Vegas odds. What's going on here

NBP81

Yippi ka yay mother******!
Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
10,983
Reaction score
12,621
Location
Montreal
To me turnovers is too big part of the game to disregard in rankings. Its pretty standard that teams that take away more win more. We currently have the longest streak for take aways at 16. And what are we 11-6 over that stretch. How do you determine what TO should or shouldn't count.
Power rankings are meant to tell you about the past, power rating are meant to be predictive. What Im saying is, if the Fins have had an extraordinary string of TOs going their way, there's a much better chance that they regress in that aspect than they keep going at the same pace... Which is why you'd want to weigh them accordingly in a predictive model...
 
Last edited:

pjzabo

Club Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
55
Reaction score
91
Location
Westchester, NY
Okay, so you found a place where it snows in Hawaii. You know he's been there, or did you just google snow in Hawaii?
No it snows on Mauna Kea all the time, its not rare and I did see it with my own eyes. I think you may be busting on me though. This whole warm weather team wilting in the cold is overplayed. I was at the 12/8/13 game in Pittsburgh, a friend that has season tix to Steelers invited me and my son (18 at the time) to the game. We froze our *** off in the stands, but RT17 and the rest of the team didn't seem to care, he galloped through the snow and despite the last minute AB heart attack we took that game. S.jpg
 

Awsi Dooger

Super Duper Club
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
9,835
Reaction score
3,863
Location
Las Vegas
I also believe most profesional power ratings weigh turnovers down as they introduce alot of noise into predictive models. Turnovers and blocked punts always big candidates to regress to the means. In other words, I believe the 22 Fins rating would be higher than that if so many of their points didnt come off turnovers and low percentage plays... Could be way off here, would really like your input on this.
Interesting question. I've never seen the newer power ratings broken down by component. I've been out of town for 12 years, even though I notice my user name here still indicates Las Vegas and not Miami. I may not be up to date on some changes. But I've heard Jeff Sagarin discuss his model many times going back decades, and I've never heard anything regarding turnovers or anything similar. Sagarin is now in his early 70s. I severely doubt he has recently incorporated anything like that. Here is a summary from 2013. I always respected Sagarin's model because it relies heavily on Bayesian concepts. That's always my fundamental belief, that everything tends to drift back to the beginning. The 2020 Miami Dolphins basically have no chance with me, along those lines. Sorry, but I'm not giving points on the road, or significant points at home, with a team that was picked to win 6 games. I don't care what it looks like now. Bet on sports long enough and that type of thing is ingrained:


Here is The Gold Sheet model of power ratings. This is indeed the gold standard. They have been around for longer than anyone, and are still used. The legendary oddsmaker Bob Martin relied on The Gold Sheet. This is the preseason 2020 version. You'll note all the basic categories like points for/point against, home and away, plus straight up record and point spread record, along with over/under results. Also note that home field value is actually closer to 2 than 3 for most teams. That is the far left category. It is a misconception that home field is automatically 3. If you want to be technical it is basically 2.5 on average:


Again, I think the overriding tendency among sports fans is to try to make the oddsmaking process more complex than it is. Handicappers often use complicated methodology. Handicappers are obsessed with making decisions. But they aren't forced to wager on every single game plus every single over/under plus every single money line and every single prop. Sportsbooks ARE forced to deal with all of the above. That's why by definition it has to be a simple process. Based on foundational math. Assembly line plug and play. When I began working as sports book supervisor in fall 1989 the first thing that shocked me was how few decisions are involved, compared to the other side of the counter as a bettor. Basically we got the numbers from the oddsmaker, then we'd have brief conversation whether to "shade" any of the numbers, then stick them on the board and absorb. Wait to see what happens. Then when we took a high denomination wager we'd have to evaluate whether or not to move the number, based on the identity and reputation of he guy who placed the bet, and also how our number compared to what other sportsbooks were using on the same game.

