Sports betting chatter
you know the old saw about the home dog being a good bet
I just went over 100 past games on covers.com and came up with the home dogs winning 63-37
edit again - just went over 100 games from the previous year and the home dogs lost 46-54
so I erased my experimental picks - looks like it was just variance - not worth pursuing
.
Quote: lilredrooster.
you know the old saw about the home dog being a good bet
I just went over 100 past games on covers.com and came up with the home dogs winning 63-37
edit again - just went over 100 games from the previous year and the home dogs lost 46-54
so I erased my experimental picks - looks like it was just variance - not worth pursuing
.
link to original post
I would guess that if there is some +EV on the home underdogs, it is very small like 1% or 2%. That small of an edge can be attractive if you have a very large bankroll but most people will over bet their bankroll just because they have been told there is an edge, If it was me I probably would not bet more than 1% of my bankroll on a small edge like that.
Quote: DRichQuote: lilredrooster.
you know the old saw about the home dog being a good bet
I just went over 100 past games on covers.com and came up with the home dogs winning 63-37
edit again - just went over 100 games from the previous year and the home dogs lost 46-54
so I erased my experimental picks - looks like it was just variance - not worth pursuing
.
link to original post
I would guess that if there is some +EV on the home underdogs, it is very small like 1% or 2%. That small of an edge can be attractive if you have a very large bankroll but most people will over bet their bankroll just because they have been told there is an edge, If it was me I probably would not bet more than 1% of my bankroll on a small edge like that.
link to original post
And I would bet you are wrong. I seriously doubt with the normal vig that sportsbooks use to make a profit, betting home underdogs would result in a win. I’m not saying you won’t find a season or an era even where it is possible you would be housing that strategy. With normal variance you can probably find a season that you’d make money betting home favorites. Point being, the VIG is hard to beat.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: DRichQuote: lilredrooster.
you know the old saw about the home dog being a good bet
I just went over 100 past games on covers.com and came up with the home dogs winning 63-37
edit again - just went over 100 games from the previous year and the home dogs lost 46-54
so I erased my experimental picks - looks like it was just variance - not worth pursuing
.
link to original post
I would guess that if there is some +EV on the home underdogs, it is very small like 1% or 2%. That small of an edge can be attractive if you have a very large bankroll but most people will over bet their bankroll just because they have been told there is an edge, If it was me I probably would not bet more than 1% of my bankroll on a small edge like that.
link to original post
And I would bet you are wrong. I seriously doubt with the normal vig that sportsbooks use to make a profit, betting home underdogs would result in a win. I’m not saying you won’t find a season or an era even where it is possible you would be housing that strategy. With normal variance you can probably find a season that you’d make money betting home favorites. Point being, the VIG is hard to beat.
link to original post
I am not claiming there is an advantage and I would also guess there is not. My point was that if there was, it would be so small.
What are the chances of finding a positive EV situation that someone else hasn't found and exploited, thus soon gone? Pretty nil.
The vulnerabilities of these sites come in where they trying to entice new customers and keep old customers [of the right kind]
Deni Avdija, Trailblazeers - under 15.5 points - 110 at DraftKings
trying something new (for me) to get back in the win column with this one
my first time posting a prop - maybe that's what I'll look at from now on
he has a quad injury and is listed as questionable - he only played 6 minutes and had only 5 points on Wed.
he's been under that total in 7 out of his last 11 games
.
Go Thunder. I occasionally lose one of these when it’s a blowout and the star sits the fourth quarter. I think Memphis is good enough that it shouldn’t be a rout. Also in my favor is the O/U is 253. So lots of points for SGA to get his share.
Quote: SOOPOOI think I have a very +EV bet on HR today. Thunder win/SGA over 29.5 at +115. Thunder 3-1 favorite, SGA fair O/U is 35. Two requirements are correlated. On other sites the parlay ranges from -120 to -150. I think fair is probably -105 or so.
Go Thunder. I occasionally lose one of these when it’s a blowout and the star sits the fourth quarter. I think Memphis is good enough that it shouldn’t be a rout. Also in my favor is the O/U is 253. So lots of points for SGA to get his share.
link to original post
Good pick.
Quote: DRichQuote: SOOPOOI think I have a very +EV bet on HR today. Thunder win/SGA over 29.5 at +115. Thunder 3-1 favorite, SGA fair O/U is 35. Two requirements are correlated. On other sites the parlay ranges from -120 to -150. I think fair is probably -105 or so.
