Over or under: Injuries, and their effect on season win totals

[Beyond the Bets]

Read this and give me your thoughts. I'm curious to hear what you guys think, what your approach is — whether you bet over/under win totals or not — and how injuries factor into your handicapping, if at all.

[ChiefZilla]

I tend to agree, although my past wagering history doesn't really indicate that. The largest bets on season win totals I made this year were both on overs: Boise State o10.5 and Oklahoma o10, and injuries at the QB position would certainly derail those.

[Skating Tripods]

I've got a handful of college ones. There were some NFL ones that I looked at, but I just don't play enough NFL.

With college, it's fairly clear. Graduation losses, schedule, the usual things. All but one of my plays were on unders because it seemed like the line was the high end. My only over was South Florida o8.

My approach to the totals was to get numbers I felt would either push or come through.

Worse comes to worse, half numbers are usually going to give you a hedge opportunity in the last two weeks.

[RyanParrill]

Quote:What you guys think, what your approach is — whether you bet over/under win totals or not — and how injuries factor into your handicapping, if at all.

It'd be an easy approach to take. I'm not sure it's one you bet with, but more of a safety net. "I'll take the under and that way, even if there's an injury, I'm on the right side." With that being said, I'm not sure that's a reason to stay away from an over. With a player like Peyton Manning (Any top QB in CFB or NFL) the value on the over is going to be scarce anyway, right? That's the sexy bet to make

If I'm looking for an over, injuries is something I consider. When the Lions win total was being tossed around before the season, the biggest question was could Stafford stay healthy. Most who bet the over took solace in the fact that even if he missed some games, they had enough support around to overcome that. Which is a huge factor when betting an over, how much diversity can the team overcome.

It's impossible to avoid injuries. Are the Chiefs going to miss their over/under because of season ending injuries? BTB will argue yes, and he could be right. What I see from that team, even injuries wouldn't save them. Could the same be said for the Colts? Tough to say. There are going to be things that cannot be avoided. If you're on the wrong side of a season win total because of an injury that was too much to overcome, no matter the circumstance, you'll have great success in the long-run. If you're on the wrong side because an injury helped de-rail an already dysfunctional train (Pioli/Haley) then there's room for learning .

I would assume the some of the same principles that @SoMoneySports uses for betting the unders in baseball could be applied to season win totals. It's definitely an interesting discussion.

[kreatture]

(09-21-2011 08:38 PM)RyanParrill Wrote:  [quote]
I would assume the some of the same principles that @SoMoneySports uses for betting the unders in baseball could be applied to season win totals. It's definitely an interesting discussion.

His MLB Unders are based on umpires and pitching styles which match up with how that particular ump calls his games. Situational spots like getaway games, as well. He's very reliable with them.. so much so I've actually bet many of his plays blind, and I don't tail anyone's plays blind.

I'm looking forward to seeing what he brings to the table with other sports this Fall..

[Beyond the Bets]

The difference between betting an 'over' on a win total and an 'under' on a win total is that if I'm betting an under, I can look at a team and say, "OK, this is what I think their best-case scenario is even if EVERYTHING goes right." That is, even if Team X's QB plays out of his mind, even if a few breaks go their way, even if the stars align, I STILL don't think they can reach Y number of wins.

So, in that situation, an injury, some off-field drama, a few bad breaks, etc., can be the extra 'oomph' I need to turn a likely under bet into a very comfortable one.

Oppositely, when betting an 'over,' it is impossible to project what a team's worst-case scenario could be. I didn't know anything of the Pioli-Haley rift until after the season began. I also didn't anticipate that the Chiefs would lose their best offensive and defensive players, either. Can you handicap injuries and try to anticipate them? Of course. But even if you attempt to do that, it's still a reach — and even then, you're probably looking at an under rather than an over.

Again (and yes, I know I've essentially repeated myself on this subject), I'm much more comfortable projecting an under. For instance, I said prior to the season that the Arizona Wildcats had "zero chance" of exceeding their win total of 6.5 games. In my mind, that team could catch every single break and play out of this world and still fall short of seven wins.

From a projection standpoint, you have fewer unintended (or unexpected) variables that can screw up your bet if you're on an under rather than an over.

[RyanParrill]

Quote:I would assume the some of the same principles that @SoMoneySports uses for betting the unders in baseball could be applied to season win totals. It's definitely an interesting discussion.

His MLB Unders are based on umpires and pitching styles which match up with how that particular ump calls his games. Situational spots like getaway games, as well. He's very reliable with them.. so much so I've actually bet many of his plays blind, and I don't tail anyone's plays blind.

I'm looking forward to seeing what he brings to the table with other sports this Fall..
[/quote]

Do you believe he bets the unders and not the overs for those reasons? He's great, as you've said. And obviously he uses the situation that day (umps, park, get-away, etc.) to enforce a play; But I believe there's a foundation of principles to bet the under. It's not a sexy play so there's some value there. Most lines will move towards an over naturally, so he's able to capitalize on those on game-day. And I'm sure there's plenty of others that he has that I couldn't grasp.

Also, as you may feel, he may not bet the under for any of the reasons I believe. Just a similarity I thought existed.

---

(09-21-2011 09:34 PM)Beyond the Bets Wrote:  The difference between betting an 'over' on a win total and an 'under' on a win total is that if I'm betting an under, I can look at a team and say, "OK, this is what I think their best-case scenario is even if EVERYTHING goes right." That is, even if Team X's QB plays out of his mind, even if a few breaks go their way, even if the stars align, I STILL don't think they can reach Y number of wins.

So, in that situation, an injury, some off-field drama, a few bad breaks, etc., can be the extra 'oomph' I need to turn a likely under bet into a very comfortable one.

Oppositely, when betting an 'over,' it is impossible to project what a team's worst-case scenario could be. I didn't know anything of the Pioli-Haley rift until after the season began. I also didn't anticipate that the Chiefs would lose their best offensive and defensive players, either. Can you handicap injuries and try to anticipate them? Of course. But even if you attempt to do that, it's still a reach — and even then, you're probably looking at an under rather than an over.

Again (and yes, I know I've essentially repeated myself on this subject), I'm much more comfortable projecting an under. For instance, I said prior to the season that the Arizona Wildcats had "zero chance" of exceeding their win total of 6.5 games. In my mind, that team could catch every single break and play out of this world and still fall short of seven wins.

From a projection standpoint, you have fewer unintended (or unexpected) variables that can screw up your bet if you're on an under rather than an over.

:exclamation: