RJ Esq
Prick Since 1974
Taking a look at the 2005 season and who covered and seeing the beginnings of a possible system for the upcoming season. Would like some help or stats from someone who has access to data from a number of seasons.
From the first six weeks of 2005, home dogs getting a TD or Less went 26-19 (57.77%).
Looking at the major conferences, they went (for the season):
SEC 3-2-1
Big Ten 7-3
Big XII 6-3
ACC 10-7
Pac-10 3-6-1
Big East 5-1
Total 34-22-2 (58.6%) +$980 (@ $100 and -110 lines)
Obviously this theory is based upon a competitive game (parity between teams) where the home team can feed off the crowd and keep it close. Not surprisingly, the Pac-10 with its' wide open offenses was the only BCS conference who did not beat .500.
Take out the Pac-10 last year and this system went 31-16-1 (64.6%) +$1340.
For non-BCS conferences (and Notre Dame), whose lines are not as sharp due to inconsistent play and not enough knowledge of the teams:
Mt. West 4-1
CUSA 9-5-1
WAC 3-7
Indys 2-2-1
MAC 2-5-1
Sun Belt 5-3
Total 25-23-3 (49%) -$30 (@ $100 and -110 lines)
Note that even with the non-BCS conferences, the theory still did OK last year EXCEPT in the Pac-10 lite conferences (WAC and MAC) with more of an air it out and play bad defense style.
Without the MAC and WAC, the theory went: 20-11-1 (62.5%) +$790.
I know I'm being selective by taking the Pac-10, MAC, and WAC out of the equation to come up with the improved numbers but maybe there is something to the theory especially outside these conference (with potent offenses and poor defenses). Will run the numbers for the 4 years prior to test.
money;
From the first six weeks of 2005, home dogs getting a TD or Less went 26-19 (57.77%).
Looking at the major conferences, they went (for the season):
SEC 3-2-1
Big Ten 7-3
Big XII 6-3
ACC 10-7
Pac-10 3-6-1
Big East 5-1
Total 34-22-2 (58.6%) +$980 (@ $100 and -110 lines)
Obviously this theory is based upon a competitive game (parity between teams) where the home team can feed off the crowd and keep it close. Not surprisingly, the Pac-10 with its' wide open offenses was the only BCS conference who did not beat .500.
Take out the Pac-10 last year and this system went 31-16-1 (64.6%) +$1340.
For non-BCS conferences (and Notre Dame), whose lines are not as sharp due to inconsistent play and not enough knowledge of the teams:
Mt. West 4-1
CUSA 9-5-1
WAC 3-7
Indys 2-2-1
MAC 2-5-1
Sun Belt 5-3
Total 25-23-3 (49%) -$30 (@ $100 and -110 lines)
Note that even with the non-BCS conferences, the theory still did OK last year EXCEPT in the Pac-10 lite conferences (WAC and MAC) with more of an air it out and play bad defense style.
Without the MAC and WAC, the theory went: 20-11-1 (62.5%) +$790.
I know I'm being selective by taking the Pac-10, MAC, and WAC out of the equation to come up with the improved numbers but maybe there is something to the theory especially outside these conference (with potent offenses and poor defenses). Will run the numbers for the 4 years prior to test.
money;