Go Thunder. I occasionally lose one of these when it’s a blowout and the star sits the fourth quarter. I think Memphis is good enough that it shouldn’t be a rout. Also in my favor is the O/U is 253. So lots of points for SGA to get his share.
link to original post
Good pick.
link to original post
I watched the game. Made a few more $ betting SGA over throughout the game. Not sure why the books felt he was going to stop scoring at will.
Love Lakers over Knicks tonight. Lakers are a brand new team with Doncic. Knicks do great against bottom and middle teams and terrible against top teams. I think Lakers are now a ‘top team’.
Quote: SOOPOOI think Lakers are now a ‘top team’.
I don't believe that yet, but it has been an impressive run. I think the lack of a quality big man that can defend will eventually hurt them.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: DRichQuote: SOOPOOI think I have a very +EV bet on HR today. Thunder win/SGA over 29.5 at +115. Thunder 3-1 favorite, SGA fair O/U is 35. Two requirements are correlated. On other sites the parlay ranges from -120 to -150. I think fair is probably -105 or so.
Go Thunder. I occasionally lose one of these when it’s a blowout and the star sits the fourth quarter. I think Memphis is good enough that it shouldn’t be a rout. Also in my favor is the O/U is 253. So lots of points for SGA to get his share.
link to original post
Good pick.
link to original post
I watched the game. Made a few more $ betting SGA over throughout the game. Not sure why the books felt he was going to stop scoring at will.
Love Lakers over Knicks tonight. Lakers are a brand new team with Doncic. Knicks do great against bottom and middle teams and terrible against top teams. I think Lakers are now a ‘top team’.
link to original post
So what is my bet on Lakers - Knicks?
Knicks win/ Brunson 25
+300
Highly correlated. Knicks are only slight underdogs. Fair O/U for Brunson 26.5. So I think +230 or so is fair. I think + 300 is +EV.
I’m ok betting against my ‘analysis’.
I tweaked my tracking of home dogs to limit it only to when the home dog has a better record at home than the fave does away
it gets on average about 1 play per day - I do no other handicapping
this is without shopping for the best line - I just take the line from covers.com early in the a.m. when it's convenient for me - probably could often get a better line close to game time as the fave (I believe) often gets bet down late
the home team wins outright in the NBA about 60% of the time - it varies slightly from year to year
I started my tracking on 2/28
so far, the results have been extreme - 8-1 for the home dogs (with a better home record than the fave does away) with 2 pushes
of course, I know, this is a very small sample
I will continue tracking thru the entire season and the playoffs and next season too after 25 games have been played if it still looks good
here's one for this afternoon - the Mavs are 19-14 at home and the Suns are 11-21 away
Mavericks + 7.5 over the Suns
.
Quote: lilredrooster.
here's one for this afternoon - the Mavs are 19-14 at home and the Suns are 11-21 away
Mavericks + 7.5 over the Suns
.
link to original post
Using Mavs yearly stats is just plain flawed as they recently traded away their superstar player and their second best player is out for injury,
Quote: DRichQuote: lilredrooster.
here's one for this afternoon - the Mavs are 19-14 at home and the Suns are 11-21 away
Mavericks + 7.5 over the Suns
.
link to original post
Using Mavs yearly stats is just plain flawed as they recently traded away their superstar player and their second best player is out for injury,
link to original post
agreed - but as I stated - I do no handicapping - I'm pretty sure something similar was going on in other games that I tracked
the idea is to find a very simple way to win - maybe impossible - we'll see - anyway if I do hardcore handicapping I know that if I can get any edge; and that's a very big if - it's really tiny - not worth my time
I believe it is still possible there is a flaw in the spread - the Suns are not just a losing team away - they're a losing team overall
I think it's possible that the line makers are expecting the public to overestimate the weakness of the Mavs due to what you mentioned
the Mavs lost to the Grizzlies by 11 on Friday (same situation as you mentioned) and the Grizzlies are way, way better than the Suns
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: DRichQuote: lilredrooster.
here's one for this afternoon - the Mavs are 19-14 at home and the Suns are 11-21 away
Mavericks + 7.5 over the Suns
.
link to original post
Using Mavs yearly stats is just plain flawed as they recently traded away their superstar player and their second best player is out for injury,
link to original post
agreed - but as I stated - I do no handicapping - I'm pretty sure something similar was going on in other games that I tracked
the idea is to find a very simple way to win - maybe impossible - we'll see - anyway if I do hardcore handicapping I know that if I can get any edge; and that's a very big if - it's really tiny - not worth my time
I believe it is still possible there is a flaw in the spread - the Suns are not just a losing team away - they're a losing team overall
I think it's possible that the line makers are expecting the public to overestimate the weakness of the Mavs due to what you mentioned
the Mavs lost to the Grizzlies by 11 on Friday (same situation as you mentioned) and the Grizzlies are way, way better than the Suns
.
link to original post
The OVERWHELMING importance of Doncic and/or Davis AND Irving to the Mavs overrides ANY other factors. If Doncic/Irving are still playing Mavs are favorites.
