Saturday, December 14, 2013
The Dominating Road Favorite
NBA Road Favorites that outscore their opponents by an average of 10 or more points in their most recent road games prove that the road domination continues many times more than not ATS when favored by 5 or more points. This Dominating Road Favorite has 60 covers versus 33 losses ATS for an incredible 65% success rate ATS over the last 93 plays. This play should occur about 15 times a season.
Saturday, August 31, 2013
How It Works
Matchup Handicapping calculates a pointspread for each NBA game starting after teams have played about 8 to 10 regular season games. This corresponds to weeks 3 or 4 of the regular season. For each game, a pointspread is calculated based on a comparison of performance, home court advantage, performance & winning momentum and rest and BTB situations between the two opponents. Once the line is calculated, the point discrepancy with the actual posted pointspread is noted and compared to similar historical pointspread differential outcomes. The pointspread differential is calculated by subtracting the calculated line from the actual line (negative numbers are used for favorite lines). If the differential is positive, that team is undervalued or underpriced (calculation shows a favorite should be laying more or a dog should be getting less points). Conversely, a negative line differential indicates an overvalued or overpriced team (calculation shows a favorite is laying too high a number or a dog should be getting more points). For example, the posted line shows the Nets are favored over the Magic by 10 points. However, the calculated pointspread shows the Nets should be a 7 point favorite over the Magic. Thus, the line differential is -3 points (-10 minus -7) meaning the Nets are overpriced by 3 points. Next step determines how have other home favorites overvalued by about 3 points performed in past seasons versus the pointspread?
However, a secondary analysis is needed to better define the model that includes more variables added to the analysis. Additional factors such as a SU win or loss in last game, overall SU winning percentage, winning and losing streaks and pointspread ranges are considered to fine tune the game situation. For the Nets vs. Magic example above, consider how has a home favorite overvalued by 3 points that is on a 3 game SU winning streak, has a plus .550 overall SU win percentage and is laying 10 points fared historically versus the pointspread?
Matchup Handicapping's analysis has identified certain winning situations that qualify for pointspread picks that begin during weeks 3 and 4 of the NBA regular season. Refer to the article titled "The 9 Winning Keys" for further definition of Matchup Handicapping's pointspread selection criteria.
Definitions:
Performance measures a team's ability to outscore the opposition. It combines scoring margins at home and on the road in recent games. Typically, the better teams have the better performance ratings.
There are two momentum ratings. The first is performance momentum which is not an indicator of how good a team is, but rather it indicates whether a team's short term performance is better, equal or worse than its season-to-date performance level. Good teams can have poor momentum and vice versa. Is the team in a slump, on a hot streak or playing to the level of their overall win-loss record?
The other momentum is winning momentum. A team that has won 3 or 4 of its last 4 games SU has winning momentum, a team that has lost 3 or 4 of its last 4 games SU has losing momentum and a team that has won 2 of its last 4 games SU has flat momentum. Consider a team can have winning momentum and a poor performance momentum over its most recent games. This would occur if a superior team was winning their recent games by very close margins.
An overvalued or overpriced team is where Matchup Handicapping's calculated pointspread is more than the posted line (favorites are negative values). For example, the calculated line has the home team favored by 4.5 (-4.5) and the posted line finds the home team favored by 7 (-7). The home team is overvalued by 2.5 points.
An undervalued or underpriced team is where Matchup Handicapping's calculated pointspread is less than the posted line. For example, the calculated line has the road team getting 4.5 points and the posted line shows the road team is getting 7 points. The road team is undervalued by 2.5 points.
BTB refers to a team playing on back-to-back or consecutive days or nights.
A rested team is one not playing BTB.
SU refers to straight-up or overall win or loss.
ATS refers to against the spread.
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
NBA Playoff Teams with Swagger
A team with swagger is one that has developed an aura of superiority born from a current streak of dominating the opposition. Such a team demands to win and is not satisfied with simply being good; but rather it is on a crusade to become great. The swagger manifests itself on the hardwood resulting in superior play combined with a super blend of confidence, intimidation, aggression and arrogance to achieve the killer instinct, aka the formula of champions.
Handicappers are always in search of recognizing teams that exhibit this winning edge because many times these formidable clubs blowout the opposition leading to comfortable pointspread victories. Speaking as a handicapper, I can absolutely attest to the fact that there is nothing like the satisfaction of being on the right side of a thoroughly dominating performance.
