NFL Regular Season Results + Wild Card Picks

If your friendly, non-profit pool extends through the playoffs, take all the home overdogs this week.

I admit to flying blind with playoff picks. The historical data show that favourites won 51% of all playoff games against the point spread from 1992 through last season, well above the 48% winning rate for overdogs in all regular season games since 1992. But, 187 playoff games since 1992 is too small a sample to draw conclusions. Plus, the overdog playoff tendency over the entire period since 1992 is based on 60% dominance from 1992 through the 1999 Super Bowl. Underdogs plus the points have prevailed in 55% of playoff games since then. If anyone out there has NFL playoff stats against the point spread prior to 1992, I would be very interested if you could pass that information along.

Pick	+/-	Against
ARIZONA	-1	Green Bay
CINCINNATI	-2.5	NY Jets
NEW ENGLAND	-3.5	Baltimore
DALLAS	-4	Philly

 

2009 Regular Season

7-9 last week pushed me down to 129-123-4 or 51.2% for the entire regular season.

At 8-8 with my ``value overdog`` selections, I did not provide any value-added ending up even-steven with the simplest strategy of picking all underdogs all the time. By picking all the road teams this year, you would have finished 132-120-4 or 52.3%.

But, I will say that I am adding value for those readers who did not know that tilting toward the underdogs is the best approach you can take when playing in a friendly, non-profit NFL pool. Underdogs have taken 52% of NFL regular season contests going back through the 1992 regular season and have prevailed over favourites in 14 of the past 18 seasons. Taking mostly underdogs must be the backbone of any systematic approach to participating in a NFL pool picking winners against the point spread.

28-23-1 or 55% for Lady G's best bets this year. Scroll down to the bottom of the screen for this week's special wild card selections.

World Series 2009 Recap

In toy boy Archibald's season-long baseball pool with points for each game based on posted odds, I finished with +18.45 points by picking the American League (AL) team in all 252 regular season inter-league contests as well as the all-star game plus 5 World Series games. I will provide detailed analysis of my approach when inter-league games start next year.

Evidence of AL superiority is overwhelming. The AL sports a 57% record against National League (NL) opponents in over 1,000 regular season inter-league contests from 2005 through 2009. The AL has won 8 of the past 12 World Series and 17 of the past 26. Leaving aside the 11-inning tie in 2002, the AL has won the last 12 all-star games to reach a decision and 18 of the last 21.

If Philadelphia played in the AL, they would finish around .500 over a full season. They are no better than the Detroit Tigers (who were lucky to finish above .500) or Toronto (unlucky to finish below .500). Sure, in a short series, Detroit, Toronto or even Philadelphia could defeat the mighty Yankees every now and then. But, not this year, Philly Phanatics. And, not often in future, NL backers, until management of NL teams catches up with the more scientific approach implemented by the more advanced and successful AL franchises.

It's not just a matter of money. The LA Dodgers or NY Mets could generate the same revenues as the Yankees, Red Sox and Angels. Too bad the scarecrow's song in the Wizard of Oz is the motto for most National League franchises: "If I Only Had a Brain".

San Diego took a step forward by appointing as general manager one of the bright sparks from the Boston Red Sox office. I expect to see the Padres challenging the Dodgers in a few years, despite a much smaller budget.

Final Inter-League Baseball Game

If you're playing in a not-for-profit season-long baseball pool with points based on the posted odds, take the White Sox +1.6 against the Cubs in a rain-out make-up game.

Including the all-star game, the American League (AL) is 140-112 in 2009 interleague games or 55.6% winners. I am +14.5 points in toy boy Archibald's interleague baseball pool with points based on posted odds. You can't go wrong backing the AL all the way over the course of an entire season no matter who's pitching.

2009 is the 6^th consecutive year for AL teams to take bragging rights in inter-league contests.

AL dominance is particularly underestimated by oddsmakers in games where an NL team is hosting an AL visitor – e.g., tonight's battle of Chicago.

7 Sleeps to NFL Regular Season Kick-Off

Tune in next week for my week 1 picks.

