Half Point Parlay Cards -- 2015 season
August 26th, 2015 at 2:04:38 PM
permalink
Maybe I'm tooting my own horn a bit, but I think Half Point Parlay Cards is one of the best threads this site has ever had. Two words people -- silver platter.
I'd like to start a new thread devoted to the cards for this season. To get the ball rolling, I'd like to discuss the rule change since last season. Previously an extra point was kicked from the two yard line. That was moved back to the 15 years line. Source: NFL moves extra point to 15-yard line for 2015 season.
Quoting to the article Giving Kickers the Boot, "Now a 19-yard PAT that had a 99.5 percent success rate will become a 32-yard PAT with a success rate somewhere in the mid-90s."
This seems accurate to me. That said, it would seem that in most situations going for the kick would still be the right play. This is very important because an extra half point won't be worth as much off the critical numbers (namely 3 and 7) if there are a lot of two-point conversion attempts. In other words, the margin of victory distribution won't be as spiky, which would be bad for us.
The big question I'd like to ask is so far in pre-season play, what percentage of the time was a touchdown followed by a kick? I'd prefer to remove from the sampling end-of-game situations where one extra point made a huge difference, but will take whatever information anybody may have. Thank you.
I'd like to start a new thread devoted to the cards for this season. To get the ball rolling, I'd like to discuss the rule change since last season. Previously an extra point was kicked from the two yard line. That was moved back to the 15 years line. Source: NFL moves extra point to 15-yard line for 2015 season.
Quoting to the article Giving Kickers the Boot, "Now a 19-yard PAT that had a 99.5 percent success rate will become a 32-yard PAT with a success rate somewhere in the mid-90s."
This seems accurate to me. That said, it would seem that in most situations going for the kick would still be the right play. This is very important because an extra half point won't be worth as much off the critical numbers (namely 3 and 7) if there are a lot of two-point conversion attempts. In other words, the margin of victory distribution won't be as spiky, which would be bad for us.
The big question I'd like to ask is so far in pre-season play, what percentage of the time was a touchdown followed by a kick? I'd prefer to remove from the sampling end-of-game situations where one extra point made a huge difference, but will take whatever information anybody may have. Thank you.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
August 26th, 2015 at 2:21:15 PM
permalink
Some teams like the Packers have gone for two on every TD they have had in the preseason, but from what I have read about what Coach McCarthy has said on it, he doesn't plan to carry that philosophy over to the regular season. When the 2 point conversion will become more prevalent is with teams where the coach loses confidence in the kicker or if they happen to miss one, causing them to enter what I call the 2 point death spiral. Also, IMO, games played in cold weather, particularly late in the season, will be more prone to going for 2 points.
*Edit*
In 2014, NFL teams were successful on 27 of 56 (48.2%) conversions for a 100 attempt estimate of 96.4 points per 100 attempts. A 33 yard FG has a 95% conversion rate or 95 points per 100 attempts. The numbers do show that going for 2 all the time will equal more points over the long haul. In 4 years since it was introduced in 1994, 2 point conversions were converted more than 50% of the time. Does that 1 point per 100 opportunities give people incentive to buck tradition and go for 2 more often or with regularity? My guess is it will, but the gravitation towards it will be more gradual, kind of like when the NBA first introduced the 3 point shot roughly 35 years ago
*Edit*
In 2014, NFL teams were successful on 27 of 56 (48.2%) conversions for a 100 attempt estimate of 96.4 points per 100 attempts. A 33 yard FG has a 95% conversion rate or 95 points per 100 attempts. The numbers do show that going for 2 all the time will equal more points over the long haul. In 4 years since it was introduced in 1994, 2 point conversions were converted more than 50% of the time. Does that 1 point per 100 opportunities give people incentive to buck tradition and go for 2 more often or with regularity? My guess is it will, but the gravitation towards it will be more gradual, kind of like when the NBA first introduced the 3 point shot roughly 35 years ago
A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish
August 26th, 2015 at 2:21:23 PM
permalink
I don't have numbers but I don't think it is going to be helpful to know this. I believe that teams have been tinkering with 2 point plays to get a feel on how often they can score.
My guess is week 1 and 2 there will be a higher number of 2 point plays then depending on the conversion percentage, teams will decide if they want to continue on it. There will be a few teams like the Eagles that will try more than everyone else.
My guess is week 1 and 2 there will be a higher number of 2 point plays then depending on the conversion percentage, teams will decide if they want to continue on it. There will be a few teams like the Eagles that will try more than everyone else.
Expect the worst and you will never be disappointed.