The Don Best System was brand new at that point. It was a computer screen that allowed us to check all the other prominent sportsbooks and their numbers. A line change would flash in red. Sometimes the entire row would be flashing red, when a line was moving all around town. That was indeed red alert. It was interesting because sometimes we'd see the red alert before anyone wagered at our place. Then we'd have to decide whether to wait for the wager to be made, or to shift the number to what everyone else is now using. That is a wimp strategy called "moving on air." The vast majority of the time we would merely wait. But once in a while it was possible to steal a half point. In other words, let's say a line moved quickly from -4 to -5. Okay, that means they'll play it up to -5. So let's move our -4 up to -4.5 and see if they bite there. If not, we can always move it back to -4, where they definitely will play.

Believe me, that is the type of thing that goes on in sportsbooks, light years beyond handicapping teams regarding personnel or turnovers or anything football related. I hate to say nobody cares but it's basically nobody cares. Once the internet exploded that was a boon for sportsbooks because now they had a bonanza of power ratings to steal. On all sports. It was one of the reasons I moved away. Stuff like golf and tennis and women's basketball became considerably more problematic when all of a sudden the sportsbooks were using actual power ratings to set those numbers, instead of sloppy subjectivity and all the inherent pratfalls of short term overreaction.

I should emphasize that there's a vast difference between power rankings and power ratings. That might be cause of some confusion. Oddsmakers don't care about power rankings at all. That stuff is glorified crap. It is molding subjective impression into a first to last debate. Power ratings are the numerical source of the betting odds. When those oddsmaking sessions are held, each guy will rely on roughly 4-6 sets of power ratings. Some will be consensus among the group. Some will be personal favorites/biases. There is occasional discussion regarding which power rating is faring best in the current season, or with a specific team. That type of thing engages much more lively debate than anything football related.

As I touched on in my first post in this thread, oddsmakers are paranoid about giving away bargains via the same method week after week. That shocked the heck out of me when I was listening to the Stardust Line radio program, and then participating in it. The chief oddsmaker Michael Roxy Roxborough was a co-host. He did a great job because he could blend sports analysis along with the oddsmaker perspective. Terrific wise acre style. Roxy listened to the football commentary but the thing he'd focus on above all was where the money went last week, and whether or not the bettors collected. He'd be irritated and emotional when the same team drew money either for or against several weeks in a row, and the bettors continued to win. Every week he'd fixate on that topic. Only then did I realize that's what oddsmakers obsess about. And it held up once I was in those sessions. All of them and especially the chief oddsmaker will know where the money has been going, whether it's the spread or the money line or the over/under. Consequently when they "shade" a line away from the power rating indications, it won't be because of technical football. It will be in anticipation of money showing up in that direction again. They won't even care if they shaded a line and money wins the other direction. They feel they are protecting the store and the industry when they don't allow you to yawn week after week and win on the same wager without an ounce of thought involved.
 
Last edited:

Mach2

Club Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
7,650
Reaction score
13,688
Age
56
Location
Boynton Bch, Fl
Power rankings are meant to tell you about the past, power rating are meant to be predictive. What Im saying is, if the Fins have had an extraordinary string of TOs going their way, there's a much better chance that they regress in that aspect than they keep going at the same pace... Which is why you'd want to weigh them accordingly in a predictive model...
That is true (and very logical). I would add a caveat that when talking about regressing to the mean, the mean is not static.

As sample size gets larger/longer, the mean may, or may not change as well.
 