I use three criteria to determine whether an NBA team has achieved the swagger mode. Decisive home court advantage, winning momentum and an opponent's winning or flat momentum. Matchup Handicapping provides the statistical analysis to qualify the three noted criteria.
First is decisive home court advantage is defined as one team being significantly better than its opponent based on the venue. For example, a team with a recent history of impressive play at home hosting a team with recent struggles on the road would qualify the home squad with decisive home court advantage. Since Matchup Handicapping uses team power ratings, a rule of thumb is the home team’s power rating over its most recent home games is at least ten points better than the opposing road dog’s power rating over its most recent road contests. Nothing intimidates an opponent more than finding itself in a hostile environment facing a superior club.
Winning momentum is readily defined by a team that has won three or four of its last four games outright including its last game. Flat momentum is two SU wins and two SU defeats in the last four games. Losing momentum is three or four SU losses in the last four games.
So the second and third factors pit a winning momentum club versus an opponent with winning or flat momentum (exclude losing momentum).
Playoff home teams with decisive home court advantage and winning momentum are accustom to beating its opposition and carry the winning attitude and expectation into its next contest. This translates to winning pointsprtead performance when the road opposition has winning or flat momentum to the tune of 50 covers versus 33 losses ATS since 2004-05 season. HOWEVER, it produced a poor 4 win 7 loss ATS in 2012-13 so this trend needs to be monitored closely in upcoming seasons.
Handicappers are always in search of recognizing teams that exhibit this winning edge because many times these formidable clubs blowout the opposition leading to comfortable pointspread victories. Speaking as a handicapper, I can absolutely attest to the fact that there is nothing like the satisfaction of being on the right side of a thoroughly dominating performance.
I use three criteria to determine whether an NBA team has achieved the swagger mode. Decisive home court advantage, winning momentum and an opponent's winning or flat momentum. Matchup Handicapping provides the statistical analysis to qualify the three noted criteria.
First is decisive home court advantage is defined as one team being significantly better than its opponent based on the venue. For example, a team with a recent history of impressive play at home hosting a team with recent struggles on the road would qualify the home squad with decisive home court advantage. Since Matchup Handicapping uses team power ratings, a rule of thumb is the home team’s power rating over its most recent home games is at least ten points better than the opposing road dog’s power rating over its most recent road contests. Nothing intimidates an opponent more than finding itself in a hostile environment facing a superior club.
Winning momentum is readily defined by a team that has won three or four of its last four games outright including its last game. Flat momentum is two SU wins and two SU defeats in the last four games. Losing momentum is three or four SU losses in the last four games.
So the second and third factors pit a winning momentum club versus an opponent with winning or flat momentum (exclude losing momentum).
Playoff home teams with decisive home court advantage and winning momentum are accustom to beating its opposition and carry the winning attitude and expectation into its next contest. This translates to winning pointsprtead performance when the road opposition has winning or flat momentum to the tune of 50 covers versus 33 losses ATS since 2004-05 season. HOWEVER, it produced a poor 4 win 7 loss ATS in 2012-13 so this trend needs to be monitored closely in upcoming seasons.
Monday, July 1, 2013
NBA Playoff Teams with Winning Momentum
Winning teams in the NBA have developed an attitude that gives them the edge on the hardwood to handle adversity and put forth the necessary effort to get the best of the opposition on a consistent basis. Such teams feel really good about themselves and have captured a contagious winning spirit. A general rule in handicapping is that when in doubt, side with an NBA club that exhibits winning momentum, rather than back a club that is mired in a losing cycle.
An easy, yet effective measure of determining winning momentum is to look at an NBA team’s straight-up record over its last four games. In Matchup Handicapping, any NBA team that has won three or four of its last four games outright qualifies as a team with winning momentum. The next step is to find out if there is any correlation between winning momentum and pointspread success in the NBA playoffs.
A strong winning tendency ATS reveals itself when considering home favorites with winning momentum. In the NBA playoffs dating back to the 2004-05 season, home favorites with winning momentum have compiled 151 wins against 115 losses ATS for a neat 56.8% mark.
Although the past 2012-13 playoff season disappointed with 16 covers versus 17 losses ATS, this is a trend worth following.
