SDQL Thread

[austinhous]

I'm pretty proud of myself for figuring out the QB efficiency

indeed that's pretty dope how you did that

 

[JROCK1966]

What's the chances of a UVA letdown after that win last Saturday which made them bowl eligible?? ANS: Bigtime chance of letdown! In fact, teams which fit UVA's model, going into today's game, have never won (0-14 SU, 4-10 ATS). Teams' which fit UL's model have gone 11-2 SU and 6-7 ATS. Lay the pts with UL or pass.....

 

[JROCK1966]

UL-Lafayette - almost no chance of winning today and 50/50 chance of covering ATS. 1st pic is Ole Miss model. 2nd pic is UL-Lafayette.

 

[JROCK1966]

Iowa State / Okie State....safest play is Iowa State ATS....1st pic is Iowa State model, 2nd pic is Okie State model.

 

[JROCK1966]

NC State and BC is a toss-up...ran both models and got back almost exactly 50% SU and 50% ATS on both team's models. Although I will say BC is due a win...the last two occurrences in it's model were losses....see pic 1.

 

[JROCK1966]

What's the chances of a Penn State bounce-back today? 100% SU and >60% ATS....1st pic is Rutgers model. 2nd Pic is PSU's.

 

[JROCK1966]

Lean IU to cover ATS....1st pic is IU, 2nd & 3rd pic is Illini and Illini, as you can see, is due for a loss.

 

[JROCK1966]

Lean laying pts. with LSU....Arky's game model for today has never won SU and lost ATS at a 34% clip. 1st two pics are Arky, Last two pics are LSU.

 

[JROCK1966]

Definitely taking the points with Baylor and thinking about ML....nice stats here and the model is due for a win!

 

[s--k]

The more I look at this, it's just too deep for me. If I lose on my own thoughts and opinions no big deal, but if I lose based on some of this computer stuff I don't understand I could be mad. But I think it is super exciting that you have really figured out how to use it and see what can be had there. I noticed on thing in a couple of your posts...the "due" factor. You are likely familiar with betting on a team in a due situation. I don't think I've ever lost more games for a single reason other than saying the team or a situation was "due".

I look forward to celebrating your terrific day JRock!!!

 

[JROCK1966]

OK guys, my mind has turned into silicon so I need to stop. Here is an updated list of SDQL plays due to all this shat. I'm done. It's time for beer and the BBQ!!

Ohio (Won SU & ATS)
Army ATS & SU
Purdue (lean on them due to info Tahoe provided)
Baylor ATS & SU
Florida ATS & SU
Stanford (SDQL trend in favor of Wash but situation says Stanford) ATS & SU (Win & Win)
Appy State -18 (Win)
Ball State +31 (Loss)
Charlotte +12.5
Western Ky SU & ATS
Wisconsin -11.5
Louisville -12
Iowa State +6.5
LSU -17
Indiana -9.5
Penn State -31

BOLTA!!

:beerdrink::bbq:

 

[s--k]

Tell me what you saw with Charlotte. Seems like a head scratcher. I can probably count on one hand how many times I've laid road chalk this year, but planned to be on MTSU here.

 

[s--k]

dding: Charlotte +12.5.
Home dogs (in this case Charlotte) with lines between 10 & 15 and have a loss, win, and loss in their last 3 games and gave up greater than 5, 23, and 44pts respectively, and have a QB efficiency < than the opponent, have gone 0-6 SU but 3-3 ATS....not so great but when you add in my similar sim below on MTSU as a Road Fav, their ATS record is a historical 0-3 ATS. Look for MTSU to win the game but not cover.

Nevermind i found it.

 

[s--k]

I'm always leery of road fav especially 2 TDs, but what the chart may not be taking into consideration is that Stockstill is back at QB, only played 3 games all year and got to knock the rust off last week. So I would expect he finishes the year strong.

 

[JROCK1966]

Nevermind i found it.

Glad you found it...had to running to clear my head so was not around earlier to respond

 

[JROCK1966]

I'm always leery of road fav especially 2 TDs, but what the chart may not be taking into consideration is that Stockstill is back at QB, only played 3 games all year and got to knock the rust off last week. So I would expect he finishes the year strong.

good point I most certainly can be wrong