I AM NOT PART OF GWAE RADIO SHOW
August 26th, 2015 at 2:24:14 PM
permalink
I don't think you should put any weight in pre-season stats. Teams often play it differently in pre-season than they do when it counts. One common thing is teams hate to go into overtime in preseason, so often if a team is trailing by 7 points and scores a late touchdown, they will go for 2 so they either win by 1 or lose by 1, rather than go overtime, which they almost assuredly would do during the regular season. Another example is a team that is trailing by 3 points late in a preseason game will often go for a win on 4th down instead of kicking a game tying field goal.
In addition, with the new rule change, teams that are considering playing it differently by going for 2 points more often, probably wouldn't show much of that during the preseason. "My' Philadelphia Eagles comes to mind. There is a lot of speculation they picked up Tim Tebow and he will make the team, specifically for the two point conversion play. If that is the case, they haven't shown it during preseason and likely won't until the season begins.
In addition, with the new rule change, teams that are considering playing it differently by going for 2 points more often, probably wouldn't show much of that during the preseason. "My' Philadelphia Eagles comes to mind. There is a lot of speculation they picked up Tim Tebow and he will make the team, specifically for the two point conversion play. If that is the case, they haven't shown it during preseason and likely won't until the season begins.
August 26th, 2015 at 2:26:11 PM
permalink
Here is some data from an article on ESPN's site:
Other data, including 2014 aggregates is included in the August 18 article here.
Quote: ESPN.com(In the first 17 games of the 2015 preseason, place-kickers missed two of 56 extra-point attempts from the new distance. Coaches called for 13 two-point attempts, and their teams converted six. More notably, a similar change in the Canadian Football League has brought extra-point conversion rates down from 99.4 percent to 84.1 percent during its ongoing 2015 season.)[
Other data, including 2014 aggregates is included in the August 18 article here.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
August 26th, 2015 at 3:29:22 PM
permalink
Quote: Wizard"Now a 19-yard PAT that had a 99.5 percent success rate will become a 32-yard PAT with a success rate somewhere in the mid-90s."
Over the last three years kickers have made only 94% of field goals from between 30 and 35 yards. But it is 98% when only counting attempts from the middle of the field and not rushed for time.
If I was setting a line on % of PAT made I would open around 97.5. If anyone offered only 95 or 96% I would bet very heavily on the over
But the big issue isn't the change in value so much as the change in perception. If coaches think there is a chance of missing the kick, while they have a better than 50% of making the conversion, they'll go for it early and often, forcing the other team to as well.
What's the over / under on total number of two-point conversion attempts for the year?
Quote: WizardThe big question I'd like to ask is so far in pre-season play, what percentage of the time was a touchdown followed by a kick?
Not that big. Even before this year didn't teams go for two quite often in the preseason? The thinking was that to not practice PAT in the past would have cost a team maybe one point over 16 games. But being effective at scoring from the two yard line would be worth a lot over the course of a season
The value of the 3 has definitely dropped (by as much as 10-cents according to some estimates I've heard; along with the 7). But it is still a zero-sum game. No matter what there will still most likely be 256 margins of victory this year. If a game is 7.5 on the card and 9.5 off the board, it will be more valuable than before. Same with a game that is +2.5 on the card and a pick off the board. As the value of a couple key numbers drops, the value of all the others increase.
Also very important to know the teams playing. Eagles and Patriots will go for two a lot, perhaps even on the first TD of the game. Packers might as well. Others will go far less often unless dictated by the score
August 26th, 2015 at 3:49:51 PM
permalink
Thank you for all the replies. They were so good that I have no good cross-talk on them at this time.
Heads up that the first game is on Thursday Sep 10. The half-point cards probably won't be out until after that game. The first full Sunday of games is Sep 13.
Heads up that the first game is on Thursday Sep 10. The half-point cards probably won't be out until after that game. The first full Sunday of games is Sep 13.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
August 29th, 2015 at 8:17:28 PM
permalink
For what it's worth, Eagles went for 2 pt conversion after their first two touchdowns tonight. Neither was successful as Tim Tebow ran unsuccessfully on the first and threw incomplete on the second.
I do think Eagles are planning on going for 2, quite a bit this year. I don't know if other teams are thinking similarly or will follow. Should be interesting, to see how this shakes out and effects lines.
I do think Eagles are planning on going for 2, quite a bit this year. I don't know if other teams are thinking similarly or will follow. Should be interesting, to see how this shakes out and effects lines.
August 29th, 2015 at 8:51:31 PM
permalink
My prediction it that the number of 2pt. conversions will go up in the month of Dec., especially in cities like GB, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, NE, etc.
September 11th, 2015 at 12:25:09 PM
permalink
Here are the 2015 week 1 half point-point parlay cards from William Hill. Click on any image for a larger version.
