KJ
Bump. Set. Shuma!
so..............
why, then, are they looking ahead to family day in NY in your estimation?
just cuz?
Sunday maybe C's and Clips in trade talks maybe not MLB Discussion
- Thread starter Play2win
- Start date
so..............
why, then, are they looking ahead to family day in NY in your estimation?
just cuz?
BetCrimes1984
CTG Big Brother
I don't understand your point. I'm deliberately targeting teams they don't face regularly, because by default those teams mean less to them (sans the Yankees, who should inspire any road team to perform their best, but no Yankee stats apply to what I posted). A team who doesn't inspire the greatest level of passion or hate in you, is by default one less likely to inspire your greatest motivations hence efforts. When you're considering how motivated a team is going to be, therefore, it's obviously a factor in play. If the sp played into the final margin being what it was, then so be it.
BetCrimes1984
CTG Big Brother
Bio-rhythms.
There's also another term no one has mentioned, and that's "look-ahead". Rangers, as nba pointed out, have a day off and then the Yankees on deck. Distractions result in a diffusion of conscious focus, which also compromises performance.
I know what you guys are saying but your missing my point of once it starts---all bets are off anything can happen. Guy feels great warming up and starts the game and gets shelled...I'm sure you sat down to play poker and felt great + mentally sharp and lost and vice versa
I'm saying the game starts you play...maybe it is only at 80% for some guys ...maybe capuano steps up on 3 days rest, maybe pedro hernandez wins a game on 3 hrs sleep, maybe the pirates w one foot on the plane rally in the 9th in a game they were dead in the water...
maybe wainright pitches 7 or 8 inn and allows 1run like he has done often and its not because texas didnt try
I cite crazy shit for plays all the time but family day? suddenly every guy is a great dad and family man that being in ny w their family is going to cause them to play poorly?
nbafan88
Pretty much a regular
Because they havent had a day off in nearly 3 weeks. They dont want to play tomorrow because its an off day and they have arranged for their families to all come to nyc...
Im putting myself in the players shoes and thinking that they wont give a shit about tonights game... if you dont agree thats fine... if you dont like my reasoning thats fine... post yours... its a fucking discussion board
nbafan88
Pretty much a regular
exactly... and biorhythms is what HappyKane uses among others on blankets
KJ
Bump. Set. Shuma!
ok, i think going to new york will have no bearing on tonight's game
i think rain delays lend to higher scoring affairs. i wouldn't trust any under tonight at all. it could happen
your infatuation with new york is corny
KJ
Bump. Set. Shuma!
what I'm saying non divisional is a wide variety of teams to choose from ---( divisions today are fairly even ) the astros to the red sox and possibly one meeting or instince to judge them on. It's a double edged sword imo= a divisional foe may inspire you more but knows your tendencies better.
its like using days of the week and not realized the implied meaning they hold...why are good teams usually good on sunday and poor teams usually bad? You will try squeeze 2 starts out of your best sp in a week, an edge for good teams and hurts bad teams bc they lack quality sp + series can be decided by gme 3 which almost always is sunday for late week series, not oh its sunday something magical happens
here its basically simple texas has scored less then expected and pitched worse then expected - imo creating a wider gp then expected
its not motivational its talent based
absolutely agree
twinkie13
In transit, arriving late.
not sure what we are comparing kj
KJ
Bump. Set. Shuma!
:shake:
I believe in bio-rhythms but.....its still fool's good--you can play well and lose and vice versa...plus an avg baseball game has what 13,14 different players on 2 sides + managers making decisions
I'll skip bio-rhythms
twinkie13
In transit, arriving late.
