Due Theory

[Sam Odom]

This is the way that it works.

1. X has occurred.
2. X does not coincide with what is expected to happen on average or over the long run.
3. Thus, X will not occur this time.

The Gambler’s Fallacy is based on the idea that something is due to happen and the reason it’s due to happen is that eventually things even out. This misconception is based on connecting independent phenomenon as a string of related events.

[Shutup]

I think it is more the unlikely theory. Something is unlikely because xyz. It plays a bigger role when dealing with point spreads where you may not even have to win. Not really any different than going with a hot streaking team. They are streaking because they are good not because they just randomly got hot. You have to look into reasons why something is happening and why it may not continue

[grease lightnin]

Sammy do not advertise when you have an edge.

[Sam Odom]

Sammy do not advertise when you have an edge.

'The General' or General Pete believed wholeheartedly in the Due Theory as a winner

[jjgold]

It’s buried me sammy

Every game same chance

[Sam Odom]

It’s buried me sammy

Can remember that horrific run you went on... very bloody

[Sam Odom]

Been hearing that the New England Patriots are DUE to win Sunday

ML only

[grease lightnin]

You know who is due?

Goat Milk.

[LT Profits]

Due theory does not exist as stated above.

Regression does exist though, and usually it points to a team that may be considered "due".

So to summarize:
Betting on or against a team solely because opposite result is due is almost certainly a losing strategy.
Betting on or against a team because its peripheral numbers show that it has over(under) performed is usually +EV assuming price is right.

[Easy-Rider 66]

Due threory is that with sports and horses the odds are stacked against the player. Proceed accordingly.

[ans61201]

I see it at a roulette table everytime I walk through a casino and 12 straight blacks have been hit lol

[jjgold]

Excellent point

Due threory is that with sports and horses the odds are stacked against the player. Proceed accordingly.

[Sam Odom]

JJ

how well would the Due Theory work... If you take small dogs (+105 to +120) ??

[LT Profits]

JJ

how well would the Due Theory work... If you take small dogs (+105 to +120) ??

Coming off how many losses in a row?

[Sam Odom]

Coming off how many losses in a row?

For the sake of conversation... 3 losses

Not to get too deep into the weeds but Say a MLB team last three on the road were losses then back home as a small dog

[KVB]

Sammy do not advertise when you have an edge.

[LT Profits]

For the sake of conversation... 3 losses

Not to get too deep into the weeds but Say a MLB team last three on the road were losses then back home as a small dog

Believe it or not, all dogs +105 to +120 off of 3+ Losses are 568-634 , +4.35 since 2005.

Interestingly ROAD teams +27.01, Home teams -22.66

[Sam Odom]

LT

[jjgold]

Most of us squares

We chase due

[xraygord]

JJ's due for a blow job.

[odog11]

Due theory does not exist as stated above.

Regression does exist though, and usually it points to a team that may be considered "due".

So to summarize:
Betting on or against a team solely because opposite result is due is almost certainly a losing strategy.
Betting on or against a team because its peripheral numbers show that it has over(under) performed is usually +EV assuming price is right.

Right, it's not when a team is "due", but rather that recent poor results are not indicative of performance. Opposite can be true of "hot" teams. See this in hockey a lot, puck luck, hot goalie, facing tired teams etc. Not always easy to spot in advance though.

[jjgold]

Most of us squares
We love trends

[KVB]

It's not the information, it's how you use it.

Trends like that can be useful when you start to see something completely neglected in this thread. It's the effect that those trends can have on the the marketplace.

When a team like New England starts losing, or even not covering, there becomes pressure in that marketplace for a win, from high expectations all the way down to the chaser who is doubling up and then some each game. They are all groups of money that tend to swell.

Unless you are making your own line and comparing that to the marketplace, it's tough to gauge just when the market has been sent enough out of whack to make it advantageous to pull the trigger.

In that sense, the due factor, prevalent in the marketplace, can adjust the offered line enough that you have a play. It's just one small piece of the whole pie that is the play.

In my opinion, it's often, but not always, best to let some trends just be the tiny slice that moves the market, and not have it be a part of the pie that you are already whipping up.

Over the years I've used the CFL to explain how this operates with real time examples. Those who've read, know.

[KVB]

There really is so much more to it as well. Just how efficient is an early season line as these teams begin to fail.

Or any time of the season for that matter.

When the line is, say too low for New England, then the trend could grow the line until all value on the favorite, that has been losing, is gone.

Then you get the win or cover.

The originators and books outright school the marketplace some times.

And they school certain groups of bettors nearly all the time. Members go in and out of those groups, but the groups as a whole get taken.

That's where the shifting members contribute to the give and take of the markets, and those who stay in some groups are perennially losing, not much give to the take.

[reigle9]

was going to post "we're due" in the thread about vegas winning 61 months in a row, but was sober and didn't have the energy to make fun of retards that didn't understand my joke

[kingdom]

I think it is more the unlikely theory. Something is unlikely because xyz. It plays a bigger role when dealing with point spreads where you may not even have to win. Not really any different than going with a hot streaking team. They are streaking because they are good not because they just randomly got hot. You have to look into reasons why something is happening and why it may not continue

Pirates won 9 in a row in middle of season. it was not because they are good. could be opponents, odd luck, etc. miami dolphins come to mind. one of the most unimpressive 3 game nfl winning streaks you will ever see. heavy dose of reality coming their way sunday.

[Sam Odom]

Been hearing that the New England Patriots are DUE to win Sunday

ML only