[JsmooveFTW]

There's many changes, cutoffs, and more thorough stats on the way. It's now reached a time where I've been doing this long enough to analyze a long stretch of stats and legitimately tell whether this could actually be used as a system or not. Way more stats are in the works when I have time in a day or two. Separating sides and totals, counting only sides by good teams, stuff like that. Any stat ideas you have let me know. This will be updated daily. Enjoy.


SINCE MAY 23:


+4 winners: 16-15 ; 9-2 RL (81.8%)

5+ winners: 42-32 (56.76%) ; 30-5 RL (85.7%)

No contests: 15-12 (55.55%) ; 11-3 RL (78.57%)


I tested the +4 plays to see if I could maybe lower the overwhelming consensus, but nope. It looks like it's fine the way it is. I also need to do some stats on 6 and up, 7 and up, etc. That should be interesting.

[JsmooveFTW]

Up to date: June 4

5+ winners: 46-34 (57.5%) ; 32-7 RL (82%)

No contests: 15-13 (53.57%) ; 11-3 RL (78.57%)

[kokky]

why is there difference in number of games for ML and RL, for instance there are 28 RL games and only 14 RL games in no contest?

[JsmooveFTW]

that just tells how many of the wins would have hit on the run line. it's hitting at a high enough percentage that just betting the RL would be more valuable in the long haul. If you mean why there isn't the same number, you have to take in to account the totals plays and nhl/nba that is mixed in. The RL stats only count the ML winners

[kilkennycat]

Very impressive figures on the RL there, great work J.

[JsmooveFTW]

Here are the stats for the GOOD mlb teams that were 5+ consensus on the MONEYLINE, and some cutoffs from nba and mlb totals. these teams include toronto (they WERE a good team so i included them since they still have a good record), yanks, red sox, texas, detroit, philly, mets, brewers, cards, and dodgers. everyone else was left out including the reds because they have a godawful inconsistent offense or godawful bullpen, etc, and count as a mediocre team. I just counted the good teams as teams you can generally count on for a win if there is well-seen value. It turned out teams atm that are 4 games or more over 500 were considered good teams (by me). If it were the mets that were 3 over 500 like the reds i would have still included the mets and left out the reds.


21-9 (70%) 18-3 RL (85.7%)

just think of it like an average +120 per run line even though that number may be more around +135 or so when i check it. if you bet $50 per play on the run line (estimated +120) since may 23 just on these good teams, you would have won $1080 and lost $600. Much better than if you had bet the ML even at an average line of -135. In the last 5 days, the RL is 5-1 to go along with 5 losses that would add up to 6 counting the RL loss. At avg of +120 and bet of $50 each, you would have won $300 and lost $300. If you had bet the ML for those good teams at an avg of -135, you would been 6-5; and won $222.22 and lost $250. It may be less than -135 but I'd rather get the number too high than too low. Yesterday the only good team lost, but the day before they were 1-1. The winner had an avg line around -138. You would have lost money going with the ML but if you had the RL it would have been around +144. At $50 per bet you would have been +$22 at the end of the day. The last 6 days, the overall record is 10-5 with 9-1 against the RL. At the RL avg of +120 you would have won $540 and lost $300. With the ML at -135, you would have won $370.37 and lost $300.


Here are the cutoffs on the stats in the post above. NBA sides were 5-3 and NBA totals were 1-2. MLB totals were 2-4. If you adjust the stats in the post above and only use the MLB ML games, the record is 38-25 @ 60.32%. The 'bad' teams in that stretch (the touts had a large consensus on) were 17-16 overall and 14-4 against the run line @ 77.78%. Not too good. There's teams you can always count on and there's those teams that should win certain games that always bite you in the ass with their incompetence.

In other words, if you're going by the system, dump the totals for sure. I don't know what to really think about the 'good' team vs 'bad' team thing. If anyone has any other ideas for split stats let me know. I should have some more soon. It's not easy going just with the RL but if you want to go with only the good teams, that would definitely be the way to go.