CFL Grey Cup 2009 Pick

Take Saskatchewan +9 over Montreal. I am treating the Green Riders as a home underdog even though the game is in Calgary. You can be sure that the crowd will be a sea of green on Sunday.

For the entire CFL season, I am even-steven against the point spread at 38-38 trailing all-underdogs at 43-33 or 57%. My efforts to select "value overdogs" failed miserably at 4-9.

Baseball All-Star Game 2009 Result

I correctly picked the American League (AL) taking their 12^th consecutive All-Star game in matches ending in a decision.

I moved up to 140-112 with my all-AL strategy in 2009 interleague games or 55.6% winners and to +15.5 points in toy boy Archibald's interleague baseball pool with points based on posted odds. You can't go wrong backing the AL all the way over the course of an entire season.

I didn't see the game. Fiance Archibald took me to Neko Case's concert to make up for his nearly unforgivable sin of shamelessly ogling my gal pal Elizabeth in my presence. Great show from Neko. I thought I had an impressive set of lungs, but she's got pipes to die for.

http://www.nekocase.com/

Canadian Football League Week 1

Thanks to toy boy fiancé Archibald, I live in Canada.

Just for fun and I'm always for fun, I am applying my NFL picking principles to the Canadian Football League this year.

In week 1, take:

Pick	+/-	Against
HAMILTON	+1.5	Toronto
Montreal	+3.5	CALGARY
EDMONTON	-9.5	Winnipeg
SASKATCHEWAN	+1	bc

Inter-league Baseball: AL Still Rules

American League (AL) baseball teams have dominated inter-league baseball since 2005. 2009 was no different. With one rain date to be made up later this season, AL teams have won 139 out of 251 games so far or 55%.

AL superiority this year was actually a touch below the 5-year average of 57% (including all-star and World Series games).

If the last 5 years are indicative and ownership and management of National League (NL) teams do not catch up with the AL in future, we can expect the AL to win more than 51.9% of inter-league games for 19 out of the next 20 years. In other words, AL dominance in a season's worth of inter-league play is as close to a sure thing as we can find in the world of sports.

AL superiority is no secret. What I wanted to investigate was whether the odds offered generally foolish baseball bettors correctly reflect AL dominance. Suppose you were a player in official Godiva toy boy and fiancé Archibald's non-profit office pool with points based on posted odds. Our expectation is that gaming houses set odds to line up an even proportion of betting on each team so that the house profit comes from the commission implicitly built into the odds. If the odds are calibrated correctly, we would expect an all-AL strategy picking inter-league winners (or any other baseball pool picking strategy) to generate net point losses over a long period of time.

In fact, with an all-AL strategy you would be +14.5 so far this year with one point awarded to an AL overdog winner, the odds awarded as points to an AL underdog winner (e.g., 1.25 for a +125 underdog), -1 deducted from an AL underdog loser and the odds deducted from an AL overdog loser (e.g., -1.25 for a -125 overdog). Over the past two years, AL home and away records break down to:

	Year
	2009	2008
AL home win %	58%	62%
Home Pool Points	-2.35	+9.8
AL road win %	53%	55%
Road Pool Points	+16.85	+20.95
AL total win %	55%	58.5%
Total Pool Points	+14.5	+30.75

So, we have preliminary evidence that the fools who bet on baseball may not be correctly valuing AL dominance. Participants in non-profit baseball pools with points based on posted odds should always pick all AL road teams against NL hosts.

Archibald's Baseball Predictions

For what they're worth, Archibald forecasts that the following teams will make the playoffs:

Division	Winner
AL East	Tampa
AL Central	Minnie
AL West	Angels
AL Wild Card	Yanks
NL East	Mets
NL Central	St. Lou
NL West	Dodgers
NL Wild Card	Rockies

Check out

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/standings.php

for the statistical backing for Archibald's prognostications.

