Crowdsource Syndicate Sports Betting
02-18-2020
, 02:02 PM
Quote:
can't speak for the other stuff but my sportsbetting noob intuition based upon you crushing early lines would be to put out your standard unit and then double down with a second helping if you still see something you like after the first round
for the bolded, this 100% happens in soccer. the phrase is called "parking the bus" where teams basically put everyone on defense and try to grind out a 0-0 tie where they'll try to score a goal here or there when the other team makes a big mistake.
the on/off switch between all out defense and all out attack is especially noticeable in 2 leg matches where they have aggregate scoring such as the champions league after the group stage. This means for the second leg each team knows what specific outcome they need.
anecdotally you often see teams that typically score only one or two goals against much weaker opponents suddenly score 5 goals against an elite defender and they magically needed 5 goals to win the overall match.
i haven't found any studies on it and this is so far down my pipeline of scraping and studying but these tend to agree there may be something to it even if they were looking at the problem with a different perspective
i have found some that found while the general public believes the team that plays the second game at home should have the advantage, it's actually the opposite. the reason for this is that away goals count as a tie breaker (if you tie 0-0 one game and 1-1 the other game the winner is the team that played as the away team in the 1-1 game whereas if aggregate is 1-1 after two 1-0 matches then they'll instead go into whatever in play tie breaker they normally do such as extra time or penalty shootout.
those papers don't really do much on the why because that's not scientific and highly speculative - but the first game is usually played normally and the second game played according to specific conditions with a specific target in mind. In soccer, the only measurable advantage to home field is referee influence via booking (minor) and extra time (if home team is losing there is nearly always more extra time than normal and vice versa) and this is crowd driven as stadiums with a track around them and more distance between the stands and field have smaller home field advantages than stadiums dedicated to soccer where fans are closer - given that refs in the champion's league would be under a whole extra layer of scrutiny, they'll likely be more honest than usual and thus those advantages are highly negated in exchange and thus it now becomes more advantageous to be the away side in the final game because more goals are scored in the second game and the away team gets the tie breaker so the the team that plays as the away team in what is usually the higher scoring game will win any ties
last year's semifinals in the champion's league
tottenham vs ajax
game 1
tottenham does a 3-4-2-1 formation vs Ajax 4-3-2-1
tottenham took 12 shots vs 10 for Ajax
game 2
Ajax needs to just not get outscored here so they keep their normal formation that worked in game one (they even pulled back the striker a bit more so it's really a 4-3-3 now but Tottenham absolutely needs to score one more than Ajax as well as 2 goals to win free and clear so they take on a more agressive 4-3-1-2
in this game the shot volume nearly doubled to 24 for tot and 16 for Ajax
tottenham got their goals winning 3-2. Ajax gave up less than a goal a game over the course of the season and Tottenham scored <2 goals a game over the course of the season and let in about a goal a game in their respective leagues. This is obviously a little different because they are now facing tougher competition than in their own leagues but still you get the idea that being forced to score forced tottenham to take more risks in the second game out of necessity and by doing so let in more opposing goals than normal too both compared to game 1 and their regular season averages.
the counter argument is barcelona vs liverpool. Here there was no change in formation, both teams played 4-3-3 both games.
Barcelona won game one 3-0 and then Liverpool won game two 4-0. Here, like the formations between games, the shot volume was basically the same as well with 14-11 adv liverpool in game one and 13-8 liverpool in game two. Here though it's a slightly different dynamic as Barca in theory had a much easier path than Ajax needing to just not allow 4 or more goals than their own scoring total and Liverpool had to be extra careful since they put up a goose egg as the away team meaning if barca scored a single goal, they'd win the tie breaker
maybe this is just noise but i've definitely noticed a trend of there being more goals in the second leg as usually one team is forced to stop "parking the bus" and go out on attack which opens up scoring opportunities for both sides
champions league dfs has been pretty good for me because it's far easier to predict game scripts - but to be fair it's an extremely limited sample size so I could be completely wrong about all of this - could very well be ashamed of this post in the near future
for the bolded, this 100% happens in soccer. the phrase is called "parking the bus" where teams basically put everyone on defense and try to grind out a 0-0 tie where they'll try to score a goal here or there when the other team makes a big mistake.
