Slice: have you found accuscore good for much of anything? When I started capping (not long ago, five months!) I was interested in this until I found it to be, well, less than in any way reliable. It was accurately predicting sides and totals at around 45%---meaning you'd make a slight amount of money FADING it (after juice)...or lose A TON playing it.
This was through err...100 odd games CBB, NBA and CFB combined, playing the strongest 3-5 plays based on predicted differences from the spread. I didn't layer it with any other methods or my own capping to filter plays, as I simply wanted to see the numbers it would spit out. These were not games I had money on (and thankfully so).
To be sure, it could have been any number of issues (or simply variance) as to why it was way off, but I just figured it was better to devote my time elsewhere than putting any stock in it.
Have you had a different experience? My reply wasn't meant as a negative in general, it's all about finding the best ways to cap games. Have you found success in applying it in certain ways?
Not a problem, I take no offense here is what I do.
I have only used it for Conference NCAA play, NBA Play and now Tourney Play
My results:
For conference play it yielded some suprising trends that I was able to ride to some good profits, especially in mid major conferences like the Horizion favs (10-4) Horizon overs (8-2), A-10 Unders (15-7)and playing on Big East Dogs (11-6-1), West Coast Overs (8-1). In the total month or so that I worked on it with conference NCAA play it yielded around 53% ATS Sides and 50% on Over/Unders, of course that sample size was about 1000 plays combined and nobody plays every game/every night on both sides and totals.
For the NBA it has been hit or miss, take for example variances of 5+ off the vegas line, at one point the system was 5-1 on Unders when this occurred, but now it has lost 5 straight. However some trends still are working and trends that are horribly off, I fade until I see a reversal of the trend. I've tracked it on about 200 ATS Side plays and 200 Over/Unders and it is hovering around 50% on both, however it does quite well with dogs and unders. Next year I am going to employ another tracking category on games where it picks the dog as an outright winner to see how it does there as well.
One trend current is playing any dog that presents itself as a 4.0 or greater variance of the line, currently 7-1. I wish I had started it at the beginning of the season for both NBA and college.
If you go on their website their is a public DLR report that you can download for free each month that will give you a statiscal breakdown of the variances by sport/by team/ by situation.
I wouldn't say using it is the end all be all of playing, I use it to focus in on key situations and then apply my normal handicapping and information gathering, using message boards, data mining sites, trend analysis etc to help establish my plays which sometimes go against the system and sometimes reaffirms the play presented by the system.
I will say this, I'm glad I have the tool to access for the information, it cuts down the time to look at every game by really highlighting the ones with the best variances and or pointing out the variances where the play is to fade the pick (especially if reasoning behind fading it is backed up with additional info.)
I will have this for the next year cause I bought their special $79 package which will take me up to the conference tournaments for next year in NCAA. Their main claim to fame is baseball so it'll be interesting to see how it performs and whether it is up to par as their reports indicated for the 07-08 season.
Other than that, I post the info here for folks, maintain an interactive version of my spreadsheet on google documents, as I base my records off closing lines of my book which also leads to some last minute changes of the plays strictly by the variance numbers just to maintain the accuracy of the tracking method.
But yeah it's not my only factor into my plays, just the starting point for me.
