no they do not need to match up. Just all (both) difference of 6 or more. If you remember when ou were reading through the entire thread, there was a point in the season that I was playing games based JUSt on the AVG. But there were like 15+ plays a week. It was fine when it went 11-4-1. Not so good when it was reversed. That is how that last column was born in the first place.
Thanks JaCKAL. Small bettor here myself. Bankroll is about 550 lol. Trying to set a goal of getting it up to 2500 at the end of season with nfl also. I was wanting to ask you what unit size You would play, if you were me whenever the system gets set in. I was thinking about 3% of the bank??
6-6 on the 12 plays. So to recap the first three weeks we had a good week, a shitty week, and a 'who cares' week. 12-15-1. I hope this puppy heats up next week because I'll be playing all of them at 3 units each.
This is how I plan on tracking the plays this season. I want to break out the overs and unders because last year there were a LOT more unders and already this year they are pretty even. Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
Total 0-0 +$0
Overs 0-0 +$0
Unders 0-0 +$0
17+ 0-0 +$0
All 3 match 0-0 +$0
This is how I plan on tracking the plays this season. I want to break out the overs and unders because last year there were a LOT more unders and already this year they are pretty even. Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
Total 0-0 +$0
Overs 0-0 +$0
Unders 0-0 +$0
17+ 0-0 +$0
All 3 match 0-0 +$0
Jackyl,
If you don't mind on me expanding on your post a little bit, here are some trends that I have isolated that everyone might or might not find useful.
I set up my own automated spreadsheet based on the info you and your other two amigos provided, and have been tracking 2009 NCAA OVER/UNDER records for plays that are +/-6 for all three categories (Off,Def, and Avg.), +/-17, +/- 20, +/- 23.5.
I noticed that my numbers are a little off from yours as I only used this years numbers...nothing from last year.
The records for each for week 2 and 3 are as follows.
Week 2 - +/-6, +/-17, +/20, +/-23.5
OVER - 0-0, 4-7, 3-6, 2-5
UNDER - 3-5, 4-4, 4-3, 4-1
TOTAL - 3-5, 8-11, 7-9, 6-6
Week 3 - +/-6, +/-17, +/20, +/-23.5
OVER - 0-1, 5-5, 3-3, 2-1
UNDER - 1-3, 5-1, 3-1, 2-1
TOTAL - 1-4, 10-6, 6-4, 4-2
So by my numbers:
UNDER -17 = 9-5 ATT 64.3%
UNDER -20 = 7-4 ATT 63.6%
UNDER -23.5 = 6-2 ATT 75%
It also looks as if the all three at +/-6 haven't been doing too well this year...so far. Same goes for OVERS. I expect both to regulate with another week or two of stats.
Therefore, I think this system does a great job in isolating UNDER value, and I will be slanting my wagers that way until the OVER plays and +/-6 plays prove to be more consistent. Just my $.02.
Good luck next week, everyone.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
Jackal,
When did you officially start tracking this last year? I know from the thread it seemed like Week 5 or 6, did you do any back testing?
I just took a couple hours doing the numbers from Week 4 2007 (since you were live firing in 2008) and the results did not look good.
There was 5 offense only plays (17+) which went 2-3, and there was 4 consensus plays (6+) which went 0-4. If you and the other creators of the system never back tested it I would be cautious in week 4 and only make it go live for whatever week you did last year, it was 5 or 6 I think..
If you like I can attach my spreadsheet with the numbers and results for that back testing..
Regards,
Spreadproof
When did you officially start tracking this last year? I know from the thread it seemed like Week 5 or 6, did you do any back testing?
I just took a couple hours doing the numbers from Week 4 2007 (since you were live firing in 2008) and the results did not look good.
There was 5 offense only plays (17+) which went 2-3, and there was 4 consensus plays (6+) which went 0-4. If you and the other creators of the system never back tested it I would be cautious in week 4 and only make it go live for whatever week you did last year, it was 5 or 6 I think..
If you like I can attach my spreadsheet with the numbers and results for that back testing..
Regards,
Spreadproof
Spreadproof,
That really doesn't surprise me because of the +/-6 qualifying plays from last season, there were only 6 that qualified over the last month of the NCAA, and I am not sold on its performance as an indicator. 6 games is much too small of a sample size. I bet if you continued to back test over the span of at least a month, your results will be more consistent.
Also, could you post the records for OVER wagers vs UNDER wagers for us in your findings, please? I have a hunch that the UNDER plays will have a better record Against The Total.
Good work, man. I'm with you...I am still apprehensive, and worry for all the guys talking about loading up for the system's findings next week. I've done that before on a system and it burnt me.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
That really doesn't surprise me because of the +/-6 qualifying plays from last season, there were only 6 that qualified over the last month of the NCAA, and I am not sold on its performance as an indicator. 6 games is much too small of a sample size. I bet if you continued to back test over the span of at least a month, your results will be more consistent.
Also, could you post the records for OVER wagers vs UNDER wagers for us in your findings, please? I have a hunch that the UNDER plays will have a better record Against The Total.
Good work, man. I'm with you...I am still apprehensive, and worry for all the guys talking about loading up for the system's findings next week. I've done that before on a system and it burnt me.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
It was around mid season. You need to start from the date of the beginning of this thread and then track bakc into ACE's weekly NFL thread to find tyhe starting point. Feel free if you have a couple more hours to kill. :drink:
And what does 9 plays from two years ago conclusively tell us exactly? :think2:
It's called gambling. If you can't afford to lose what you wager then you shouldn't do it. Everyone should be fully aware that this was only used for half a season. Even 2 full seasons wouldn't tell you anything about this year. Heck, it could completely bomb this year. Yes, I expect there to be fewer, more reliable plays as the season moves on as we compile more data. But I am not going to sit on the sidelines and twiddle my thumbs for another month. BOL with whatever you decide to do. (<)<