USA Soccer

Congratulations to ex-Godiva toy boy Reginald and all other fans of American soccer football for Team USA's 2-0 win over former world number 1 Spain in the Confederations Cup semi-final and their valiant effort losing 3-2 to new world number 1 Brazil in the final.

A great victory over Spain against the odds, but as I used to tell Reginald on those rare occasions when his toy boy performance met minimum standards: "Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then."

I must say that it's one of the ironies of life that one reason I left jolly, olde England was to get away from footie-mad men and yet all my North American toy boys have been huge soccer football fans. You can take Lady Godiva out of England, but you can't take England out of Godiva.

NBA Playoffs 2009 Recap

I followed my Gipp-Gibbs system -- statistically insignificant evidence that "light" overdogs are a statistically insignificant touch above 50% against the spread (ATS) and significant evidence that "heavy" underdogs are a touch above 50% ATS over many years.

I finished 41-42-2 ATS or 49.4%. Going 1-3 with 4 "heavy" overdog picks offset 40-39-2 with "light" overdogs. An all-homer strategy finished 45-38-2 or 54% followed by all-overdogs at 43-40-2 or 52%.

Last year, I did much better at 48-38 or 55.8%. So. over 2 years the Gipp-Gibbs system is 52.6% ATS.

Archibald, What Took You So Long?

The rumours are true. After years of hinting from yours truly, official Godiva toy boy Archibald finally popped the question. We haven't set a date yet. And, Archibald did not even offer an engagement ring. He tells me he's waiting to invest his baseball pool prize in the ring. Not very romantic, Archibald. Never mind. Official Godiva gal pal Elizabeth tells me it takes years to train a husband properly. And, at this point, Archibald has only graduated to fiance status.

Inter-league Baseball

Official Godiva toy boy Archibald participates in a friendly, non-profit office pool picking major-league baseball (MLB) winners in all games over the course of the season.

His pool works like this. He gets:
• 1 point for a win backing an overdog;
• -1 point for a loss backing an underdog;
• +1.x points for a win backing an underdog with 1.x based on the posted odds;
• -1.x points for a loss backing an overdog with 1.x based on the posted odds.

I am advising Archibald to pick the American League (AL) team in all inter-league games.

Forget about analyzing pitching match-ups or home and away records.
The AL sports a 57% record against National League (NL) opponents in over 1,000 regular season inter-league contests from 2005 through 2008. The AL has won 7 of the past 11 World Series and 10 of the past 16. Leaving aside the 11-inning tie in 2002, the AL has won the last 11 all-star games to reach a decision and 17 of the last 20. Last year, this all-AL strategy generated a net gain of +30.75 pool points over 258 inter-league contests.

NBA Playoffs Round 2

In your friendly, non-profit NBA playoff pools, stick with overdogs and give the points in all round 2 match-ups until I see a value “underdog”.

Atlanta might eventually get enough points against King James to warrant selection as a “value” underdog, but hold off for now.

After round 1 and 1 game from round 2, I am 24-22 or 52% against the points. There has been no trend at all so far. All-road, all-homer, all-underdog and all-overdog strategies are all 50/50 so far.

Last year, I rode my same system to a 55.8% record in the 2008 NBA playoffs and over two years of picking NCAA March madness matches I did better still at 55.9%.

The statistically significant part of what I modestly call my Gipp-Gibbs system – backing all “heavy” underdogs receiving 12.5 or more points (the Gibbs part of the Gipp-Gibbs system) – came in with 54.7% winners over the 2008/9 NBA regular season.

Let’s see where I am when this year’s playoffs are complete.

Jarhead’s Baseball Update

This comment is courtesy of Godiva toy boy Archibald’s buddy Jarhead.

Are my hometown Toronto Blue Jays, St. Louis Cardinals, LA Dodgers, Seattle Mariners and Florida Marlins really as good as their records look?

BJays, St. Louis and Dodgers have benefited from some good luck, but have been the best teams in their divisions. BJays may not be able to keep it up, but so far, so good and so much better than expected.

Seattle and Florida are sub-.500 teams that will sink back to their true levels.

