ND has moved to a 6 point favorite

[FriedmanIP]

24-18-1

It's beautiful to see you reduced to bragging about wins from the 1800s
(literally)

I almost feel bad for how badly I've beaten and humiliated you here.....every single time you've been stupid enough to open your mouth.

Time for you to sit quietly in the corner and learn.

 

[NDAFArly]

My favorite, from CBS sports:

“Notre Dame claims 11 national titles but could add 10 more if it used Alabama’s math.”

ND could claim 21 National Titles if it claimed them the same way Alabama has.

In fact, that also is how Michigan claims 11. They are actually only recognized as having 6, if you read the article.

ND is the ONLY school in the country to only count consensus titles & lower their own number. Alabama & Michigan are among a handful of schools that recognize titles that others don’t.

Using humble ND math, ND has 11, using normal counts ND would have 12-13, using Michigan & Bama math ND would have 21.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...tional-titles-with-some-sketchy-counting/amp/

 

[Toby Smart]

In full disclosure, me and the boys from Hank & Casey's (your full service shot and beer joint) declared the Irish national champs back in '93. Are you telling me it's not being recognized?

 

[NDAFArly]

In full disclosure, me and the boys from Hank & Casey's (your full service shot and beer joint) declared the Irish national champs back in '93. Are you telling me it's not being recognized?

Alabama & Michigan would.

 

[McCallen ND NYC]

Yeah, it's okay to just admit you don't understand much about statistics or betting and ask to be educated....because this is a pretty bad look.

First --- There are statistical correlations between a spread and a % chance to win. These are made using large amounts of data and are widely available. You can see one example here.

Second --- All the Vegas lines started at 3/3.5 because they were set earlier and that's where betting had them coming into the week. Vegas almost always allows lines to continue to be moved by betting rather than moving the line themselves, unless something extraordinary happens (QB injury, etc.). So Vegas allowing bets to move these lines is meaningless

Third --- Its very common to see lines move when new information creates a difference between analytic/statistical projections of outcomes and the spread currently available on those same outcomes.

That is exactly what happened here, as the previous 3-point line only gave ND ~59% chance of victory, which was not inline with other models, such as ESPN's FPI

I haven't found any other publicly available statistical models that are updated daily/weekly

Friedman, I appreciate your insight into the analytical side of the game. I’m not really into betting games but I’m intrigued by the statistical models. If spreads typically converge to the models then I assume the models are highly accurate. Just curious, how accurate are the models and which one would you recommend following?

 

[FriedmanIP]

Friedman, I appreciate your insight into the analytical side of the game. I’m not really into betting games but I’m intrigued by the statistical models. If spreads typically converge to the models then I assume the models are highly accurate. Just curious, how accurate are the models and which one would you recommend following?

It’s a little bit of hard to define how accurate the models are in this discussion, because the models That are being looked out here are projecting a teams percent chance to win.

For example, if a model says that Notre Dame has a 70% chance to win and Notre Dame then loses the game… What is the model wrong or right?
There isn’t necessarily an answer to that question, unless a model actually predicted a 100% chance of victory for a specific team (which can never occur, mathematically)

For this type of analysis, the accuracy of a model typically have to be assessed by a valuating it’s methodology and data sets for any type of logical error, Baez, or oversight. This time of the valuation is inherently subjective, and therefore for a decent model reasonable minds may differ as to its accuracy.

Overall, I have found the ESPN app PI model to be surprisingly affective, both in its methodology and in the results that it outputs.

All that being said, there is no guarantee that a betting spread well actually converge to statistical models. However, when it does, the most reasonable inference off of that occurrence is rational action by bettors being driven either by the model itself or by the same underlying factors that cause the model to predict that outcome.

This is the simple reality that @hayaka and @ivan brunetti Either do not understand or intentionally ignoring.

 

[ivan brunetti]

I am using all time results. That includes all the data. Including this season.

And unlike you, people generally don't open their mouths to type.

"Models" are just computer programs. They are only as good as the data that is included. I believe S&P is considered to be the best at the moment. But betting momentum does not consistently follow computer projections. Sometimes yes and sometimes no.

 

[ivan brunetti]

Congrats on the first 8 wins

Thanks.

"ND wasn’t even a team, & they just scrimmaged for fun to learn the game. (Even twice one year & only a half one game).
Then Yost got so butt-hurt later on he had them changed to offcial wins. "

This is the kind of excuse making you are famous for FArly.

"Like one famous person in Michigan says, “95% of Michigan's success was before they allowed black people to play”

You are a famous person living in Michigan? George Jewett, 1890:

 

[FriedmanIP]

I am using all time results. That includes all the data. Including this season.

