Will you change anything in your approach to handicapping/betting football this year?

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
I will bet less games.

That's for sure.

I plan to base my handicapping on two angles:

One has to do with ATS margins of cover/no cover and the other has to do with road dogs of +7> that win outright and how they perform in their next game.

Anyone else?
 

Bluemound Freak

WAR EAGLE!
Forum Member
Oct 9, 2001
2,249
0
0
North Alabama
I plan on cutting out the number of games I bet as well! Last year I would bet 15-20 games, damn I spent most of my winnings on Rolaids and Pepto! So I plan on limiting myself to about 5-10 games per wekkend!


And I am done betting on damn basketball! That crap bought broke the camel if you know what I'm saying!

And I, like Shats, am cutting out all the damn losing! no more losing!
 

BobbyBlueChip

Trustee
Forum Member
Dec 27, 2000
20,705
286
83
53
Belly of the Beast
No matter how good an early season matchup looks, I will not play anything the first four weeks of the season except for system plays.

Playing without any knowledge of how this year's team matches up against competition has cost me some good early season weekends in the past.
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
I am fairly confident my handicapping ability, patience and discipline could allow me to hit 7 in a row.

For me, even if it took an entire 11 week season (3 months), 7 in a row and doubling each wager would be worth the wait.

1. 50 = 50
2. 45 = 95 (allowed for juice)
3. 85 = 180
4. 160 = 340
5. 300 = 640
6. 580 = 1,220
7. 1,100 = 2,330

In the past, one of my weaknesses was treating a well-handicapped game no differently than a game that was merely a hunch.

In post season play (Jan. 2, 2002), Maryland was a +14' dog versus Florida.

Everything I knew, felt and believed pointed toward Florida.

The two-td plus line was laughable and I knew it.

Even MadJack increased his wager on this game to 2 dimes.

Florida won this game, 56-23.

Unfortunately, I treated this game the same as any other.

If I'm gonna' make money at sportsbetting, I need to resolve the issue of when to "step out" and why.
 

BobbyBlueChip

Trustee
Forum Member
Dec 27, 2000
20,705
286
83
53
Belly of the Beast
I love talking about football handicapping, even in May as all the other sports seem to be a chore for me.

I would never tell anyone that their handicapping theory is wrong as I do stupid things all the time, but ?stepping out? will lead to ruins. The problem with football is that a game can change in a play, especially with a high-risk/reward offense like Florida and a high-risk/reward defense like Maryland last year. I will never risk more than twice my standard wager on any game as no matter how good of a handicapper you are, your long-term success will hover at about 56-58%. If you risk a lot more than your standard unit, then your bankroll will start depleting in a bad run so much so that you won?t be able to have the ammo left to take advantage of your good runs.

I respect your handicapping ability, Buddy, but if you?ve have had great success with your top picks over the past couple of years, mean regression theory would state that you will have a bad year at some point with those plays, so be careful.
 

ddubs

Let's Go Boilers!!!
Forum Member
Oct 22, 2000
7,907
3
38
The Windy City
buddy said:
If I'm gonna' make money at sportsbetting, I need to resolve the issue of when to "step out" and why.

I wholeheartedly agree, that is BY FAR my biggest problem in sportsbetting. I'm an action junkie.:shrug:
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
I plan on being less stubborn.I usually do well in college,but not as well in pro-football.that is why I plan on betting less on the pro's than on college.Unless.of course my stubborn side takes over,then I will bet the same on Saturday's & Sunday's.(lol!)
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Bobby Blue Chip,

You're like me...I love to discuss handicapping football all year long. You can throw college basketball in there also, but we can save that for another thread.

Bobby, my problem is not with my handicapping theory or handicapping angles.

My problem is with my betting strategy. There is no bettor anywhere that is sloppier than me in making wagers.

It's like ddubs just said about being an action junkie.

The action has destroyed me too.

I prefer handicapping methods or angles that follow logic and probability (who doesn't?).

But for me, those games don't occur very often.

On a 50 game card, I MIGHT stumble across 2-4 plays.

What's my excuse for playing the other 12-15 games that don't follow logic or probability?

Let's say it's an additional 12 games.

Well, that's just not 12 more wagers.

Those 12 games could be 25-30 wagers.