Tampa Bay has been plagued by a run of bad luck and will challenge for 1st just by maintaining the same level of play.

Who’s the best team in New York? The Mets are the best team in the NL East, while the Yankees are lucky to be over .500.

Of course, the American League (AL) has been so much better than the National League (NL) over the past several years that a .500 AL team might be better than a 1st place NL team. Stay tuned for that story when inter-league games begin.

NBA Playoffs Game 1 Picks

Just for fun (and it's always about fun, never money, since you can't make money consistently picking winners against the point spread), I'm following a strategy based on a Stanford undergraduate essay.

http://siepr.stanford.edu/siepr_news/JGibbs_NBA_Analysis.pdf

Based on the statistically not significant part of the strategy, I recommend giving the points and taking all overdog favourites against the point lines in game 1.

Check back with my blog as the playoffs unfold and I will discuss the statistically significant part of the Gibbs plan.

NCAA Wrap-Up

Baracketer-in-Chief Obama and I correctly picked UNC.

Kudos to the President for picking UNC to win right at the start of the tournament. I just went along round-by-round backing UNC against the points except when they were heavily favoured in round 1. But, I am proud of finishing 5-3 against the President giving him the points in games when I disagreed with his straight-up bracket selections.

Overall, I finished 34-29-1 or 54%. Over two years of following my system in March madness match-ups, I have picked 56% winners against the spread (ATS).

Before falling in love with my genius, note that a plain-vanilla, all-overdogs strategy is 60% ATS over the last two NCAA tournaments.

NBA Update

I am now 51-45-2 or 53% following the Gibbs system of taking all "heavy" underdogs.

Baseball

I won't be active on this site until inter-league baseball starts. I have a very simple system to advise participants in season-long, non-profit pools with points based on posted odds.

Farewell to my friends at http://www.faniq.com/. I'm not happy with the changes at this site and won't be wasting my time there anymore. But, I am still a member of the http://www.crowdpicks.com/ community.

Lady G 1-on-1 vs. Baracketer-in-Chief

I'm glad to see that President Obama managed to find time to fill out his Barackets this year.

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2009/0317/obamasbracket09.jpg

http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/03/a_bracket_you_can_believe_in.php

He's picking winners straight up and I'm picking winners against the spread. But, when he is picking underdogs to win outright, we can delineate clear differences between his prognostications and mine. Just for fun, I will be keeping track of who's got the better system – Veronica Gipp (aka Lady Godiva) from Coventry, England with no knowledge or interest in basketball or the Baracketer-in-Chief. And, I am willing to give the President the benefit of the points even when he is picking upset winners straight up.

Lady G Pick:	Obama Pick:
Arizona	Utah
USC -2	BCU +2
Cal -1	Maryland +1
UCLA -7	VCU +7
LSU -2.5	Butler +2.5
ASU -4.5	Temple +4.5

I won't count the fact that I started correctly picking Morehead State -3.5, while the President opted for Bama State +3.5 in the play-in game.

March Madness

I myself take no interest whatsoever in American college basketball, but toy boy Archibald can't get enough roundball. Every year he organizes a friendly, non-profit office pool for the NCAA men's tourney. Instead of picking bracket winners, the object of his pool is to pick winners against the point spread each and every day as the tournament unfolds. The winner of his winner-take-all pool is the contestant who picks the most winners against the spread over 64 matches. All matches are weighted equally starting with tonight's play-in match to determine the 64^th team through the 6 April championship.

To humour Archibald, I participate by relying on economists' studies showing that "heavy" underdogs win more than their fair share of college basketball games against the point spread, while "non-heavy" overdogs win slightly more than 50% (although this particular result is not statistically significant).

http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/print/179073423.html

Last year, I followed this approach and finished 2nd with a 37-27 record or 57.8%. The "non-heavy" overdogs part of my strategy worked like a dream at 33-19 or 63.5%. But, "heavy" underdogs let me down at 4-8 or 33%. Last year's winner followed a plain-vanilla, all-overdogs approach that took home the prize with a 41-23 record or 64%.