NBP81

Yippi ka yay mother******!
Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
10,983
Reaction score
12,621
Location
Montreal
Interesting question. I've never seen the newer power ratings broken down by component. I've been out of town for 12 years, even though I notice my user name here still indicates Las Vegas and not Miami. I may not be up to date on some changes. But I've heard Jeff Sagarin discuss his model many times going back decades, and I've never heard anything regarding turnovers or anything similar. Sagarin is now in his early 70s. I severely doubt he has recently incorporated anything like that. Here is a summary from 2013. I always respected Sagarin's model because it relies heavily on Bayesian concepts. That's always my fundamental belief, that everything tends to drift back to the beginning. The 2020 Miami Dolphins basically have no chance with me, along those lines. Sorry, but I'm not giving points on the road, or significant points at home, with a team that was picked to win 6 games. I don't care what it looks like now. Bet on sports long enough and that type of thing is ingrained:


Here is The Gold Sheet model of power ratings. This is indeed the gold standard. They have been around for longer than anyone, and are still used. The legendary oddsmaker Bob Martin relied on The Gold Sheet. This is the preseason 2020 version. You'll note all the basic categories like points for/point against, home and away, plus straight up record and point spread record, along with over/under results. Also note that home field value is actually closer to 2 than 3 for most teams. That is the far left category. It is a misconception that home field is automatically 3. If you want to be technical it is basically 2.5 on average:


Again, I think the overriding tendency among sports fans is to try to make the oddsmaking process more complex than it is. Handicappers often use complicated methodology. Handicappers are obsessed with making decisions. But they aren't forced to wager on every single game plus every single over/under plus every single money line and every single prop. Sportsbooks ARE forced to deal with all of the above. That's why by definition it has to be a simple process. Based on foundational math. Assembly line plug and play. When I began working as sports book supervisor in fall 1989 the first thing that shocked me was how few decisions are involved, compared to the other side of the counter as a bettor. Basically we got the numbers from the oddsmaker, then we'd have brief conversation whether to "shade" any of the numbers, then stick them on the board and absorb. Wait to see what happens. Then when we took a high denomination wager we'd have to evaluate whether or not to move the number, based on the identity and reputation of he guy who placed the bet, and also how our number compared to what other sportsbooks were using on the same game.

The Don Best System was brand new at that point. It was a computer screen that allowed us to check all the other prominent sportsbooks and their numbers. A line change would flash in red. Sometimes the entire row would be flashing red, when a line was moving all around town. That was indeed red alert. It was interesting because sometimes we'd see the red alert before anyone wagered at our place. Then we'd have to decide whether to wait for the wager to be made, or to shift the number to what everyone else is now using. That is a wimp strategy called "moving on air." The vast majority of the time we would merely wait. But once in a while it was possible to steal a half point. In other words, let's say a line moved quickly from -4 to -5. Okay, that means they'll play it up to -5. So let's move our -4 up to -4.5 and see if they bite there. If not, we can always move it back to -4, where they definitely will play.

Believe me, that is the type of thing that goes on in sportsbooks, light years beyond handicapping teams regarding personnel or turnovers or anything football related. I hate to say nobody cares but it's basically nobody cares. Once the internet exploded that was a boon for sportsbooks because now they had a bonanza of power ratings to steal. On all sports. It was one of the reasons I moved away. Stuff like golf and tennis and women's basketball became considerably more problematic when all of a sudden the sportsbooks were using actual power ratings to set those numbers, instead of sloppy subjectivity and all the inherent pratfalls of short term overreaction.

I should emphasize that there's a vast difference between power rankings and power ratings. That might be cause of some confusion. Oddsmakers don't care about power rankings at all. That stuff is glorified crap. It is molding subjective impression into a first to last debate. Power ratings are the numerical source of the betting odds. When those oddsmaking sessions are held, each guy will rely on roughly 4-6 sets of power ratings. Some will be consensus among the group. Some will be personal favorites/biases. There is occasional discussion regarding which power rating is faring best in the current season, or with a specific team. That type of thing engages much more lively debate than anything football related.

