1. #1
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    Let me know what ya think....

    I have a NBA betting strategy that I have been testing out for this year. So far here are the results.

    466 plays

    248 wins

    218 losses

    53.22%


    It seems my theory has proven to have an edge.

    Is this a significant edge?
    Should I monkey with it to produce a better win percentage?
    Are 466 plays a good enough barometer?

    My grand theory is for the NBA, MLB, NHL. Once you know my grand design, you will see that this is DAMN good. I tested a little for the MLB last year and it totally rocked as well. Is it time to go for real dough yet?



  2. #2
    matthew919
    Update your status
    matthew919's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-21-12
    Posts: 421
    Betpoints: 5869

    Get that money.

  3. #3
    Waterstpub87
    Slan go foill
    Waterstpub87's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-09-09
    Posts: 4,043
    Betpoints: 7236

    Binomial dist gives ~92.Have you measure against closers, openers ect. What is the basis of your methodology? I know you won't want to give it away, but are you using quantitative or qualitative methods?

  4. #4
    gamblingisfun
    I'm a 'handicapper'...
    gamblingisfun's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-14-10
    Posts: 401
    Betpoints: 8632

    What are the odds of the games you're playing? Or is it totals? Because if you're playing mostly -125 and above faves, 53.22% seems less impressive.

  5. #5
    mcduggly
    mcduggly's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-22-12
    Posts: 2,489
    Betpoints: 2401

    I don't know if others agree or not, but I think the sample size is just a little small.

  6. #6
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    97% of the odds are at -110 sides only for the NBA. 3% of the time it is -105. (-105 juice on Fridays). MLB/NHL will have an average odds of -110 as well.

    I guess I use both quantitative/qualitative methods?

    I will give away my grand design/theory, but I won't give away my exact rules for my strategy.

  7. #7
    Sawyer
    Sawyer's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-01-09
    Posts: 7,592
    Betpoints: 6650

    Quote Originally Posted by keel44 View Post
    I have a NBA betting strategy that I have been testing out for this year. So far here are the results.

    466 plays

    248 wins

    218 losses

    53.22%


    It seems my theory has proven to have an edge.

    Is this a significant edge?
    Should I monkey with it to produce a better win percentage?
    Are 466 plays a good enough barometer?

    My grand theory is for the NBA, MLB, NHL. Once you know my grand design, you will see that this is DAMN good. I tested a little for the MLB last year and it totally rocked as well. Is it time to go for real dough yet?


    WTF? What the hell is that? Man, % means NOTHING without odds. And if %53 is based on -110 lines, then it's not good. 248-218 is no good. It sounds very normal to me.

  8. #8
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    I say normal is 50% with that many plays. I am up 9.05 units this season all with flat betting.
    You know, a lot of the time I didn't even get the best lines I could have.


    That is why I posed the questions I did. I wanted to see what people think. I take it you think I should do some tinkering to increase the winning percentage?

  9. #9
    Waterstpub87
    Slan go foill
    Waterstpub87's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-09-09
    Posts: 4,043
    Betpoints: 7236

    Quote Originally Posted by keel44 View Post
    97% of the odds are at -110 sides only for the NBA. 3% of the time it is -105. (-105 juice on Fridays). MLB/NHL will have an average odds of -110 as well.

    I guess I use both quantitative/qualitative methods?

    I will give away my grand design/theory, but I won't give away my exact rules for my strategy.
    Why on earth would you lay -110 in MLB. There are like 4 books that are reduced juice for baseball.

  10. #10
    rlabeaud
    rlabeaud's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-09-10
    Posts: 1

    I like

    Relly good

  11. #11
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    For MLB there are bets that range from +200 to -145. I am talking average.

    Let me tell yous guys what's the deal a little later.



  12. #12
    brettd
    brettd's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-25-10
    Posts: 229
    Betpoints: 3869

    A z-score test shows that your record has a Z of 1.39 against a 50% ATS record. Z reduces to 0.36 against a 52.34% record.

    Your record does not even prove that you are doing better than flipping coins, let alone beating the spread.

  13. #13
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    Let me know what you guys think of this sports betting theory:


    Have you ever noticed that in pro sports, there are teams that go through ups and downs? At any length of time, a team can be trending poorly for a long while, and a team can be riding high for a long while. It certainly would be nice to know which team(s) would go on a nice long trend so you could tail/fade that team for profits.