[JsmooveFTW]

MLB SIDES Up to date: June 4

5+ winners: 38-25 (60.32%) ; 32-7 RL (82%)

No contests: 15-13 (53.57%) ; 11-3 RL (78.57%)


the no contest here may need adjusting. will check later

[tasmania12]

.....Thanks this might just help us to beat the bookie finally!

[genero]

i need to get this right your saying when 5 or more touts like the same side vs the other side, thats a BET ON according to the stats..like thursday exapmples?

[Saab]

so whats the consensus today?

i really appreciate that RL stat. i think im going to start doing that from now on

[metsfan2008]

I can almost guarantee that the most overwhelming consensus today will be on the St. Louis Cardinals. The cubs and royals will also be a strong consensus, probably a no contest.

[JsmooveFTW]

Originally Posted by genero

i need to get this right your saying when 5 or more touts like the same side vs the other side, thats a BET ON according to the stats..like thursday exapmples?

the stats don't lie. to clarify, the 5+ is one side having 5 MORE (or more) than the other side. Doesn't work with totals though. And was okay in the NBA playoffs since may 23. 5-3 at a period where a lot of top nba touts were getting hammered or doing little better

[HighVoltage]

Jsmoove,

I did some sorting myself up through June 1. I was only using 5+, but with only 2 or less on the other side. Further, I looked at only teams of less than -140 and the dogs. I am trying not to lay the big juice. It was at 12-7. I haven't had a chance to run the last several days. I will run those when I get a chance and report back.

[JsmooveFTW]

MLB SIDES Up to date: June 5

5+ winners: 41-27 (60.3%) ; 34-8 RL (80.95%)

Good teams (see updated list below)

23-10 (70%) 20-3 RL (86.96%)



no contest record is temporarily off until i can weed out the nba/totals plays in the record

[JsmooveFTW]

Mediocre teams were a mediocre 1-1 and 0-1 against the RL yesterday. Here is a list of the current good teams to play on for the 'good team' system. As the Cardinals are 1-3 at 5+ on the tallies and 2-5 on 2+, they're no longer a play on. The updated record of mediocre/bad teams that are thought to have a lot of value is 18-17 and 14-5 against the RL. Leaving out the Cardinals would make that a semi-decent 17-14. Leaving them out on the good team record would make it a VERY good 22-7. As I've said, the 'good teams' are teams you can consistently count on for a win. When they're supposed to win, they win and win big. I've taken Toronto and St Louis off.


Yankees, Red Sox, Rangers, Tigers, Philly, Mets, Dodgers, Brewers

[danychaos]

So the system would be betting on the run line only with the "good" teams that are 5+? Is this right? thanks.

[JsmooveFTW]

Yeah you're right. But anyone following the 5+ method can research and play it however they want. I keep finding new ways. It would be nice to let me know any sort of other system you're playing with it though so I can keep it well updated. But the good team RL is what I'm playing myself right now. If you go back 7 days with the good teams since last friday they're 14-6 and 12-2 with the runline. 1 losing day and there was only 1 play that day, and their starter had a meltdown.

[jgilmartin]

Thanks for the hard work on this...seems to be a great method so far

[peeiempee]

I think its relatively subjective for the determination of "good teams." A team wins its included in the "good teams" a team loses 2 in a row its in the "bad teams." (like the cards). How can the Cards be a bad or mediocre team when they are 6th in rankings and ahead of the Mets and Tigers? JS, I think you hit a good system, but the criteria for inclusion and exclusion has to be more concrete. I think with the "good team" we are trying to make the system fit the criteria, not the criteria to fit the system. Need something a little more solid...

[danychaos]

Originally Posted by JsmooveFTW

Yeah you're right. But anyone following the 5+ method can research and play it however they want. I keep finding new ways. It would be nice to let me know any sort of other system you're playing with it though so I can keep it well updated. But the good team RL is what I'm playing myself right now. If you go back 7 days with the good teams since last friday they're 14-6 and 12-2 with the runline. 1 losing day and there was only 1 play that day, and their starter had a meltdown.