Me too. And what teams do on certain days of the week. Ive never bought that angle
KJ
Bump. Set. Shuma!
u can't compare look aheads in college football, or football in general, to baseball
just way too different game, schedule, opportunities
and I agree w the day off angle but still when they were 4-11 a day off was on their mnd, now playing better 5-1 last 6 they dont want a day off
if you win 5 of 6 bets are you taking a day off from betting? no different for texas , this FUN after 6 straght hme losses
every stat and trend has a reason behind it....how many shit SP went today? every good team will probably skip their weak link but bad teams even if they have that option itsa diff talent gap...their is generally a reason why hings occur a certain way on certain day imo
DaRaiders
Pretty much a regular
:bomb:
BetCrimes1984
CTG Big Brother
I split the difference in the post I made, posting only the results vs +.500 teams, as well as the overall number. The margins stayed the same (at least 5 runs in both cases).
I don't care about days of the week (but then I'm primarily a totals bettor, and I've not seen anyone post totals for days of the week).
Why did they score less than expected, and pitch worse than expected. That's no answer in itself, that's simply a description of what obviously happened for such a margin to come about.
Minnesota beat Texas 7-2 & 5-0 in late April in MN. Texas closed -138 (Holland) & -126 (Ogando) for each game. Talent disparity doesn't qualify as a sufficient answer for why Texas didn't compete in those 2 games (down 3-0 after 6 inns in both games: no single late blowout inning can be pointed to for making the final margin disguise how otherwise close the game "really was". Both games were well on there way of being out of the Rangers immediate reach 2/3rds of the way through). But I can tell you what factor did play into those 2 results: Texas won the first 2 games by 1 run margins. They were forced to expend to use a lot of energy to win a couple of tough games. Expending a lot of energy leaves less fuel in your tank for the next few days. Less fuel irrevocably means you're going to feel less motivated. Texas clearly didn't compete in Game 3 & 4 with the fire they competed in Game 1 (won 2-1) & 2 (won 4-3).
No one is saying talent mismatches for particular games play no factor in the final result, but if the talent levels involved alone always decided the final result, then "true dogs" (teams accurately dogged based on disparate talent levels, as opposed to teams being "wrongly" dogged for whatever other factors) would never win a game.
The observations I'm making are remarkably plain. I don't see what's to argue against.
twinkie13
In transit, arriving late.
I dont buy the Angels are great on Tuesday. Or the Cubs are great on Friday.....I just dont see how you can read into that
I know some guys look at SP in day/night games, and I am borderline on that even....I know some guys use it, it just doesnt matter to me:shake:
MusicCityGambler
Chill Winstonnn!
I don't disagree with anything you say here. Sports can be very fluid.
BetCrimes1984
CTG Big Brother
I obv. agree. And I believe if things go a team's way early on, on a night they're otherwise indifferent at to whether they win or lose at the start, then that can wake up their motivation.
I think with days of the week and feel like it's lost somehow , that I always subscribed to situations dictate results ......I always factor in "spot"
but the spot or the situation has nothing to do with oh its Tuesday ....its maybe realizing that a team may be playing well on that day in that season because it started the same 2 SP and those guys doing well in turn leads them to a good certain day of the week record. However , I think if you sit back and think about it --situations are very different every day of the week. My belief on home field advantage is it's about the comfort factor , players do better at home because they are simply more comfortable and that in turns lead to better performance. Think every job you see better performance if the surroundings are comfortable......
anyway ......good teams focusing on winning series ...1 series at a time .....so that could lead to a better wed , thursday or sunday record.....weekend games are much different then a Monday night game where you maybe have 20K fans and the weekends are packed...so each day I do think is slightily different but again there is only so much meaning you can imply to any of this and that is something I think that tends to happen with day of the week stats...a team could be 2-7 but maybe its ace never pitched or started 1 game on that day...it's nice to take notice but only so much merit imo.....with any stat or trend .....its all the past and each day is a new day:shake:
BetCrimes1984
CTG Big Brother
imo.....with any stat or trend .....its all the past and each day is a new day
What underpins my working with (certain kinds of) trends is this: psychology makes for all human manifestations in reality.
Any person's base psychological state does not change from day to day. Just because it's a new day, doesn't mean what you believe, or the tendencies you've developed, have changed from yesterday. The past is the inertia to the present. And sports people suffer from that inertia re their work place efforts just as every other human does re their own work place efforts (work places being but 1 example).
