Tweet
NFL: Contrarian Views (Week 13)
December 2, 2005
by James Patrick
2005 RECORD: (21-16) +3400/ +3.4units
Last Week's Recap: (0-3)
Washington+3.5(loser) -1100
Tampa Bay-2 ½ (loser) -1100
Pittsburg+8 (loser) -1100
Week 1: (3-1) +$1800
Week 2: (2-1) +900
Week 3: (2-1) +900
Week 4: (3-0) +3000
Week 5: (2-1) +900
Week 6: (0-3) -3200
Week 7: (2-1) +900
Week 8: (3-0) +3000
Week 9: (0-3) -3300
Week 10: (2-1) +900
Week 11: (2-1)+900
Week 12: (0-3)-3300
Why have all the favorites been covering?
It is high time that someone address the question that is haunting bookmakers in their sleep. Why have all the favorites been covering this year? I've talked to many people regarding this topic and seemingly, all of them have a different view.
A few local bookmakers are suspicious that the CRIS' of the world are purposely trying to bankrupt local American bookmakers who are known to have a spectrum of clients that are far more likely to lay the points than they are to take them. While I find this theory interesting, I also find it quite unlikely. I doubt that CRIS would purposely provide value for any spectrum of clientele in order to make an uneducated attempt at driving competitors out of the business without having any knowledge of the depth of bankroll or spectrum of volume/clientele. This theory has to be bullshit.
The second interesting theory is that CRIS has figured out a way to profit from the rest of the market's dependence upon them for openers. The theory goes that CRIS is purposely opening the numbers with value on the favorite and betting out elsewhere on the value side as the clone joints simply copy their lines. This theory is also interesting to me, and seems on its face to make sense. After all, is it fair for CRIS to have to hire the talent and infrastructure in order to be able to put out openers in virtually every sport? Is it fair that their competitors simply clone their numbers without any investment of their own? Probably not, however there is one glaring problem with this theory. If CRIS were this innovative and deceptive and devilish, they would not be so dumb as to only put out bad lines that were short on the favorite, and thereby consistently put out numbers too low. They would mix it up a bit in order to conceal what they were doing. This fact alone stands this conspiracy theory on its head.
The theory you will likely hear from every professional is the business is simply this. We are on a short run of mathematical aberration. A few hundred trials in which a 50% outcome lands 60% is not impossible. A coin has been flipped 169 times and 96 times the coin has popped heads. This is really not that big of a shake, mathematically speaking. (favorites are 96-73-4 per covers, 2 games lined at pk em this year which aren't part of the total).
However, as a whiner and a worrier, I need some type of explanation..and I think I have one that is mathematically consistent with the results. I asked a prominent bookmaker, what his explanation was for all the favorites covering this year. He said, "There just aren't that many good teams." On its face, the statement didn't seem to be that important or make that much sense to me. However, as I thought about it all day and talked through it with a gambling buddy of mine, I figured out what he was saying and what I now believe to be the reason for the inequity this year between the dog/favs.
The real difference this year is that there are far too many bad teams. Simply list the teams this year that when visioned, conjure up negative images. For me they are: Buffalo, Miami, Houston, Baltimore, Tennessee, Cleveland, Green Bay, Minnesota, Detroit, New Orleans, Arizona, San Francisco, St. Louis, N.Y. Jets, and Oakland. That is a grand total of 15 (FIFTEEN) teams, all of which I would argue.would be in the bottom 4 of the NFL of the past 5-6 years. So what is the point? The point is this: NFL teams on average are worse than in years past. Why? I don't know, whether its talent or coaching or management or quarter back play, it's all irrelevant. The salient point is this, that when this year's #4 team in the league travels to this years #20th team in the league, the line should NOT be the same as when last year's #4 team traveled to last year's #20th ranked team. It should be MUCH higher.
Secondly, I don't think we can blame the bookmakers for this oversight. The lines simply reflect the perceptions of the public, and it is those perceptions that are wrong. In the past, the public's perception was that the stronger teams were much stronger than the weaker teams, and that was simply not the case. That perception led to mucho profits for the contrarian. However, in this case, when the perception of the public is that teams are not really that much better than one another, and when that perception is WRONG, then we'll end up with results such as we are getting this year. Results which seem to defy mathematics, where the chalk wins every week and the obvious sides take home the money.
This week I'm simply going to include my three top plays for the week and withhold the tired worn out analysis. I'm not changing anything, my approach remains the same.
Game #1: Cincinnati Bengals +3 @ Pittsburgh Steelers
TOP PLAY: Pittsburgh Steelers-3 $1000 (1 unit)
Game #2: Minnesota Vikings -2 @ Detroit Lions
TOP PLAY: Detroit Lions +120 for $1000 (1unit)
GAME #3: Oakland Raiders +11 @ San Diego Chargers
TOP PLAY: Oakland Raiders+11 for $1000 (1 unit)
Disclaimer: Previous week's results do NOT reflect future performance.
