First, let's take a look at how things have gone (on avg) the past 5 seasons and how things have gone thus far this season, and you'll get an idea of what I mean. Note that the weekly averages really vary from one year to the next, and we will get into that more later...
Typically, and by that I mean on average, not every single season, dogs start out better than they do in the 2nd half of the season. And we saw that this year too. In fact, it was an extreme in weeks 2-5. Dogs were producing very well. So what happened?
Well, perhaps you, like myself and others, started thinking that dogs would continue to bark just as much as they have been early on. And what happens? They lost their bite. Dogs have hit at much lower % than they do on average. I don't think its a coincidence either. These linesmakers are brilliant guys. They are smarter than any of us. You have the psychology of guys taking a few favs in the early weeks that lose, and the player starts to doubt his plays, and goes for a dog when he shouldn't, because his dogs have been coming through, or his favs were losing to dogs.
Now, does this happen every year?
You may be suprised, but the answer is: YES.
Take a look at all data from 2001 thru 2007. What I did was I took the weekly ATS for dogs, and I found the "periods" or groups of weeks where dogs or favs did very well for a couple of weeks in a row, and then it reversed for a few weeks. And I grouped them by these "periods".
A few things I want to show you:
1. Note that dogs don't always start off well. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.
2. Note that starting in week 6 and ending in week 8 or 9, we typically have a "period" of change that is vastly different from the prior few weeks. Sometimes dogs do better, but in most cases, dogs have done much worse during this period of time.
3. Look at this more by viewing the column to the right. This is a calculation of the % change from the period directly before weeks 6-8 (or 9) to that of weeks 6-8/9. The only season there was not a strong pronouncement was in 2004.
4. Look at the dropoff after the 6-8 week "period". Typically if weeks 6-8 are great, as in 2001 and 2006, the dogs don't do as well in the next "period". But they didn't do terrible, either. But when the dogs have done poor in the "period" around weeks 6-8, or dropped off from what they started the season out at, they will typically rebound in the following "period". 2003 is the most similar season to this one, where dogs only went 43% for the "period" of weeks 6-8 (42% this season). They then rebounded back to 56%. Every season where dogs did worse in weeks 6-8/9, they improved the following "period".
5. The only exception was that terrible year for dog players in 2005, where favs covered more than any time in recent memory.
So, what can we expect?
Well just because I tell you I think that over the next 3 or 4 weeks, I think dogs will do better, does not mean you'll win money. Firstly, they probably won't be hitting much better than they did to start the season, and secondly, you still have to play the right sides.
But, we should find out over the next couple of weeks if a dog bettor's season will start to improve. My money says it will, and I'll continue to play my dogs (and a few select favs when I like one). I never blindly play a dog because he's a dog, but it definitely factors in.
Last year, dogs started out at only 47% and then in the "period" of weeks 6-8, jumped to 63%. The reverse of this year.
So, to all you who have had a down few weeks, this usually happens each year. It will vary between which side is getting the most play, but I can tell you from looking at the numbers, we definitely went through a transition again this season during the "period" or weeks 6-8. Will it last another week before we see a change? Perhaps. But sometime during weeks 10-11, we should see a decent stretch for those sharp dog bettors. That is, if we can learn anything from the past.
Don't get discouraged, better days lie ahead.
No comments:
Post a Comment