Here are my suggested plays:
Clev +3.5
Wash +3.5
Jack +3.5
StL +4.5
SD -2.5
Tenn +3.5
Oak +3.5
Atl +3.5
Here are my suggested plays:
Clev +3.5
Wash +3.5
Jack +3.5
StL +4.5
SD -2.5
Tenn +3.5
Oak +3.5
Atl +3.5
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 11th, 2015 at 12:55:01 PM
permalink
No "magic" 7 point lines, but is a 4.5 pt line (Broncos/Ravens; Seahawks/Rams) like a "fat" 3.5 pt. line or an "ugly" 6.5?
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
September 11th, 2015 at 3:01:18 PM
permalink
Quote: AyecarumbaNo "magic" 7 point lines, but is a 4.5 pt line (Broncos/Ravens; Seahawks/Rams) like a "fat" 3.5 pt. line or an "ugly" 6.5?
Too bad the Pats/Steelers game wasn't on there. That was a 7-point spread and landed exactly on it. The perfect situation for these cards.
The Broncos/Ravens line is 4.5 off the board and on the card, so no value there. StL is +4 off the board and +4.5 on the cards. Granted getting the half point off the 4 isn't as good as 3 or 7, but still worth it. Given that there are seven other solid picks, maybe I shouldn't have listed it. Normally I have to throw in some marginal picks to fill out the card, but not this time.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 13th, 2015 at 5:42:11 AM
permalink
Here is my plays this week, which I put in Saturday night:
GB -6.5
Jags +3.5
SD -2.5
Tenn +3.5
Oak +3.5
Bal +4.5
GB -6.5
Jags +3.5
SD -2.5
Tenn +3.5
Oak +3.5
Bal +4.5
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 13th, 2015 at 7:38:23 AM
permalink
Thank you for the card Wizard, I love football wagers but my state won't allow it, I can't even play draft kings and the like here in Washington, but pot is fine, go figure :)
I don't know where to find those , do you recommend a website? Will those be posted here every week ? I just like to make my picks and dream of being allowed to but a few bucks on football ...
As for extra points going for 2, I thought it was interesting that the Steelers, trailing behind, tried for two in the very first game, I hope this is the sign of a new trend. I hope they use a chart and go for it when they can see a mathematical advantage from doing so instead of being so conservative.
I don't know where to find those , do you recommend a website? Will those be posted here every week ? I just like to make my picks and dream of being allowed to but a few bucks on football ...
As for extra points going for 2, I thought it was interesting that the Steelers, trailing behind, tried for two in the very first game, I hope this is the sign of a new trend. I hope they use a chart and go for it when they can see a mathematical advantage from doing so instead of being so conservative.
So Wizard, still no basic strategy for strip poker huh?
September 13th, 2015 at 4:30:41 PM
permalink
Quote: Wonko33As for extra points going for 2, I thought it was interesting that the Steelers, trailing behind, tried for two in the very first game, I hope this is the sign of a new trend. I hope they use a chart and go for it when they can see a mathematical advantage from doing so instead of being so conservative.
Yes, they were down 3-21 and converted a 2-point conversion in the second quarter (source).
If anybody would like an extra credit project, please parse through all the week 1 games and let me know how many were 6, 7, and 8-point touchdowns.
Meanwhile, my picks above went 3-3 for a big fat zero in the win column.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 13th, 2015 at 4:46:55 PM
permalink
Did you have to wait for approval on any of them or did they all go right through?
September 13th, 2015 at 9:06:58 PM
permalink
Quote: Wizard
If anybody would like an extra credit project, please parse through all the week 1 games and let me know how many were 6, 7, and 8-point touchdowns.
Despite the best efforts of the Dallas Cowboys, (turned it over three times and achieved zero turnovers) the New York Giants were unable to prevail in tonight's game because they very politely decided to throw on 3rd-and-Goal from the 1 in their final drive with DAL out of time outs as opposed to running and burning clock if they failed to punch it in.
While many might disagree with me, I would have at least considered trying to punch it in on fourth down even though the Cowboys were only down by three. Assuming you ran unsuccessfully on third down, the Cowboys would have just over a minute to get into field goal range, coming out of their own end zone, if the Fourth Down conversion failed. Furthermore, if you successfully score on the fourth down conversion, then you definitely win the game. Fail and hold the Cowboys to a Field Goal, and at least you're going to OT.
I don't know if I would have went for it or not, though, just saying I'd have thought about it.
To answer your request, though, I went through the games and came up with an answer that obviously does not include Monday night's games. I do not guarantee these results are 100% accurate, but I will check them again later to be sure.