It was very unusual to see overdogs win 64% against the points over 64 games. It has occurred to me that the "science" pointing to "heavy" underdogs in basketball may apply only to regular season matches. Playoffs may be different with teams going all out to bury opponents in elimination games. There is some evidence, albeit inconclusive in a statistical sense, that this may be true in NFL football.

In any case, just for fun I am sticking to the same strategy this year. So, in tonight's play-in match I recommend

Morehead State -3.5 over Alabama State

Thursday games:
Pick	Spread	Against
Bing	+22	Duke
Texas	-4	Minnie
Radford	+26.5	UNC
LSU	-2.5	Butler
Chatt	+20.5	UConn
BYU	-2	Texas A&M
American	+17	Villanova
UCLA	-7	Virginia Comm
CS Northridge	+19.5	Memphis
Cal	-1	Maryland
Morgan	+16.5	Oke
Clemson	-5	Michigan
Purdue	-8.5	N Iowa
Wash	-5	Missie State
Illini	-4.5	WKU
Akron	+12.5	Gonzo
Friday games:
Arizona	0	Utah
Wake	-7.5	Cleve State
Syracuse	-12	SF Austin
ASU	-4.5	Temple
Morehead St.	+21	Louisville
OSU	-3	Siena
ETSU	+20	Pitt
Tennie	-2	Oke State
Bob Morris	+17	Mich State
USC	-2	BCU
Kansas	-10	NDS
WVU	-8.5	Dayton
Cornell	+13	Missouri
Marquette	-4	Utah State
FSU	-2.5	Wisconsin
Xavier	-11	Port State

 

NBA Update

 

So far this year, heavy NBA underdogs are 45-38-2 or 54% against the spread.

 

Friday night take:

 

Minnie +12.5 over HOUSTON

Wash +14.5 over DENVER

 

Archibald refers you roundball fans to a New York Times article by Moneyball author Michael Lewis on the quantitative approach to picking players taken by the management team in charge of the Houston Rockets. We can predict that the Rockets will be a top team for years to come as long as they stick to this plan.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/magazine/15Battier-t.html

Super Bowl Wrap-Up

Through 43 Super Bowls to date, favourites are now 21-20-2 against the point spread and 29-14 even-up.

Lady G's final playoff results:

Picks	Win	Lose
All	5	6
Home Faves	2	3
Home Dogs	3	2
Super Bowl		1
Readers' Choice	3	1
Last Week	Cards +7

 

Underdogs did the playoff barking for the 3^rd consecutive year going 7-4 against the points in 2009.

From 1992 through this year, overdogs boast a 51% winning rate against the points in 187 playoff games. But, this is based entirely on overdogs' 60% run over 7 years from 1992 through the 1999 Super Bowl. Over the past 10 seasons, underdogs have won 55% of playoff games.

187 playoff games since 1992 is too small a sample to say whether playoff games differ from regular season games. If anyone out there has data on NFL playoff results with and without point spreads going back beyond 1992, please feel free to reply and give our readers the benefit of your knowledge.

While I know enough about sports betting to have recorded a 52% record against the points over the past 8 NFL seasons, I don't know anything about the sport itself. I spent most of yesterday's game in the kitchen preparing delicacies for toy boy Archibald. I did see Bruce Springsteen's halftime show. Maybe it's the fact that I came of age musically in England during the 1990s, but I fail to hear what you Yanks hear in that old man's dull drudge. And, what was he thinking opening with Tenth Avenue Freeze-Out – one of his most forgettable tunes? At least Glory Days had something to do with gridiron.

NBA Underdogs

35-26-1 or 57% against the spread for underdogs of 12.5 points or more. The results so far are proving Stanford undergrad whiz kid Gibbs (see 1 November post) correct with his analysis showing that we can expect to see heavy NBA underdogs finish above 50% by a statistically significant margin over at least one full season. I will track this trend for the rest of the year for players in non-profit NBA pools.

