Totals are Fickle

[stwoody]

As I sit here watching the lone afternoon PAC 10 game and perusing the ending numbers today, I thought I would comment on something I have alluded to previously.

College totals are not near as sharp as in past years, and I'm scratching my head trying to figure out what the marked difference is and why the actuarians are having such a hard time staying in workable numbers. I have been wagering on sports for 30 years, and have developed many systems as well as "borrowed" many programs that have usually led to positive outcomes and results, but the most reliable models have fallen very short, and there doesn't appear to be much rhyme nor reason for the large disparity. College totals this year are very fickle, and if any of you are having success with your "systems" or reasoning, I would love to hear it.

What do I mean by disparity in total outcomes? Consider the 15 lined games today and notice that of those 15, only 6 were in the "sharp" range. What do I mean by sharp? The final number landed within 10 points of the total. This seems to be the pattern this year, and I'm very hard pressed to go back and find years, where the numbers have been so far off. Of the 6 "sharp" totals, only 3 managed to stay within 5 points of the final total.

The reason I even mention this, my most productive "totals system" has been inconsistent as hell this year, and isn't worth tweaking at this point. It makes me a bit uncomfortable to know that the linesmakers seem to be having trouble coming up with numbers that are this far off. I have other models I follow, yet none are showing a consistent productive end.

I have thought a lot about possible factors for this. Unfortunately, nothing really stands out. I'm more than happy to hear if you have any ideas? I have noticed some very reliable total cappers on this site that have struggled this year,even those of you that have a direct grasp of your conference, hell I junked 3 conferences this year, as there is no feasible predicted outcome.......so I don't think I'm the only handicapper coming to this realization. On the other hand, maybe I'm missing something, and some of the newer members have a successful system that is helping their end line.

I have changed my team assessment factors: which include-

Results ATS, Personnel, Shooting %, Scoring, Defense, Rebounding, Coaching and Coaching Changes, Strategy, Schedule, and History, Home Court.

I factor in all the key ingredients that I found to be most productive in the past:

Example: Scoring

Home and Road 2 point Shooting %
" " 3 point Shooting %
Pct of 3 Point Shots Made/Attempted (H/R)
Opponent Same
Free Throw % Made/Attempt*
Distribution of Outcomes
Player Averages
Pct. of Points attributable to 2 top scorers
Tempo
Points off Turnovers

*I'm a firm believer that Officiating makes a huge difference in FT Attempts, and unfortunately, in college hoops, there is no way in knowing who is scheduled to officiate until gametime. NCAA is very secretive in this. I know 3 PAC 10 and Mountain West officials, and they aren't allowed to tell anyone where they will be, and they very seldom know what game they are doing 24 hours before. I see them on TV, and laugh because I know their style, and it would've been helpful to have known the game.

In addition, I have never seen such a wide range of high/low totals in College hoops as I have this year. Todays total of 177 in Rhode I/Duq game was very high........and still flew over 21 points. Even the oddsmakers are having problems finding the key. The biggest discrepancy I saw was that Duq scored 87 points, yet only shot 34 % from the field. Of course 23 Offensive Rebounds will help your numbers, and jacking up 44 Att. from 3 point range......well, some are bound to fall.

I have always avoided the end of the spectrum totals..............it is too hard to predict for the most part. How high is too high? How low is too low? However, if one would have bet OVER in the two highest totals today: U. Mass/Temple OVER 152 covered by a comfortable 35 points, and of course Rhodie/Duq......also was very comfortable.

The three lowest totals: Indiana St/Evans 125.5 went over by 11. Fairfield/Loyola (129) went under by 3. Illinois St/Wichita St (129) Over by 4. If you would've played every Over today, you would've been rewarded with 10 Wins and 5 losses.

I don't have the answer................I wish I did. Handicapping is hard enough when your models are fairly consistent, but when totals are fluctuating all over the place, and there is no apparent reason for it, it makes it harder to turn a productive profit.

The process of investing over the course of the season must be highly systematic and deliberate. I want to know what I'm missing this season? Any ideas?

The one variable I have come up short on this year is Coaching philosophy. Some coaches will start to the foul process early and often, while others seem content with losses only being down 6-8 points. This is important as wins become extremely important towards getting an NCAA bid. I believe if we could come up with a list of Coaches that implement that philosophy, and those cappers here that know their teams well, that we can implement one of my systems to be highly productive here towards the end of the season. These teams should be considered "Bubble" teams, and of course knowing their opponents is crucial. Perhaps we should start a thread of this information, and utilize it to clobber these books here in the final month. I would be happy to entertain any suggestions, and I know there are some of you that probably have similar models.

