Picking the best bowl bets
Chad Millman
ESPN INSIDER
(Which somehow has yet to get a catchy nickname, like the Music City Miracle. I am proposing the Belk WTF-just-happened-to-my-Duke-Cover Bowl or the Belk holy-crap-how-did-Cincy-Cover Bowl.) The only way for me to truly comprehend this situation was to turn the last 90 seconds of the game into an SAT-like math problem, for which there is a reasonable solution that doesn't require a Princeton Review course. I'm sure the geniuses at Duke appreciate me helping them work out their feelings in a rational, logical way. So here goes: If team A is as high as a 10-point underdog to Team B, and Team A has a first and goal with 1:30 seconds remaining in a tie game, what are the chances that Team B can still cover the double-digit spread?
In case you have forgotten, this is the exact scenario that unfolded Thursday night in the Belk Bowl. Duke, which had opened as a 10-point dog and closed as an 8.5-to-9-point dog (it got as low as seven over the past few weeks) had a first and goal in a game that was tied 34-34 with 90 seconds left to play. They were a couple of kneeldowns and a field goal away from winning a bowl game for their gracious coach David Cutcliffe. Instead, Duke running back Josh Snead fumbled, Cincy recovered and, four plays later, the Bearcats scored on an 83-yard touchdown pass.
That wasn't enough.
With Duke flailing in a last-chance drive, QB Sean Renfree was hit as he threw, leaving a floater for a Cincy linebacker, who plucked the gift from the sky and ran it back for a touchdown. What had been a sure Belk Bowl win for Duke turned into a miracle cover for Cincy.
So I ask, in my best prep-test language, what are the chances?
My first call was to Fezzik, two-time SuperContest champ and an actuary-turned-professional bettor. The man is good with numbers. "It was 99.99 percent that Duke would cover. The only realistic chance for Cincy to cover was a triple-OT win, beating the 7.5."
I wasn't satisfied. This was like knowing the answer without understanding the work. I needed the work. Next I asked Mike Perry, a spokesman for the online betting site SportsBook, if his bookmakers could work up some stats, since they offer in-running wagering. I figured their algorithm would have something from that exact moment in the game. But it was so unlikely a scenario that they had taken that option off the board. The only bet they were offering was a money line wager of Duke -600/Cincy +400. "It's really anyone's guess unless you can simulate the situation," Peter Childs, the site's live betting director, said in an email.
Still, I needed a resolution. On Friday morning I texted the SportsBoss, who has been a regular in the column the past couple of years. He has an MBA from a very fine private school and works in finance. He also moonlights as an analytics-based handicapper, applying everything he learned about advanced metrics to who will win and who will lose and by how much. I figured this would be the kind of math problem he'd enjoy tackling.
When we connected Sunday night, ostensibly to go over non-BCS title bowl games he likes over the next week (see below), he did, in fact, have a solution for me. The truth is, he didn't do anything revolutionary. He just did something very, very smart. He took the formulas already available, tinkered with the ingredients, and came up with something that made relative sense.
There is a book called "Mathletics: How Gamblers, Managers and Sports Enthusiasts Use Mathematics in Baseball, Basketball and Football." It was written by Wayne Winston, a professor at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business who has worked as a consultant to the Mavericks. The book has a nifty commercial cover, but make no mistake, it is not for the simpleminded. Open it up and it is as dense as a textbook, with lots of graphs and math formulas. It's exactly the kind of research that appeals to a guy like the SportsBoss.
Winston's website, waynewinston.com, allows you to download all the files he references in his book. Again, this is heady stuff, not to be trifled with or used by mere amateurs. I tried it, and shortly after my computer locked up, my head exploded. But one of the files he allows you access is called "collapses," and it has a formula for determining how likely the biggest breakdowns in sports history were to happen. Think the Blazers losing to the Lakers in the 2000 Western Conference Finals or the Oilers choking against the Bills in the 1992 wild-card game. It's fascinating stuff; miracles as math.
If you can understand it.
