<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> You stated in your post that when a team playing their second pre-season game is facing a team playing their first that "this is an advantage in most cases." (Most means way more then 50%, wouldn't you agree?) History shows that this is a losing proposition (after you subtract the vig) over the last six years. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
But you're confusing ATS success with success on the field. When we say a team "has an advantage", that means an advantage that would help it win the game. But winning the game doesn't necessarily mean the team will cover. And, as you probably know, the notion that a team playing its second game has an advantage over a team that hasn't played yet is probably the most widely known historical fact relevant to preseason handicapping. It's so widely known that it is likely factored into the pointspread, meaning it shouldn't be surprising that the team with the advantage only covers 50% of the time.
Moreover, Big Lou, you ignore the issue of travel -- in recent years, a lot of the teams with this "advantage" have had the advantage lessened (or eliminated) by the internatuional travel they have had to endure after the first game. Why don't you compare the ATS records (and SU records) of those teams with the records of other teams playing their second game against a team that hasn't played yet?
But you're confusing ATS success with success on the field. When we say a team "has an advantage", that means an advantage that would help it win the game. But winning the game doesn't necessarily mean the team will cover. And, as you probably know, the notion that a team playing its second game has an advantage over a team that hasn't played yet is probably the most widely known historical fact relevant to preseason handicapping. It's so widely known that it is likely factored into the pointspread, meaning it shouldn't be surprising that the team with the advantage only covers 50% of the time.
Moreover, Big Lou, you ignore the issue of travel -- in recent years, a lot of the teams with this "advantage" have had the advantage lessened (or eliminated) by the internatuional travel they have had to endure after the first game. Why don't you compare the ATS records (and SU records) of those teams with the records of other teams playing their second game against a team that hasn't played yet?
mws - While it would seem that teams that traveled overseas would have a disadvantage in their next game, especially if it comes within the next six days or so (like TB will against Miami), it is just the opposite of that.
I don't have the numbers in front of me right now but I will post them when we get closer to this game. The numbers favor the team playing the second game (with all the travel) overwhelmingly.
I don't have the numbers in front of me right now but I will post them when we get closer to this game. The numbers favor the team playing the second game (with all the travel) overwhelmingly.
I'm probably going to take almost every dog plus the points for .2% and the ML for .1%, and leave room for exceptions. At least that's the reasoning that I'll start with on NFLX and look to see if I can build a stronger case game by game for a favorite. A lot of these games will be toss-ups.