The Mavs are now a bottom 5 team in the NBA. Bottom 5 teams do occasionally win home games, but they were 7.5 home underdogs to a discombobulated Suns team for a reason. I used the Suns money line in all my NBA picks. (Mavs up 3 as I type!).
Quote: lilredrooster
agreed - but as I stated - I do no handicapping - I'm pretty sure something similar was going on in other games that I tracked
the idea is to find a very simple way to win - maybe impossible - we'll see - anyway if I do hardcore handicapping I know that if I can get any edge; and that's a very big if - it's really tiny - not worth my time
I wish you luck but those season stats are useless for this game. I still hope you win.
pretty interesting to me anyway -
the link shows how each NBA team does ats with no rest - playing back to back games - this season
only 9 teams had winning records - 3 teams broke even and 18 teams had losing records
I added it all up and teams with no rest went 157-182 losing 53.68%
anyone who bet equal amounts on every game that the team with no rest would lose would profit by about 5.78%
I then looked at the prior season
11 teams had a winning record - 3 broke even and 16 teams had a losing record
teams with no rest did better last season going 199-223 - losing 52.84% of the time
anyone betting that the team with no rest would lose would profit by a tiny amount - slightly less than 1%
they also have the records since 2020 - 12 teams have winning records - 3 teams broke even - and 15 teams had losing records
I didn't add all that up - too much work - I am assuming it would amount to a very tiny edge or break even for anyone betting that all the teams with no rest would lose ats
Portland, Dallas & Charlotte all won at least double the amount they lost this season and last season playing back to back
Washington, Indiana and NY all lost more than twice as many as they won this season and last playing back to back
I believe that the most recent data is the most predictive for the future - but I can't be 100% sure about that
https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/trends/ats_trends/?sc=no_rest&range=yearly_2024_2025
.
Quote: lilredrooster.
pretty interesting to me anyway -
the link shows how each NBA team does ats with no rest - playing back to back games - this season
only 9 teams had winning records - 3 teams broke even and 18 teams had losing records
I added it all up and teams with no rest went 157-182 losing 53.68%
anyone who bet equal amounts on every game that the team with no rest would lose would profit by about 5.78%
I then looked at the prior season
11 teams had a winning record - 3 broke even and 16 teams had a losing record
teams with no rest did better last season going 199-223 - losing 52.84% of the time
anyone betting that the team with no rest would lose would profit by a tiny amount - slightly less than 1%
they also have the records since 2020 - 12 teams have winning records - 3 teams broke even - and 15 teams had losing records
I didn't add all that up - too much work - I am assuming it would amount to a very tiny edge or break even for anyone betting that all the teams with no rest would lose ats
Portland, Dallas & Charlotte all won at least double the amount they lost this season and last season playing back to back
Washington, Indiana and NY all lost more than twice as many as they won this season and last playing back to back
I believe that the most recent data is the most predictive for the future - but I can't be 100% sure about that
https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/trends/ats_trends/?sc=no_rest&range=yearly_2024_2025
.
link to original post
Aren’t you assuming the money lines on all these bets paid -110 to calculate if you would have been a winner?
Quote: unJonQuote: lilredrooster.
pretty interesting to me anyway -
the link shows how each NBA team does ats with no rest - playing back to back games - this season
only 9 teams had winning records - 3 teams broke even and 18 teams had losing records
I added it all up and teams with no rest went 157-182 losing 53.68%
anyone who bet equal amounts on every game that the team with no rest would lose would profit by about 5.78%
I then looked at the prior season
11 teams had a winning record - 3 broke even and 16 teams had a losing record
teams with no rest did better last season going 199-223 - losing 52.84% of the time
anyone betting that the team with no rest would lose would profit by a tiny amount - slightly less than 1%
they also have the records since 2020 - 12 teams have winning records - 3 teams broke even - and 15 teams had losing records
I didn't add all that up - too much work - I am assuming it would amount to a very tiny edge or break even for anyone betting that all the teams with no rest would lose ats
Portland, Dallas & Charlotte all won at least double the amount they lost this season and last season playing back to back
Washington, Indiana and NY all lost more than twice as many as they won this season and last playing back to back
I believe that the most recent data is the most predictive for the future - but I can't be 100% sure about that
https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/trends/ats_trends/?sc=no_rest&range=yearly_2024_2025
.