When it comes to human beings, there's really no such thing as a new day each day. There may be a truly new day once a year-decade, for some maybe just once or twice a lifetime, or maybe never.
What underpins my working with (certain kinds of) trends is this: psychology makes for all human manifestations in reality.
Any person's base psychological state does not change from day to day. Just because it's a new day, doesn't mean what you believe, or the tendencies you've developed, have changed from yesterday. The past is the inertia to the present. And sports people suffer from that inertia re their work place efforts just as every other human does re their own work place efforts (work places being but 1 example).
When it comes to human beings, there's really no such thing as a new day each day. There may be a truly new day once a year-decade, for some maybe just once or twice a lifetime, or maybe never.
I'm not discounting your findings by any means but sometimes I just think it's simpler to think about it fundamentally. For the Rangers they have scored less then epected and pitched worse . So that alone is going to create a gap and I think because they are a good team or had a certain standard placed on them , the results becomes more out of porportion then one would normally assume or realize . SO I do think it great it you have been able to show this. Guess my point is going forward it's a slippery slope because the future opponents are different and as the season progresses records are more meaningful( not sure if you broke it down as .500 + teams now or the time they met) , in that april games are still a form of spring training and same could be said for certain teams in Sept ...so when your are talking non divisional and I do get your overall point --the variables are so different IMO because its like 25 teams to choose from and 1 game can have so many other factors then non divisional going on with it
I do get what your saying , regardless, the outcome finds a way to be the same . Very key and I use the same approach ....
with your Rangers observation I do disagree somewhat ....I think your reading the situation maybe incorrectly ....
Rangers were road chalk ..as in significantly better then the opponent because that's implied when a team is favored......they didnt waste energy in the game 1 or 2 wins = they simply failed to score runs all series...they won 2-1 and 4-3 == that's below obvious offensive epectations and I can back that up because w 8.5 totals they were assumed to have 4 or 4.5 team totals...they lost because they failed to score , they lost by 2+ runs because they failed to score = scoring 0 and 2 almost automatically means you lost and lost by multiple runs...you don't need anything but average output of 4 runs in those 2 games to lose by 2 and 4 runs ......
Also lost in your thought process is Rangers were supposed to easily win those games and the fact they won game 1 and 2 makes it more likely a bettor will BET Rangers again despite the obvious fact they were not scoring enough runs...so as a gambler its easy to see how the Rangers were setup to fail in those games .....I looked it up and after that Twins series the Rangers were 3-7 when they scored 3 runs or less....which backs up how likely the Rangers were to lose without scoring runs
I just think your somewhat missing the mindset of how those games are bet . Rangers are more likely to lose by 2 + runs because they are a good team and it seems illogical for them to not be competitive in a sense. What we know though is gambling is so illogical ......
I think and clearly so do you , is picking up information and being able to see how a pattern forms and using it to one;s edge is very possible. I think it's a tougher task to find the pattern quickly and implement it in one's betting while it's not visible to all . I think the basis of the Rangers outcomes is the fact they are a solid team , with high epectations from everyone , and they simple have under performed....the easiest way to lose money is on a good team because we suspect a bounce back to the norm is always near (whatever the norm might be ) so if rangers dont hit we tend to hope for it and think it will happen despite reality. So w Rangers not scoring as much as we thought , think it's easier for them to have as many 2+ run losses as they do + struggling SP skews it further
how many times in that sample of non divisional losses did they scores 6+ runs or even 4 +....?