As I touched on in my first post in this thread, oddsmakers are paranoid about giving away bargains via the same method week after week. That shocked the heck out of me when I was listening to the Stardust Line radio program, and then participating in it. The chief oddsmaker Michael Roxy Roxborough was a co-host. He did a great job because he could blend sports analysis along with the oddsmaker perspective. Terrific wise acre style. Roxy listened to the football commentary but the thing he'd focus on above all was where the money went last week, and whether or not the bettors collected. He'd be irritated and emotional when the same team drew money either for or against several weeks in a row, and the bettors continued to win. Every week he'd fixate on that topic. Only then did I realize that's what oddsmakers obsess about. And it held up once I was in those sessions. All of them and especially the chief oddsmaker will know where the money has been going, whether it's the spread or the money line or the over/under. Consequently when they "shade" a line away from the power rating indications, it won't be because of technical football. It will be in anticipation of money showing up in that direction again. They won't even care if they shaded a line and money wins the other direction. They feel they are protecting the store and the industry when they don't allow you to yawn week after week and win on the same wager without an ounce of thought involved.
Thank you for the amazing reply... I got that concept out of Feustel's book many years ago and I thought it made sense though he was talking about making your own ratings as opposed to what really goes on when the books make theirs. I've heard you talk about how books making their lines is an overrated proccess by many fans before, and I've heard many more saying the same type of thing since.

Liked reading this from the article... "And it turns out that the most accurate method to pick the games is Bayesian. Even late in the season, you’re still better off using the method that does not throw away the starting ratings.". This is the framework Im mostly using so thats kind of good to read...
 
Last edited:

Dolphinator530

Club Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
1,677
Reaction score
2,691
Home teams typically get 3 from my understanding so they are really saying it’s about a one TD game which isn’t far fetched.
 

Butterfrog 2.0

Pro Bowler
Club Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
5,391
Reaction score
1,600
Like most young qbs Drew Lock can be up and down. I think Miami fans are really overlooking him. I hope he's out of the line up on Sunday. He may have looked bad at times this season, but he can also drop a 25 of 32 and 300+ yard game on you with 2 or 3 tds. He reminds me of a young Jay Cutler when he was in Denver.
Not vs this defense he isnt...
 

SuperMarksBros.

Formerly Fiedler for MVP
Joined
Nov 13, 2001
Messages
7,380
Reaction score
853
Location
A van down by the river
Drew Lock is hot garbage. We should win by 10 easily.
Lol "should". Steelers shouldve beaten dallas by 3 TDS, pats should've hammered the jets, colts should've beaten the jaguars, 2007 Patriots should've beaten the giants, 1969 colts should've beaten namath, etc etc.

The dolphins aren't at a place where their fans can start looking past other teams, especially on the road, sure as **** hope the team doesn't.
 

ANUFan

Club Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
15,854
Reaction score
11,920
Well, I already loss my Parlay with that Arizona not winning nor covering the spread.
 

Feverdream

Club Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Messages
3,626
Reaction score
5,163
Well, I already loss my Parlay with that Arizona not winning nor covering the spread.
That was an ugly game. Both teams played poorly. Undisciplined penalties all night long... cheap shots... fighting. Neither team deserved to win.
 

EasyRider

Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2019
Messages
2,663
Reaction score
4,962
Location
Lancaster Pennsylvania
That was an ugly game. Both teams played poorly. Undisciplined penalties all night long... cheap shots... fighting. Neither team deserved to win.
Welcome to Thursday night football. For the life of me I don’t know how the players association agreed to this bad idea
 

ANUFan

Club Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
15,854
Reaction score
11,920
That was an ugly game. Both teams played poorly. Undisciplined penalties all night long... cheap shots... fighting. Neither team deserved to win.

They didn’t even cover the spread. Now I have to reset for Sunday matchups. Any match’s out there that we like?
 

Feverdream

Club Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Messages
3,626
Reaction score
5,163
They didn’t even cover the spread. Now I have to reset for Sunday matchups. Any match’s out there that we like?
All three of these games have higher point spreads, but in addition to Miami, I like the Ravens, Chargers, and Vikings.
 
Top Bottom