<TABLE class=tborder cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=page><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=bottom><TD style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt">goodcall</TD><TD class=smallfont align=right>06-29-2006 05:25 PM</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><HR>Assuming every game in the following years "qualified" by ML as a play, you would need the average of the two runlines to be the at least the following in order to turn a profit:
1999: +179
2000: +178
2001: +172
2002: +176
2003: +172
2004: +171
2005: +183
So far in 2006 the figure is +176...I'm hoping 2005 was just a freak year and not a trend that is going to continue.
Remember, these numbers assume that no game is more likely to end in a one-run game than another, which is a BAD assumption...just trying to get some numbers out there.
Games that are expected to be close have better RLs. I'll look at the MLs to see how much more frequently games that are expected to be close end in 1-run games than the games in which there is a clear winner expected. I'll post these numbers when I get them.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE class=tborder cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=page><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=bottom><TD style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt">goodcall</TD><TD class=smallfont align=right>06-29-2006 07:30 PM</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><HR>Alright guys here we go. I went through two years of data (5617 games) and came up with the numbers I expected to. Games that are expected to be close (similar MLs) tend to finish as one-run games more often than games that aren't supposed to be close. This I kind of knew, but now I have the numbers to prove it. That is the reason the RLs and ARLs have bigger payoffs when the MLs are even.
Here's the number everyone is waiting for - in those two years, the average of the RL and ARL you get should be no less than
+180 to be profitable. This is for the PK games. The cut-off number drops gradually from 180 the more one team is favored by. So, if the ML is -195 for the favorite and +205 for the dog, bet the RL and ARL on the game if you can get the average of the two for
+174 or better.
I haven't gone back to see how many games qualify under these contraints, but I can't imagine it's very many. Of course, that won't keep me from looking for them.
One more thing - on this kind of thing, always bet so you'll win the same amount no matter who wins for maximum profit...kind of like the sportsbooks try to set the line right in the middle of the action.
Please give me some feedback on what you think about this and where I should go from here. I have 5 more years of data, but I'm convinced that will only mimic the two years I have sorted through so I'd rather not waste my time going through it. Sorry if any of these points have already been posted...I'm late joining this party.
Thoughts please!!!
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE class=tborder cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=page><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=bottom><TD style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt">shipdapaper</TD><TD class=smallfont align=right>06-29-2006 07:47 PM</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><HR>OK I just went through every game this season.....this is what i found
Out of all the games this year there have been 146 games that have had a runline of 10.5 or greater
Of those 146 games if you were to bet the -1.5 Fav and -1.5 Dog Blindly your win loss record would be 110 Wins and 36 losses
now having said that
Of those 146 games if you were to bet the -1.5 Fav and MoneyLine Dog Blindly your win loss record would be 118 Wins and 28 Losses
*note none of these games have been counted twice so these are the correct numbers
Shipdapaper
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
I appreciate the input given on this method. Thanks Shipdapaper and goodcall for your work looking into the historical data!
Good luck today. tulsa
