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.

Be Sure to Watch for the (Poison) Ivy League

Being a coach in the Ivy League has to be a hard job, you can only recruit a very select group of young men, who have virtually no interest in playing in the NBA and they went to college, ready for this, for an education. Betting the Ivy League can be a real education also. Playing only when school is out on Friday and Saturday nights, (expect for the occasional Penn and Princeton weekday game –their so special), they at least draw attention, especially when the NBA takes a break for All-Star weekend. Here is what to watch (or lookout) for in Ivy action tonight.

Handicapping the Ivy is extremely difficult unless you read up on all eight teams, as seven of the eight started league play with losing records, so you have to just focus on what they are doing now. Take the Big Green from Dartmouth; they were supposed to be a one man team behind senior forward Alex Barnett. Though Barnett is indispensable, coach Terry Dunn has played 10 players in games, when most experts weren’t sure if they had five useable players. Dartmouth is 4-2 and 5-1 in league play and 15-5 ATS after two or more consecutive Unders.

Bookmaker.com has Columbia as 8.5-point favorite over the Big Green (what’s that mascot look like, Gumby). The Lions have a ferocious defense which only allows 40.2 percent of shot attempts. They need to since the offense only makes 39.7 percent of heaves towards the rim. Columbia (3-3, 4-2 ATS in Ivy) lost at Princeton and is 9-2 ATS after one or more consecutive losses. The Lions appear to be oversized favorite until you notice the Big Green is like a small light green sponge on the road losing by over 18 points a game.

Princeton (4-0 SU & ATS) is in first place, after stammering through non-conference slate like Joaquin Phoenix on Letterman the other night. The Tigers have a seven game winning streak and have guarded like the Secret Service in giving up just 56.8 ppg. Princeton is making the trip up to Yale and is 5-0 ATS on the road this season.

This will be just Yale’s second league home game (3-3, 2-4 ATS) and they 4-1 on the year at John J. Lee Amphitheater (typical Ivy, can’t call it gym, have to call it an amphitheater). In tonight’s performance, err contest, the Bulldogs are going to have to do better than convert 28.5 percent from beyond the arc and make more than 65.7 percent from the charity stripe to win as two-point favorites. Yale has won last four matchups.

Had to go back and actually confirm Harvard (2-4, 0-6 ATS) beat Boston College after the Eagles had tumbled than No. 1 North Carolina. Based on how the Crimson has played since, the B.C. loss should go down as one of the great all-time flat performances ever. Can’t help but think Harvard will regret the day they hired Tommy Amaker as coach, since the term “good coach” and his last name are never used in the same sentence. Harvard is 2-11 ATS as a road underdog or pick under Amaker, but at least has Jeremy Lin who scores 20 ppg in Ivy play.

Cornell (5-1, 4-2 ATS) is the most powerful team in the league and has a record that worthy at 15-7. The Big Red saw their 19-game Ivy League winning streak end last weekend at Princeton 61-41 and they are better than a two touchdown favorite over Harvard to make it two wins in a row, starting another streak. Cornell has been dealing with injuries and has enough talent to work thru them. Big Red (not a gum reference) is 12-4 ATS after playing a road game.

One of my favorite sports betting movies is James Caan in “The Gambler”. In that movie, Caan is listening for basketball scores and hears one he doesn’t like and says, “Brown? Brown ain’t crap” or words very similar. Well, Caan is correct again, with the Bears in last place (0-6, 2-4 ATS), but they actually favored by a point over Penn (1-3 SU & ATS) at home, since they have also played like a, a, crap. With Brown (Chris Berman’s alma mater) 0-7 ATS after playing a game as a road underdog, not sure I’d support either team. The Quakers are 9-18 ATS as underdogs and don’t exactly exude the confidence infomercial maven Kevin Trudeau.

Be careful playing in the Ivy League patch, you don’t want to wake up scratching in the morning.

Red Wydley wrote this article.