arty:Willye said:anyone no any stats or info as to how much a park will effect the total of the game bye how many runs appreciate the info
I don't have any stats, but I believe the linemaker STARTS with the park. At Coors Field, the line is usually around 12. At Shea, its typically 7-8. Then they probably look for pitchers that are either hot or stone cold and adjust accordingly. It's not really rocket science and the linemaker just tries to establish a good opening line. Adjustments put the book in a profitable position in enough games that they don't get killed.
Maybe if I get some time, I can generate the average totals line at each park.
Willye:
I looked at the website posted above and I don't think it is that valuable. It has Oakland for example as a hitters park. If you look at that stadium there is tons of foul ground, which results in outs. Certain parks like coors are going to have higher numbers and it mostly due to the high altitude. The air if you want to call it seems to effect the scoring as much as the parks themsleves. Wind blowing out at Wrigley field, pop ups become home runs. Some of the west coast parks on the ocean the air seems to get "heavy" at night and the ball doesn't carry, results in less homeruns and more long outs. I told in San Fran when the wind is blowing a certain direction in days games the ball travels extremely well and run scoring increases. Not sure what type of information you are looking for but I hope it helps.
Northern Star
I looked at the website posted above and I don't think it is that valuable. It has Oakland for example as a hitters park. If you look at that stadium there is tons of foul ground, which results in outs. Certain parks like coors are going to have higher numbers and it mostly due to the high altitude. The air if you want to call it seems to effect the scoring as much as the parks themsleves. Wind blowing out at Wrigley field, pop ups become home runs. Some of the west coast parks on the ocean the air seems to get "heavy" at night and the ball doesn't carry, results in less homeruns and more long outs. I told in San Fran when the wind is blowing a certain direction in days games the ball travels extremely well and run scoring increases. Not sure what type of information you are looking for but I hope it helps.
Northern Star
My 2 cents
I don't calculate or track stats anymore either, but park factor is definitely an important component but most likely over compensated for in many respects. Problem is finding the "true" park factor is damn near impossible. Yes the factor they give comparing runs at home to runs on the road is pretty good, and gets better as the season goes on. But there are alot of things that can skew a park factor such as the one provided by ESPN. Schedule, fortuitous pitching matchups, crazy weather, umpires with strikezones as wide as their ass, ground crews jacking with mounds, and teams that plain suck arse on the road, etc. At one point, I tried to calculate true park factor, I adjusted the runs scored, for things such as quality of pitching, quality of hitting by opponents at home on the road, umpires, ground ball to fly ball ratios, weather etc. Got a number that was probably pretty accurate, but the difference between parks after all of that was pretty small in most cases (usually around a half run per game), and like previously noted, boys in Vegas already have that built in. You'd probaby be more sucessful spending time really studying the umpires and taking notes on their games. Can really get an advantage if you know not just the stats they put on the internet, but what a ump really does. Some umps might draw Peavy versus Penny, or the crap bag Astros all the time and get a 5 under to 1 over record but really have a pretty tight strikezone. And may refuse to give a back door curve ball to Jamie Moyeresque lefties when facing right handed batters. There are certain situations every week, with regard to umpires,patient or impatient teams, and stellar/crappy bullpens that will trump any park factor.
I don't calculate or track stats anymore either, but park factor is definitely an important component but most likely over compensated for in many respects. Problem is finding the "true" park factor is damn near impossible. Yes the factor they give comparing runs at home to runs on the road is pretty good, and gets better as the season goes on. But there are alot of things that can skew a park factor such as the one provided by ESPN. Schedule, fortuitous pitching matchups, crazy weather, umpires with strikezones as wide as their ass, ground crews jacking with mounds, and teams that plain suck arse on the road, etc. At one point, I tried to calculate true park factor, I adjusted the runs scored, for things such as quality of pitching, quality of hitting by opponents at home on the road, umpires, ground ball to fly ball ratios, weather etc. Got a number that was probably pretty accurate, but the difference between parks after all of that was pretty small in most cases (usually around a half run per game), and like previously noted, boys in Vegas already have that built in. You'd probaby be more sucessful spending time really studying the umpires and taking notes on their games. Can really get an advantage if you know not just the stats they put on the internet, but what a ump really does. Some umps might draw Peavy versus Penny, or the crap bag Astros all the time and get a 5 under to 1 over record but really have a pretty tight strikezone. And may refuse to give a back door curve ball to Jamie Moyeresque lefties when facing right handed batters. There are certain situations every week, with regard to umpires,patient or impatient teams, and stellar/crappy bullpens that will trump any park factor.