the on/off switch between all out defense and all out attack is especially noticeable in 2 leg matches where they have aggregate scoring such as the champions league after the group stage. This means for the second leg each team knows what specific outcome they need.
anecdotally you often see teams that typically score only one or two goals against much weaker opponents suddenly score 5 goals against an elite defender and they magically needed 5 goals to win the overall match.
i haven't found any studies on it and this is so far down my pipeline of scraping and studying but these tend to agree there may be something to it even if they were looking at the problem with a different perspective
i have found some that found while the general public believes the team that plays the second game at home should have the advantage, it's actually the opposite. the reason for this is that away goals count as a tie breaker (if you tie 0-0 one game and 1-1 the other game the winner is the team that played as the away team in the 1-1 game whereas if aggregate is 1-1 after two 1-0 matches then they'll instead go into whatever in play tie breaker they normally do such as extra time or penalty shootout.
those papers don't really do much on the why because that's not scientific and highly speculative - but the first game is usually played normally and the second game played according to specific conditions with a specific target in mind. In soccer, the only measurable advantage to home field is referee influence via booking (minor) and extra time (if home team is losing there is nearly always more extra time than normal and vice versa) and this is crowd driven as stadiums with a track around them and more distance between the stands and field have smaller home field advantages than stadiums dedicated to soccer where fans are closer - given that refs in the champion's league would be under a whole extra layer of scrutiny, they'll likely be more honest than usual and thus those advantages are highly negated in exchange and thus it now becomes more advantageous to be the away side in the final game because more goals are scored in the second game and the away team gets the tie breaker so the the team that plays as the away team in what is usually the higher scoring game will win any ties
last year's semifinals in the champion's league
tottenham vs ajax
game 1
tottenham does a 3-4-2-1 formation vs Ajax 4-3-2-1
tottenham took 12 shots vs 10 for Ajax
game 2
Ajax needs to just not get outscored here so they keep their normal formation that worked in game one (they even pulled back the striker a bit more so it's really a 4-3-3 now but Tottenham absolutely needs to score one more than Ajax as well as 2 goals to win free and clear so they take on a more agressive 4-3-1-2
in this game the shot volume nearly doubled to 24 for tot and 16 for Ajax
tottenham got their goals winning 3-2. Ajax gave up less than a goal a game over the course of the season and Tottenham scored <2 goals a game over the course of the season and let in about a goal a game in their respective leagues. This is obviously a little different because they are now facing tougher competition than in their own leagues but still you get the idea that being forced to score forced tottenham to take more risks in the second game out of necessity and by doing so let in more opposing goals than normal too both compared to game 1 and their regular season averages.
the counter argument is barcelona vs liverpool. Here there was no change in formation, both teams played 4-3-3 both games.
Barcelona won game one 3-0 and then Liverpool won game two 4-0. Here, like the formations between games, the shot volume was basically the same as well with 14-11 adv liverpool in game one and 13-8 liverpool in game two. Here though it's a slightly different dynamic as Barca in theory had a much easier path than Ajax needing to just not allow 4 or more goals than their own scoring total and Liverpool had to be extra careful since they put up a goose egg as the away team meaning if barca scored a single goal, they'd win the tie breaker
maybe this is just noise but i've definitely noticed a trend of there being more goals in the second leg as usually one team is forced to stop "parking the bus" and go out on attack which opens up scoring opportunities for both sides