Six Point Plays: 6 (Two Failed Conversions, One Blocked PAT, Three Missed PAT's)
Seven-Point Plays: 64
Eight Point Plays: 4
Assuming these numbers are correct, PAT success currently sits at 94.12% while 2-PT success sits at 66.67%. The average value of a PAT is 0.9412 points while the average value of a 2-PT is 1.333 points. It's early in the season, but it will be interesting to see if 2PT Conversions yield the highest return in points at the end.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
September 13th, 2015 at 9:20:25 PM
permalink
It would still be best for someone to double-check me, but I went through the games again and got the same results.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
September 13th, 2015 at 9:24:37 PM
permalink
Getting the same numbers. Not sure what Tom was thinking. Obviously he didn't do the math.
September 13th, 2015 at 9:26:52 PM
permalink
Thanks for double-checking me, Boz.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
September 13th, 2015 at 9:38:39 PM
permalink
Quote: Mission146
Six Point Plays: 6 (Two Failed Conversions, One Blocked PAT, Three Missed PAT's)
Seven-Point Plays: 64
Eight Point Plays: 4
Assuming these numbers are correct, PAT success currently sits at 94.12% while 2-PT success sits at 66.67%. The average value of a PAT is 0.9412 points while the average value of a 2-PT is 1.333 points. It's early in the season, but it will be interesting to see if 2PT Conversions yield the highest return in points at the end.
That's funny, mission, I was just looking at these numbers myself as you posted. I used the website deadspin, which had numbers posted through the late afternoon games (excluding dallas/giants).
Deadspin had 2 point conversions listed higher than you at 6 of 8. Since I don't see any in the giants/cowboys game, I am not sure where that discrepancy is. But either way 4 of 6, or 6 of 8 is just way to small of a number to analyze as having much value.
It's early and a small sample size, BUT, that 94.12% kicking extra point is almost spot on to what was predicted, 94.4%, which they came up with by looking at FG percent from the new extra point difference based on last 3 years.
Of course Eagles have not played yet and they are one of the teams, everyone thought might......
Surely if the kicking extra point percentage stays in that 94% range (or lower) as expected, anyone taking a long term analytical look will determine the 2 point try to be a better value. Surely it will come down from either 66% or 75% where it now stands, presumably towards 50%. ???
But here's the thing. If someone decides to go for 2 all the time, it will set up interesting in game situations. I mean what happens if you are losing by 6 and score a TD? You are going to pass up a 94% chance to take the lead for a 50% chance to take the lead by 2 and a 50% chance to remain tied?
What happens if you are down by 7? You pass up a 94% chance to tie for a 50% change to take a one point lead, but also risking a 50% chance to remain losing by 1?
What if the game is tie? If you score and go for 2 and miss (50%) you leave the door wide open for the other team to score a TD and have a 94% chance of taking a 1 point lead.
As advantage players, we look at the long term. And if you do that with this situation, then always going for 2 would be the EV play. But that is going to butt heads with in game circumstances where it wouldn't make sense.
Should be interesting to see what teams decide going forward, including Chip Kelly. :/
September 13th, 2015 at 10:14:45 PM
permalink
Quote: Mission146Despite the best efforts of the Dallas Cowboys, (turned it over three times and achieved zero turnovers) the New York Giants were unable to prevail in tonight's game because they very politely decided to throw on 3rd-and-Goal from the 1 in their final drive with DAL out of time outs as opposed to running and burning clock if they failed to punch it in.
While many might disagree with me, I would have at least considered trying to punch it in on fourth down even though the Cowboys were only down by three. Assuming you ran unsuccessfully on third down, the Cowboys would have just over a minute to get into field goal range, coming out of their own end zone, if the Fourth Down conversion failed. Furthermore, if you successfully score on the fourth down conversion, then you definitely win the game. Fail and hold the Cowboys to a Field Goal, and at least you're going to OT.
I don't know if I would have went for it or not, though, just saying I'd have thought about it.
.
Not to derail, but I agree with you 100%. They needed to burn the clock with a 4th down run (and for that matter a 3rd down run before that, not the pass they tried) because, even if they failed to convert, it's much more likely Dallas would have to settle for a FG/OT at best with 40-50 less seconds available. I was shaking my head from the point he threw on 3rd down. And if I could see it (not an expert), you can bet millions of other more knowledgeable people blew a gasket screaming at the tv the whole time.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
September 13th, 2015 at 10:29:22 PM
permalink
Quote: beachbumbabsNot to derail, but I agree with you 100%. They needed to burn the clock with a 4th down run (and for that matter a 3rd down run before that, not the pass they tried) because, even if they failed to convert, it's much more likely Dallas would have to settle for a FG/OT at best with 40-50 less seconds available. I was shaking my head from the point he threw on 3rd down. And if I could see it (not an expert), you can bet millions of other more knowledgeable people blew a gasket screaming at the tv the whole time.