Well I think this is great! so if I had bet $50 on those plays with a total record of 12-8 on the run line with an average of +120 I would have won $720 and lost $400 so that would be a net profit of $320 in 7 days, I think I'll jump on it!

[peeiempee]

Its real easy to make criterias for a system in hindsight. Yankees, Red Sox, Rangers, Tigers, Philly, Mets, Dodgers, Brewers these teams have been hot the last 2-3 weeks. Not bashing the system, in fact I like it and has won me a good amount of cash last week. I will do some researching when I get done with my day and lets see if we can get something more solid.

[JsmooveFTW]

Originally Posted by peeiempee

I think its relatively subjective for the determination of "good teams." A team wins its included in the "good teams" a team loses 2 in a row its in the "bad teams." (like the cards). How can the Cards be a bad or mediocre team when they are 6th in rankings and ahead of the Mets and Tigers? JS, I think you hit a good system, but the criteria for inclusion and exclusion has to be more concrete. I think with the "good team" we are trying to make the system fit the criteria, not the criteria to fit the system. Need something a little more solid...

i know there's plenty of holes in this but you have kinda the wrong idea. i only took out the cardinals because they're consistently inconsistent right now. injuries and they dont have the offense to be a consistent team right now. they're 1-3 when they're a 5+. I didn't take them off because they're on a losing streak. I'm just trying to narrow it down to consistent teams that consistently win the games they're supposed to. which is done with stats and using my opinion yes, but the cardinals have been really bad with this system. they're a team that you have no idea when they're going to show up. that's why i put them in the same league as the braves, white sox (bad example. they just suck), giants, angels, jays (were on the good team list but too many bullpen troubles and a up and down offense), etc. Those teams all have big faults right now that make it nearly impossible to legitimately predict them to win. Maybe it could work better as a 'hot vs cold' or 'inconsistent vs consistent'. the 'good team' name is just something that came out of my ass. Long term we'll just have to wait and see how many better ideas that we can come up with. any help would be nice though. i would appreciate it

[peeiempee]

Team% Wins of RL
D-Backs 0.46
Braves 0.65
Orioles 0.75
Red Sox 0.72
WhiteSox 0.85
Cubs 0.78
Reds 0.82
Indians 0.63
Rockies 0.91
Tigers 0.82
Marlins 0.73
Astros 0.71
Royals 0.79
Angels 0.64
Dodgers 0.68
Brewers 0.72
Twins 0.64
Yankees 0.78
Mets 0.66
A's 0.74
Phillies 0.78
Pirates 0.88
Padres 0.52
Giants 0.82
Mariners 0.44
Cardinals 0.77
Rays 0.76
Rangers 0.69
Blue Jays 0.71
Nationals 0.64

Here is a sheet I put together about teams that win and win by RL for the whole season. Conclusion I can draw from this is certain teams when they win, they win by alot such as Rockies, Pirates, Tigers, Reds, Giants. Going back to the Cardinals, they are a much better team to bet on for the RL than Mets, Rangers or RedSox. On average 70% of winners win by the RL. So there is definately value in taking the RL and not the ML. One thing you can do is compare the relative percentages and the vigorish and decide if its a better value to play ML or RL or even both. Hope this helps and opens up more ideas on a solid system

[JsmooveFTW]

Thanks for the stats. But we do have to factor in which of these teams actually win games they're 'supposed to' when touts and cappers are all over them, and then factor in which teams have the overall talent and pieces to win consistently. These stats are just one factor, and a little over 2 weeks doing this isn't really enough to tell atm what will happen the rest of the season. Teams like the White Sox are on there at the top, but have one of the worst offenses in the league. Never know what they're going to do. This just means they either win significantly or get embarrassed by many crappy teams because of their terrible offense. It's easy to notice teams like this being a Braves fan. They may win big consistently, but going with them on the run line doesnt exactly help when they get blown out themselves in the game they should of won.