Fortunately, the SportsBoss can. He manipulated the formula for the Bills-Oilers, which includes phrases like "sigma for game," "fraction for game" and "sigma for rest" to determine the probability of a win/loss in the exact situation we saw last week. "The number I ended up with for the Duke-Cincy game was 3 out of 1,400, which is around .002," the SportsBoss told me.
Really, it's no different than what any of us thought: The chances of Cincy covering were the most infinitesimal in sports. But at least now we know how infinitesimal. And when something as illogical as this happens, it's nice to have something concrete to hold onto.
Anyway, onto the bowl matchups the SportsBoss saw as being most advantageous between now and the BCS title game.
[h=3]Gator Bowl[/h]Matchup: Northwestern versus Mississippi State
Line: Northwestern minus-1.5
<offer>SportsBoss says: "I would back Northwestern in this one. All season long, they have played so solid -- not one game was a stinker. The closest would be Penn State when they lost by 11 -- but they were actually winning that game in the second half. The other losses are one point at Nebraska and OT at Michigan. I really like that consistency. When you shift and look at MSU, they were the opposite. Look at who they beat; they didn't beat a bowl team other than Middle Tennessee, and they didn't play any good teams very well. That is one of my favorite aspects of handicapping bowl games -- consistency and how teams played the high and the low on their schedule."</offer>
[h=3]Outback Bowl[/h]Matchup: Michigan versus South Carolina
Line: South Carolina minus-5.5
SportsBoss says: "I like Michigan here. I am not crazy about SC's offense. It is hit or miss to me. Before they beat Clemson, they played Wofford and were outgained by 40 yards at home. In their last five games, they didn't outgain anyone by more than 38 yards, other than that Clemson game. That plays into a Michigan team whose defense is legit. They improved the strategy and fundamentals last year, and now they are improving their personnel -- you can see how much faster they are. You look at the UM losses and they have more impressive losses than anyone in the country: Bama, Notre Dame, Ohio State. The one bad loss is Nebraska, in which Robinson was injured. I think they win straight up."
[h=3]Sugar Bowl[/h]Matchup: Louisville versus Florida
Line: Florida minus-14
SportsBoss says: "I am going to back Louisville getting 14. For me, one of my number one things in high-level bowls is to see if there is a team laying double-digits that has no motivation to play big in the game. If anything, I believe Louisville has the motivation on its side, with Charlie Strong going against his old team. He was one of best recruiters when he was there, and Louisville has a lot of Florida guys who felt overlooked by that school. Also, I love Teddy Bridgewater, especially compared to Jeff Driskel. That's why 14 points is way too many. Florida, before covering against FSU in the last game of the year, was the favorite of six or more in four games, and they didn't cover any of them. You can't count on them to score a lot of points."
[h=3]Fiesta Bowl[/h]Matchup: Kansas State versus Oregon
Line: Oregon minus-9.5
SportsBoss says: "If this is was a regular-season game and it mattered, I might be on Oregon, but in a game where the two teams are very similar and neither has anything else to play for, I have to believe in Collin Klein and [coach Bill] Snyder. Oregon is all about running the ball, averaging 322 yards on the ground. K-State's D only allows 119 yards on the ground, and K-State was only outgained in one game this year on the ground. It might not outgain Oregon, because Oregon will run 10 to 15 more run plays, but it will do enough against the run, and Collin Klein will do enough to cover this number."
[h=3]Cotton Bowl[/h]Matchup: Texas A&M versus Oklahoma
Line: Texas A&M minus-3
SportsBoss says: "When you get into it statistically, Texas A&M has been so good. It has outgained every opponent this season except Alabama, ironically. Oklahoma, in what seems like the 12th time in the last 12 years, had a team ready to challenge for national title and fell short. What really stands out is how the Sooners have been gashed on the ground. Against Oklahoma State, West Virginia, Notre Dame, Kansas and Kansas State, they were outgained by more than 100 yards on the ground in every game. A&M averages more than 200 yards on the ground and five yards per carry. There just isn't enough of an edge in the passing game for Oklahoma. Motivationally, this is also a huge spot. A&M wants to flex and show it is the dominant program in this region."
