theory

[robby_morini]

Thanks Spark! I hope you haven't helped in creating a monster.

I have always said that preparation is key to success. If you give a team enough time they should be able to respond in a positive way. I also realize that superior teams can adjust and correct short term situations. Better teams and athletes should be able to turn it around, making 2nd half wagers a possibility. Tracking those will be my next year thread starter.

This year I will be tracking underdog teams on first half wagers. The thought process being what I stated above. So far this theory is 0-1, with N Illinois not covering. BYU is -2 for the first half tonight. Like most of my "bright ideas", this will probably fall, flat, but I will track it and post after each bowl games.

I know there are flaws with this theory, but I will track and post the results. I also think that most teams are nervous and begin the game on a conservative note. FWIW, I will also be playing under the first half in each bowl game.

Thanks guys (and Meg), and good luck

[TCB in a Flash]

I like the thought.
Good science: Propose a theory, test it with data.
If you have time - and can find the info - see how this played out the pvs 2 years.
Keep us posted.

good luck,

greg

[robby_morini]

2006 1st half underdog theory YTD ($100 per wager)

N. Illinois +6.5 (16-0 TCU) Loss (110) Under 24: Win $100
Oregon +2 (17-0 BYU) Loss (110) Under 31: Win $100

[CheCheBoFumbe]

Sorry robby but I've been around a long time and theory plays, trend plays, mean nothing. I've heard guys say they were 20-5 but you jump on their picks and they lose. 20-6 is still a good record but your down big bucks. It's always about today, yesterday is gone and will never return. Not trying to start anything I just post what I know. Thanks for posting and your thoughts.

[robby_morini]

Hey Che, I appreciate your response.

I hope I didn't mislead anyone about playing these as actual plays. I am just testing a thought that I had with hypothetical dollars. I simply am using $100 as an easy number to re-cap.

I definitely don't want anyone to try this as this is an untested method. I will post the results after each game. As you can probably tell, science was never my field because so far this theory is 0-2 against the 1st half side. The total is doing better, but I would still be in the hole $10.

Again, thanks for your input. This is more of a test of my limited handicapping thoughts. It just always seems to me that underdogs do well in bowl games. It will probably be another worthless thread, but no one will be hurt by it

[CheCheBoFumbe]

robby, I respect your thoughts I'am glad you took the time to give us your plays. I hope you took my commits as positive, I believe to many people pay to much attention to records and trends. Best of luck to you in the future.

[robby_morini]

Friday 12-22-06

Troy State +3 (Win) Under 27 1/2 (Loss)

YTD 1st half Bowl Game Underdog and Under Experiment

1st half dog: 1-2 ($120) *
1st half under: 2-1 +90 *

Based on a hypothetical $100 per play

3 games tomorrow. I will post results late tomorrow night.

Good Luck everyone, and Happy Holidays

[TheRook]

Awesome stuff Robby......

Anything to help everyone make money is a great post.

Looking forward to seeing how this goes....

Happy holiday's buddy,
Rook


PS...I want to get to Ashville soon!

[robby_morini]

Thanks John, you too my friend.

Remember, next time you are up this way, I owe you a cold one or two. I was thinking about you when I heard the Clemson qb is out for the game. Tough break, but Bowden did the right thing

You will have some mail on Sunday. Thanks again John.

[robby_morini]

Saturday December 23, 2006

ECU +3 (loss) under 21 1/2 (loss)
SJ State +1 1/2 (win) under 24 (win)
Tulsa +1/2 (loss) under 24 1/2 (win)

Today: 1st half dog 1-2 (120)
1st half under 2-1 +90


2006 Bowl Record through 12-23-2006:
1st half dog's: 2-4 ($240)
1st half unders: 4-2 +180

Even though some of the lines were small today, I still counted them. I also am finding that my theory ain't working so far. I will also say that I expect this may change as we get deeper into the bowl season.

[robby_morini]

Sunday December 24, 2006

1st half: ASU + 4.5 (Win)
1st half under: 36.5 (Win)

2006 Bowl YTD 1st half dog: 3-4 ($140)
1st half under: 5-2 +$380

Above is based on hypothetical $100 bet. As mentioned in earlier thread, this is just something I am testing. I am playing these, but not recommending them.

[robby_morini]

Tuesday 12-26-2006

1st half MTSU +6 (Loss) ($110)
1st half under 26 (Loss) ($110)

2006 Year to Date:

1st half underdog Won 3 Lost 5 ($250)
1st half under Won 5 Lost 3 +$170

So far I am down $80 year to date. I expect the later bowl games to produce better results

[frankb03]

Sorry robby but I've been around a long time and theory plays, trend plays, mean nothing. I've heard guys say they were 20-5 but you jump on their picks and they lose. 20-6 is still a good record but your down big bucks. It's always about today, yesterday is gone and will never return. Not trying to start anything I just post what I know. Thanks for posting and your thoughts.

Che, I disagree. Believe it or not almost every capper uses systems or trends. When we hear statement like let down, good rushing team vs bad rushing D etc. For weeks we've heard Indy can't stop the run. Those are a variation of systems. Most cappers base their selections on teams past performance.

I do pretty well playing systems in NFL, NBA and College football.

[Spearit]

I also disagree- I have had success on first half plays and link them to trends and record in the first half against like teams.

[griswold]

I like systems that make sense.

For example, there's a longstanding NFL trend that has hit over 60 percent for years on playing home dogs that won as road dogs. There's some logic to this.

What throws people off are the worthless contrived systems used by professional touts (Marc Lawrence, etc) that don't have any logic. Stuff like: "Play on any favoite of 7-9 points that won its last game by four or more if it passed for more than 300 yards and its opponent is off a bye. Blah...blah..blah."

Computers can go back and find anything that is largely coincidence.

I feel the same way about team trends. They're usually worthless as personnel and coaches change from year to year. However, there are a few team trends that are compelling. This weekend, for example, KC ends its season at home and has an unbelievable ATS record in that situation.