[peeiempee]

These stats are for the whole season dating back to April 2nd or whenever the start date was. I will have to agree that we need to filter out what will actually win. Take today for example, White Sux were suppose to lose, but ended up covering. Mets were solid and looks like they will get the crap beat out of them by the worst team in the MLB. Need some more work on getting teams that are 'supposed to win'. Lets keep brainstorming

[JsmooveFTW]

The Mets are just beat up and 2 out of their last 3 starters have tanked. Their GM is a dipshit that's always scared of making moves. There's not enough hispanics available on the market I guess. If it wasn't for Kfraud they'd probably be well under 500 with the rest of their bullpen. I still can't see them going to complete shit though. They're reaching their bottom point and i expect them to bounce back. they have the offensive weapons unlike the Cardinals. If they had any guts they'd trade for Nick Johnson right away. He's a stud that's finally healthy. Bouden is gone from the Nats and the trade demands will lower a lot. Manuel's lineup choices/order have been really suspect to say the least. Jose Reyes is not exactly a deal breaker, but other guys being out hurts. manuel's shifting guys around and has a minor league loser in the outfield starting about every game. like today he had tatis at first but sit murphy on the bench. It scares me to bet on them right now but I can't see them going too far down. Maine just got drilled and Pelfrey got murdered by the Pirates, so I think their starters will do okay with that out of their system

I don't exactly think touts will be having them as a consensus much in the near future either. So it's all trivial

[peeiempee]

Yup, touts did the capping already, have to go with the tallies. Much appreciated for putting this together. Like you said before, here are the concensus with stats, now you can play it anyway you want.

[kokky]

JsmooveFT, can you make statistic about dogs winning procentage on 5+ and no contest?

[Shempy]

Great post Peeiempee, information like that can only help! Between guys like JsmooveFTW and you brainstorming, I can only see success in the future. The winning ideas and possible systems are there for the finding. Keep it going.

[JsmooveFTW]

Originally Posted by kokky

JsmooveFT, can you make statistic about dogs winning procentage on 5+ and no contest?

I have many many many new stats for later today. If anyone has any ideas of their own let me know

[Shempy]

Here's something for Peeiempee, if you still have the numbers, what is the opposite side of the coin? What I mean is, what are the numbers for every teams losses and how many they lose by 2 runs or more in their losses? That would be just as interesting as the numbers you put out on winning teams and how manythat they win by 2 runs or more. Maybe by seeing both lists we can put together some theory or even make Jsmoove's concensus plays and taking the RL even more effective. Food for thought.

[JsmooveFTW]

MLB SIDES Up to date: June 6

5+ winners: 44-31 (58.67%) ; 36-9 RL (80%)

Good teams (see updated list above)

25-11 (70%) 21-4 RL (84%)


mediocre/bad teams: losing record now at 19-20 and 15-5 RL. keep a look out for the new stats later. it should help some of you comprehend what i mean about the whole good team bad team thing. i doubt it makes sense to a lot of people

[JsmooveFTW]

MLB SIDES Up to date: June 7

5+ winners: 46-34 (57.5%) ; 37-10 RL (78.72%)

Good teams (see updated list above)

25-12 (67.57%) 21-4 RL (84%)

[JsmooveFTW]

Team by team records as of Saturday. I did not take into account Sunday's games so I can notice any patterns. The records the right is the RL

bal - 0-0
bos - 4-1, 4-0
nyy - 1-1, 1-0
tb - 4-2, 3-1
tor - 1-2, 1-0
cws - 2-3, 2-0
cle - 0-0
det - 4-3, 3-1
kc - 0-1
min - 4-0, 4-0
laa - 0-0
oak - 0-0
sea - 1-1, 1-0
tex - 2-0, 2-0
atl - 1-1, 1-0
fla - 2-0, 1-1
nym - 2-3, 2-0
phi - 2-0, 1-1
was - 1-0, 1-0
chc - 1-0, 0-1
cinc - 0-2
hou - 1-1, 1-0
mil - 2-0, 2-0
pit - 0-2
stl - 1-4, 1-0
ari - 0-1
col - 0-0
lad - 4-0, 3-1
sd - 0-0
sf - 2-1, 2-0

[johnnyou]

Nice stats... Who have been to http://www.bryantay.com ??? Don't know if it really works