Chad Millman
ESPN INSIDER
(Which somehow has yet to get a catchy nickname, like the Music City Miracle. I am proposing the Belk WTF-just-happened-to-my-Duke-Cover Bowl or the Belk holy-crap-how-did-Cincy-Cover Bowl.) The only way for me to truly comprehend this situation was to turn the last 90 seconds of the game into an SAT-like math problem, for which there is a reasonable solution that doesn't require a Princeton Review course. I'm sure the geniuses at Duke appreciate me helping them work out their feelings in a rational, logical way. So here goes: If team A is as high as a 10-point underdog to Team B, and Team A has a first and goal with 1:30 seconds remaining in a tie game, what are the chances that Team B can still cover the double-digit spread?
In case you have forgotten, this is the exact scenario that unfolded Thursday night in the Belk Bowl. Duke, which had opened as a 10-point dog and closed as an 8.5-to-9-point dog (it got as low as seven over the past few weeks) had a first and goal in a game that was tied 34-34 with 90 seconds left to play. They were a couple of kneeldowns and a field goal away from winning a bowl game for their gracious coach David Cutcliffe. Instead, Duke running back Josh Snead fumbled, Cincy recovered and, four plays later, the Bearcats scored on an 83-yard touchdown pass.
That wasn't enough.
With Duke flailing in a last-chance drive, QB Sean Renfree was hit as he threw, leaving a floater for a Cincy linebacker, who plucked the gift from the sky and ran it back for a touchdown. What had been a sure Belk Bowl win for Duke turned into a miracle cover for Cincy.
So I ask, in my best prep-test language, what are the chances?
My first call was to Fezzik, two-time SuperContest champ and an actuary-turned-professional bettor. The man is good with numbers. "It was 99.99 percent that Duke would cover. The only realistic chance for Cincy to cover was a triple-OT win, beating the 7.5."
I wasn't satisfied. This was like knowing the answer without understanding the work. I needed the work. Next I asked Mike Perry, a spokesman for the online betting site SportsBook, if his bookmakers could work up some stats, since they offer in-running wagering. I figured their algorithm would have something from that exact moment in the game. But it was so unlikely a scenario that they had taken that option off the board. The only bet they were offering was a money line wager of Duke -600/Cincy +400. "It's really anyone's guess unless you can simulate the situation," Peter Childs, the site's live betting director, said in an email.
Still, I needed a resolution. On Friday morning I texted the SportsBoss, who has been a regular in the column the past couple of years. He has an MBA from a very fine private school and works in finance. He also moonlights as an analytics-based handicapper, applying everything he learned about advanced metrics to who will win and who will lose and by how much. I figured this would be the kind of math problem he'd enjoy tackling.
When we connected Sunday night, ostensibly to go over non-BCS title bowl games he likes over the next week (see below), he did, in fact, have a solution for me. The truth is, he didn't do anything revolutionary. He just did something very, very smart. He took the formulas already available, tinkered with the ingredients, and came up with something that made relative sense.
There is a book called "Mathletics: How Gamblers, Managers and Sports Enthusiasts Use Mathematics in Baseball, Basketball and Football." It was written by Wayne Winston, a professor at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business who has worked as a consultant to the Mavericks. The book has a nifty commercial cover, but make no mistake, it is not for the simpleminded. Open it up and it is as dense as a textbook, with lots of graphs and math formulas. It's exactly the kind of research that appeals to a guy like the SportsBoss.
Winston's website, waynewinston.com, allows you to download all the files he references in his book. Again, this is heady stuff, not to be trifled with or used by mere amateurs. I tried it, and shortly after my computer locked up, my head exploded. But one of the files he allows you access is called "collapses," and it has a formula for determining how likely the biggest breakdowns in sports history were to happen. Think the Blazers losing to the Lakers in the 2000 Western Conference Finals or the Oilers choking against the Bills in the 1992 wild-card game. It's fascinating stuff; miracles as math.
If you can understand it.