And unlike you, people generally don't open their mouths to type.

"Models" are just computer programs. They are only as good as the data that is included. I believe S&P is considered to be the best at the moment. But betting momentum does not consistently follow computer projections. Sometimes yes and sometimes no.

Wow.
The stupid in this post is challenging to describe.

1st - using outdated data doesn’t make your analysis or conclusion better...it destroys it.

2nd - You continue to kiss the boat on the point of the spread & model discussion. The point isn’t that they always converge, but rather what it means when they do.

3rd - ESPN’s FPI is much more respected for per game analaysis, from everything I’ve seen.

4th - Michigan’s defense so OVERRATED because it always fails against quality competition.

5th - Shea Patterson is even more OVERRATED because he sucks against every quality opponent he’s ever faced (literally 100%) of them. His game losing turnovers had to be least surprising thing since Harbaugh blowing yet another game against a rival.


Will you ever, ever be right about anything?

 

[8th Man]

The line has moved because A) people are more confident in ND (with Book!) and less confident in Stanford after last weekend. And because B) there are more ND fans. Pretty basic stuff...

 

[McCallen ND NYC]

It’s a little bit of hard to define how accurate the models are in this discussion, because the models That are being looked out here are projecting a teams percent chance to win.

For example, if a model says that Notre Dame has a 70% chance to win and Notre Dame then loses the game… What is the model wrong or right?
There isn’t necessarily an answer to that question, unless a model actually predicted a 100% chance of victory for a specific team (which can never occur, mathematically)

For this type of analysis, the accuracy of a model typically have to be assessed by a valuating it’s methodology and data sets for any type of logical error, Baez, or oversight. This time of the valuation is inherently subjective, and therefore for a decent model reasonable minds may differ as to its accuracy.

Overall, I have found the ESPN app PI model to be surprisingly affective, both in its methodology and in the results that it outputs.

All that being said, there is no guarantee that a betting spread well actually converge to statistical models. However, when it does, the most reasonable inference off of that occurrence is rational action by bettors being driven either by the model itself or by the same underlying factors that cause the model to predict that outcome.

This is the simple reality that @hayaka and @ivan brunetti Either do not understand or intentionally ignoring.

I can appreciate that explaining the accuracy of the model isn't a simple response. One way to validate the model would be to backtest its rank/order ability, ie do teams with 90% chance to win, outperform the 80% cohort, 70% cohort, etc...

I'll look into the FPI. ESPN must has a team of analysts validating the model constantly so I'll have to check the web on backtest results.

 

[michigaNDer#1]

Thanks.

Slink back into your hole, Schadenfreude. You do realize that not one of your opponents had won a game going into you game.

Western 0-2
SMU 0-3
Nebraska 0-3

After two stellar wins by Western over Delaware State and Birmingham Seaholm, your opponents are 2-10, not including ND. That's the typical September that gets you guys all lathered up and talking how great you are.

 

[ndnd]

True, but that's irrelevant to what I'm saying.

The fact that the Vegas line and statistical prediction models are now alligned in terms of ND's likelihood to win means that the bets which moved the line from 3.5 to 6 are far less likely to be "optimistic ND fans" and far more likely to be savvy gamblers taking advantage of what appeared to be a overly favorable line.

The point is, both Vegas and statistical models have ND as a 70% chance to win right now, so it doesn't seem logical that "opptimistic ND fans" are having much of an impact, or the Vegas line that they do impact should not be aligned with the models that they do not.

That is possible, but why would Vegas set an opening line so low, if they didn't think it was the right one? We've seen this before with ND-Stanford, that the line is set at X, and the lines moves to ND X-2 or X-3. I could be wrong, but I would wager (pardon the pun) that it is moving due to bets by Irish fans, who let's face it, outnumber "savvy gamblers" by a significant margin.

I like the Irish by a lot son6 points is a bargain

 

[notredamerises23]

No injuries on our side. In fact, the only change I'm aware of is that our starting LB Casey Toohill is back in the two-deep, which surprises me. I'll believe it when I see him on the field, as he was in a cast two weeks ago.

Anyway, the line move is most likely due to ND fans betting the Irish up. It happens most years against us.

No way a 6 point line is due to a bunch of Irish fans mooring it. That’s not realistic. See @FriedmanIP post.

 

[NDIRISH53]

Slink back into your hole, Schadenfreude. You do realize that not one of your opponents had won a game going into you game.

Western 0-2
SMU 0-3
Nebraska 0-3

After two stellar wins by Western over Delaware State and Birmingham Seaholm, your opponents are 2-10, not including ND. That's the typical September that gets you guys all lathered up and talking how great you are.

Hey! The hornets of Delaware state are a gritty bunch!