Cfl wk 2

Cfl wk 2 A really exciting week shaping up as no game is lined at more than 2 points. I played one unit each on: tor +2 bc -1 mtl -1.5 ham +2 Best, Londo

Thanks and Good Luck

[QUOTE=TheDude;44369]Thanks and Good Luck[/QUOTE] x2 ........

We know these plays are going to be very sharp. But it is worth noting for us followers that Londo's numbers have a significant advantage especially this week compared to the current numbers. This isn't the NFL. The fact he has Toronto +2 is a big advantage over Toronto +1 which is also an advantage over PK. In the NFL the value of a play losing +2 or +1 may be overcome by a handicapping advantage but much less so in the CFL. Numbers such as +2 and +1 are probably not as valuable as +7 in the NFL but I'm going to make an honest guess that they might be as valuable as +10 in the NFL and that is both of them. Perhaps someone would be willing to share that value exactly. I used to use 8 cents for the number 2 and 6 cents for the number 1 when I would scope for value reviewing lines to gauge the difference between lines. For interest I think the number 3 I would use similar to the number 2 so for truly new CFL bettors the 3 in CFL is probably not as valuable as a 7 in the NFL. I raise this since Toronto has moved close to -1.5, Montreal is over -3, Hamilton is close to PK and BC is almost -3. That Toronto move from +2 to -1.5 I'm going to estimate might be worth a move of over 30 cents of value. I'd almost say it is worth as much as a move from -3 to perhaps as high as -4.5 in an NFL game. I'm as guilty of it as anyone since I want these plays too since I'm pretty sure they're sharp but one must really watch the value given up to follow the play. It is easy to know that when someone says -7 is a play that -7.5 is a huge difference but it is easy to forget in the CFL that a crossover favourite is a big difference. Those who are more familiar with the CFL and it scoring will understand why numbers like 2 and 1 are far more valuable than in the NFL. However, the value of Londo's handicapping is probably quite high that although there is huge value being given up on these numbers, the value of the handicapping is so strong it also has to be considered in how much value to give up. But all of these numbers played this week were off what I consider key numbers in the CFL.

all the games in the CFL this week are essentially "pk em" i doubt the actual pt spread will come into play, but as always i would get best numbers i could just in case

This is regarding key numbers in the CFL. The first problem is that sample sizes are *really* small. I mean, it's small for the NFL with 256 games a year, but the CFL has less than a third this number of games per year. I've got CFL data back to the 2001 season, and I've got push percentage charts for that margin. (I've also got push percentage numbers based on limited line ranges as well, but these are based on such small sample sizes I don't really have any faith in them.) Skeeter is basically right. The value of numbers is much flatter in the CFL than the NFL or even NCAA. The 3 is still a key number, but based on what numbers I do have, but much less so than in the NFL. The second most common margin of victory is 2. Third is 7, although, statistically, 1,2,4-8,10 are all basically in a tie for second place after the 3. There are several curiosities in the data I assume are due to random chance (I find it hard to imagine that an 18 point final margin will be more than twice as likely as a 14 going forward.) A move from -2 to +1.5 is worth closer to 20 cents. About the same percentage of games fall within a 10 point margin in the NFL as CFL, so, basically, you're just flattening out a similar looking distribution. It's easy to get carried away with this, though. Plus, as counter-intuitive as it is to realize that in the CFL the 5 and 2 aren't dead numbers, it's also entirely possible to overcompensate for this. In any case, I expect serious bettors to have ready access to this sort of information.

Thanks. 20 cents that is less than what I would have thought. I can't argue numbers if you've got the push percentages but my instincts tell me I would pay more than that. I've middled games between +1 and +2 and I didn't consider it to be a poor investment but no doubt I have to take your data that I am overcompensating. I'm going to drop it to 25 cents in my mind that difference and defer later that it should be 20 cents. The data is limited but I watch enough games that I know the numbers you're talking about are important and I'm going to substitute limited data for observation. I believe it has become more valuable as coaches in the CFL recognize that conceeding a safety touch within their 10 yard line is probably a better value play for them and then kicking away the ball then a punt deep in their zone. Although it was always a play you would see I felt, it just seems like I see it more. Even one of these plays puts the 2 in the play for the final score much more than you would see otherwise. Ironically, I find the single point is scored less but this is totally on observation. The reason being that the teams recognize that there is far more value in having a punt returner or kick returner take the ball out if he can for a shot at a return that goes for a big play infrequently but more often again than you would intuitively think. If he can get the ball past the 10 so that the safety touch doesn't come into play if they lose the ball on downs immediately it is a smarter play to return it since you avoid losing a point and you got a shot for an immediate big play. I also see teams kicking for out of bounds deep in another team's zone on punts more than I used to. Honestly, I thought there was a time teams wouldn't mind taking the single point vs. not kicking it accurately for out of bounds and risking a poor punt or a return. I really feel most teams now expect that punter to be able to do a pin job. And in the past I felt it was taking a single point isn't that bad. Again, it is just observation. I think already you are seeing CFL teams think much harder about even attempting a 45 YD Fg since they miss these so frequently and the return man is so much closer to the goal line to grab a kick combined with a coverage team set for a FG not a punt return and really you're licking your chops for a chance at a missed FG return to score a big play and change the momentum of the game. A long FG now just doesn't result in a single point the way it used to IMO. The previous thoughts were to concede the single point after the missed FG and take the field position. That is not the case now. If you don't have a return man who might break that, you're behind your competition. If you're 5'5" and can burn 40 and 100 yards Canada needs you. I'll add one more thought you'll see 4 pt games turn to 1 pt games that you won't see in the NFL because of the 3 down rule and the rules for the clock in the last 3 minutes. The last 3 minutes are an eternity and you can gain back possession of the ball and still have time to score again. Fez had a tweet on that regarding the BC/Montreal game and I actually agreed with him in that situation and time remaining but there are lots of times where the FG is still coming into play way later on games which might take a 4 to a 1 or 5 to a 2 late. You're not going to see that in the NFL and it isn't poor strategy. Thanks to npc I have just updated my internal computer to use 7 cents instead of 8 cents for the value of the 2 and I'm going to use 4 cents for the value of the number 1. So when I go from +2 to -1.5 I will get 23 cents and I'll throw in 1 cent for the chance of a tie which I think still exists in the CFL for a total of 24 cents down from my estimate of 33 cents. But I'm a little worried limited data can also mean you can underestimate the value.