte you're trying to ignore...maybe a "three strikes and you're also ignored" kinda' system...eventually build up a nice "neighbourhood watch" style of culture in here where newcomers are corrected the first time they innocently pollute the thread with the recycled trash from one of the officially-shunned pests...and seriously warned if it should ever happen again...

the idea is simple...it should be very hard to get officially shunned...it should require an amazing level of stubbornness and dedication to negativity ("dai-homo-sausage" springs to mind as the best current example...but they abound)...but once D2D and the thread's regulars decide someone has no redeeming value...they officially become non-entities as far as the thread is concerned...meaning no-one interacts directly with them, or even refers to them by name, or quotes them (talking ABOUT the vermin is 100% ok, but not TO or WITH them)...inadvertent first-time violators of the shunning-order are wised up and warned that they'll be next if they don't respect the wishes of the OP and the thread's citizens
_________
whaddya' guyz think...

[Enjoi]

Fitguy, that is a brilliant idea! I really hope you can see the advantages in keeping this thread civilised, D2D.

[pacocn]

Fitt, as usual practical and smart i compare this to bringing your own
avocado to subway (byoats) it just makes cents.

[fitguy67]

speaking of that rarest of sbr-commodities, civilized threads, and who should show up but the CEO of the smoothest-flowing (and money-making) threads...up 50 units in MLB this past year (the old fashioned hard way...one unit at time)

http://forum.sbrforum.com/baseball-betting/2269918-2013-mlb-thread-p188.html

currently
NFL http://forum.sbrforum.com/nfl-bettin...3-14-a-p3.html
NBA http://forum.sbrforum.com/nba-basket...3-14-a-p6.html

that "culture" which intuitively protects itself from external threats is alive and well in all of Paco's threads...all centred around the OP and a good gang of regulars...same thing i posted about above, and the raw materials are all in place here as well

good threads at SBR are like good friends in real life...hard to find, but definitely worth the effort to maintain...and always room for one more

[Smoke]

Welcome back donut

Many sleepless nights thinking about you...no homo

Cliff notes so far?

[alamo]

Nice to see you posting again D2D. Good to hear all well with you.

[Dollars2Donuts]

Welcome back donut

Many sleepless nights thinking about you...no homo

Cliff notes so far?

Lol, well maybe a little homo, no? 😉

Brief synopsis, been back a week, running around 68% and up a couple of G's.

I will become a ghost again around here this year when the NBA and NHL disappear.....

Good to be back and good to see you buddy!

D2D

[Dollars2Donuts]

Nice to see you posting again D2D. Good to hear all well with you.

Good to be back bud. Hopefully the games have been treating you well. 😎

[Dollars2Donuts]

Doing this from my phone so I am hoping it looks ok. Today's wagers:

214097739-1 12/3/13 1:06pm $102.00 $100.00 Pending 12/3/13 7:05pm NHL Hockey 53 Pittsburgh Penguins (1st 60 min) -½ -102* vs New York Islanders (1st 60 min)
214097739-2 12/3/13 1:06pm $100.00 $101.00 Pending 12/3/13 7:05pm NHL Hockey 56 Washington Capitals (1st 60 min) -½ +101* vs Carolina Hurricanes (1st 60 min)
214097684-1 12/3/13 1:06pm $50.00 $50.00 Pending 12/3/13 7:05pm Reduced Hockey 58 Columbus Blue Jackets +100* vs Tampa Bay Lightning
214097684-2 12/3/13 1:06pm $106.00 $100.00 Pending 12/3/13 7:35pm Reduced Hockey 59 Ottawa Senators -106* vs Florida Panthers
214097684-3 12/3/13 1:06pm $115.00 $100.00 Pending 12/3/13 8:05pm Reduced Hockey 61 Vancouver Canucks/Nashville Predators Over 5 -115*
214097684-4 12/3/13 1:06pm $100.00 $115.00 Pending 12/3/13 8:05pm Reduced Hockey 62 Nashville Predators +115* vs Vancouver Canucks
214097684-5 12/3/13 1:06pm $50.00 $50.00 Pending 12/3/13 8:05pm Reduced Hockey 63 Dallas Stars/Chicago Blackhawks Under 5½ +100*
214097684-6 12/3/13 1:06pm $50.00 $54.00 Pending 12/3/13 9:35pm Reduced Hockey 66 Edmonton Oilers +108* vs Phoenix Coyotes
214097684-7 12/3/13 1:06pm $128.00 $100.00 Pending 12/3/13 10:05pm Reduced Hockey 68 Anaheim Ducks -128* vs Los Angeles Kings
214097483-1 12/3/13 1:02pm $103.00 $100.00 Pending 12/3/13 10:35pm Reduced Basketball 515 Toronto Raptors +7½ -103* vs Golden State Warriors
214097413-1 12/3/13 1:01pm $52.50 $50.00 Pending 12/3/13 7:35pm Reduced Basketball 507 Denver Nuggets -4 -105* vs Brooklyn Nets
214097413-2 12/3/13 1:01pm $105.00 $100.00 Pending 12/3/13 8:05pm Reduced Basketball 509 Phoenix Suns/Memphis Grizzlies Over 192½ -105*
214097413-3 12/3/13 1:01pm $108.00 $100.00 Pending 12/3/13 8:05pm Reduced Basketball 510 Memphis Grizzlies -3 -108* vs Phoenix Suns

[Dollars2Donuts]

Adding:

214103425-1 12/3/13 2:12pm $105.00 $100.00 Pending 12/3/13 7:35pm Reduced Basketball 503 Detroit Pistons/Miami Heat Under 201 -105*

[bald_guy]

Looks bad (no grid), but I put in Text pad and cut it up and was able to get it into a readable format that I could put into my iphone.

Thanks for all the picks!! I got a feeling we are going to be kicking some butt tonight!!

[Dollars2Donuts]

Looks bad (no grid), but I put in Text pad and cut it up and was able to get it into a readable format that I could put into my iphone.

Thanks for all the picks!! I got a feeling we are going to be kicking some butt tonight!!

Sorry guys, I will try and get them done from my laptop as much as possible.

As for tonight, I sure hope so....

GL everyone.

[vancapper]

Thanks D2D for posting them early!

[I~man]

sorry that came up so small. if you just copy and paste into excel it is easy to read. and thanks d2d!

[dzejzee]

if anyone has a spare minute to tell me what are d2ds hockey picks tonight i would much appreciate cheers