P.S. -- I apologize for any incoherent posting and maybe jumping all over the place , my ADD is really bad today .....My mind is all over the place so I kee losing my train of thought
I do agree with your findings but think ( IMO ) at least that the results are due to a good team and offense struggling to score and having pitching concerns as well . I could be wrong e:shake:
that's very true ....it's definitely a continuation in a sense ...
guess with each event though once it ends the odds reset ..so in that way its a new day , fresh start
BetCrimes1984
CTG Big Brother
Chalk up flinch #1
BetCrimes1984
CTG Big Brother
You've made a long post, and I'm not inclined to go into everything I could (re time issues). However, you mentioned early on in your post about thinking fundamentally. To put my pov another way, I can't get anymore fundamental than as follows -
A baseball season is 162 games, almost without fail day in and day out play. No human being can perform in anywhere near approaching all 162 games, not matter how much they'd try and mentally will it. It can't be done, and it's not solely down to sheer physical limits. All players could be permitted to ingest whatever substance they wanted to boost their physical energy stocks, and they'd still not pull it off, because inherent psychological limits simply wouldn't permit it (hence the cliche goes that top sport is all about the top 2 inches. Those who narrowly fail to reach the top level aren't "just off the pace" because they lack the physical attributes, it's because they lack all that is required upstairs). The combined psychological & physical toll the day-in-day-out schedule takes on players means that teams enter particular games (& in an instance or 2 throughout a season, a whole series) where collectively it's just not there for them (to clarify, "it" being their ability to bring anything approaching 100% mental focus). They don't mentally consciously choose that it isn't there for them, it simply isn't.
Added to this day-in-&-day-out inertia is the sheer fact that road games in-&-of-themselves naturally wear down teams, because the psychological comfort available from being in a familiar/home environment isn't available when they're away: simply being in an unfamiliar environment naturally wears on all humans psychologically (cue the experience of homesickness in some children, thou to be sure this isn't the only basis for homesickness). The factor of the unbalanced schedule means that at least by visiting divisional foes more often, those ballparks (& their surrounds) become more familiar to the visiting divisional players than the other non-divisional teams they visit (in some cases, obviously rarely ever: like, for Texas, any NL team) = more familiarity lessens the psychologically taxing nature of the environment.
All this has meaning when it's seen that if Team A brings 100% mental focus to their 75% skill set, then more often than not they're going to beat Team B who brings 75% mental focus to their 100% skill set (with day-in-day-out & venue-specific realities being amongst the factors making for that focus only being at 75%). Someone (for whatever reason) inclined to sell short the relevance of psychological focus will observe a boxscore which represents the fact that Team B batted less well and pitched less well than their "100% skill set facing a 75% skill set" otherwise suggested or represented they would or should, and in consequence develop extraneous explanations for why such a result came about. Said result will, in this hypothetical instance, have had little-to-nothing to do with betting lines, or somehow Team B being illogically more inclined to lose by 2+ runs, or their having a few key players missing (since teams at full capacity have just as many "just-not-there days" as do teams lacking their ideal first choice players. No matter if you're a first or second choice player, you're still a human vulnerable to being subject to such psychological inertia: your reason for not performing that day may have had much less to do with your being merely a less skilled back-up player, and more to do with sharing in the general malaise felt throughout the team). It'll simply be a final outcome rooted in the fact that the better team's "fuel tank" was low for that game, and in squaring off against a lesser team with far more "juice" to bring to bear, a "suprising" lopsided result played out.
My splitting divisional foes from non-divisional foes isn't some sort of arbitrary act. It's rooted in my knowing for a fact a certain environment will have sucked more energy out of a team than is usually the case for them (no matter what the sport). That loss of "environmental psychological energy" affects (to X degree) their ability to fully execute their personal skill sets. Once that's been established as a factor in play, from there it's a matter of gauging what else is working for/against the collective mindset of the team concerned. It may well be the venue-inertia is the only current negative aspect in play for that particular team at a particular point, hardly enough by itself to inspire a fade of that team.
All sport starts which psychology. The psychological space a player is in trumps the skill set he or she is otherwise capable of bringing to bear, every single time, in every single sport.
It's not hard to cap the skill set each team (or player) is going to bring to a contest (esp. in the age of the 'net). The challenge is to cap how much "juice" a team (or player) is going to (be able to) bring to bear on the skill set they own. That's the rub of sports betting. The fact is teams and players can & do betray their psychological tendencies (both good & bad/their highs & lows) in the way they manifest results = as you said, the hunt for patterns.
Similar threads