For me, talking about patience and discipline is one thing.

Being able to employ them is another story.
 

BobbyBlueChip

Trustee
Forum Member
Dec 27, 2000
20,705
286
83
53
Belly of the Beast
When you say ?when to step out?, I am assuming that you mean ?increase my wager? and that?s where my comments came from above and not ?betting less games:? I have been successful betting 4-5 games per/day at between 1-2 units (1 unit = 2.5% of BR) and taking a parlay for one-fifth of a unit on the other 4-10 games that I like based on discussion on the forum or games I like but keep playing the ?what if? scenario in my head. (?What if Notre Dame looks shell-shocked to be playing its first game of the season in Lincoln??)

It?s a easy way to have ?action? (albeit, long odds) on the games you have a hunch on while not really hurting your bankroll as it is only for a fifth of a unit when you have played 7-10 units for that day. I know parlays suck in the long run, but if they can keep you off of playing significant money on bad wagers, then they are actually making you money. It might sound stupid to the serious players here, but it works.
 

Night Owl

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 4, 2001
264
0
0
Bremerton, WA
Like several others, cutting down on the action is a big key for me, too. Sometimes it's like I think these are the last games I can ever bet on or something!? :shrug:

Even more than that, though, there are three specific CRAP thoughts/philosophies that I REALLY need to cut out. One is the lure of "building the bankroll." For some reason, I think there is a rule somewhere that says I HAVE to bet on at least one game that starts at noon (eastern) so I can "build my bankroll" for later in the day and then just keep doing that so I'll have a ton of funds for the following day's NFL action :rolleyes: :nono: Suffice it to say, I realize this is more along the lines of forcing bets and just doesn't work out very well very often. Hell, I am NOT anywhere close to an ACC or Big 10 expert, so why I do this is really beyond me. All I know is I need to stop doing it and probably won't enjoy any degree of consistent success until I do so.

The 2nd thing is to stop being scared of X number of points. There's always one or two coaches totally willing to run up the score, although with Spurrier gone to the NFL, I don't know who (by name) they're going to be this year. Great example of me being scared last year is Florida -35.5 vs. Vanderbilt at home. I liked that game, but started thinking "wow....that's A LOT of points!!!" If I wasn't such a dumb-ass, maybe I would've realized the line was like that because Florida usually wins pretty handily at home, especially against perennial cellar dwellers like Vandy. I even figured no mercy was going to be forthcoming.....and sure enough, none was. I believe the final was something like
70-7 :eek: So I need to do a much better job of matching up which teams are justified in being large favorites (and not being scared to take a shot with them if I like them....) and which ones seem to be bigger faves than I feel they should be, which of course means the dog in that case needs to be given a long look.

The 3rd thing is that last week was/is just that....last week. It's so easy to get caught up in how good or bad a certain team looked one week when the real question is....is that par for the course for their season or does it look more like a fluke-type performance. Got to keep in mind, too, that motivational factors, revenge, etc. are constantly changing a little bit each week, too. Not a huge deal for a 1-0 team to go to 1-1 as opposed to a 8-1 team trying to go to 9-1, for example, and stay in the National Championship hunt. Conversely, a 2-5 team playing terribly each week might now be playing a team -- at home -- who they lost to last year 63-0 on the road. As a result, maybe even at 2-5, they are treating that game like their own personal "championship" game?? At the very least, I think it's the mentality that leads to a lot of upsets....

One other small thing is I need to realize the SEC, for one, is a tough conference in which to win on the road. I don't have any numbers on it, but seems like just about ALL SEC home dogs deserve a very long look......

Love this discussion and hearing what others think their weak areas are. Good luck all.

Night Owl
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
If a person has a system that has done well,should a person abandon it?So if the system shows that a person should bet 10 games,how can teams be reduced?
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
I know one thing for sure. I watched it happen many weekends in college. When a whole truckload of us liked the same games. We had folks jumping up and down 5*, 10*, Mothers pick, outlaw picks, you name it. Bang your dead. However seemed if we did have afew like that. They were early games and died. If you had patients. The late one or two games won. I guess it's the law of averages. Or was it good capping that failed for what ever reason early in the day. But came through in the late ones. I hope that was the case. Then it would mean the work behind the picks were good and sooner or later some thing had to go right.
I also saw afew fellows had good handle on a certain conference and did well just in those.
Buddy I agree you can capp a certin amount of games that just fit all your looking for. That number may only be 20 for a college season. If you have the data that shows this. And You wish to make money It is a very good way to do so. Hard to hold back on the other games is the problem. I had very good friend that had such great disapline. In the pros he followed certain rules. He played only those games. One year there were only 13. Would you take 10 & 3 for the year and be happy. He did.
 

