I now have 2 years of info going into next year.
Key findings:
1) 1st half under dogs went 14-4 (77.7%)from Bowl games played on Friday 12-29 through last night's game, including 6-0on January 1. 2006\07 total bowl 1st half underdog results were 17-14 (54.8%)
2) 2005\06 1st half underdogs in bowl games went 7-1 (87.5%) on January 1st and after.
3)Combined, "Big Bowl Games" 1st half under dogs went 21-5 for the past 2 years(80.7%).
4) In 2006\07, 1st half unders on all bowl games went a dismal 10-19-2 (34.4%), with no major trends in big bowl games. Last years results were slightly above 50% for the year
What is all of this worth? Maybe nothing, but after next years results we will have a full 3 years of results.
I really do think that teams that play in big bowl games have the technology and backing to know exactly what their opponents have. Factor in line error, public perception, and 1st half line value, I feel strongly that this system will produce results over the long run.
See you guys next fall.
Key findings:
1) 1st half under dogs went 14-4 (77.7%)from Bowl games played on Friday 12-29 through last night's game, including 6-0on January 1. 2006\07 total bowl 1st half underdog results were 17-14 (54.8%)
2) 2005\06 1st half underdogs in bowl games went 7-1 (87.5%) on January 1st and after.
3)Combined, "Big Bowl Games" 1st half under dogs went 21-5 for the past 2 years(80.7%).
4) In 2006\07, 1st half unders on all bowl games went a dismal 10-19-2 (34.4%), with no major trends in big bowl games. Last years results were slightly above 50% for the year
What is all of this worth? Maybe nothing, but after next years results we will have a full 3 years of results.
I really do think that teams that play in big bowl games have the technology and backing to know exactly what their opponents have. Factor in line error, public perception, and 1st half line value, I feel strongly that this system will produce results over the long run.
See you guys next fall.
Comment