Tonight, I recommend taking Sacramento +14 against Phoenix. I'm going with my head over my heart with this one. I agree with fellow Anglobabes Ginger Spice and Elizabeth Hurley that Steve Nash is the cutest man alive (even if he needs to cut his hair).

I may not be as active with this blog for the next little while. T.S. Eliot was clearly no NFL fan. He moved from America to England trading gridiron for rugby and baseball for cricket – losing bets on both counts. And, he wrote that April is the cruellest month. For NFL fans, February is definitely the longest month even without leap day.

But, I will be back every now and then with NBA updates. And, look for me at the end of March when I will be testing Mr. Gibbs' system against the points in the NCAA basketball tournament.

 

Super Bowl XLIII Pick

If your non-profit NFL pool extends through the playoffs, take Pittsburgh Steelers -7 on Super Sunday.

Through 42 Super Bowls to date, favourites have overcome the points half the time in 21 games. 2 matches have ended tied on points. 5 times the overdog has won the score line, but lost the bet on points. And, the underdog has won 14 previous Super Bowls outright.

To sum up, overdogs have won 2 out of every 3 Super Bowls even up. So far, only 7 of 42 Super Bowls have turned on points, which is a touch below the 1 in 5 average for regular season games.

So, I'm going with the Steelers –7 based on evidence (albeit not significant in the statistical sense) that fewer Super Bowls and playoff games in general turn on points than is the case for regular season games. Oddsmakers and their foolish customers may not fully account for the fact that winning teams go all out to put away opponents in elimination games.

But, check out Freakonomics author Professor Steven Levitt's case for picking the Super Bowl underdog every year because Super Sunday bettors are less sophisticated than regular season punters and overvalue overdogs even more than regular season bettors.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/05/magazine/05sbgamble_92_94_.html

Playoff results so far:

Picks	Win	Lose
All	5	5
Home Faves	2	3
Home Dogs	3	2
Readers' Choice	2	1
Last Week	PITT -5

 

I don't take game analysis seriously, but will pass on former Godiva toy boy Reginald's argument that Steelers -7 against the Cardinals looks to be a bargain. By kickoff, the Eagles were favoured by 4 in Arizona. Before the conference championship games, would we have valued the Eagles and Steelers as roughly even? Reginald thinks not and is backing the Steelers with as much of his exotic dancer girlfriend's assets as he can lay his hands on. Also, since the NFL moved to a 16-game season, no team has won the Super Bowl with less than 10 wins in the regular season -- another sign pointing against 9-7 Arizona.

Archibald's NBA Projections

Having given space to Reginald, I must allow equal time to reigning Godiva toy boy Archibald. (Don't be jealous of Reginald, Archibald. You know you've got my heart, soul and, of most importance to you, my body, you handsome devil.) Archibald claims to have a statistical package for making NBA projections. Based on data to the halfway point of the season, expect the following:

Cleveland will defeat Lakers in the NBA Final.

Boston and Denver will lose at the Final Four stage.

Surprise teams making the playoffs: Indy and Toronto.

Biggest steal of 2008: Denver getting Chauncey Billups from Detroit in return for Allan Iverson. (Honourable mention: Bernard Madoff hedge fund.)

NFL Conference Champ Picks

If your non-profit NFL pool extends through the playoffs, take both home teams this weekend.

Over the past 38 seasons since 1970, favourites have won 2/3 of conference championship games straight up – right in line with overdogs' outright winning % in regular season games. Ordinarily, this would point me to both underdogs since 1 of 5 regular season games turn on points.

But, I'm going with the Steelers –5 based on evidence (albeit not significant in the statistical sense) that fewer games turn on points in the playoffs than regular season. Oddsmakers and their foolish customers may not fully account for the fact that winning teams go all out to put away opponents in elimination games. I also take comfort in the fact that the fifth point in a 5-point spread rarely comes into play. It is unusual for an NFL game to end with a 5-point gap. So, I treat Steelers -5 as Steelers -4.5 for practical purposes.

