I made the no. Cruncher, which is a spreadsheet type of program to find which FAVORITES are gonna cover every week. Why only FAVORITES? Well, I keep records, well over 5 years worth, and thems tell me that my FAV. plicks are way, way, more profitable that my UNDERDOG plicks in the past. If I only played dogs, I'd be licking rocks for nourishment these days. Sooo.. I made the No. Cruncher with all the calculations necessary to figure out ONLY the favorites that should cover every week during college footsball season and play the one's I agree with. It's a long, complicated process and I won't bore anybody with starting a book here about it.
The Cruncher spits out a no. (rating) for the teams I feed it for each week's games. It takes much too much time to feed it all the games, so I select which games to feed it generally it's about 1/3rd of all the games that are played each week. Every week, I enter the names of the teams that are facing each other AND the last 3 teams each of the two that are playing "today" faced, and I also give it the point spread of course. The Cruncher already has the factors for the teams it knows about from previous weeks and it continually adjusts the factors (stats.) it already has for each team by using the results (scores) that I feed it after each week's games are completed. Bottom line is the rating it comes up with reflects the confidence it has that the FAVORED team for this week's game wll cover.
Here's the important point here.... . . I've only noted the TOP ratings all along but about a week ago I checked out how it did for the bottom of the Cruncher's report, that is - the FAVORITE teams with the LEAST confidence of covering. Surprise, surprise. It sure is better than me for finding UNDERDOGS that will cover. It did a really good job over the LAST 4 weeks in finding FAVORITES that should fail to cover . That means I am now gonna start including DOGS in the list of "Plicks".
Let's see what happens:
Arkansas +3 1/2 vs. Ole Miss
Wisconsin -26 vs, Illinois : I was really glad it came up with this one. It was sickening to watch MY plick (week 1 or 2) was a team making fools of them selves on that field, going into reverse after their seldom big yardage gains to only give back and PLUS MORE back on the field due to penalties or turnovers and/or BLUNDERS. A team of complete screw ups. I don't care how much they've learned since that game... the Badgers are gonna moirder dos bums.
San Jose St. +14 vs. BYU: Hey, what can I say? The Cruncher likes this one and BYU continues to surprise us about how bad they really are this year.
Mich. St. -2 1/2 vs. Northwestern
SMU -9 vs. Tulsa
I have a long way to go and hope I can get back here to add the rest. I don't know if the VISITORS are interested in the Misc. stuff like the Mini Dog Upsetter and the Bestest Bet ( for me it's Wisc. , but I don't know yet who it will be according to the computer BB). If anybody is interested in those, chime in, otherwise I'll just leave the regular listing.
Have a profitable Sat.
The Cruncher spits out a no. (rating) for the teams I feed it for each week's games. It takes much too much time to feed it all the games, so I select which games to feed it generally it's about 1/3rd of all the games that are played each week. Every week, I enter the names of the teams that are facing each other AND the last 3 teams each of the two that are playing "today" faced, and I also give it the point spread of course. The Cruncher already has the factors for the teams it knows about from previous weeks and it continually adjusts the factors (stats.) it already has for each team by using the results (scores) that I feed it after each week's games are completed. Bottom line is the rating it comes up with reflects the confidence it has that the FAVORED team for this week's game wll cover.
Here's the important point here.... . . I've only noted the TOP ratings all along but about a week ago I checked out how it did for the bottom of the Cruncher's report, that is - the FAVORITE teams with the LEAST confidence of covering. Surprise, surprise. It sure is better than me for finding UNDERDOGS that will cover. It did a really good job over the LAST 4 weeks in finding FAVORITES that should fail to cover . That means I am now gonna start including DOGS in the list of "Plicks".
Let's see what happens:
Arkansas +3 1/2 vs. Ole Miss
Wisconsin -26 vs, Illinois : I was really glad it came up with this one. It was sickening to watch MY plick (week 1 or 2) was a team making fools of them selves on that field, going into reverse after their seldom big yardage gains to only give back and PLUS MORE back on the field due to penalties or turnovers and/or BLUNDERS. A team of complete screw ups. I don't care how much they've learned since that game... the Badgers are gonna moirder dos bums.
San Jose St. +14 vs. BYU: Hey, what can I say? The Cruncher likes this one and BYU continues to surprise us about how bad they really are this year.
Mich. St. -2 1/2 vs. Northwestern
SMU -9 vs. Tulsa
I have a long way to go and hope I can get back here to add the rest. I don't know if the VISITORS are interested in the Misc. stuff like the Mini Dog Upsetter and the Bestest Bet ( for me it's Wisc. , but I don't know yet who it will be according to the computer BB). If anybody is interested in those, chime in, otherwise I'll just leave the regular listing.
Have a profitable Sat.