Actually that horrible 3rd down decision was only one of 3 time mismanagement decisions in the last few minutes.
With 3-4 minutes left and the giants leading by 3 trying to pick up first downs and run out the clock, there was that strange situation where the giants receiver picked up the ball and ran the length of the field. I guess he though it was a fumble. Anyway that led to a situation where both the game and play clock needed to be reset. after several delays and attempts the game clock was reset to 3:20 and the play clock to :40 and both started on the ref's whistle. Inexplainably the giants snapped the ball with 19 seconds left on the play clock (and the game clock running). Next play, with game clock running they snapped with 11 seconds remaining on the play clock.
Those two earlier than necessary snaps cost them 25-30 seconds and if you add that to 35-38 second they could have run off if they had run on the 3rd and goal with a minute and a half left, they could have still kicked the field goal, took a 6 point lead, but gave Dallas the ball with less than 30 seconds rather than 90 seconds remaining.
I don't know who handles clock management on the Giants, but they failed miserably.
September 13th, 2015 at 10:35:28 PM
permalink
KewlJ,
I don't know where the discrepancy is, but there were definitely not eight 2PT attempts.
As you mentioned, even if the play has greater point value, there will be many situations in which it is correct to take the higher probability of getting a point. Do you happen to know offhand what the 2PT% is at for all of NFL history? I don't, but I may look it up.
I think the first TD in a 0-0 game will be interesting. If you take the better value play (if indeed it is) then the other team needs a TD and a lower percentage 2PT to tie it back up, but if you fail, then they can take the lead with a TD and a high percentage PAT, or even tie it up with two FG's.
If coaches decide they prefer the reduced, but still high, probability of getting the PAT, I don't think the 2PT strategy will change too much.
I don't know where the discrepancy is, but there were definitely not eight 2PT attempts.
As you mentioned, even if the play has greater point value, there will be many situations in which it is correct to take the higher probability of getting a point. Do you happen to know offhand what the 2PT% is at for all of NFL history? I don't, but I may look it up.
I think the first TD in a 0-0 game will be interesting. If you take the better value play (if indeed it is) then the other team needs a TD and a lower percentage 2PT to tie it back up, but if you fail, then they can take the lead with a TD and a high percentage PAT, or even tie it up with two FG's.
If coaches decide they prefer the reduced, but still high, probability of getting the PAT, I don't think the 2PT strategy will change too much.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
September 13th, 2015 at 10:40:33 PM
permalink
According to business insider there were 214, 2 pt attempts in the NFL from 2010 through 2014, with 108 successful. 50.5%
September 13th, 2015 at 10:48:22 PM
permalink
Interesting, by default, they have the higher point value. I still think it is situational and won't change much, though. Even looking at the PIT/NE game, had the Steelers taken the PAT when the successfully converted for 2, if they had scored another TD without any other scores, you still go for two to get within an FG.
Most of the time, I think teams will still take the 94% chance of locking up a point.
Most of the time, I think teams will still take the 94% chance of locking up a point.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
September 13th, 2015 at 11:26:48 PM
permalink
Just saw the episode on family guy about god screwing over the patriots,. I swear god does this to our last team on the half points :(
"Man Babes" #AxelFabulous
September 14th, 2015 at 2:47:23 AM
permalink
Just as a reminder....
The Cowboys appear to have been a 7 point favorite.
The over/under appears to have moved from 52 to 53 1/2
The gamed ended 27 to 26, a total of 53 points with the Giants covering the seven points.
Yes, we all know the players and coaches don't know the lines and aren't told to "play to 26" or anything like that, however....
In addition:
http://espn.go.com/newyork/nfl/story/_/id/13653044/las-vegas-sportsbooks-lose-big-opening-nfl-sunday
One would assume a lot of money was on this Sunday night game considering the participants and it being the first week of season.
The Cowboys appear to have been a 7 point favorite.
The over/under appears to have moved from 52 to 53 1/2
The gamed ended 27 to 26, a total of 53 points with the Giants covering the seven points.
Yes, we all know the players and coaches don't know the lines and aren't told to "play to 26" or anything like that, however....
In addition:
http://espn.go.com/newyork/nfl/story/_/id/13653044/las-vegas-sportsbooks-lose-big-opening-nfl-sunday
One would assume a lot of money was on this Sunday night game considering the participants and it being the first week of season.
