Computer's El Fuego
That's right. On fire. (Or does that translate to "man on fire"? Whatever.) Computer "outside the margin" picks as documented in the Week 14 Rotoaction NFL Forecast (see link on left) were 4-0 last week and are now 16-6 on the season. Outside the margin is defined by the computer using the Stat Power Index (see link on left) to make a line that is more than three points different than the Vegas line. Last week, the computer said the best values on the boards were Redskins plus 10, Falcons minus 7.5, Seahawks plus 5.5, and Texans plus 11.
To be clear, we don't ever advocate betting on NFL football. I grew up next to the local bookie in Paterson, NJ and was told as a boy that the lines are too good to beat with any consistency (and that parlays and teasers were the biggest sucker bets in the world). And the lines ARE too good. But this year I wondered if there might be a consisistent, reliable methodology for identifying what lines each week are artificially inflated or deflated and by how much. Would that improve the likelihood of winning to at least 60 percent?
Now, we're a long, long way off from proving anything. But there has only been one losing week since we started using the system and no losing weeks since we refined the system by expanding the Stat Power Index beyond simple YPA differential.
I do not think a win percentage of 73 percent is sustainable. This percentage will decline. But I think there's a chance -- A CHANCE -- of sustaining a plus 60 pecent record with regularity.
Remember the two major drawbacks to this system. One is that there aren't many lines that the system identifies as being wrong (about two to four per week). Second, you can't bet with any confidence until well into the season because it takes at least five or six weeks of stats for the Stat Power Index to achieve any semblance of critical mass. But as Louie the bookie also told me as a boy, "Anyone who bets football during the first month of a season is a fool."
To be clear, we don't ever advocate betting on NFL football. I grew up next to the local bookie in Paterson, NJ and was told as a boy that the lines are too good to beat with any consistency (and that parlays and teasers were the biggest sucker bets in the world). And the lines ARE too good. But this year I wondered if there might be a consisistent, reliable methodology for identifying what lines each week are artificially inflated or deflated and by how much. Would that improve the likelihood of winning to at least 60 percent?
Now, we're a long, long way off from proving anything. But there has only been one losing week since we started using the system and no losing weeks since we refined the system by expanding the Stat Power Index beyond simple YPA differential.
I do not think a win percentage of 73 percent is sustainable. This percentage will decline. But I think there's a chance -- A CHANCE -- of sustaining a plus 60 pecent record with regularity.
Remember the two major drawbacks to this system. One is that there aren't many lines that the system identifies as being wrong (about two to four per week). Second, you can't bet with any confidence until well into the season because it takes at least five or six weeks of stats for the Stat Power Index to achieve any semblance of critical mass. But as Louie the bookie also told me as a boy, "Anyone who bets football during the first month of a season is a fool."
<< Home