[polson22]

here's an article that goes thru a bunch of things that have been debated/analyzed on here recently...... and he does give attribution to seeing these discussions around.

http://www.statfox.com/statfoxnews/n...s-Answered.htm

i didn't understand the distinction in this passage. regarding the morrison system.

For probably more than a decade, this was a safe and convenient play for the bettor that needed a quick fix. A team that had covered the spread three consecutive times was set for downfall and was a solid Play Against team in the 54-60 percent range. Teams that had failed to cover for three consecutive games were a quality bet ranging from 55 to 63 percent. These days, not so much. (Numbers based on three continuous games, no bye weeks)
3ATS Wins
2008 24-25
2007 21-22
2006 30-27
2005 34-32
3ATS Losses
2008 21-28
2007 26-25
2006 16-33
2005 29-28
The one angle that has offered the most hope is playing against teams failing to cover a trio of oddsmakers numbers. Thus far in 2009, three-time spread winners are 12-11 ATS and three-time losers are 14-9 ATS in next encounter.



i don't see how he's further breaking it down in the last sentence...........

and a question about the totals movement question. i assume he's using the opening totals before the movement for the win rate. that would make sense as he's talking about how sharps demolish over/under betting.

thanks for any responses.....