September 14th, 2015 at 9:38:26 AM
permalink
Six two point attempts in 14 games. That rate isn't too much higher than other years
And all those attempts did nothing to get the games off key numbers. Texans made two after missing a kick -- lose by 7. Steelers made their two to make it 10 instead of 11 -- lose by 7. Colts and Raiders combine for three two point attempts simply because they were down big in the fourth quarter -- Indianapolis scores 14 points, Oakland scores 13. Seattle makes their attempt to make it a three point game in the fourth quarter -- lose by 3 in overtimes
Five out of six of those attempts would have been attempted had the old rules still been in effect. Houston-Kansas City game would still have ended up with the same score.
Maybe later in the year we'll see a game end 25-20 that would have otherwise been 24-21. But it won't be too often and it is just as likely to help you win your bets as lose them
And all those attempts did nothing to get the games off key numbers. Texans made two after missing a kick -- lose by 7. Steelers made their two to make it 10 instead of 11 -- lose by 7. Colts and Raiders combine for three two point attempts simply because they were down big in the fourth quarter -- Indianapolis scores 14 points, Oakland scores 13. Seattle makes their attempt to make it a three point game in the fourth quarter -- lose by 3 in overtimes
Five out of six of those attempts would have been attempted had the old rules still been in effect. Houston-Kansas City game would still have ended up with the same score.
Maybe later in the year we'll see a game end 25-20 that would have otherwise been 24-21. But it won't be too often and it is just as likely to help you win your bets as lose them
September 14th, 2015 at 9:51:08 AM
permalink
Quote: TomGSix two point attempts in 14 games. That rate isn't too much higher than other years
Based on the numbers of 214 attempts in last 5 years or 43 per year, that is 2.5 per week, so 6 is more than double that and we still have 2 games remaining, including the Eagles who many believe are one of the teams most likely to be aggressive with this rule change.
It also is likely to increase as time goes on and teams really analyze the numbers. By years end, I'll bet the numbers will by 3 times the average of last 5 years, in the 120 range for the year.
September 14th, 2015 at 11:14:34 AM
permalink
Thanks Wizard for posting the card. Washout for me. As for the dallas/giants game you'd think with a four game preseason teams would be able to work those kinks out. Apparently not!
September 14th, 2015 at 2:09:09 PM
permalink
Quote: kewljBased on the numbers of 214 attempts in last 5 years or 43 per year, that is 2.5 per week, so 6 is more than double that
Teams averaged 65 attempts the past two years, so there was a definite increase in going for two even before the rule change. While it is definitely true that the 3 and 7 are worth less than before, kicking the PAT from further out is only a represents a fraction of that change (the rule changes that have helped make offenses much more efficient have had a far greater impact).
September 14th, 2015 at 2:40:34 PM
permalink
Quote: Mission146While many might disagree with me, I would have at least considered trying to punch it in on fourth down even though the Cowboys were only down by three. Assuming you ran unsuccessfully on third down, the Cowboys would have just over a minute to get into field goal range, coming out of their own end zone, if the Fourth Down conversion failed. Furthermore, if you successfully score on the fourth down conversion, then you definitely win the game. Fail and hold the Cowboys to a Field Goal, and at least you're going to OT.
The commentators made that point about the clock too. I had Giants on the money line and I'm still disgusted about that ending. Normally, I think I'm pretty cool about losing a bet, but that one was hard to take. Grabbing defeat from the hands of victory.
Quote:Six Point Plays: 6 (Two Failed Conversions, One Blocked PAT, Three Missed PAT's)
Seven-Point Plays: 64
Eight Point Plays: 4
Assuming these numbers are correct, PAT success currently sits at 94.12% while 2-PT success sits at 66.67%. The average value of a PAT is 0.9412 points while the average value of a 2-PT is 1.333 points. It's early in the season, but it will be interesting to see if 2PT Conversions yield the highest return in points at the end.
Thank you for doing that research! I owe you a beer.
According to Wikipedia, the general success rate is 40% to 55%. It is hard to draw a lot of conclusions from a sample size of six.
If anything, shouldn't the success rate be lower, because you have to declare the attempt in advance now, losing the element of surprise.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 14th, 2015 at 2:43:40 PM
permalink
Quote: TomGWhile it is definitely true that the 3 and 7 are worth less than before, kicking the PAT from further out is only a represents a fraction of that change (the rule changes that have helped make offenses much more efficient have had a far greater impact).
Why do those other rule changes matter in this regard? Are you suggesting that the other rule changes making scoring easier, leading to higher totals, and thus less significance to the key numbers?
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 14th, 2015 at 3:03:25 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardWhy do those other rule changes matter in this regard? Are you suggesting that the other rule changes making scoring easier, leading to higher totals, and thus less significance to the key numbers?
