Bad Teams

[diondublin]

I have a lovely system for the NFL which has been producing great results this season.

However, since it is dependent (essentially like all successful analyses) upon determining which teams are under-rated, I need to know whether an market low-ratedness is either genuine (no bet) or due to bad luck/negative variation (bet).

To this end, I maintain a list of NFL teams who I think are, frankly, poor - and therefore I do not want to bet even if the system throws them up [Incidentally, I also maintain a list of 'unopposable' teams who I will not oppose even if the system recommends that, but right now there is no-one on it!]

Here is my list of bad teams (who I at the moment won't back at all)...comments please - is there anyone on this list who shouldn't be on it, or conversely anyone who is not on it who should be!

Cleveland
St Louis
Kansas City
Seattle
Oakland
Miami
Washington
Detroit
Cincinnatti

Remember these are teams who are not to be backed, even when receiving substantial points AND system-indicated...they are just too likely to let you down.

[Murdoch Sez]

Just my oppinion , but i think you should leave the jury out on Miami and Cincinnati before putting them on the 'bad list' .

Miami's 3 losses have all been fairly close and all against quality opponents and 2 of them were tough road situations , and they drilled Buffalo with a back up quarterback ... hard to call them bad at this point.

Cin. is 3-1 and the one loss was somewhat of a fluke , they may very well belong on the list later but right now that's a hard call. ... and their defense is playing good enough to make them appealing as a medium to large dog.

.. as for somebody not on the list .. keep your eyes on Arizona , if they dont find any offense they're not going to finish .500 , hard to believe they almost won the Super Bowl last year.

[diondublin]

Just my oppinion , but i think you should leave the jury out on Miami and Cincinnati before putting them on the 'bad list' .

Miami's 3 losses have all been fairly close and all against quality opponents and 2 of them were tough road situations , and they drilled Buffalo with a back up quarterback ... hard to call them bad at this point.

Cin. is 3-1 and the one loss was somewhat of a fluke , they may very well belong on the list later but right now that's a hard call. ... and their defense is playing good enough to make them appealing as a medium to large dog.

I just see these two as quintessentially lightweight; I don't see any way that they will find themselves in a situation where they represent value.

As lightweights, they will both be seriously vulnerable on the road, and at home they are highly unlikely to be good value.

I'd be more likely to put Buffalo on the bad list than take Miami off it - i.e. the reason for Miami looking good yesterday is more likely because Buffalo sucked rather than Miami are any good.

The great trick here is to respect your subjective analysis. By allowing yourself to be swayed by conventional factors away from your 'instincts' one risks throwing away one's advantage which is most likely to tell when it seems contrarian.

.. as for somebody not on the list .. keep your eyes on Arizona , if they dont find any offense they're not going to finish .500 , hard to believe they almost won the Super Bowl last year.

Of course Arizona only beat .500 by one last year! However, they won't go on my bad list because I have such respect for Kurt Warner. I certainly don't see much opportunity likely to oppose them, because that QB can hurt you!