If you've taken a beating in weeks 6-8, don't fear:

For a lot of dog bettors, sharp players, or guys who get caught in a pattern, you may have had a bad few weeks. Why? Well, because the NFL season typically goes in ebb and flow. There are definite periods of 3-4 weeks when dogs just seem to kick ass. Then, everyone catches up w/ the high number of dogs, and it seems favs start to do better. It's the linesmaker's way of keeping you on your toes, but if you're not careful, and they hope you are not, keeping your money in their pockets.

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.

Teasing across Zero, other teaser myths, and High Percentage Teases

First, I encourage you to read my predecessor article on teasers:

http://sharpfootballanalysis.blogspot.com/2007/09/truth-about-teasers-must-read-for-those.html

I decided to do a closer look at each and every pointspread to see when teasing is "typically" of value and when it is not. If you understand that you must hit 52.37% of your plays at -110 juice, you should also understand that if you want to win playing 2 team, 6 point teasers, each leg should have better than 73.1% chance of hitting. On a 3 team, 10 point teaser, each leg should have better than 81.1% chance of winning. And on a 4 team, 13 point teaser, each leg should have better than 85.5% chance of winning.

So those are what we are looking for when we target teasers. Of course, selecting games in a teaser is the same as selecting them in straight wagers. You have to cap the game and see when a team has good value. The hard part about teasers is the fact that if you misread one game, or get "unlucky" in 1 game, the whole teaser is lost. Whereas on a straight play, you only lose 1 play. Therefore, treat a "whole teaser" like a single play. Don't wager more than you normally would because you think "this has to hit". And don't let 1 teaser loss ruin your weekend, even if it is because you lost 1 game out of 4 in a 4 team teaser. You should have a couple other straight plays to get you where you need to be, and remember: everyone has a down weekend now and then. Lastly, know that teasers are jackpots for sportsbooks, because many "average joes" play them and lose. So if you can actually win consistently on teasers, consider yourself in lucky company.

Now, if that didn't dissuade you from wanting to play teasers, here we go. These numbers are drawn from a database dating back to 2000. (I could go farther back, but I wanted to look at the most recent 6 seasons.)

Teasing the Favorite



The Myth of Teasing across Zero

That's the first thing that jumps out at us when we look at this. The plays highlighted in the yellow color are those where the teased line has crossed zero. The plays in red are those that are above our target percentages. Remember, no teaser has a 52.4% target, 6 point, 10 point and 13 point teasers have their own targets. Therefore, I have a column in each category which shows the % over the target. If it's positive, that play is a solid one that, when paired w/ other positive plays, could help produce a winning teaser.

If negative, you're looking at a poor tease possibility. For instance, look at teasing from -11.5 or -12 down to -5.5 or -6. That teaser won only 47% of the time, which is 26% less than you need to actually earn money as a leg of a 6 point teaser.

The best 6 point teaser is teasing RIGHT ACROSS ZERO with a -3.5 or -4 point favorite and making that team a +2 or +2.5 point dog. It's hit 10% more than taking a -2.5 or -3 point favorite and making them a +3 or +3.5 point dog. Typically, you would think "why would I want to tease to +2.5? Wouldn't I want to make sure it was at +3? And you would think so, but based on historical lines, you would be wrong.

Also, look at teasing teams that are -3.5 or -4 in a 6 point, 10 point, or 13 point teaser. Either way, they are one of the best teams to put into any teaser.

Teasing the Underdog



As you can see and as you should know, you don't cross zero teasing a dog. But, as described in the prior article (linked at the top) teasing dogs is far less profitable than teasing favs. Look at the overall odds of hitting straight wagers w/ dogs. There's only 3 out of 13 that hit less than 50%. And the majority are hitting over that 52.4% mark.

Teasing them, on the other hand, yields far less "red" selections above our target levels.

I'll let you take what ever else you want to from this one.

Summary of Top Teasers

The following are summary tables which are quick references from the above tables, highlighting top teaser candidates.

Top 6 Point Candidates



Top 10 Point Candidates



Top 13 Point Candidates



Summary Points

I hope this gives you a good overview as to which spreads are more likely to produce winning plays. However, this does not mean these hit 100%. Even the best are hitting at a rate where you need to also employ some solid capping skills and as always, have a bit of luck on your side. The goal, however, is to equip you with all of these tools, so that you can combine your capping w/ solid ATS trends by pointspread. Hopefully the combination will give you added advantage, and in some cases, steer you away from a potential negative play. More could be done, such as looking at home field vs road, or adding total information to the queries. But this is a good middle ground and hopefully you will find some useful information that leads to winning plays. Good luck.

Perception of Home Field Advantage vs. ATS results

Like it or not, for the most part, the "dumb betting public" views each team based on what they have seen from them lately, and their W/L record. The public has also been influenced by ESPN and other media to believe that certain teams are simply better at home or on the road.

Think of what you have heard... how hard it is to play at Mile High Stadium in Denver. How intimidating it is for teams to travel and play in the Black Hole out in Oakland. Other places that seem to hold a great home field advantage, such as the noise from the "12th man" in Quest Field in Seattle. The heat down in Miami in September/early October. What about KC, the frozen tundra of Lambeau, or the domes in NO, ATL, STL, Min, Det?

Well, I hope this article will shed some light as to which teams really do have a home field advantage, and which really do not. Therein, which teams win at home, and which teams do not. Even more important, which teams COVER at home and which do not.