Exactly. Historically if you could bet -2.5 and +3.5 you would have about a 4% edge overall, right? But you would hit the middle a lot more often on games with totals in the 30s than you would on games with totals totals in the 50s.
Also why "basic strategy" teasers have become much less valuable. Damn that last Cardinals TD with 90 seconds left. . .
September 14th, 2015 at 4:20:03 PM
permalink
Quote: TomGExactly. Historically if you could bet -2.5 and +3.5 you would have about a 4% edge overall, right? But you would hit the middle a lot more often on games with totals in the 30s than you would on games with totals totals in the 50s.
Let's look at some data, shall we. This is for every NFL game played since 1994, except the last Super Bowl.
First, here is the average points scored per game:
We can see it held close to about 42 through 2005. However, in 2006 it started going up by an average of almost half a point per year.
How does that affect the margin of victory? In particular those key 3 and 7-point margins of victory?
We can see the seven-point MOV has been holding steady at 9.1%. However, the three-point MOV has been dropping steadily by about one percentage point every four years.
Personally, I think this is still worth doing, but would agree the value is declining by the year.
Here is the data:
| Year | Average Points | 3-pt MOV | 7-pt MOV |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1994 | 40.8 | 16.2% | 10.2% |
| 1995 | 43.4 | 19.9% | 6.8% |
| 1996 | 41.0 | 12.7% | 9.2% |
| 1997 | 41.3 | 17.1% | 5.6% |
| 1998 | 42.7 | 12.7% | 11.6% |
| 1999 | 41.7 | 15.8% | 9.3% |
| 2000 | 41.1 | 16.6% | 8.1% |
| 2001 | 40.5 | 17.4% | 10.0% |
| 2002 | 43.7 | 16.2% | 10.9% |
| 2003 | 41.8 | 16.9% | 11.6% |
| 2004 | 43.1 | 18.7% | 9.7% |
| 2005 | 41.2 | 14.3% | 6.0% |
| 2006 | 41.5 | 17.2% | 9.4% |
| 2007 | 43.4 | 16.1% | 10.1% |
| 2008 | 44.0 | 10.5% | 9.7% |
| 2009 | 43.2 | 15.4% | 9.4% |
| 2010 | 44.3 | 17.7% | 7.9% |
| 2011 | 44.5 | 13.9% | 11.6% |
| 2012 | 45.8 | 13.5% | 9.7% |
| 2013 | 46.9 | 14.6% | 8.6% |
| 2014 | 45.2 | 10.9% | 6.0% |
| Average | 42.9 | 15.4% | 9.1% |
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 14th, 2015 at 6:55:10 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardThe commentators made that point about the clock too. I had Giants on the money line and I'm still disgusted about that ending. Normally, I think I'm pretty cool about losing a bet, but that one was hard to take. Grabbing defeat from the hands of victory.
I don't blame you, that's a pretty sick loss. If it makes you feel any better, the offense never did perform like a team that should have won that game. It took plenty of miscues by the Cowboys to even put them in that position.
Quote:Thank you for doing that research! I owe you a beer.
According to Wikipedia, the general success rate is 40% to 55%. It is hard to draw a lot of conclusions from a sample size of six.
If anything, shouldn't the success rate be lower, because you have to declare the attempt in advance now, losing the element of surprise.
I accept the beer, they might not be free anymore by the time I get out to Vegas!
I'm definitely not drawing any conclusions off of that sample size, but now that you've got me good and interested, I'll be tracking this statistic throughout the season, so I'll continue to update in this thread. No further beers required. ;)
I'm not sure how much of a true element of surprise there was given the formations. I don't recall seeing too many fake PAT's to get conversions. Besides that, as discussed before, even with the old Rules going for two was pretty situational, and thus, pretty obvious that would likely be what the other team was planning.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
September 14th, 2015 at 7:35:50 PM
permalink
Six Point Plays: 6 (One Blocked PAT, Three PATs Missed)
Seven Point Plays: 69
Eight Point Plays: 4
PATs improve to 94.52% for an average value of 0.9452 points. 2PTs hold at 66.67% for a value of 1.333 points. One game in progress, will update tomorrow.
Seven Point Plays: 69
Eight Point Plays: 4
PATs improve to 94.52% for an average value of 0.9452 points. 2PTs hold at 66.67% for a value of 1.333 points. One game in progress, will update tomorrow.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
September 15th, 2015 at 10:37:03 PM
permalink
Was reading all the work you put in on these cards, great stuff. Forgive me if I overlooked it but when you have like 6 plays in the example above do you do a bunch of combinations of 4 and 5 teamers in addition to the 6 team?
