Making Sense of Numbers in Revenge Games

With less then two weeks remaining in the regular reason for college basketball, nearly every game has a revenge twist to it. Some of the bigger conferences will not have every game playing into pay back contests, with the unruly nature of trying to play most every team once, with leagues of more than 12 universities. In fact, the Mid-American Conference to date has not had a single return match this season.

In looking for an edge in gambling on college basketball, trying to comprehend what certain numbers mean from the oddsmakers is important. For example, if two teams in the same conference are evenly matched, the standard deviation should have the home team favored by four to five points, depending on the league and what a typical home court advantage would be. This would mean any normal return game should have a swing of eight to 10 points. When this doesn’t occur, what does this mean?

If a team was favored by 10 points playing at home and is now favored by eight on the road (instead of about two), how should this information be interpreted? Was the favorite undervalued to start with or has the other team gotten worse and needs more points from those setting the line to make a more even contest from wagering point of view?

For this and other answers, went thru every conference that keeps track of point spreads and limited all revenge situations to in-conference only. (Random tournaments and scheduled games did pop up) Stayed with the standard deviation of 8-10 points, also added revenge games where the spread was 7.5 or less or 10.5 or greater.

The specific question was -how do teams perform in following meeting after having beaten their opponent, be it home or away, against the spread? Ended up studying the results of 21 conferences and this is what was found thru Feb. 23.

Starting with the normal turnaround numbers of 8-10 points, the first time winner was not very successful in posting 91-104 ATS record, good for 46.6 percent mark. This is not entirely surprising given the fact the numbers fell within conventional parameters. If the two schools are somewhat comparable, then it would stand to reason the more motivated previous loser would play better. Certain conference contributed more to the losing than others as you can see.

Big 12 1-6 ATS
Horizon 3-7 ATS
Ivy 1-5 ATS
Sun Belt 4-8 ATS
WAC 2-5 ATS
West Coast 1-4-1 ATS

Each of the other two categories essentially generated the same meanings, depending on how you interpret the numbers; however the volume of games was dramatically different.

The spread differential of 7.5 or less points yielded 189 games almost as many as what was perceived as average point spread differences. (195) In this case, the results again favored the team in revenge, even to a greater degree. The revenge-minded club was 104-85 ATS, 55 percent. Why this number could be higher, is the results of the initial contest might not have accurately reflected the strengths or weakness of the two teams and enough has changed since prior encounter to limit the amount of movement in the spread.

Here we find sharp figures pointing pronounced results in particular conferences, with teams looking a for season split very profitable.

Big Ten 7-3 ATS
Big West 8-1 ATS
Colonial 6-1 ATS

Nevertheless, the numbers are balanced out is some method and other leagues saw the previous winning team covering the spread in next contest.

Ohio Valley 11-7-1 ATS
Pac-10 8-5 ATS
WAC 2-0 ATS

Spread differentials that were greater than 10 points were less than half, with a total of 89 recognized plays. The results were remarkably similar to the other groups, with the revenger 48-41 ATS, 54 percent.

In this part of the study, two conferences stood out for different reasons. In the Colonial, the winning team looking for a cover was 0-4 ATS, while the same squad in the Pac-10 was an even better going the other way at 6-0 ATS.

For the rest of the regular season, look to certain conferences which have had a proclivity to revenge situations. Here are the best and worst records against the linemaker for teams trying to sweep league rivals and cover the number.

Colonial 9-22 ATS
Horizon 13-20 ATS
Ivy 3-8-1 ATS
MAAC 13-21-1 ATS
WAC 9-14 ATS
West Coast 6-12-1 ATS

Pac-10 19-7-1 ATS
Big Sky 16-10 ATS

Keep these numbers handy over the next several days and remember, revenge is best served with a purpose.