And then we'll take it even further, and examine which teams have sustained success on the road, vs. those teams who can't quite cut it in games away from home.

In each scenario, I looked at how a team has done the last 5 years, and then also broke out this current year. Although this current year is young and less than halfway through, it is still interesting to see if a certain team has reversed its fortunes or has continued along the same path.

Home Teams ATS

http://img37.picoodle.com/img/img37/6/10/17/f_HomeTeamsATm_2c54dda.png

The Ravens have been solid at home ATS, but somewhat suprising that they are tops in the NFL over this 5 year span. Not really known for a huge home field advantage compared to some other clubs. You do have a couple Florida teams up there in Jac and TB, but the rest are pretty much the tops in the NFL in terms of solid teams the last few years: NE, Pit... KC is known for its home field advantage and it shows based on their ATS at home. Dal, though not near as dominant in the NFC the last few years (the past couple aside) still has covered well at home.

What's most interesting is the teams that are poor. NO, ATL and Oak are at the bottom. 2 dome teams and the Black Hole. Perhaps too much emphasis has been made in the line on their home field advantage, or at least in the public's mind, and really there is not much advantage for those teams at home. Some good teams over the last few years like Car, NYG and Cin also don't show up as much at home. But the biggest suprise is Denver. I'll get into them more after I show the next chart.

This is the same chart from above, but sorted by the column "SU-ATS". Basically, it shows which teams UNDERPERFORMED at home ATS but still managed good SU records. And similarly, which teams are known for losing at home, yet have solid ATS records.

http://img28.picoodle.com/img/img28/6/10/17/f_OvervaluedHm_49749da.png

As you can see from this chart, Den has the largest discrepancy in the NFL in terms of home games won vs. home games covered in the NFL. That could be in part because since 2002, they have only been home dogs one time, this weekend to Pittsburgh! I couldn't believe it at first, but it is true. They have never been home dogs since their 2002 Week 1 matchup w/ the Rams.

At any rate, their "home field" advantage has been played up far to much in the media and has caused bettors to lose out on $ far to long now. Let's look at the next offender (you have to skip Ind, KC, NE and Pit, because they are only up so high since they have such a large SU win %. They still cover 50% or much better ATS at home.)

Seattle, GB and St. Louis. 3 teams that have a supposed great home field advantage. While their SU records have been great, they don't get the cover in most cases. Lastly is Miami. Teams have to fly down to the tip of the Country in the heat to play them, but Miami just does not get the covers at home like you would think, whereas some other Florida teams do. In fact, even looking at the limited data from this season, you'll find that the only team above .500 ATS at home from this group in red has been GB.

Moving from the bad to the good, at the bottom are teams who may not win many home games, but have done very well in covering the past 5 years. And in fact, look over to 2007 and you'll see that none of these teams are below .500. Many have continued that stellar ATS at home this year.

With that look at how teams have done at home, let's move along to teams that are great or terrible on the road.

Road Teams ATS

http://img37.picoodle.com/img/img37/6/10/17/f_RoadTeamsATm_d33c055.png

It should be to no one's suprise that NE has been at the top of the league in road covers. 69% though is a huge number above and beyond the 2nd, 3rd and 4th place clubs. What is equally suprising, after studying the poor home teams, is the number of teams "in the red" who were bad at home covers are "in the green" with great road covers. The list includes Car, NO, ATL and Cin. Even GB, which was good at winning home games but poor at covering, is "in the green". It should be no suprise that 2 of the powerhouses in the AFC join NE "in the green": Indy and SD.

Let's look at the poor teams on the road. Try considering the entire NFC West as teams that don't cover well on the road. Ari, STL, ST, and Sea's right there too at 44%. The Raiders have just been bad, they can't get it done at home or on the road. Then a couple teams who play in extreme environments: Chi and TB. Chi plays a lot of road games in domes, as does TB, so that could factor in.

Getting back to good teams to bet on, this next chart is the same as the road teams chart, but it is sorted by "SU-ATS". This will show us teams on the road who win a lot but don't cover, and likewise, those that lose a lot but do cover.

http://img28.picoodle.com/img/img28/6/10/17/f_Undervaluedm_24f354e.png

First, the teams that are at the top, showing they "win a lot but don't cover" is not very meaningfull. Most of these teams landed here simply because they won so many SU that even if they have just above a .500 ATS on the road, it's not as great as their SU win %. But at the top, you find perhaps the top 4 teams since 2002 in the NFL. From the AFC you have Indy, NE and Pit. And from the NFC: Philly.

Moving down to numbers we can use: teams in the green don't win at a high rate on the road, but do bring a game usually, and pull off a suprising % of covers than you may expect. Det only has won 16% of its road games, but covered 44% of them. Houston, Cleveland, Buffalo are 3 other relatively "poor" teams who have done better than average on the road. Same w/ Washington and Cincy.

So there you have it. A look at which teams really do have a home field advantage, and which do not. And a look at which teams have got the job done on the road for bettors, even if they didn't win SU. These are the type of charts I print and refer to each and every week as I see the lines spit out from Vegas, and hear the talking heads blabbing about "poor weak Cleveland heading into the menacing Black Hole", or Denver's Mile High Stadium, or the "12th man" in Seattle.

You can keep talking up the hype, ESPN, trying to generate ratings. I'll keep my mouth shut and keep on winning.