Let me know what you think.......

Stwoody

 

[spang]

"I'm a firm believer that Officiating makes a huge difference in FT Attempts, and unfortunately, in college hoops, there is no way in knowing who is scheduled to officiate until gametime. NCAA is very secretive in this. I know 3 PAC 10 and Mountain West officials, and they aren't allowed to tell anyone where they will be, and they very seldom know what game they are doing 24 hours before. I see them on TV, and laugh because I know their style, and it would've been helpful to have known the game."

VERY TRUE !!


Thats the X factor. There are 3-4 guys that do the MAC & Horizon games that are true drama queens that blow the whistle at every opportunity. its not too often they all work together but it does happen. I've seen them arrive together on the floor for the warm ups at the JAR here, and I get on the phone quick. When paired together the over is in the bag. Unfortunately, when not present at a game you just don't know.

 

[Mully]

For what it's worth....

Been tracking NCAA totals for Nationally Televised games for the past 5 weeks. When at least 68% of the money is on the over, the under has been hitting at close to 70%. With 80% or more on the over, it jumps even higher closer to 80%!

Like I said...take it for what it's worth, but has been a nice money maker for me the past several weeks. And as pointed out, refs can and will make some difference. I always check that out also.

 

[stwoody]

"I'm a firm believer that Officiating makes a huge difference in FT Attempts, and unfortunately, in college hoops, there is no way in knowing who is scheduled to officiate until gametime. NCAA is very secretive in this. I know 3 PAC 10 and Mountain West officials, and they aren't allowed to tell anyone where they will be, and they very seldom know what game they are doing 24 hours before. I see them on TV, and laugh because I know their style, and it would've been helpful to have known the game."

VERY TRUE !!


Thats the X factor. There are 3-4 guys that do the MAC & Horizon games that are true drama queens that blow the whistle at every opportunity. its not too often they all work together but it does happen. I've seen them arrive together on the floor for the warm ups at the JAR here, and I get on the phone quick. When paired together the over is in the bag. Unfortunately, when not present at a game you just don't know.

Its a huge X factor, and I hate to say it, but some of these guys are alumni too. The MAC was the first conference I scrapped this year. I noticed yesterdays MAC totals were 4 unders to 1 Over. Which coaches in this conference are more apt to foul at the end consistently to play catch up? Its is unfortunate, as its not like MLB where it can be factored in. Still, the officials are aware of game importance, and I believe they tend to call tighter games as the season comes to a close.........games that don't mean so much you tend to see a "looser" game. Its a lot of work going back and finding who did what game though.

 

[stwoody]

For what it's worth....

Been tracking NCAA totals for Nationally Televised games for the past 5 weeks. When at least 68% of the money is on the over, the under has been hitting at close to 70%. With 80% or more on the over, it jumps even higher closer to 80%!

Like I said...take it for what it's worth, but has been a nice money maker for me the past several weeks. And as pointed out, refs can and will make some difference. I always check that out also.

Good Stuff Mully, was curious which sites your using to monitor where the money is going? Nationally Televised Games are typically good Under Bets, but honestly, I haven't kept track as much this year.

 

[hawkeye]

I totally agree with Spang and the refs. I have had my bother attend Iowa games and he will call me and tell me who the refs are--I will then bet accordingly. I still feel college totals are a good way to bet--Vegas just takes the average of the teams off/def and avg them out for a total usually--especially in lesser conferences. Pro total lines are more in the ball park--but thre are several teams that are very predicitable.

 

[Morris]

For what it's worth....

Been tracking NCAA totals for Nationally Televised games for the past 5 weeks. When at least 68% of the money is on the over, the under has been hitting at close to 70%. With 80% or more on the over, it jumps even higher closer to 80%!

Like I said...take it for what it's worth, but has been a nice money maker for me the past several weeks. And as pointed out, refs can and will make some difference. I always check that out also.

Question I use the anti public thing alot especially in playoffs, seems to do better, but how do you define Nationally televised games? Different regions show different games and there are alot of independent stations?

 

[Mully]

Question I use the anti public thing alot especially in playoffs, seems to do better, but how do you define Nationally televised games? Different regions show different games and there are alot of independent stations?

