Burytheb said:i have started tracking this year the statfox simulator for nfl sides. have not but will be going to last year and beyond to track also.
They run two simulators. simulator two when is gives road dog edge it is 0-4.
a fade situation. week 2 had four fade situations :
oakland to cover baltimore (l0st)
cleavland to cover cincinnatti (lost)
detroit to cover chicago (lost)
washington to cover dallas (lost)
this week there are four more potential fade situations
tennessee to cover indy (+18 1/2)
miami to cover new england (+9 1/2)
jets to cover jacksonville (+7)
buffalo to cover chicago (+11)
the reason i bring it up is two one here that intersect with your system Jacksonville and chicago.
once i get last year complete can update with some confidence.
burytheb
cubsfn4ever said:Kojak- You obviously have alot of time on your hands as evidenced by the number of posts you have and the amount of work you've put in to this new so-called trend analysis system you think you've discovered. Just because a guy has only 8 posts doesn't make his criticism invalid. You may have won on your plays today but there is no plausible correlation to this so-called system and your original numbers from 2005 do not hold up to scrutiny. If you really want to help people, try to pick consistent winners and keep an accurate record of your picks. I know you did neither of these last year and then quit in a huff when people criticized you.
There is simply no way this system will work over the long term (eg the rest of the season) and you're not helping anyone by making them think you've got a system that will work for them.