champions league dfs has been pretty good for me because it's far easier to predict game scripts - but to be fair it's an extremely limited sample size so I could be completely wrong about all of this - could very well be ashamed of this post in the near future
this is good stuff thats almost certainly priced into straight bets market but probably isnt with dfs and props so its good to know. Youre basically just talking about scoring effects which effect hockey and soccer (that I know of.) Basically when one team is winning by a comfortable margin they shift from trying to score goals to trying not to be scored upon. In hockey it means that losing teams generally actually will get more shot attempts but of much lower quality. And vice versa for the winning team; when theyre up theyll get less shots but theyll be better quality. I remember reading in some book (I think justin7s) that he found an exploit in betting second half soccer totals depending on the score. I dont know enough about soccer to say what the exploits are but its not hard to figure out
02-19-2020
, 07:06 AM
I've made some major tweaks dusting it off from last year, it's done well to produce good cash lines but never any real gpp success thought i'd just share it here
be forewarned golf is by far my weakest sport
be forewarned golf is by far my weakest sport
Quote:
ran my model, here are my generic and arbitrary rankings, i'll have this published in blog form tomorrow because i have so little faith in it i'll share it publicly 
whereas will never share hockey info etc etc so take this all with a grain of salt
bear in mind i'd rather be wrong about not playing the right guy than wrong by playing the wrong guy so euros who i have very little data on are severely punished in the model
tier 1
Rory McIlroy
Justin Thomas
Webb Simpson
Hideki Matsuyama
tier 2
Adam Scott
Jon Rahm
Dustin Johnson
Xander Schauffele
Bryson DeChambeau
Collin Morikawa
tier 3
Marc Leishman
Paul Casey
Gary Woodland
Sungjae Im
Sergio Garcia
Corey Conners
Abraham Ancer
Matt Kuchar
Bubba Watson
Tommy Fleetwood
tier 4
Patrick Reed
Chez Reavie
Sebastian Munoz
Louis Oosthuizen
Byeong Hun An
Scottie Scheffler
Brandt Snedeker
Carlos Ortiz
Jordan Spieth
Kevin Kisner
Rafa Cabrera Bello
Billy Horschel
Lucas Glover
tier 5
Danny Willett
Tyrrell Hatton
Kevin Na
Jason Kokrak
Charles Howell III
Cameron Smith
Kurt Kitayama
Graeme McDowell
Matthew Fitzpatrick
Sung Kang
Shane Lowry
Branden Grace
Lanto Griffin
Matt Wallace
Bernd Wiesberger
Lee Westwood
Erik van Rooyen
Francesco Molinari
tier 6
Robert MacIntyre
Jazz Janewattananond
Justin Harding
Mike Lorenzo-Vera
Brendon Todd
Shugo Imahira
Jorge Campillo
Christiaan Bezuidenhout
Benjamin Hebert
Marcus Kinhult
Ryan Fox
Ryo Ishikawa
Shaun Norris
Lucas Herbert
Zander Lombard
Pablo Larrazabal
Scott Hend
Tae Hee Lee
Victor Perez
Matthias Schwab
Zach Murray
whereas will never share hockey info etc etc so take this all with a grain of saltbear in mind i'd rather be wrong about not playing the right guy than wrong by playing the wrong guy so euros who i have very little data on are severely punished in the model
tier 1
Rory McIlroy
Justin Thomas
Webb Simpson
Hideki Matsuyama
tier 2
Adam Scott
Jon Rahm
Dustin Johnson
Xander Schauffele
Bryson DeChambeau
Collin Morikawa
tier 3
Marc Leishman
Paul Casey
Gary Woodland
Sungjae Im
Sergio Garcia
Corey Conners
Abraham Ancer
Matt Kuchar
Bubba Watson
Tommy Fleetwood
tier 4
Patrick Reed
Chez Reavie
Sebastian Munoz
Louis Oosthuizen
Byeong Hun An
Scottie Scheffler
Brandt Snedeker
Carlos Ortiz
Jordan Spieth
Kevin Kisner
Rafa Cabrera Bello
Billy Horschel
Lucas Glover
tier 5
Danny Willett
Tyrrell Hatton
Kevin Na
Jason Kokrak
Charles Howell III
Cameron Smith
Kurt Kitayama
Graeme McDowell
Matthew Fitzpatrick
Sung Kang
Shane Lowry
Branden Grace
Lanto Griffin
Matt Wallace
Bernd Wiesberger
Lee Westwood
Erik van Rooyen
Francesco Molinari
tier 6
Robert MacIntyre
Jazz Janewattananond
Justin Harding
Mike Lorenzo-Vera
Brendon Todd
Shugo Imahira
Jorge Campillo
Christiaan Bezuidenhout
Benjamin Hebert
Marcus Kinhult
Ryan Fox
Ryo Ishikawa
Shaun Norris
Lucas Herbert
Zander Lombard
Pablo Larrazabal
Scott Hend
Tae Hee Lee
Victor Perez
Matthias Schwab
Zach Murray
02-22-2020
, 02:46 PM
02-22-2020
, 02:51 PM
02-23-2020
, 12:13 AM