    The thing is, we don't know which teams are going to do that, or when. I have devised a certain set of triggers and parameters that encompass every team in the league. I know when to start tailing a team, and I know when to fade a team, and I know when to stop. As I said, every team can qualify to be tailed or faded, so there is no picking and choosing which teams. There is no picking when. It is all a predetermined set of circumstances and parameters.



    Here is what needs to happen (and has been happening) in order for my strategy to work:

    (*) At any given stretch throughout an entire season, there must be a handful of teams that are on a significant trend; either winning or losing. These are the teams that are giving me profit. The other big bulk of teams are a wash. They are giving me a 50% strike rate. They are losing me "juice" which is more than made up for by the profitable handful.

    (*) As the teams in the profitable handful fall out of favor, another group of team(s) will surely now become profitable.

    While it is true, there is no evidence that a trend will continue or is more likely to "win" that day, I believe it to be true that there will always be 4, 5, 6 teams that are hot/cold, and all the rest -- a big jumbled mess of 50%. The worst that could happen is that there are no teams trending for a while, which only increases the jumbled mass of 50%.

    The question is: Can a very strong 50% be swayed into profits by a "chosen" few? It seems to be exactly as I thought--yes. Yes it can. For example, I will give a small window for the NBA this year.

    For the month of FEB. I hit 54% 98 plays +3.6 units profit

    My profitable situations were as follows:

    Fade NY: 3-0
    Fade ORL: 3-1
    Ride BOS: 4-0
    Ride DEN: 3-0
    Ride MIA: 3-1

    16-2 on those teams everywhere else I was 37-43

    This has been happening all year and for the 6 weeks of tracking for MLB, it was crazy good. I am a grinder for sure, but I like it. It has been very consistent. Any comments?
    Last edited by keel44; 03-17-13 at 12:30 AM.

  14. #14
    brettd
    brettd's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-25-10
    Posts: 229
    Betpoints: 3869

    I sincerely doubt this theory reaches the level of sophistication required to beat the NBA spread.

    You're conducting ATS trend analysis. Every man and his dog does this. Hell I've done this using a variety of some quite complex time series modelling of ATS moving averages. It doesn't work well enough on its own to beat the spread.

    Wait another 1000 plays and see where you are at. As the z score test shows, your theory is currently indistinguishable from random results.

  15. #15
    Waterstpub87
    Slan go foill
    Waterstpub87's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-09-09
    Posts: 4,043
    Betpoints: 7236

    Your going to hit 50% long term. Especially if you try this in MLB without taking into account the pitcher.

  16. #16
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    Quote Originally Posted by brettd View Post
    I sincerely doubt this theory reaches the level of sophistication required to beat the NBA spread.

    You're conducting ATS trend analysis. Every man and his dog does this. Hell I've done this using a variety of some quite complex time series modelling of ATS moving averages. It doesn't work well enough on its own to beat the spread.

    Wait another 1000 plays and see where you are at. As the z score test shows, your theory is currently indistinguishable from random results.

    I really don't think you get it. I don't analyze ATS. I have explained everything in my post except my exact rules and guidelines for a play. You just might be over interpreting what I'm doing.

  17. #17
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterstpub87 View Post
    Your going to hit 50% long term. Especially if you try this in MLB without taking into account the pitcher.

    You are way off base. The line itself takes the pitcher into account.

  18. #18
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    I believe my edge lies in the fact that there will always be a handful of trending teams (hot/cold) that I can profit from to counteract all of the other teams that do not trend significantly enough.

    ALL of the teams are in play, all at the same time. I obviously don't bet on both sides of a match-up, but ALL teams can qualify to be played or not.

    I mean not every team will finish at .500 will they? There must be a handful of successful teams to tail and a handful of failures to fade. There will also be teams that go hot then cold and finish in the middle, which I will also profit from both ways.

    Will these profitable trends be enough to outweigh the trendless? I say yes.
    Last edited by keel44; 03-17-13 at 03:40 PM.

  19. #19
    matthew919
    Update your status
    matthew919's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-21-12
    Posts: 421
    Betpoints: 5869

    I retract my previous statement. But this thread was still good for a chuckle.

  20. #20
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    I would like to hear the argument against what I'm talking about. It makes beautiful sense to me. I can be convinced otherwise. That is why I started this thread.


