Please don't take this the wrong way cuz I'm a fan of yours but I do not understand how you can calculate odds or percentages of a team winning or losing based on prior performance since each game's results are independent of each other. What a team did yesterday or the day before has no effect on what they will do today. I understand that if you said Team A will certainly win .537, then you could hypothetically calculate those odds of a streak. However, we do not know for certain and cannot calculate those odds. If that were the case, why were the Phils not -10,000 or higher?? Their "odds" of losing 7 in a row were less than 1% according to you.
"and considering there are only 16.2 possible ten-game stretches in a 162-game season". This is completely wrong again. Games 1-10 are a set. 2-11, 3-12, 4-13, 5-14 etc.
All of this may sound contradictory towards my statement of betting on/against streaks but what I said was to never bet AGAINST a streak. I did not say to BLINDLY bet on the streak. The logic of, "they couldn't win/lose X games in a row" is not a sound strategy when trying to beat the market. Again, when betting against a streak you can only win 1 time. You may happen to choose the 1 time correctly, but using the logic of a team winning/losing a specified game because they have won/lost X games in a row is a sure fire way to the poor house.
With all that said....Good Luck and keep up the great picks!!
Sounds like you're hung up on the NEXT game and predicting whether they will win or lose TODAY. I'm not saying that. I just gave laws of probability of a consecutive streak given an assumed true occurence rate. That's all. Don't confuse game odds with streak odds. Of course the Phils would never be -10000 because the oddsmakers have to keep each game independent to promote proper action. For the bookmakers and bettors, every game IS independent and I don't recommend anyone be foolish enough to bet on or against streaks because we don't know when it will end.
Again, it is just a general calculation based on assumed true odds (I said we have to assume the Phils were a true .537 for sake of the example). It's just simple mathematics of a .537 probability (or .463 for a loss) having the likelihood of occuring a # of consecutive times.
You have to realize that at .463, the odds of consecutive occurences gets gradually lower EACH GAME. You can't single out the 7th game at 0.46% and factor that into a wager. The first loss is 46.3% and then it basically gets cut in half with every consecutive occurence after that. The longer it goes, the less likely it is to continue. That's all I'm saying.