|
|
#51
08-06-2007, 07:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NCAAF Team totals plays
I have to run out. This analysis looks somewhat legit. I'll review it when I get back and post what I think about it.
I don't understand your comment about systems. Some systems work great. Some don't. Depends on the sport and the system. 
|
|
#52
08-06-2007, 07:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAAF Team totals plays
Gotcha. I do want to make note that I don't disrespect you, nor your stance on things. I'm excited to hear what you think about what I linked.
I'll try to be a little more tactful in the future. I do want to dig deeper into more mathematical approaches to sports betting, as I've barely tipped the iceberg of it. Again, sorry for being so defensive.
|
|
#53
08-07-2007, 04:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAAF Team totals plays
Sorry, I read through them and didn't get a chance to post. I don't like the RS and DDH as they seem to capture the same phenomena. Also, I don't like the whole idea of draft day talent escaping as some players such as Russell are arguably less valuable to their teams than far inferior talents such as Troy Smith. Really RB is the only position where I'd really go with a real linear relationship.
That being said, obviously losing starters sucks and keeping them is better. Well... Unless your team is terrible, in which case it may be better to scrap your trash starters for freshmen with talent... But I digress. I can't comment on his rating system as I couldn't really delve into the mechanics of it. I don't know how well it would adjust for SoS. But that would bolster weaker teams instead of harming them. Regardless, my biggest problem with ASU is a low conversion rate on 3rd downs (could be for a variety of reasons that I can't analyze without a ton of time). I'm interested in the TO stat as it seems it could be incorrect for a team that sees a ton of receiver fumbles as these are much more likely to become TOs. But as a general guideline it seems very solid.
|
|
#54
08-07-2007, 04:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAAF Team totals plays
You don't need to apologize to Thremp on this forum. That's pretty much the one rule we have. He swore up and down last year that early regular season NFL games should count the exactly same as playoff games 3 months later, but still won't provide *any* mathematical justification, or logic behind that at all. So he's as subject to bias as any of us, homerism or not.
|
|
#55
08-07-2007, 04:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAAF Team totals plays
[ QUOTE ]
You don't need to apologize to Thremp on this forum. That's pretty much the one rule we have. He swore up and down last year that early regular season NFL games should count the exactly same as playoff games 3 months later, but still won't provide *any* mathematical justification, or logic behind that at all. So he's as subject to bias as any of us, homerism or not. [/ QUOTE ] Yep, you correctly called the greatest playoff defense of all time without any more justification than Bob Sanders and group cohesion. Clearly clairvoyance is the new rage in sportsbetting. Maybe you'd like to give some coy story about how you work with nine figures on a daily basis and thats how you know about this line of work?
|
|
#56
08-07-2007, 09:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAAF Team totals plays
a) You're still ducking the question, Mr. MathBoy. Wuss.
b) I weight more recent results more, esp when they include the return of not just one as you wrongly imply, but TWO defensive starters in the latter half of the season. Just answer the question of WHY Week 1 = Week 9 = Week 16 and injuries don't affect performance. Obviously you can't so you change the topic. kthxby.
|
|
#57
08-07-2007, 09:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAAF Team totals plays
[ QUOTE ]
a) You're still ducking the question, Mr. MathBoy. Wuss. b) I weight more recent results more, esp when they include the return of not just one as you wrongly imply, but TWO defensive starters in the latter half of the season. Just answer the question of WHY Week 1 = Week 9 = Week 16 and injuries don't affect performance. Obviously you can't so you change the topic. kthxby. [/ QUOTE ] Recent form fallacy much?
|
|
#58
08-08-2007, 12:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAAF Team totals plays
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] a) You're still ducking the question, Mr. MathBoy. Wuss. b) I weight more recent results more, esp when they include the return of not just one as you wrongly imply, but TWO defensive starters in the latter half of the season. Just answer the question of WHY Week 1 = Week 9 = Week 16 and injuries don't affect performance. Obviously you can't so you change the topic. kthxby. [/ QUOTE ] Recent form fallacy much? [/ QUOTE ] All games are equal fallacy much? Keep ducking the question, it proves you know you are wrong so easily. And your assertions that losing 2 defensive starters doesn't impact the stats are hilarious! Ignoring important data much?
|
|
#60
08-08-2007, 12:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAAF Team totals plays
[ QUOTE ]
for me personally, if the edge is greater than the 2.5% I'd gain on the money from a CD, I bet it. But, I do derive utility from having long-term bets to keep me in action. For all these posted, the edge is greater than 5%. [/ QUOTE ] Little off-topic but I believe most cash account are yielding presently over 4% and closer to 5% in some cases without any liquidity issues.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