  21. #21
    statnerds
    Put me in coach
    statnerds's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-23-09
    Posts: 4,047
    Betpoints: 103

    Quote Originally Posted by keel44 View Post
    You are way off base. The line itself takes the pitcher into account.
    agreed on this point. we wouldn't call the Market efficient if damn near 100% of knowable information wasn't already baked into the price.

    which is also why you are correct when you say there will be good teams to tail and bad teams to fade, but the price is going to reflect that as the season moves along. not matter what you do, you had better find a reduced juice book and join right now, especially for MLB.

    finally i do agree that teams will run hot and cold, if you will, but turning that from theory into practice is another matter. we do have regression to the mean and possible other weapons in our arsenal, but it is impossible to time a streak of a team playing poorly or playing above expectations.

    GL

  22. #22
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    Quote Originally Posted by statnerds View Post
    agreed on this point. we wouldn't call the Market efficient if damn near 100% of knowable information wasn't already baked into the price.

    which is also why you are correct when you say there will be good teams to tail and bad teams to fade, but the price is going to reflect that as the season moves along. not matter what you do, you had better find a reduced juice book and join right now, especially for MLB.

    finally i do agree that teams will run hot and cold, if you will, but turning that from theory into practice is another matter. we do have regression to the mean and possible other weapons in our arsenal, but it is impossible to time a streak of a team playing poorly or playing above expectations.

    GL

    It is not impossible to time a streak at all. If a team "starts" to get hot, you start betting on that team to win. If that team then starts to lose you "jump ship", BUT if that team goes on a nice long winning trend, you will make some profits.

    BUT YOU MUST KEEP IN MIND, I am encompassing ALL of the teams all of the time. I don't need to pick when and who. I let happen what will happen. And what will happen is that there will be a handful of hot/cold team trends to exploit.

    I already have a working system in place that recognizes potential trends and certain parameters. I know when to tail or fade a team. I know when to bail. I know what odds are acceptable or not. It is all in place. This is all automatic.

  23. #23
    gamblingisfun
    I'm a 'handicapper'...
    gamblingisfun's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-14-10
    Posts: 401
    Betpoints: 8632

    What sucks is a lot of the time people try to ride streaks, most of the streak has happened already. Like a team wins 3 in a row before we call them "hot", then ride them then they lose the next couple games. Or a team is cold and loses 3 then we fade but they end up winning when we bet on them. And if a streak were to go 6 or more games or something where one could profit, most people would already be riding or fading them, altering the lines and adjusting for said streak riders. But hey, if you grind out a small profit that way it's much better than losing. Best of luck with the streak riding and trying to time when to jump ship or hop on board.

  24. #24
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    Quote Originally Posted by gamblingisfun View Post
    What sucks is a lot of the time people try to ride streaks, most of the streak has happened already. Like a team wins 3 in a row before we call them "hot", then ride them then they lose the next couple games. Or a team is cold and loses 3 then we fade but they end up winning when we bet on them. And if a streak were to go 6 or more games or something where one could profit, most people would already be riding or fading them, altering the lines and adjusting for said streak riders. But hey, if you grind out a small profit that way it's much better than losing. Best of luck with the streak riding and trying to time when to jump ship or hop on board.

    I agree with you, most definitely. Just remember, I am not talking streaks, but trends, and I incorporate ALL the teams ALL the time. All the rules, as to jump on or off, are all predetermined and equal for all teams.

    I say there will always be a few pronounced trends at all times.

  25. #25
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    For the month of FEB. I hit 54% 98 plays +3.6 units profit

    My profitable situations were as follows:

    Fade NY: 3-0
    Fade ORL: 3-1
    Ride BOS: 4-0
    Ride DEN: 3-0
    Ride MIA: 3-1

    16-2 on those teams - everywhere else I was 37-43

    You see there were many failed trend attempts, but the 5 trends that did stick, I made more than enough to scratch out a profit. As these trends peter out, there will be a few more that do stick. They must--teams go through ups and downs, and if they don't, they don't get bet anyway.

  26. #26
    Inspirited
    Inspirited's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 06-26-10
    Posts: 1,783
    Betpoints: 17732

    well, as already said your results are not that significant, but as long as you're having fun go on and keep betting. may the hand of doom not fail down upon u.

  27. #27
    brettd
    brettd's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-25-10
    Posts: 229
    Betpoints: 3869

    Quote Originally Posted by keel44 View Post
    For the month of FEB. I hit 54% 98 plays +3.6 units profit

    My profitable situations were as follows:

    Fade NY: 3-0
    Fade ORL: 3-1
    Ride BOS: 4-0
    Ride DEN: 3-0
    Ride MIA: 3-1

    16-2 on those teams - everywhere else I was 37-43

    You see there were many failed trend attempts, but the 5 trends that did stick, I made more than enough to scratch out a profit. As these trends peter out, there will be a few more that do stick. They must--teams go through ups and downs, and if they don't, they don't get bet anyway.
    Dude trust me, you are going down hard with this type of handicapping. You are NOT going to beat the spread with this. If you don't believe me, your pockets will tell you the truth in time.