yak merchant said:
Excellent advice.I don't understand how so many can claim "locks" etc. on totals when they make no mention of who has the plate for that game.I rely heavily on umpires for my plays.Taking notes on umpires is important.Sometimes a certain umpire will generate a play on side instead of a total.
Yak Merchant:
I think your observation is quite accurate. I always say they have nice big shiny hotels for a reason and it isn't from putting up bad numbers. I also use to track everything. I tracked umpires before tracking umpires was fashionable. Each umpire has their own style and strike zone. The problem it seemed to me is it seemed like umpires numbers would change from year to year. Some of it could be accounted for by different pitching matchups. But it seemed odd to me that some umpire would go 10-20 to the unders one year and go just the opposite 20-10 the following year. Umpires seemed to goof me up more than help me in my handicapping.
I still think the best indicator is how the 8 guys in the feild are doing as far as scoring runs. I think vegas basis the majority of the line off the pitchers and not the hitters. Therefore tracking teams hitting will give you a bigger edge.
One other factor in the pitcher is not so much the era but their style or should I say how the teams play for them. Woody Williams was a good example a few years ago he had an era about 4.0 and went 23-3 to the under or something like that. Pitched decent and got very little run support. Growing up the Twins always seemed to hit until the day Burt Blyleven pitched. He would pitch good enough to lose 3-2 or 2-1. Next day the would score 7 or 8 runs. It is almost like mentally the players know someone is going to pitch good and they take the day off or aren't as mentally sharp. When a pitcher is slow and the team spends alot of time in the field I think effects the hitting although I have never seen any kind of study of how pitchers who throw a high % of strikes do compared to a low %.
Keep it simple and you probably will do just as good. Make it more complex and what you may find is that although you looked at 10 things, really only one or 2 gave you the same handicapping results.
Northern Star
I think your observation is quite accurate. I always say they have nice big shiny hotels for a reason and it isn't from putting up bad numbers. I also use to track everything. I tracked umpires before tracking umpires was fashionable. Each umpire has their own style and strike zone. The problem it seemed to me is it seemed like umpires numbers would change from year to year. Some of it could be accounted for by different pitching matchups. But it seemed odd to me that some umpire would go 10-20 to the unders one year and go just the opposite 20-10 the following year. Umpires seemed to goof me up more than help me in my handicapping.
I still think the best indicator is how the 8 guys in the feild are doing as far as scoring runs. I think vegas basis the majority of the line off the pitchers and not the hitters. Therefore tracking teams hitting will give you a bigger edge.
One other factor in the pitcher is not so much the era but their style or should I say how the teams play for them. Woody Williams was a good example a few years ago he had an era about 4.0 and went 23-3 to the under or something like that. Pitched decent and got very little run support. Growing up the Twins always seemed to hit until the day Burt Blyleven pitched. He would pitch good enough to lose 3-2 or 2-1. Next day the would score 7 or 8 runs. It is almost like mentally the players know someone is going to pitch good and they take the day off or aren't as mentally sharp. When a pitcher is slow and the team spends alot of time in the field I think effects the hitting although I have never seen any kind of study of how pitchers who throw a high % of strikes do compared to a low %.
Keep it simple and you probably will do just as good. Make it more complex and what you may find is that although you looked at 10 things, really only one or 2 gave you the same handicapping results.
Northern Star