An easy, yet effective measure of determining winning momentum is to look at an NBA team’s straight-up record over its last four games. In Matchup Handicapping, any NBA team that has won three or four of its last four games outright qualifies as a team with winning momentum. The next step is to find out if there is any correlation between winning momentum and pointspread success in the NBA playoffs.
A strong winning tendency ATS reveals itself when considering home favorites with winning momentum. In the NBA playoffs dating back to the 2004-05 season, home favorites with winning momentum have compiled 151 wins against 115 losses ATS for a neat 56.8% mark.
Although the past 2012-13 playoff season disappointed with 16 covers versus 17 losses ATS, this is a trend worth following.
The Weary NBA Road Dog Warrior
A common theme in NBA handicapping is the rest factor. Many handicappers and bettors like to play against NBA teams in the midst of a long road trip. I have heard and read this rationale on countless occasions. Why not? It sure sounds like a sound reason to make a play. However, logic does not prevail as the facts hardly support the supposition.
Going back to the 2004-05 NBA season, an initial study finds that any NBA road dog coming off a SU loss on its third or more consecutive road game has covered 397 times versus 329 losses ATS. This winning mark computes to 54.7% and is quite admirable given the great number of plays.
Taking it another step, I eliminated the games where either team was playing on back to back nights. These NBA road dogs coming off a SU loss on its third or more consecutive road game, with neither team playing back-to-back, have covered 350 times versus 281 losses ATS. This approach increased the winning percentage to 55.5%.
Never one to leave a job half finished, I called on the Matchup Handicapping performance ratings to fine tune the study in more detail. To my great satisfaction, I uncovered a solid winning situation as follows:
NBA road dogs coming off a SU loss on its third or more consecutive road game, with neither team playing back-to-back and where the opposing home favorite does not have an excellent or very poor performance rating, show an outstanding 236 wins against 171 losses ATS for a rather crisp 58.0% tally. Last season (2012-13) was disappointing as this play produced 23 covers versus 27 losses ATS. We will continue to keep an eye on this.
Going back to the 2004-05 NBA season, an initial study finds that any NBA road dog coming off a SU loss on its third or more consecutive road game has covered 397 times versus 329 losses ATS. This winning mark computes to 54.7% and is quite admirable given the great number of plays.
Taking it another step, I eliminated the games where either team was playing on back to back nights. These NBA road dogs coming off a SU loss on its third or more consecutive road game, with neither team playing back-to-back, have covered 350 times versus 281 losses ATS. This approach increased the winning percentage to 55.5%.
Never one to leave a job half finished, I called on the Matchup Handicapping performance ratings to fine tune the study in more detail. To my great satisfaction, I uncovered a solid winning situation as follows:
NBA road dogs coming off a SU loss on its third or more consecutive road game, with neither team playing back-to-back and where the opposing home favorite does not have an excellent or very poor performance rating, show an outstanding 236 wins against 171 losses ATS for a rather crisp 58.0% tally. Last season (2012-13) was disappointing as this play produced 23 covers versus 27 losses ATS. We will continue to keep an eye on this.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Gambler’s Fallacy
Suppose an NBA handicapping method has proven over time to produce 55 percent winners on average per season. If the selections are only posting 50 percent winners halfway through a current season, does this confident handicapping method begin to raise the wager amounts with the belief that 55 percent winners will be achieved at season end? And, future plays would need to win at greater than 55 percent of the time over the remainder of the season to raise the success rate from 50 to 55 percent.
The answer is an unequivocal “NO”. Many emotional cappers and bettors hold to the mistaken belief that the chances of winning increase during losing periods. Sports gamblers on a losing streak suffering from gambler’s fallacy will believe that their next wager will have an increased chance of winning. The reason is that these gamblers believe that they will win in the end; therefore they are more inclined to win the next bet when in the midst of a losing period.
Often times this disastrous thought process leads to larger wagers because sports gamblers feel they are “due” to win. Unfortunately, anyone who believes they are due to win is many times only increasing the probability of losing. Progressive betting schemes are the result of gambler’s fallacy and have caused the ruin of many a gambler.
Gambler’s fallacy fails to realize that the handicapping method is an inanimate entity with no memory. Each pointspread selection is unbiased and unprejudiced and independent of the last. Regardless of the outcome of prior wagers, each and every future bet will have the same 55 percent chance of winning, provided the handicapping method is truly capable of producing 55 percent winners over time.