link to original post
Aren’t you assuming the money lines on all these bets paid -110 to calculate if you would have been a winner?
link to original post
yes, here is the math for this season
53.68 (of course you can't win .68 games but just for math purposes) times 100 = $5,368 won if you bet $110 on 100 games to win $100 at 10/11 odds
46.32 times you lost $110 losing $5,095
the profit is $5368 minus $5095 which equals 273 which equals 2.48% - my op stated 5.78% which was incorrect - sorry about that
when I have time I will double check the prior season - maybe I made an error there also
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: unJonQuote: lilredrooster.
pretty interesting to me anyway -
the link shows how each NBA team does ats with no rest - playing back to back games - this season
only 9 teams had winning records - 3 teams broke even and 18 teams had losing records
I added it all up and teams with no rest went 157-182 losing 53.68%
anyone who bet equal amounts on every game that the team with no rest would lose would profit by about 5.78%
I then looked at the prior season
11 teams had a winning record - 3 broke even and 16 teams had a losing record
teams with no rest did better last season going 199-223 - losing 52.84% of the time
anyone betting that the team with no rest would lose would profit by a tiny amount - slightly less than 1%
they also have the records since 2020 - 12 teams have winning records - 3 teams broke even - and 15 teams had losing records
I didn't add all that up - too much work - I am assuming it would amount to a very tiny edge or break even for anyone betting that all the teams with no rest would lose ats
Portland, Dallas & Charlotte all won at least double the amount they lost this season and last season playing back to back
Washington, Indiana and NY all lost more than twice as many as they won this season and last playing back to back
I believe that the most recent data is the most predictive for the future - but I can't be 100% sure about that
https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/trends/ats_trends/?sc=no_rest&range=yearly_2024_2025
.
link to original post
Aren’t you assuming the money lines on all these bets paid -110 to calculate if you would have been a winner?
link to original post
yes, here is the math for this season
53.68 (of course you can't win .68 games but just for math purposes) times 100 = $5,368 won if you bet $110 on 100 games to win $100 at 10/11 odds
46.32 times you lost $110 losing $5,095
the profit is $5368 minus $5095 which equals 273 which equals 2.48% - my op stated 5.78% which was incorrect - sorry about that
when I have time I will double check the prior season - maybe I made an error there also
.
link to original post
Sorry, I mean what makes you think the team playing with rest is -110 money line versus -120 or -200 or whatever?
Quote: unJonSorry, I mean what makes you think the team playing with rest is -110 money line versus -120 or -200 or whatever?
the 2nd sentence of my op states that the data is ats (against the spread)
it's not money line data
ats is typically priced at -110 for both sides but sometimes it can vary slightly
calling it -110 is, I believe, a fair way to look at it
note - the 2nd sentence of my op - "the link shows how each NBA team does ats (against the spread) with no rest - playing back to back games this season"
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: unJonSorry, I mean what makes you think the team playing with rest is -110 money line versus -120 or -200 or whatever?
the 2nd sentence of my op states that the data is ats (against the spread)
it's not money line data
ats is typically priced at -110 for both sides but sometimes it can vary slightly
calling it -110 is, I believe, a fair way to look at it
note - the 2nd sentence of my op - "the link shows how each NBA team does ats (against the spread) with no rest - playing back to back games this season"
.
link to original post
Sorry I missed that. Withdrawn.
Quote: lilredrooster.
pretty interesting to me anyway -
the link shows how each NBA team does ats with no rest - playing back to back games - this season
only 9 teams had winning records - 3 teams broke even and 18 teams had losing records
I added it all up and teams with no rest went 157-182 losing 53.68%
anyone who bet equal amounts on every game that the team with no rest would lose would profit by about 5.78%
I then looked at the prior season
11 teams had a winning record - 3 broke even and 16 teams had a losing record
teams with no rest did better last season going 199-223 - losing 52.84% of the time
anyone betting that the team with no rest would lose would profit by a tiny amount - slightly less than 1%
they also have the records since 2020 - 12 teams have winning records - 3 teams broke even - and 15 teams had losing records
I didn't add all that up - too much work - I am assuming it would amount to a very tiny edge or break even for anyone betting that all the teams with no rest would lose ats
Portland, Dallas & Charlotte all won at least double the amount they lost this season and last season playing back to back
Washington, Indiana and NY all lost more than twice as many as they won this season and last playing back to back
I believe that the most recent data is the most predictive for the future - but I can't be 100% sure about that
https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/trends/ats_trends/?sc=no_rest&range=yearly_2024_2025
.
link to original post
I get the feeling you are trying to simplify all of these bets too much. It would seem to me that evaluating each team individually for when they have back to back games would produce much better data. So many teams now have players that won't play back to back games it is probably really affecting the reliability of the information.
