TomG's Robot Professional MLB Betting

[TomG]

Wednesday Baseball...

Florida at Atlanta
Florida +107
Risk 1 unit to win 1.07 units

Chicago Cubs at Milwaukee
Chicago Cubs +103
Risk 1 unit to win 1.03 units

Tampta Bay at Toronto
Toronto -105
Risk 1.05 units to win 1 unit

Cincinnati at St. Louis
St. Louis -105
Risk 1.05 units to win 1 unit

Detroit at Texas
Texas +132
Risk 1 unit to win 1.32 units

Houston at Colorado
Houston +137
Risk 1 unit to win 1.37 units

Boston at Oakland
Boston -107
Risk 1.07 units to win 1 unit

[fun160]

[ QUOTE ]
in the model I'm working on I'm using EQA rather than Murray's OBP*SLG*.975.

[/ QUOTE ]

That just seems so, you know, complicated. I think I'll just stick to betting on the Yankees, Braves, and BoSox.

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

All seriousness aside, thanks to everyone who has made a meaningful contribution to this thread. One of my all-time favs on 2+2.

[newb411breaker19]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
basement, OPS is not well regarded, but mostly because as a single number it captures little about a hitter's performance.

The formula discussed here comes out of the Murray book, but the below link is a solid reference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runs_created

[/ QUOTE ]
in the model I'm working on I'm using EQA rather than Murray's OBP*SLG*.975.

basics on EQA

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks for that link.. i'll go through this in the next couple of days and see the differences between the two methods

[TomG]

[ QUOTE ]
One thing I have noticed is that the difference between FIP and xFIP is often very large, e.g.


2007 Dan Haren 1.70 ERA / 3.38 FIP / 4.13 xFIP

Use at your own risk.

[/ QUOTE ]
I looked at Dan Haren going as far back as possible and the numbers converge better... Dan Haren's 2004 through 2007 stats (~570 inning pitched)...

ERA = 3.63
xERA = 3.67
FIP = 3.88
xFIP = 4.02

[newb411breaker19]

they all really do seem to converge with one another over the long term.. here's a couple examples

mike mussina (career)
XERA: 3.678
FIP: 3.687
DIPS: 3.672
QERA: 3.57
Actual: 3.67

pretty much identical for mike mussina, there is a difference for andy pettitte however

Andy Pettitte (career)
XERA: 4.1
FIP: 3.75
DIPS: 3.81
QERA: 3.89
actual: 3.79

[newb411breaker19]

TOMG, quick question.. are you applying a Universal Home field advantage (i think murray says 16 cents) to all the games or are you making unique home field adjustments. I've always been a little torn on what to do with this particular situation and would like to hear other's opinions on this

[TomG]

[ QUOTE ]
TOMG, quick question.. are you applying a Universal Home field advantage (i think murray says 16 cents) to all the games or are you making unique home field adjustments. I've always been a little torn on what to do with this particular situation and would like to hear other's opinions on this

[/ QUOTE ]
In the Home Field Advantage chapter Murray says the home team wins 54% of the time. So I add in a flat 4% to the home team's chance of winning. He goes onto say some home fields such as Minnesota and Boston are above average, but right now I treat everyone the same. Also, I add a flat 4%. In his example with Houston/St. Lous, Murray added in 16 cents to move from a line of +114 to -102. I don't like this method because adding in 16 cents like that means Murray is actually adding 7.5% for HFA which is way too high IMO.

[newb411breaker19]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
TOMG, quick question.. are you applying a Universal Home field advantage (i think murray says 16 cents) to all the games or are you making unique home field adjustments. I've always been a little torn on what to do with this particular situation and would like to hear other's opinions on this

[/ QUOTE ]
In the Home Field Advantage chapter Murray says the home team wins 54% of the time. So I add in a flat 4% to the home team's chance of winning. He goes onto say some home fields such as Minnesota and Boston are above average, but right now I treat everyone the same. Also, I add a flat 4%. In his example with Houston/St. Lous, Murray added in 16 cents to move from a line of +114 to -102. I don't like this method because adding in 16 cents like that means Murray is actually adding 7.5% for HFA which is way too high IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks tom, i was thinking the same exact thing when i read that in the book and from one other book i had read about baseball handicapping the same thing was done (constant amount of cents subtracted from away team) and this didn't make sense to me but because both books had this i assumed it was right. thanks

[rjp]

Anytime you're altering odds you always want to alter the probabilities. You can then convert the probability to american, decimal, fractional, or whatever odds format you're interested in.

You might be able to find statistically significant reasons to alter a team's home field advantage more than normal, but without having done a study on this topic myself adding 4% for all home teams is good enough. Not perfect, but good enough.

[crockpot]

[ QUOTE ]
In the Home Field Advantage chapter Murray says the home team wins 54% of the time. So I add in a flat 4% to the home team's chance of winning. He goes onto say some home fields such as Minnesota and Boston are above average, but right now I treat everyone the same. Also, I add a flat 4%. In his example with Houston/St. Lous, Murray added in 16 cents to move from a line of +114 to -102. I don't like this method because adding in 16 cents like that means Murray is actually adding 7.5% for HFA which is way too high IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

???

-116 converts to a 53.7% chance of winning. that's the fair line for the home team if the teams are evenly matched.

i agree that 16 cents is not a great rule because cents are non-linear (for that matter, adding a flat 4% is wrong for the same reason) but i think you're getting your math wrong.