Gambler’s fallacy is not to be confused with a statistical term called “regression to the mean.” Regression to the mean simply means that if an event has a certain statistical chance of occurring, the event should eventually approach the expected occurrence rate over the long term.
Looking at the graph below, it is seen for this hypothetical series of pointspread plays that during the first 100 or so plays, the winning percentage hovers between 48 and 60 percent. Only after about 225 plays does the winning percentage settle in to the 55% target area.
In plain terms, if an NBA handicapping method can produce 55% winners over time, then regardless of how many winning and losing streaks are encountered along the way, 55% winners should ultimately be achieved at some future point in time. Consequently, a winning handicapping method should eventually post an overall winning record. However, notice the operable terms are “ultimately” and “eventually”.
The inability to understand the difference between gambler’s fallacy and regression to the mean is one of the main reasons why many sports bettors bust their bankrolls long before they would have had any chance of turning a profit for the season. As soon as the wager amounts start to progressively increase during losing periods, gamblers place themselves in imminent danger of going bust. Trust me, the next bet has no compassion for the previous losing ones.
There are two major obstacles with a progressive betting scheme anyway. The first is that Fort Knox is needed to fund the venture since a losing streak will cause the wager amounts to increase dramatically since the objective is to win all the losses back plus show a profit when a winning bet does eventually occur. What happens if the bettor loses ten consecutive bets? Imagine the size of the next wager to recoup the losses.
When you think about it, our federal government could certainly embark on a progressive betting scheme in Vegas aimed at eliminating the federal deficit over time. The U.S. government has access to unlimited funds as it could simply print more money as needed. Such a bank vault could theoretically cover any number of consecutive losing streaks.
Unfortunately, the second obstacle poses a problem for Uncle Sam. Once the wager sizes become too large, the sportsbooks can simply refuse to take the bet. House limits provide the casinos with the ability to cut-off a bet size deemed excessive. Therefore, sportsbooks have built-in protection from colossal money sources involved in progressive stakes.
Sports gambling for any NBA contest is an indisputable, uncertain venture because nobody, and I mean nobody, can predict with any degree of certainty how long of a time period is required to realize the regression to the mean result. Going back to the above graph, who is to say when the 55% winning rate is achieved? It may take 300 to 400 pointspread plays to come true.
This is why Matchup Handicapping holds to the conviction that each bet should be the same wager amount during a betting season. Mission impossible is trying to predict winning and losing periods. It is fact that winning seasons experience losing streaks. It is hard enough picking 55% winners over time. It is impossible to pick 55% winners over every week or every month.
In summary, operating in a gambler’s fallacy mode attempts to predict when the regression to the mean outcome will come true. Unfortunately, the short term gambler’s fallacy will run its course long before the realization of the long term regression to the mean. As I have written many times before, the single biggest mistake made in sports betting is viewing it as a short term prospect.
On the contrary, a successful winning strategy involves a long term and disciplined commitment. You are not running a sprint. You are running a marathon.
The answer is an unequivocal “NO”. Many emotional cappers and bettors hold to the mistaken belief that the chances of winning increase during losing periods. Sports gamblers on a losing streak suffering from gambler’s fallacy will believe that their next wager will have an increased chance of winning. The reason is that these gamblers believe that they will win in the end; therefore they are more inclined to win the next bet when in the midst of a losing period.
Often times this disastrous thought process leads to larger wagers because sports gamblers feel they are “due” to win. Unfortunately, anyone who believes they are due to win is many times only increasing the probability of losing. Progressive betting schemes are the result of gambler’s fallacy and have caused the ruin of many a gambler.
Gambler’s fallacy fails to realize that the handicapping method is an inanimate entity with no memory. Each pointspread selection is unbiased and unprejudiced and independent of the last. Regardless of the outcome of prior wagers, each and every future bet will have the same 55 percent chance of winning, provided the handicapping method is truly capable of producing 55 percent winners over time.
Gambler’s fallacy is not to be confused with a statistical term called “regression to the mean.” Regression to the mean simply means that if an event has a certain statistical chance of occurring, the event should eventually approach the expected occurrence rate over the long term.
Looking at the graph below, it is seen for this hypothetical series of pointspread plays that during the first 100 or so plays, the winning percentage hovers between 48 and 60 percent. Only after about 225 plays does the winning percentage settle in to the 55% target area.