And, I'm taking Arizona +3 as the home underdog in the NFC championship. Archibald's buddy Michael (Moto) Gourleymann informs us that home underdogs are riding a 13-4 streak against the spread in playoff games. I don't take a sample size of 17 seriously, but I'm counting on home underdogs being as good a choice in the playoffs as they have been in most regular seasons -- although not this past season.

Playoff results so far:

Picks	Win	Lose
All	3	5
Home Faves ¼ finals	1	3
Home Dog Wild Cards	2	2
Readers' Choice	1	1
	PITT -6

As my regular readers know, I do not waste time analyzing team stats and other irrelevant data. But, for entertainment purposes, I will pass along these unsubstantiated factoids courtesy of former Godiva toy boy and long-suffering Jets fan Reginald:

• Baltimore was lucky to defeat Tennessee in a game when they were outgained 391-211. You can't count on winning the turnover battle every week.
• Steelers have now reached 7 of the past 15 AFC championship games -- a tremendous record of achievement. Before we get carried away, let's keep in mind that their AFC championship record under Coach Cowher was only 2-4.
• The underdog plus the points has now won 10 straight Eagles-Giants contests – a record streak for NFL head-to-head rivalries.
• The Eagles defeated the Cards 48-20 on Thanksgiving night by gaining 458 yards.
• Lady G was correct that home overdogs have won almost 3 of every 4 divisional ¼ final games straight up since 1990. But, that record is based on 82% home team dominance from 1990 through the January 2005 playoffs. From 2006 on, home teams have won only 7 of 16 divisional ¼ final games.
• This has been the year for unusual final scores. In the regular season, the Steelers and Chargers posted the first 11-10 final in NFL history. And, the Eagles-Giants playoff match ended with the first 23-11 score.
• From memory, Eagles vs. Cardinals must be the first conference championship game featuring two teams that failed to reach 1o wins in the regular season -- at least since the NFL went to a 16-game schedule and maybe even going back to the 14-game era.

NBA Underdogs

30-23-1 or 56% against the spread for underdogs of 12.5 points or more. The results so far are proving Stanford undergrad whiz kid Gibbs (see 1 November post) correct with his analysis showing that we can expect to see heavy NBA underdogs finish above 50% by a statistically significant margin over a full season. I will track this trend for the rest of the year for players in non-profit NBA pools. Tonight, I recommend taking my beloved Raptors +12.5 against the Celtics.

Dr. Archibald Not Licensed

Official Godiva toy boy Archibald directed me to the following article and suggested that I would be doing him a good turn -- since every good boy deserves favour -- by parading around in my birthday suit in order to extend his life.

http://www.tosports.ca/?p=2471

A small amount of research dashed Archibald's hopes.

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/weekly/aa072600a.htm

Keep your day job, Archibald, and forget about applying to medical school. And, I will be doffing my duds only for my benefit, not yours, thank you very much.

NFL ¼ Final Weekend

If your friendly, non-profit pool extends through the playoffs, take all the home overdogs this week.

The match-ups look even on paper with the exception of Arizona @ Carolina. But, the extra week of rest augurs well for home cookin' this weekend. Favourites have won ¾ of 72 divisional round games over the past 18 seasons. Even if we expect 1 of every 5 games to turn on points (and ignore the hypothesis that fewer playoff games turn on points because winning teams go all out to pile up the score in elimination games), the godds of probability tilt to home overdogs.

Pick	+/-	Against
CAROLINA	-10	Arizona
TENNESSEE	-3	Baltimore
NY GIANTS	-4.5	Philly
PITTSBURGH	-6	San D

 

Wild Card results:

Picks	Win	Lose
All	2	2
Home Dogs	2	2
Readers' Choice	MINN +3 lost

 

NBA Underdogs

28-20-1 or 58% against the spread for underdogs of 12.5 points or more. The results so far are proving Stanford undergrad whiz kid Gibbs (see 1 November post) correct with his analysis showing that we can expect to see heavy NBA underdogs finish above 50% by a statistically significant margin over a long period of at least one full season. I will continue tracking this trend on behalf of players in non-profit NBA pools.