Deleted my post. I misread your numbers. -110 & -110 (on average) would be about right.Quote: lilredrooster...
Quote: DRichIt would seem to me that evaluating each team individually for when they have back to back games would produce much better data.
the link I posted has the data for every single team
yes, it is possible a bettor could improve his performance by focusing on those teams that do the worst back to back
the data is more useful when combined with handicapping
it would require too much work for me to go thru it all - but I would think that teams playing back to back on the road do worse than teams playing back to back at home
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: DRichIt would seem to me that evaluating each team individually for when they have back to back games would produce much better data.
the link I posted has the data for every single team
yes, it is possible a bettor could improve his performance by focusing on those teams that do the worst back to back
the data is more useful when combined with handicapping
it would require too much work for me to go thru it all - but I would think that teams playing back to back on the road do worse than teams playing back to back at home
.
link to original post
Serious question. Are you saying bookies are not aware of the fact that teams playing back to back tend not to do as well as teams that have had rest?
DRich nailed it. There are teams that don’t play their stars (Embiid, Leonard) and those that do (Jokic, Doncic) in back to backs. I’d look at it more simplistically. Who are the players that are actually going to be playing, and go from there.
This point is what I think you generally miss. You MAY have found something real, but if so, it is more likely than not to already be baked into the odds.
Quote: SOOPOOAre you saying bookies are not aware of the fact_____? This point is what I think you generally miss. You MAY have found something real, but if so, it is more likely than not to already be baked into the odds.
seriously
thru my link I showed that it's been there all this season and all last season
and all the way thru from 2020 - thru many thousands of games
so you are saying that they have just right now discovered it and will from now on be baked it in to the odds_________?
what are the chances of that__________?
slim and none
believe what you wanna believe - I don't care -
THE DATA IS WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO ME
THE DATA IS NOT A SPECULATION - as is your post
it's IRRELEVANT what bookies are aware of or not aware of - they are concerned only if they are losing $ because many are taking advantage of it
if they don't see themselves as losing $ because of it they have no need to change anything
.
Quote: lilredrooster
if they don't see themselves as losing $ because of it they have no need to change anything
Having worked in casino gaming for almost 30 years, I can tell you that is not true. They love to change things to improve their win, not just when they are losing.
Quote: DRichQuote: lilredroosterif they don't see themselves as losing $ because of it they have no need to change anything
Having worked in casino gaming for almost 30 years, I can tell you that is not true. They love to change things to improve their win, not just when they are losing.
link to original post
but they obviously haven't changed anything in this instance because back to back teams have done worse this season than prior seasons - allowing a small edge for a person doing no handicapping betting against all of them -
as I indicated the small edge or break even goes all the way back to tracking all the games since 2020
I don't dispute that a bettor could do even better by handicapping using the methods you and Soopoo mentioned
.
the link is the trends page from covers.com
all home dogs ats this season in the NBA are 207-187-7 - winning 52.5% about breaking them even with no handicapping - the winning % needed to break even is 52.4% at odds of 10/11
https://www.covers.com/sport/basketball/nba/league-trends/seasontodate
.
I think lilrooster looking at the data is cool. Would be interested (academically) at it if he split back to back road games subset, but don’t know if that would be a lot of work for him.
Quote: unJonThe back to back NBA road teams is a “known” phenomenon in the same way that people say to bet home dogs or road dogs in the NFL.
I think lilrooster looking at the data is cool. Would be interested (academically) at it if he split back to back road games subset, but don’t know if that would be a lot of work for him.
link to original post
thanks unJon
I thought about that too
as I stated before the back to back thing is all games back to back and I would think just looking at those playing back to back road games might improve on the %
but it's just too much work to try to do that - it would take a lot of time
I looked at some similar NFL data and didn't find anything interesting
it varied quite a bit from year to year unlike the NBA back to back thing and I couldn't pinpoint anything that I thought was profitable
I did track all underdogs in the NFL in the first 2 weeks of the season and in the pre-season believing that the greater unpredictability would favor the dogs since they are getting points
it did best in the pre-season - I tracked about 300 games and the dogs won 59.5% of them - they also were profitable in the first 2 weeks of the regular season - iirc I tracked a couple of hundred games - but it was a smaller %
.
