AgainstTheNorm said:
Greg Shaker said:
I have questions ATN. Do you use Trends a lot? What makes a Trend viable in your opinion? What makes a trend worthless? Or do all trends have value? Thx.
That's a fair question. I don't really consider the fact certain pitchers do certain things in certain situations a trend. I think it means they perform a certain way in different roles. The Freeland 1st 5 under trend is a thing because he is an unknown quantity to most bettors, so there is value in the under. When he pitches at home the number is always high and he has one of the lowest ERAs in Coors Field history for a pitchers with as many innings as he has logged there. It doesn't take connected brain cells to see the most obvious trend for a pitcher who excels in his own park would be 1st 5 innings under. In the case of the Brewers under trend as decent sized dogs, I don't think that is flukey either. They have VERY under-rated starting pitching, and in general when 2 good teams meet the under is a solid bet because good teams have good pitchers. If the Brewers are a good sized dog they are playing another good team, so that follows. I use common sense when deciding if a trend makes sense or if it is random noise.
Nice thoughts ATN. It's obvious you have a good idea what you are doing. Trends make sense when they make sense and when they have not been prostituted by the books. As always all trends have less value when they become publicized too much...It's still all about line value so recognizing the best trends/angles and acting accordingly. Much respect to your method..