No idea why I'm posting this

[JustFootball]

As my handle implies, I am pretty much all about football. But...for what it's worth....

I often think back to Billy Blastoff. My take from his picks was to note lines that really made no sense and then bet contrarian. Yesterday, Tenn and Baylor both fit (ranked lower than opponent but favored) and they both covered easily. Nothing that obvious today, but this jumped out at me.

Why is 7-10 St Peter's (also 2-7 in MAAC) favored by 3.5 (and now up to 4) over 12-9 Mt St Marys (5-5 MAAC)? The Mount is coming off a big win against (surprising?) Merrimack, which is 8-2 in conference. Anyway, don't see any way St Pete's should be favored and now getting bumped higher. I think Billy Blastoff would say give me the peacocks **giving** 4 (I bought down to 3--just because).

Unfortunately, I think a similar case could be made for Wright State against Bob Morris (worse overall and conference records giving 3.5?) I see some other posts liking Robert Morris (and it makes perfect sense), but that's why the line doesn't really make sense--at least to me.

Finally, I like Merrimack to bounce bank after the loss to MSM. They were on a roll--solid in conference--and Rider has been up and down (only 4-6 in conference).

Again, not sure why I'm even posting. Don't feel like this is really my gift and I generally lose when I post---so there's that. But yesterday's card reminded me of BB and I guess the St Pete's game looked inviting.

 

[Smitty]

my 2 cents....

not long ago, that was a solid way to make money. but.... the lines are completely driven by the computers now. obviously i don't have access to the programs used by the books or the big syndicates (bummer). i think BB used the Sagarin ratings. Near as I can tell, those are no longer available. So I usually use the ESPN computer #s and kenpom.com.

looking at these 2 games...

espn has st peters with a 72.3% chance of winning. normally that would translate to a fav of over 10 points. based on that, the line has already been adjusted down by quite a bit. kenpom doesn't have that large of a discrepancy, but they do have st peters rated slightly higher than mt. st. mary's. add in a little for home court advantage, and the line is about "right."

similar situation in the other game. espn has wright st with a 68.6% chance of winning. kenpom has the teams nearly identical on a neutral court.

i assume the kenpom #s are more accurate than espn.

i'm not trying to talk you off the bets. i'm just saying that we can't just assume that the linesmakers have one team rated higher than another just because of their records.

another factor to remember.... public perception only plays a role in NFL wagering. everything else is pretty much the linesmakers computers vs the syndicates' computers.

i'd love to get others' thoughts on this. if nothing else, it's an interesting conversation to have.

 

[Evvin]

my 2 cents....

not long ago, that was a solid way to make money. but.... the lines are completely driven by the computers now. obviously i don't have access to the programs used by the books or the big syndicates (bummer). i think BB used the Sagarin ratings. Near as I can tell, those are no longer available. So I usually use the ESPN computer #s and kenpom.com.

looking at these 2 games...

espn has st peters with a 72.3% chance of winning. normally that would translate to a fav of over 10 points. based on that, the line has already been adjusted down by quite a bit. kenpom doesn't have that large of a discrepancy, but they do have st peters rated slightly higher than mt. st. mary's. add in a little for home court advantage, and the line is about "right."

similar situation in the other game. espn has wright st with a 68.6% chance of winning. kenpom has the teams nearly identical on a neutral court.

i assume the kenpom #s are more accurate than espn.

i'm not trying to talk you off the bets. i'm just saying that we can't just assume that the linesmakers have one team rated higher than another just because of their records.

another factor to remember.... public perception only plays a role in NFL wagering. everything else is pretty much the linesmakers computers vs the syndicates' computers.

i'd love to get others' thoughts on this. if nothing else, it's an interesting conversation to have.

Billy used these 2 sites for his counterintuitive calculations. Both must vary by 4 or more points from the line, and, like
George Costanza, you do "the opposite."


https://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/predictions.shtml

Seven Overtimes NCAA Basketball Analytics Ratings

 

[loophole]

lot to unpack here. no doubt bb had a great run in the day. now i agree with smitty that modern linesmaking has made that system obsolete as a stand-alone handicapping tool, although i still think the basic principal has value. i believe bb used pomeroy, barttorvik and sevenovertimes, and i still use the latter two. i incorporate that system with other intangibles, such as conference rivalries along with anomalies, such as the "unranked favored over ranked" plays. i particularly like in-season conference revenge, especially in the smaller conferences. today eying etsu, wright state and (outside my confort zone) memphis. tigers have to be pissed about that loss down in houston.

 

[loophole]

evvin is right, replace pomeroy with talismanred. and fwiw i believe cincinnati -6 would be a bb play today. can anyone confirm?

 

[Evvin]

evvin is right, replace pomeroy with talismanred. and fwiw i believe cincinnati -6 would be a bb play today. can anyone confirm?

Loop, the Seven Overtimes site never updated today's predictions. This happens pretty often. Talismanred met the criteria.

 

[loophole]

Loop, the Seven Overtimes site never updated today's predictions. This happens pretty often. Talismanred met the criteria.

that's strange, sevenovertimes shows cincy 68 w va 66 for me. of course bearcats are getting waxed 40-25 in the first half making everything they throw up.

 

[JustFootball]

As my handle implies, I am pretty much all about football. But...for what it's worth....

I often think back to Billy Blastoff. My take from his picks was to note lines that really made no sense and then bet contrarian. Yesterday, Tenn and Baylor both fit (ranked lower than opponent but favored) and they both covered easily. Nothing that obvious today, but this jumped out at me.

Why is 7-10 St Peter's (also 2-7 in MAAC) favored by 3.5 (and now up to 4) over 12-9 Mt St Marys (5-5 MAAC)? The Mount is coming off a big win against (surprising?) Merrimack, which is 8-2 in conference. Anyway, don't see any way St Pete's should be favored and now getting bumped higher. I think Billy Blastoff would say give me the peacocks **giving** 4 (I bought down to 3--just because).

Unfortunately, I think a similar case could be made for Wright State against Bob Morris (worse overall and conference records giving 3.5?) I see some other posts liking Robert Morris (and it makes perfect sense), but that's why the line doesn't really make sense--at least to me.

Finally, I like Merrimack to bounce bank after the loss to MSM. They were on a roll--solid in conference--and Rider has been up and down (only 4-6 in conference).

Again, not sure why I'm even posting. Don't feel like this is really my gift and I generally lose when I post---so there's that. But yesterday's card reminded me of BB and I guess the St Pete's game looked inviting.

You, sir, are no Billy Blastoff.

 

[loophole]

true dat!