    You don't even have significant results, not even against 50% coin flipping. Just remember that when you are trying to rationalize why you think your method works.

  28. #28
    BeatingBaseball
    It's all about the price
    BeatingBaseball's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-30-09
    Posts: 904
    Betpoints: 70

    Although your sample size may be too small to be statistically significant right now, I would not dismiss your fundamental theory simply on the basis of "...not having the level of sophistication required..."

    Contrary to what some here may believe - complexity does not always outperform simplicity. I would encourage you to pursue your approach - esp in baseball with reduced juice - and possibly work on fine tuning the wager amounts basis the identified trends and getting away from the flat betting.

    Good Luck.

  29. #29
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    I think that is a lot of plays. I have over 200 more from the last 6 weeks in baseball. The results were even better.

    I really would like to know why people would dismiss this theory? I am NOT on here to convince you to like my theory. I am on here to hear why you don't like it. I knew people wouldn't approve. I wanna know why?


    I wanna hear arguments against the fundamental theory of mine, not math stuff.

  30. #30
    matthew919
    Update your status
    matthew919's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-21-12
    Posts: 421
    Betpoints: 5869

    Quote Originally Posted by keel44 View Post
    I wanna hear arguments against the fundamental theory of mine, not math stuff.

    This is why I don't like it.

  31. #31
    brettd
    brettd's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-25-10
    Posts: 229
    Betpoints: 3869

    Quote Originally Posted by keel44 View Post
    I think that is a lot of plays.


    I wanna hear arguments against the fundamental theory of mine, not math stuff.
    Statistically, you are no different to flipping coins right now.

    If you want to bury your head in the sand with the 'math stuff', the market will eventually tell you how good you are.

  32. #32
    keel44
    Update your status
    keel44's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-01-09
    Posts: 3,363
    Betpoints: 12276

    What results should I have by now, that would be better than flipping coins?

  33. #33
    seaborneq
    It's time to collect
    seaborneq's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-08-06
    Posts: 22,556
    Betpoints: 13422

    53% of 400+ picks is pretty good. Throwing darts blindfolded or letting a wild monkey point to the teams jersey would net about 52%. You must have a lot of extra time on your hands. Keep doing what you are doing. research, statistics, late night perusing of past information versus buying a wild monkey or a dartboard. The choice is up to you.

  34. #34
    statnerds
    Put me in coach
    statnerds's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-23-09
    Posts: 4,047
    Betpoints: 103

    Quote Originally Posted by keel44 View Post
    It is not impossible to time a streak at all. If a team "starts" to get hot, you start betting on that team to win. If that team then starts to lose you "jump ship", BUT if that team goes on a nice long winning trend, you will make some profits.

    BUT YOU MUST KEEP IN MIND, I am encompassing ALL of the teams all of the time. I don't need to pick when and who. I let happen what will happen. And what will happen is that there will be a handful of hot/cold team trends to exploit.

    I already have a working system in place that recognizes potential trends and certain parameters. I know when to tail or fade a team. I know when to bail. I know what odds are acceptable or not. It is all in place. This is all automatic.
    again i say you have got to get a reduced juice out somewhere.

    another suggestion is to apply it to the first 2 or 3 months of baseball at something extremely small. i'm talking $5/game, just so you have to keep tracking it. unless you are so confident that you go 1% of your BR with out blinking an eye.

    but what i really wanted to say is the Market is going to react quickly to 'hot' or 'cold' teams. hot and cold are misnomers anyway, i prefer to look at as stocks. sometimes they are going to outperform expectations and other times they fall short of expectations. if they win a few games, the price is going to rise, warranted or not. lose a few, price is going to drop.

    i'm am interested to see how it works out for you. please post your MLB results weekly or monthly, whichever is easier.

    GL

  35. #35
    ThaWoj
    hope i dont wake up tomorrow
    ThaWoj's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 03-09-10
    Posts: 6,254
    Betpoints: 3507

    I think this theory would not work for the nfl however. teams seem to bounce back or bounce than any other sport. I guess u coulda faded the chiefs last year lol. I dont even know their ats record offhand tho.

12 Last
Top