Fortunately, the SportsBoss can. He manipulated the formula for the Bills-Oilers, which includes phrases like "sigma for game," "fraction for game" and "sigma for rest" to determine the probability of a win/loss in the exact situation we saw last week. "The number I ended up with for the Duke-Cincy game was 3 out of 1,400, which is around .002," the SportsBoss told me.
Really, it's no different than what any of us thought: The chances of Cincy covering were the most infinitesimal in sports. But at least now we know how infinitesimal. And when something as illogical as this happens, it's nice to have something concrete to hold onto.
Anyway, onto the bowl matchups the SportsBoss saw as being most advantageous between now and the BCS title game.
[h=3]Gator Bowl[/h]Matchup: Northwestern versus Mississippi State
Line: Northwestern minus-1.5
<offer>SportsBoss says: "I would back Northwestern in this one. All season long, they have played so solid -- not one game was a stinker. The closest would be Penn State when they lost by 11 -- but they were actually winning that game in the second half. The other losses are one point at Nebraska and OT at Michigan. I really like that consistency. When you shift and look at MSU, they were the opposite. Look at who they beat; they didn't beat a bowl team other than Middle Tennessee, and they didn't play any good teams very well. That is one of my favorite aspects of handicapping bowl games -- consistency and how teams played the high and the low on their schedule."</offer>
[h=3]Outback Bowl[/h]Matchup: Michigan versus South Carolina
Line: South Carolina minus-5.5
SportsBoss says: "I like Michigan here. I am not crazy about SC's offense. It is hit or miss to me. Before they beat Clemson, they played Wofford and were outgained by 40 yards at home. In their last five games, they didn't outgain anyone by more than 38 yards, other than that Clemson game. That plays into a Michigan team whose defense is legit. They improved the strategy and fundamentals last year, and now they are improving their personnel -- you can see how much faster they are. You look at the UM losses and they have more impressive losses than anyone in the country: Bama, Notre Dame, Ohio State. The one bad loss is Nebraska, in which Robinson was injured. I think they win straight up."
[h=3]Sugar Bowl[/h]Matchup: Louisville versus Florida
Line: Florida minus-14
SportsBoss says: "I am going to back Louisville getting 14. For me, one of my number one things in high-level bowls is to see if there is a team laying double-digits that has no motivation to play big in the game. If anything, I believe Louisville has the motivation on its side, with Charlie Strong going against his old team. He was one of best recruiters when he was there, and Louisville has a lot of Florida guys who felt overlooked by that school. Also, I love Teddy Bridgewater, especially compared to Jeff Driskel. That's why 14 points is way too many. Florida, before covering against FSU in the last game of the year, was the favorite of six or more in four games, and they didn't cover any of them. You can't count on them to score a lot of points."
[h=3]Fiesta Bowl[/h]Matchup: Kansas State versus Oregon
Line: Oregon minus-9.5
SportsBoss says: "If this is was a regular-season game and it mattered, I might be on Oregon, but in a game where the two teams are very similar and neither has anything else to play for, I have to believe in Collin Klein and [coach Bill] Snyder. Oregon is all about running the ball, averaging 322 yards on the ground. K-State's D only allows 119 yards on the ground, and K-State was only outgained in one game this year on the ground. It might not outgain Oregon, because Oregon will run 10 to 15 more run plays, but it will do enough against the run, and Collin Klein will do enough to cover this number."
[h=3]Cotton Bowl[/h]Matchup: Texas A&M versus Oklahoma
Line: Texas A&M minus-3
SportsBoss says: "When you get into it statistically, Texas A&M has been so good. It has outgained every opponent this season except Alabama, ironically. Oklahoma, in what seems like the 12th time in the last 12 years, had a team ready to challenge for national title and fell short. What really stands out is how the Sooners have been gashed on the ground. Against Oklahoma State, West Virginia, Notre Dame, Kansas and Kansas State, they were outgained by more than 100 yards on the ground in every game. A&M averages more than 200 yards on the ground and five yards per carry. There just isn't enough of an edge in the passing game for Oklahoma. Motivationally, this is also a huge spot. A&M wants to flex and show it is the dominant program in this region."