In plain terms, if an NBA handicapping method can produce 55% winners over time, then regardless of how many winning and losing streaks are encountered along the way, 55% winners should ultimately be achieved at some future point in time. Consequently, a winning handicapping method should eventually post an overall winning record. However, notice the operable terms are “ultimately” and “eventually”.
The inability to understand the difference between gambler’s fallacy and regression to the mean is one of the main reasons why many sports bettors bust their bankrolls long before they would have had any chance of turning a profit for the season. As soon as the wager amounts start to progressively increase during losing periods, gamblers place themselves in imminent danger of going bust. Trust me, the next bet has no compassion for the previous losing ones.
There are two major obstacles with a progressive betting scheme anyway. The first is that Fort Knox is needed to fund the venture since a losing streak will cause the wager amounts to increase dramatically since the objective is to win all the losses back plus show a profit when a winning bet does eventually occur. What happens if the bettor loses ten consecutive bets? Imagine the size of the next wager to recoup the losses.
When you think about it, our federal government could certainly embark on a progressive betting scheme in Vegas aimed at eliminating the federal deficit over time. The U.S. government has access to unlimited funds as it could simply print more money as needed. Such a bank vault could theoretically cover any number of consecutive losing streaks.
Unfortunately, the second obstacle poses a problem for Uncle Sam. Once the wager sizes become too large, the sportsbooks can simply refuse to take the bet. House limits provide the casinos with the ability to cut-off a bet size deemed excessive. Therefore, sportsbooks have built-in protection from colossal money sources involved in progressive stakes.
Sports gambling for any NBA contest is an indisputable, uncertain venture because nobody, and I mean nobody, can predict with any degree of certainty how long of a time period is required to realize the regression to the mean result. Going back to the above graph, who is to say when the 55% winning rate is achieved? It may take 300 to 400 pointspread plays to come true.
This is why Matchup Handicapping holds to the conviction that each bet should be the same wager amount during a betting season. Mission impossible is trying to predict winning and losing periods. It is fact that winning seasons experience losing streaks. It is hard enough picking 55% winners over time. It is impossible to pick 55% winners over every week or every month.
In summary, operating in a gambler’s fallacy mode attempts to predict when the regression to the mean outcome will come true. Unfortunately, the short term gambler’s fallacy will run its course long before the realization of the long term regression to the mean. As I have written many times before, the single biggest mistake made in sports betting is viewing it as a short term prospect.
On the contrary, a successful winning strategy involves a long term and disciplined commitment. You are not running a sprint. You are running a marathon.
Monday, May 4, 2009
NBA Playoffs - Avoid Forcing the Action
The exciting part of the NBA playoffs is that each series is an elimination round. Every playoff game takes on meaning, since every loss finds a team one step closer to extinction. Having watched countless NBA playoff games, the level of play is highly energized as the teams are faced with the ultimate motivation of the do or die consequence.
Needless to say, NBA playoff fever spreads throughout the sports betting world. Since every game is large, I believe I am accurate in stating that there is a noticeable increase in the betting action during the playoff season. While this time is certainly exciting for any pro hoop fan, a large trap with far reaching tentacles is lurking around each and every contest. Cappers and bettors must fight off the temptation of having to play every “big” game. The need to show up for every big game is a sure-fire formula for losing precious amounts of the bankroll.
My NBA playoff handicapping philosophy is very simple: proceed with caution and pick the spots wisely. Think quality, not quantity. The game plan is to build the regular season ending bankroll, not to give it away. All gamblers should realize that many of the best bets are the ones that are never laid.
Needless to say, NBA playoff fever spreads throughout the sports betting world. Since every game is large, I believe I am accurate in stating that there is a noticeable increase in the betting action during the playoff season. While this time is certainly exciting for any pro hoop fan, a large trap with far reaching tentacles is lurking around each and every contest. Cappers and bettors must fight off the temptation of having to play every “big” game. The need to show up for every big game is a sure-fire formula for losing precious amounts of the bankroll.
My NBA playoff handicapping philosophy is very simple: proceed with caution and pick the spots wisely. Think quality, not quantity. The game plan is to build the regular season ending bankroll, not to give it away. All gamblers should realize that many of the best bets are the ones that are never laid.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)