Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Gambling > Sports Betting
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-25-2007, 02:03 PM
pirateboy pirateboy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,514
Default Pirateboy\'s NCAAF ML Dogs Experiment - W9

Alright friends, I'm doing it. Diving in headfirst. Added bankroll to the ol' account to make it possible. Over at sbrforum, they had a breakdown of moneyline underdogs and their records broken out in each spread class and compared winning percentages. The data is from 1985-2007, and I will be updating it every week. They also included the "BE," or break even, odds you'd need to ... yes, break eve.

So, after talking to MT2R via PM, I decided that for every game where I find even the smallest edge, I'm putting a unit on it. He advised I wait until the latest possible time to place the bet, due to the theory that we'd get the best information throughout the week, and a more correct ML. He advised I do kelly betting for this, but because I do happen to like action, I'll play every edge. So, the schedule each week should be:

For Thursday games: make wager at 4pm PST on Thu
For Friday games: make wager at 4pm PST on Fri
For Saturday games: make wager either late Friday night or early Saturday morning

I happen to drink a bit almost every Friday night, so I'll have flexibility here. I'll post the plays for Week 9 in this thread, and start a new one for Week 10 next week. If a mod would rather me keep them all in one thread, let me know. Oh, and all odds from Bookmaker.

So, even though I'm not placing the wager for another 4 hours, here's an example for tonight.

<u>Dog (Spread) - Win % - ML (BE) Edge</u>
Boston College (+3) - 37.54% - +135 (+166) -31

Air Force (+6) - 37.54% - +205 (+166) +39


So, by using this procedure, I'd place 1 unit on the Air Force moneyline, and nothing on the BC moneyline. As was pointed out before, there can be a flaw here, because, is a 3 pt dog the same as a 6 pt dog? No. It's a flaw. However, I truly believe this is going to be profitable longterm, but I'm doing the experiment to find out.

I'll check back at 4pm PST to make the official wager.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-25-2007, 02:40 PM
knicknut knicknut is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stewie\'s sexy parties
Posts: 945
Default Re: Pirateboy\'s NCAAF ML Dogs Experiment - W9

So your system is just to bet every ML &gt; +166?

I'm confused.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-25-2007, 02:54 PM
Jazzy3113 Jazzy3113 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mergers & Acquisitions
Posts: 1,022
Default Re: Pirateboy\'s NCAAF ML Dogs Experiment - W9

[ QUOTE ]


I'm confused.

[/ QUOTE ]
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-25-2007, 03:03 PM
Austiger Austiger is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,504
Default Re: Pirateboy\'s NCAAF ML Dogs Experiment - W9

Pirate- I think you should either compile the data yourself somehow (I know that's a tall order) or send a message to the guy who wrote the article to get his data. If you consider +166 as BE for all the teams between +3 and +6.5, you're going to be betting all of the +6.5 games and none of the +3 games. Or...at the very least estimate what the BE points are for each spread.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-25-2007, 03:07 PM
Austiger Austiger is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,504
Default Re: Pirateboy\'s NCAAF ML Dogs Experiment - W9

Also, I mentioned this before but... Why are you restricting the experiment to dogs only? (I would pose the same question to the author of the article.) If +166 is the BE point, you should be betting any favorite that is below -166. Right?

FWIW, I have found that dog MLs get worse as the week goes on. That may just be a sample size thing with the ones I have looked at, but it is something I have noticed. You should really track that as well.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-25-2007, 03:19 PM
CaptainHook CaptainHook is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 35
Default Re: Pirateboy\'s NCAAF ML Dogs Experiment - W9

4th(?)ing the shock of acting as if +6.5 dogs have the same chance of winning as +3 dogs. I really hope this is some sort of error in my understanding/comprehension and not your actual betting method, for your sake.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-25-2007, 03:53 PM
NajdorfDefense NajdorfDefense is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 8,227
Default Re: Pirateboy\'s NCAAF ML Dogs Experiment - W9

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


I'm confused.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-25-2007, 04:02 PM
pirateboy pirateboy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,514
Default Re: Pirateboy\'s NCAAF ML Dogs Experiment - W9

[ QUOTE ]
So your system is just to bet every ML &gt; +166?

I'm confused.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's just coincidence that the 2 dogs tonight fall in the same point spread range in the table created by sbrforum.

For instance, a 10 point home dog has a different win % historically than a 3-6.5 point away dog.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-25-2007, 04:08 PM
pirateboy pirateboy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,514
Default Re: Pirateboy\'s NCAAF ML Dogs Experiment - W9

Here is an example to help:

Utah State is a 2.5 point underdog at home. Historically, home teams getting up to 2.5 points win 48.2% of the time, thus you'd need +108 odds to break even on the ML. You can get Utah State at +120 right now on Bookmaker, giving you a positive EV on the play.

SMU is a 13.5 road dog, and road dogs of 10-13.5 have a 22.2% win rate, so you'd need +351 on the ML. SMU is at +425 at Bookmaker, so nice edge there.

An example of a negative EV play would be UTEP at home as a 4 point dog. They win at 37.1%, meaning you need +170 to break even. UTEP is at +150, so it's a negative expectation.

Hope that helps.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-25-2007, 04:20 PM
CTrayne CTrayne is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4
Default Re: Pirateboy\'s NCAAF ML Dogs Experiment - W9

I started something similar last week. Probably missed a few games. Went 3-5, +3.9U thanks to Pitt and Stanford winning. Missed one by 2 pts and one by 3 pts. 8 games is nothing to judge by but I'm going to stay on it this week at least. I'm intrigued so keep us updated [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.