Turnovers in NFL Handicapping

The teams + in TOs were only 9-2 this week. YTD: 59-6. However, no luck in predicting which team would be + in TOs. Believe it or not, I think Oakland is the only team to cover being -2 or more in TOs this year!

[QUOTE=Old School;6420]The teams + in TOs were only 9-2 this week. YTD: 59-6. However, no luck in predicting which team would be + in TOs. Believe it or not, I think Oakland is the only team to cover being -2 or more in TOs this year![/QUOTE] 59-6 ... Wow!

[QUOTE=Old School;6420]The teams + in TOs were only 9-2 this week. YTD: 59-6. However, no luck in predicting which team would be + in TOs. Believe it or not, I think Oakland is the only team to cover being -2 or more in TOs this year![/QUOTE] This is nothing new. Every year this number hovers between 80% and 90% depending on the number of net turnovers (+1 to +3 or more). Trying to figure out who will win that battle is more complicated and when you know the negative team (in the "right" situation) actually covers at a fairly decent clip, it only complicates this even more. My turnover stuff, which kicked in week five, went 2-1 week five and 1-2 last week and is now 3-3 this year. More than anything it keeps me from playing against bad teams. Last week it played Tennessee, Detroit and Buffalo. It helps to keep me from playing against these teams.

From Game 4 thru 14, play on any team whose relative turnover margin - relative to their opponent, that is - is worse than -0.6 per game and up to and including -1.85 per game. From 2002 thru last weekend I have this at: 290-303 ATS, -0.45 pts/game average cover margin. Pre-2002, it was the case that going past the -1.85 limit got you nothing. Its way too small a sample size, but maybe this means something. Since 2002, these "monster" turnover teams are 82-75 ATS, +0.92 pts/game I don't see how the turnover stuff can work in today's game, unless you're datamining. I tested a myriad of tighteners over the years - out of sample - and nothing.

[QUOTE=Tiresias;6514]From Game 4 thru 14, play on any team whose relative turnover margin - relative to their opponent, that is - is worse than -0.6 per game and up to and including -1.85 per game. From 2002 thru last weekend I have this at: 290-303 ATS, -0.45 pts/game average cover margin. Pre-2002, it was the case that going past the -1.85 limit got you nothing. Its way too small a sample size, but maybe this means something. Since 2002, these "monster" turnover teams are 82-75 ATS, +0.92 pts/game I don't see how the turnover stuff can work in today's game, unless you're datamining. I tested a myriad of tighteners over the years - out of sample - and nothing.[/QUOTE] There are other parameters to this as well. Don't consider it datamining. Again, it's one tool of about 100+ systems I use. It helps to keep me off going against bad teams more than anything.

But has your stuff held up out of sample? I've been tracking turnover stuff since '97. Maybe '96; been a long time.

[QUOTE=Tiresias;6557]But has your stuff held up out of sample? I've been tracking turnover stuff since '97. Maybe '96; been a long time.[/QUOTE] Yes, it has held up. I did adjust it a few years ago because, although it held up overall, there was too much volatility associated with it when it had a losing year. I adjusted it, which reduced the overall plays, but also reduced the volatility.

Tiresias... [QUOTE=Tiresias;6557]But has your stuff held up out of sample? I've been tracking turnover stuff since '97. Maybe '96; been a long time.[/QUOTE] I don't think I'm letting any cats out of the bag by noting that Sixth Sense is Scott Kellen, a professional handicapper whose documented record over many years is among the best out there. Scott's database is extraordinary, perhaps second to none, and his integrity as good as it gets. Not dispositive on what he says here, of course, but a good indicator that he knows what he's talking about.

[QUOTE=gaslamp;6579]I don't think I'm letting any cats out of the bag by noting that Sixth Sense is Scott Kellen, a professional handicapper whose documented record over many years is among the best out there. Scott's database is extraordinary, perhaps second to none, and his integrity as good as it gets. Not dispositive on what he says here, of course, but a good indicator that he knows what he's talking about.[/QUOTE] What is his service called? I would LOVE to use his database!

[QUOTE=gaslamp;6579]I don't think I'm letting any cats out of the bag by noting that Sixth Sense is Scott Kellen, a professional handicapper whose documented record over many years is among the best out there. Scott's database is extraordinary, perhaps second to none, and his integrity as good as it gets. Not dispositive on what he says here, of course, but a good indicator that he knows what he's talking about.[/QUOTE] I've heard good things about Scott Kellen too.