Teach a Man to Fish: UCLA/ Gonzaga OVER 144

[existential]

I acknowledge more than once in this thread that a level of sophisticated or "sharp" money sent that line to 144 points. I also acknowledge that early limits were likely hit with that sharp money.

I considered 144 points a pretty sharp line, by most standards. I wrote that. I even give Marques credit for getting there.

So you repeat my position and credit any seasoned market reader with the same position. I guess thank you.

Don't troll, read and comprehend instead.

I guess you can't comprehend a simple request.

Again, we're still waiting for any "evidence" of this supposed market edge that you claimed to have. You've yet to provide any, just flowery language.

[James Marques]

I use Bayes Theorem to compare each team's tempo (PACE) against the league NCAA median. That accounts for game speed reasonably well. As for low scoring vs high scoring teams, that's a bit more complicated. I don't wanna say too much but essentially I have a statistical method that I use to break down each team's possessions and calculate the probability of said team scoring 0, 1, 2, or 3 points on that possession (I eliminate the 4 point play for simplicity purposes, plus it's extremely rare). You do this for both offense and defense. Then you compare team 1 offense vs team 2 defense and get an adjusted number... you get the idea. It's fairly accurate, but has some obvious faults I'm working to correct. At the very least, it is often close to Vegas numbers, so it keeps me selective.

[pavyracer]

The lesson here is if you can't fish you go to McDonald's.

[sjm5122]

Good play these college kids just cant shoot for shit

[KVB]

I use Bayes Theorem to compare each team's tempo (PACE) against the league NCAA median. That accounts for game speed reasonably well. As for low scoring vs high scoring teams, that's a bit more complicated. I don't wanna say too much but essentially I have a statistical method that I use to break down each team's possessions and calculate the probability of said team scoring 0, 1, 2, or 3 points on that possession (I eliminate the 4 point play for simplicity purposes, plus it's extremely rare). You do this for both offense and defense. Then you compare team 1 offense vs team 2 defense and get an adjusted number... you get the idea. It's fairly accurate, but has some obvious faults I'm working to correct. At the very least, it is often close to Vegas numbers, so it keeps me selective.

More detail than I expected Marques, lol I was just poking a little when asking if you addressed those tendencies. Good work. A good example of how a winning handicapper never stops learning and must constantly improve his work to stay ahead or sometimes just with the markets.

It's not easy.

[dfish]

Going to need more fish...

[James Marques]

More detail than I expected Marques, lol I was just poking a little when asking if you addressed those tendencies. Good work. A good example of how a winning handicapper never stops learning and must constantly improve his work to stay ahead or sometimes just with the markets.

It's not easy.

Yeah, I tend to get long winded when I talk statistical analysis.

[kmarinouofm]

i prefer steak..

[STAX]

not trying to sound trollish here James, but don't you think all your statistical analysis is already built into the line? I'm of the belief that crunching numbers doesn't do a whole lot of good, bc I believe the books already figure in about every number you can muster up. I tend to put my stock in the intangibles of sports. It just seems like a little bit of a waste of time to be crunching all these numbers when the books have already incorporated it into the line. By all means, if it is working for you then more power to ya, but I just never bought it personally.

[teaserpleaser]

The NCAA needs to stop playing these games in huge arenas where the sight line sucks balls and no one can shoot!

its most likely not the sightline I bet you somebody messed with the rims theres been an fukk ton of in and outs in both games and both duke and Utah can shoot they both look like Baylor outside of winslow.

[boomer62]

Thanks Boomer. As far as basketball goes, the refs are a part of every game, always have been. Don’t let the grove of trees that make up handicapping a game get in the way of you seeing the forest.

Keep an eye on the big picture.

Like I said I appreciate your write up and insight. Actually,it's good to educate or try anyway, to the many uneducated on here. Sorry you lost. I had Utah +5. Can you believe that I communicated that there are many bad beats in BB and then the bullshit foul call with .07 seconds when teams were in the locker room. See, just what I've been saying about the mindset of gambling and the power of our thoughts. That's why I don't post plays, bad energy in here! That FUKING foul was bullshit, game was over!! But it all balances out. Lose with dignity or FUKING cry game was fixed. Lol

[jjgold]

if you watched game you can see outcome was all random events

[James Marques]

not trying to sound trollish here James, but don't you think all your statistical analysis is already built into the line? I'm of the belief that crunching numbers doesn't do a whole lot of good, bc I believe the books already figure in about every number you can muster up. I tend to put my stock in the intangibles of sports. It just seems like a little bit of a waste of time to be crunching all these numbers when the books have already incorporated it into the line. By all means, if it is working for you then more power to ya, but I just never bought it personally.

I don't disagree. But I'm looking at closing numbers the market has moved from what Vegas set initially. If Vegas thinks a line is 4, and I think a line is 4, and then it gets bet up to 6... that's useful information.

[James Marques]

Further, the math I do is by no means a crystal ball. It simply alerts me to bets I should look into and bets I should pass over. I treat it like reading an injury report or studying a rotation schedule. Nothing more.

[KVB]

Like I said I appreciate your write up and insight. Actually,it's good to educate or try anyway, to the many uneducated on here. Sorry you lost. I had Utah +5. Can you believe that I communicated that there are many bad beats in BB and then the bullshit foul call with .07 seconds when teams were in the locker room. See, just what I've been saying about the mindset of gambling and the power of our thoughts. That's why I don't post plays, bad energy in here! That FUKING foul was bullshit, game was over!! But it all balances out. Lose with dignity or FUKING cry game was fixed. Lol

There's something about posting plays and them going sour that I just can't put my finger on...lol

And I was watching that Duke ending. When he missed the first free throw I thought he was just going to miss #2 and keep it real. Then we all saw what happened.

We'll get 'em next time.

[STAX]

Further, the math I do is by no means a crystal ball. It simply alerts me to bets I should look into and bets I should pass over. I treat it like reading an injury report or studying a rotation schedule. Nothing more.

OK, that makes a lot of sense then... good insight, always looking for different views on betting, whether I agree or not. I'm more of an intangibles better. I put a lot of stock into anything you can't put a number on... tradition, momentum, destiny, philosophy, feel, "it" factor... I'm sure if I put a little more effort into the numbers crunching side of things (Im very good with numbers, passed 4 levels of college calculus) it could only help me.

[KVB]

OK, that makes a lot of sense then... good insight, always looking for different views on betting, whether I agree or not. I'm more of an intangibles better. I put a lot of stock into anything you can't put a number on... tradition, momentum, destiny, philosophy, feel, "it" factor... I'm sure if I put a little more effort into the numbers crunching side of things (Im very good with numbers, passed 4 levels of college calculus) it could only help me.

Bingo Stax. You nailed it right here. I have helped countless bettors (well a good amount of folks anyway) take their own subjective skills and see immediate positive results by just considering some of the basic numbers.

You're right...that "little more effort into the number crunching side of things" can become a little more cash in your pocket quicker than you might think. Being able to stack your opinions up against the market in a numerical way, and then diligently track your results will help any bettor's bottom line. Your awareness of the markets will increase, immediately taking you off of some losers and eventually maybe even putting you on to some winners.

To all of us improving....