September 16th, 2015 at 12:18:32 AM
permalink
Quote: Lucky1Was reading all the work you put in on these cards, great stuff. Forgive me if I overlooked it but when you have like 6 plays in the example above do you do a bunch of combinations of 4 and 5 teamers in addition to the 6 team?
Thank you. I'd do a 5-leg round robin and one 6-leg.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 16th, 2015 at 6:26:31 AM
permalink
great, thanks!
September 16th, 2015 at 1:27:50 PM
permalink
UPDATE:
Six Point Plays: 6 (One Blocked PAT, Three PATs Missed)
Seven Point Plays: 71
Eight Point Plays: 4
PATs improve to 94.67% for an average value of 0.9467 points. 2PTs hold at 66.67% for a value of 1.333 points.
Six Point Plays: 6 (One Blocked PAT, Three PATs Missed)
Seven Point Plays: 71
Eight Point Plays: 4
PATs improve to 94.67% for an average value of 0.9467 points. 2PTs hold at 66.67% for a value of 1.333 points.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
September 17th, 2015 at 11:21:14 AM
permalink
Here is your first look at the week 2 William Hill card. As usual, click on the image for a larger version.
This was posted on Thursday as 11:30 AM. As I write this there are only three good sides:
Houston +3.5 (market is +3 EV)
SD +3.5 (market is +3)
Indy -6.5 (market is -7 EV)
I've been criticized off the forum for betting these too early. So, out of necessity this time, I'm going to give it more time to let the lines mature. I'll probably put in my cards Saturday night or Sunday morning, assuming more sides ripen.
This was posted on Thursday as 11:30 AM. As I write this there are only three good sides:
Houston +3.5 (market is +3 EV)
SD +3.5 (market is +3)
Indy -6.5 (market is -7 EV)
I've been criticized off the forum for betting these too early. So, out of necessity this time, I'm going to give it more time to let the lines mature. I'll probably put in my cards Saturday night or Sunday morning, assuming more sides ripen.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 17th, 2015 at 3:32:19 PM
permalink
I suppose it makes sense to wait until Sat night or Sunday morning since the closing line should be considered the sharpest, but waiting until then could work against you as well....if it moves too much they may not even take the bet. Say Indy moved to -11 (extreme example) they wouldn't take those cards before kickoff but would take them today only being off half a point.
September 17th, 2015 at 3:57:10 PM
permalink
Quote: Lucky1....if it moves too much they may not even take the bet. Say Indy moved to -11 (extreme example) they wouldn't take those cards before kickoff but would take them today only being off half a point.
I don't see them take NFL games off very often, but do college. Another reason against betting late is there is more heat. Just try betting late at the Rampart and you'll get two cards approved, at best.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 17th, 2015 at 7:28:03 PM
permalink
https://wizardofvegas.com/articles/Much-Ado-About-Two/
This is my new Article about whether or not I expect the new NFL PAT Rule to significantly change spread or totals betting.
This is my new Article about whether or not I expect the new NFL PAT Rule to significantly change spread or totals betting.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
September 17th, 2015 at 10:43:45 PM
permalink
yes, good pointQuote: WizardI don't see them take NFL games off very often, but do college. Another reason against betting late is there is more heat. Just try betting late at the Rampart and you'll get two cards approved, at best.
September 19th, 2015 at 11:38:51 AM
permalink
As I write this on Saturday at 11:30 AM it looks like a bad week. The only three solid plays are:
Hou +3.5
SD +3.5
Wash +3.5
I'm going to sit out week #2.
Hou +3.5
SD +3.5
Wash +3.5
I'm going to sit out week #2.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 19th, 2015 at 9:31:18 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardAs I write this on Saturday at 11:30 AM it looks like a bad week. The only three solid plays are:
Hou +3.5
SD +3.5
Wash +3.5
I'm going to sit out week #2.
Why did IND -6.5 get eliminated? Maybe throw in a total to complete the 5-teamer. Perhaps add BAL/OAK under 43.5?
Hou +3.5
SD +3.5
Wash +3.5
Ind -6.5
BAL/OAK under 43.5
**Edited to fix error**
September 20th, 2015 at 2:01:56 AM
permalink
Quote: KeeneoneWhy did IND -6.5 get eliminated? What about SAN +3.5 or maybe throw in a total to complete the 5-teamer. Perhaps add BAL/OAK under 43.5?
Hou +3.5
SD +3.5
Wash +3.5
Ind -6.5
SAN +3.5 or BAL/OAK under 43.5
Just curious...
Also curious what's wrong with a three team parlay?
