USC Game Question...Point Spread vs FPI
- Thread starter ryoder1
- Start date
People think we will win yet the computer picks USC a little more than half the time. Seems like you would want to take USC and the points.
It's computers versus humans.
One (FPI) is a sophisticated computer readout. The other (Vegas odds) is the take by human minds and eyes.
And here's an interesting fact that may blow your mind: both have been accurate in predicting game winners about 75% of the time over the years.
With regard to Penn State-USC, however, one will be wrong on Saturday.
The FPI ranks USC #13 in the country, giving them a lot more respect than the pollsters, but still making this game a virtually 50-50 proposition.
Vegas gives a slight edge to us.
I think it's going to be a challenging game on a number of levels, but in the end, I go with the Vegas humans over the ESPN computers. Don't know if we'll cover the Vegas spread but I think we'll win the game. Hope I'm right.
Vegas numbers mean nothing about who will win. They set the number to get bets on both sides evenly. If one side bets too much, they move the line to entice more bets for the other side.
FPI is data driven. I would say that home field is playing a key role. Neutral, we are probably 51-55% favorite. Home, I'd say 56-63%.
Keep in mind, USC was a 74% favorite in the FPI to beat Minnesota. It's only a predictor. It's not the end all be all.
FPI is data driven. I would say that home field is playing a key role. Neutral, we are probably 51-55% favorite. Home, I'd say 56-63%.
Keep in mind, USC was a 74% favorite in the FPI to beat Minnesota. It's only a predictor. It's not the end all be all.
The computer didn’t take into account the welcome to the Conference ref treatment for USC.
How Do Bookmakers Generate Sports Odds?
Ever been curious how the spread is determined, or how the moneyline comes into being? Read on to learn more about how odds and lines are made!
As I see it, the initial Vegas line is an assessment of the difference between two teams, taking sundry factors into account. And it's generally a pretty good take.
I mean, to me it seems more complicated than the bookies saying, OK, where will we set the line to attract equal action between two teams. Rather, it starts with an assessment of a reasonable point differential between the two teams, based on all factors, so that bettors see it that way and make their choices accordingly.
If the initial line is reasonable and plausible, the rest will take care of itself for the bookies. The more accurate the initial assessment is, the more likely it will attract roughly equal action on both teams from the get-go.
Generally, the line doesn't move significantly. Maybe a point or two. There are exceptions of course, and they happen every week. All in all, however, the general stability of the initial line tells you not how clever the bookies are in enticing equal money on each team but rather how accurately they've assessed the contest to start so that money will flow in equally on both teams. Accuracy first. Cleverness second.
The initial line is usually pretty straight-on. Penn State, for example, opened at 4.5...moved to 5.5...and is now back in the range of 4.5-5, depending on the book. This suggests the bookies got it right to begin with, though that doesn't mean that either Penn State or USC couldn't end up coasting to an easy beat of that line. Happens all the time.
As I said above, over time the FPI winner predictions are roughly on par with those of Vegas. But the FPI doesn't predict victory margins...only winners. That's easier to do than nailing margins of victory.
I'm generally not a big fan of computer wizardry when it comes to predicting football games...and definitely not when it comes to predicting margins of victory. That said, I do think ESPN's FPI algorithms are comparatively good for the former purpose...comparatively as in compared to other computer programs.
Oh well, this is just my amateur blather on the issue...for what it's worth.
I mean, to me it seems more complicated than the bookies saying, OK, where will we set the line to attract equal action between two teams. Rather, it starts with an assessment of a reasonable point differential between the two teams, based on all factors, so that bettors see it that way and make their choices accordingly.
If the initial line is reasonable and plausible, the rest will take care of itself for the bookies. The more accurate the initial assessment is, the more likely it will attract roughly equal action on both teams from the get-go.
Generally, the line doesn't move significantly. Maybe a point or two. There are exceptions of course, and they happen every week. All in all, however, the general stability of the initial line tells you not how clever the bookies are in enticing equal money on each team but rather how accurately they've assessed the contest to start so that money will flow in equally on both teams. Accuracy first. Cleverness second.
The initial line is usually pretty straight-on. Penn State, for example, opened at 4.5...moved to 5.5...and is now back in the range of 4.5-5, depending on the book. This suggests the bookies got it right to begin with, though that doesn't mean that either Penn State or USC couldn't end up coasting to an easy beat of that line. Happens all the time.
As I said above, over time the FPI winner predictions are roughly on par with those of Vegas. But the FPI doesn't predict victory margins...only winners. That's easier to do than nailing margins of victory.
I'm generally not a big fan of computer wizardry when it comes to predicting football games...and definitely not when it comes to predicting margins of victory. That said, I do think ESPN's FPI algorithms are comparatively good for the former purpose...comparatively as in compared to other computer programs.
Oh well, this is just my amateur blather on the issue...for what it's worth.
Both could be wrong. We could win by 3. I would think the point spread has some analytics attached to it. Saying it means nothing about who will win is inaccurate. Not just some bookies cooking meaningless stuff up. Usually it is pretty accurate .