December 2, 2005
by James Patrick
2005 RECORD: (21-16) +3400/ +3.4units
Last Week's Recap: (0-3)
Washington+3.5(loser) -1100
Tampa Bay-2 ½ (loser) -1100
Pittsburg+8 (loser) -1100
Week 1: (3-1) +$1800
Week 2: (2-1) +900
Week 3: (2-1) +900
Week 4: (3-0) +3000
Week 5: (2-1) +900
Week 6: (0-3) -3200
Week 7: (2-1) +900
Week 8: (3-0) +3000
Week 9: (0-3) -3300
Week 10: (2-1) +900
Week 11: (2-1)+900
Week 12: (0-3)-3300
Why have all the favorites been covering?
It is high time that someone address the question that is haunting bookmakers in their sleep. Why have all the favorites been covering this year? I've talked to many people regarding this topic and seemingly, all of them have a different view.
A few local bookmakers are suspicious that the CRIS' of the world are purposely trying to bankrupt local American bookmakers who are known to have a spectrum of clients that are far more likely to lay the points than they are to take them. While I find this theory interesting, I also find it quite unlikely. I doubt that CRIS would purposely provide value for any spectrum of clientele in order to make an uneducated attempt at driving competitors out of the business without having any knowledge of the depth of bankroll or spectrum of volume/clientele. This theory has to be bullshit.
The second interesting theory is that CRIS has figured out a way to profit from the rest of the market's dependence upon them for openers. The theory goes that CRIS is purposely opening the numbers with value on the favorite and betting out elsewhere on the value side as the clone joints simply copy their lines. This theory is also interesting to me, and seems on its face to make sense. After all, is it fair for CRIS to have to hire the talent and infrastructure in order to be able to put out openers in virtually every sport? Is it fair that their competitors simply clone their numbers without any investment of their own? Probably not, however there is one glaring problem with this theory. If CRIS were this innovative and deceptive and devilish, they would not be so dumb as to only put out bad lines that were short on the favorite, and thereby consistently put out numbers too low. They would mix it up a bit in order to conceal what they were doing. This fact alone stands this conspiracy theory on its head.
The theory you will likely hear from every professional is the business is simply this. We are on a short run of mathematical aberration. A few hundred trials in which a 50% outcome lands 60% is not impossible. A coin has been flipped 169 times and 96 times the coin has popped heads. This is really not that big of a shake, mathematically speaking. (favorites are 96-73-4 per covers, 2 games lined at pk em this year which aren't part of the total).
However, as a whiner and a worrier, I need some type of explanation..and I think I have one that is mathematically consistent with the results. I asked a prominent bookmaker, what his explanation was for all the favorites covering this year. He said, "There just aren't that many good teams." On its face, the statement didn't seem to be that important or make that much sense to me. However, as I thought about it all day and talked through it with a gambling buddy of mine, I figured out what he was saying and what I now believe to be the reason for the inequity this year between the dog/favs.
The real difference this year is that there are far too many bad teams. Simply list the teams this year that when visioned, conjure up negative images. For me they are: Buffalo, Miami, Houston, Baltimore, Tennessee, Cleveland, Green Bay, Minnesota, Detroit, New Orleans, Arizona, San Francisco, St. Louis, N.Y. Jets, and Oakland. That is a grand total of 15 (FIFTEEN) teams, all of which I would argue.would be in the bottom 4 of the NFL of the past 5-6 years. So what is the point? The point is this: NFL teams on average are worse than in years past. Why? I don't know, whether its talent or coaching or management or quarter back play, it's all irrelevant. The salient point is this, that when this year's #4 team in the league travels to this years #20th team in the league, the line should NOT be the same as when last year's #4 team traveled to last year's #20th ranked team. It should be MUCH higher.
Secondly, I don't think we can blame the bookmakers for this oversight. The lines simply reflect the perceptions of the public, and it is those perceptions that are wrong. In the past, the public's perception was that the stronger teams were much stronger than the weaker teams, and that was simply not the case. That perception led to mucho profits for the contrarian. However, in this case, when the perception of the public is that teams are not really that much better than one another, and when that perception is WRONG, then we'll end up with results such as we are getting this year. Results which seem to defy mathematics, where the chalk wins every week and the obvious sides take home the money.
This week I'm simply going to include my three top plays for the week and withhold the tired worn out analysis. I'm not changing anything, my approach remains the same.
Game #1: Cincinnati Bengals +3 @ Pittsburgh Steelers
TOP PLAY: Pittsburgh Steelers-3 $1000 (1 unit)
Game #2: Minnesota Vikings -2 @ Detroit Lions
TOP PLAY: Detroit Lions +120 for $1000 (1unit)
GAME #3: Oakland Raiders +11 @ San Diego Chargers
TOP PLAY: Oakland Raiders+11 for $1000 (1 unit)
Disclaimer: Previous week's results do NOT reflect future performance.
Comment