You must find those televised in each and every region. ALL weeknight ESPN and ESPN 2 games are as well as most weekend contests. You have to be careful with those on ABC, CBS, ESPN + ect...as most will be regional coverage. FSC has a Sunday deal with the NCAA that shows those match ups nation wide on all affiliates. The system only works at this clip on these types of games. Hope this helps somewhat Morris....

 

[Mully]

Good Stuff Mully, was curious which sites your using to monitor where the money is going? Nationally Televised Games are typically good Under Bets, but honestly, I haven't kept track as much this year.

There are several out there...With respect to Jack, your best bet would be to google "betting trends "when you have some free time. I also have an old local from my hometown who I talk to on occasion. Those are the guys who really know where the money is....

 

[stwoody]

I have been up all night developing a new Total System. There will be a ton of bugs to work out, but raw figures are interesting when I go back the past 10 match-ups in Conference. Will post soon...........Sorry Mully, not taking into account where "Money" is..........too many factors and players involved, but I think if you back back 20 years, you will find that Nationally Televised games are almost always overvalued. Let us know what you have when you find out.

 

[stwoody]

Try this new System for Totals: I checked previous results going over the past 10 games........these two stand out.


We shall see:

Georgetown/W.Virgina OVER 125' LOST

Wofford/Citadel UNDER 136'WIN

Will track this.............still haven't heard much input on which coaches choose to foul alot towards the end of games. I don't watch too many games, but I'm making a short list of coaches I have personally seen. I was hoping some of you might have added insight. Maybe I'm barking up wrong tree?:shrug:

 

[Underbar]

I watch totals on tv games like a hawk. I can tell you that very few end up with fouling making a difference. Only one I can remember this year, a horrible one-point loss when the teams hit three threes and six FTs (at least) in the last minute. That was last week, I believe. I took a 69 loss on a 68. Freak loss on a fifteen-point (at least) last minute. I just don't think it's worth worrying about. You'll see it happen a little as the teams worry about the bubble, but overall it's just not that big a factor. Just seems like it because it's so painful the handful of times it does happen.

 

[Underbar]

With due respect, I think you're making things much more difficult than need be. Just watch the first half of the game and bet the reverse in the second half, unless you see a very specific reason that the scoring pattern will continue. Usually it will not. The public is composed of drooling idiots who overrate everything that just happened, so if a team hits 8 threes in the first half, they assume it will continue in the second. Almost never is that the case. And that's all you need to know to beat totals. It works both ways. If teams miss threes in the 1h, they'll hit some in the 2h. There's a certain amount of raw physical energy teams possess. If they expend a bunch in a 85-point half, they're almost surely going to follow it up with a sub-80-point 2h.

Why bet blind and try to calculate better lines than the pros? Just watch the game and see what your eyes tell you. And unless there's a specific reason, bet on reversion to the mean.

 

[stwoody]

With due respect, I think you're making things much more difficult than need be. Just watch the first half of the game and bet the reverse in the second half, unless you see a very specific reason that the scoring pattern will continue. Usually it will not. The public is composed of drooling idiots who overrate everything that just happened, so if a team hits 8 threes in the first half, they assume it will continue in the second. Almost never is that the case. And that's all you need to know to beat totals. It works both ways. If teams miss threes in the 1h, they'll hit some in the 2h. There's a certain amount of raw physical energy teams possess. If they expend a bunch in a 85-point half, they're almost surely going to follow it up with a sub-80-point 2h.

Why bet blind and try to calculate better lines than the pros? Just watch the game and see what your eyes tell you. And unless there's a specific reason, bet on reversion to the mean.

While I agree with your premise..........like I said, the most reliable model I have used in the past 5 years, capitalizes on 1/2 time Totals. The problem is like I state. Totals are fluctuating all over the place. In years past, on any given night, you could expect 50-60% of the totals to be sharp. It isn't happenening this year for whatever reason. Case in point. Davidson second half line last night, should have been a good over bet. It was consistent with past trends. I think the over was 76. It came in at 71. Both halves went under. What I'm looking for is testing a theory. It isn't as simple as watching one half, then expecting teams to do the polar opposite in the 2nd half. I wish it was. What I'm saying is that the numbers are off. The Pros...........seem to be missing something. I will let you know what I find out, having to go back a few years and see which "bubble" teams with coaches that foul were good over bets. Thanks