BobbyBlueChip

Trustee
Forum Member
Dec 27, 2000
20,705
286
83
53
Belly of the Beast
AR182 said:
If a person has a system that has done well,should a person abandon it?So if the system shows that a person should bet 10 games,how can teams be reduced?

I don't know if the question was directed at me, but when I say 4-5 games a day, I mean the games that I handicap fundamentally (I'm not sure if that's the right term - stats, matchups and motivation, etc.). The system plays that I use (returning starters, 40+ point underdogs, rushing D dogs) all are played on top of that at the same unit throughout the year. I count system plays in my record, but don't take any pride in them because somebody else did the work (I know it's dumb).
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Night Owl,

Thanks for your honest reply.

Regarding your comment about the FLA -34 vs. Vandy, I remember my local saying something about "look for the hidden statistic".

That's all well and good if you know what you're looking for.

But for a square like me, what am I looking for?

I went back and checked my records for that particular matchup...this is what I came up with.

Vanderbilt

10/13.....GEORGIA....+7.....14-30.....loss / no cover
10/20.....@ so car.....+17...14-46.....loss / no cover
10/27.....@ duke.......-7......42-28.....win / cover
11/03.....@ florida.....+34...13-71.....loss / no cover

FLORIDA

10/06.....@ lsu..........-14.....44-15.....win / cover
10/13.....@ auburn...-26.....20-23......loss / no cover
10/20.....BYE
10/27.....GEO (j'vlle)..-19.....24-10.....win / no cover
11/03.....VANDY.........-34.....71-13.....win /cover

This is when my handicapping is at its best! After the game has been played! LOL!

Hindsight is always 20-20, especially after the games have been played and I have the previous records in front of me.

But for what it's worth, I'd say there were two hidden statistics:

1. Vandy is on the third leg of a 3 game road trip facing an ultra-talented Florida team.
2. This is Florida's first return to the Swamp since 9/29 where they hammered Miss State +18, 52-0. (not shown above).

Lastly, I think Vandy's win / cover over Duke probably made some bettors think that Vandy would not roll over. But knowing Spurrier, weak teams do not roll over versus Florida...they just get creamed and the alumni get an easy cover.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
Bobby.....Actually I was referring to me.I have a system that I have used for years.It does well in college,but not too well in pro's.The system could state that I should bet anywhere up to 16 games on Sat.Since 1999,I averaged out at about 57%.This includes sides & totals.On Sunday the same system could pick about 10 games.In 1999,I hit about 55%,but the last 2 years it hit about 50%
Obviously,I should stay away on Sunday's.But I am not that discipline & I stubbornly still bet what the system shows.
I was just throwing those questions out to see if anyone had any opinions.
Sorry if I was not clear.
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Bobby,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I always thought a "Fundamental Handicapper" meant looking at man-to-man matchups.

A "Statistical Handicapper" looked at offensive and defensive stats. I.e, yards per rush, pass attempts, completions, kicking stats, etc.

An "ATS Handicapper (that's me)", looks at SU / ATS patterns, strength of competition, margin of cover or no cover against the number, etc..

This is probably a poor example, but I remember at the beginning of last year when ucla was playing ALABAMA. Someone wrote an analysis saying there was no way Alabama's defensive line could contain Ucla's, DeShaun Foster and that analysis was right on the money.
 

BobbyBlueChip

Trustee
Forum Member
Dec 27, 2000
20,705
286
83
53
Belly of the Beast
The three that I have heard is : Fundamental; Situational; and Technical.

Fundamental - matchups, stats

Situational - letdown, emotional

Technical - past ATS records, systems

This is only what I think that they refer to, I think Nolan would know better because I've heard him refer to them before in past articles. I'm not sure how you could look at matchups without taking into consideration stats.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top