MGCOLBY's Picker Thread 2024
- Thread starter mgcolby
- Start date
mgcolby
Go Eat a satchel of Richards!
I tried to get this posted before kickoff but didn’t quite make it. I want to be clear up front that there are no changes to any predictions, lines, or picks from the weekly slate I posted on Tuesday. This post is strictly informational.
So why am I reposting Week 16 picks, something regulars here know I rarely do? I finally got around to testing my confidence rating system, and I wanted to share the results.
Below is the season record heading into Week 16, broken down by confidence level.
Based on those results, I’ve added a confidence rating column to the picker and introduced two new visual alerts. You’ll notice I haven’t highlighted Shamlock’s Pick of the Week yet. I usually prefer to wait closer to kickoff so I can factor in as much late information as possible. That said, I selected it earlier than usual this week so all three alerts would be visible. Shamlock’s Pick of the Week is marked with a green shamrock. It does not distinguish between ATS or totals in this view, it's shown in the weekly view I post.
The two new alerts are represented by pots of gold. One is a full pot of gold for five-star plays, and the other is a spilled pot of gold for one-star plays.
As you can see in the chart, five-star picks are hitting at 84.6 percent while accounting for just under 10 percent of all games since Week 5, specifically 9.3 percent. The pot of gold is simply a quick, quirky visual to flag those high-confidence spots. Digging a little deeper, the model is 5-0 when both the model and Vegas are within one to two points of each other and agree on the favorite. It is 6-2-2 when the predictions still fall within that one to two point range but disagree on who the favorite is.
On the other end of the spectrum are the one-star ratings, which I’m labeling the fade zone. The spilled pot of gold signals games that are worth considering as fades. As part of my personal approach, I try to be as honest and transparent as possible without giving away the recipe. If the data suggests fading the picker in certain spots, it only makes sense to acknowledge that. If I were to reclassify these one-star picks as fades, it would add five wins to the ATS season total, pushing it to 61 percent on the year. That’s nothing to scoff at.
So, welcome to the new fade zone picks.
I will note that I have not added a totals confidence. One not sure its 48% win rate warrants one and honestly I haven't narrowed down a pattern that structurally works i.e. more stars equals higher win percentage.
So why am I reposting Week 16 picks, something regulars here know I rarely do? I finally got around to testing my confidence rating system, and I wanted to share the results.
Below is the season record heading into Week 16, broken down by confidence level.
Based on those results, I’ve added a confidence rating column to the picker and introduced two new visual alerts. You’ll notice I haven’t highlighted Shamlock’s Pick of the Week yet. I usually prefer to wait closer to kickoff so I can factor in as much late information as possible. That said, I selected it earlier than usual this week so all three alerts would be visible. Shamlock’s Pick of the Week is marked with a green shamrock. It does not distinguish between ATS or totals in this view, it's shown in the weekly view I post.
The two new alerts are represented by pots of gold. One is a full pot of gold for five-star plays, and the other is a spilled pot of gold for one-star plays.
As you can see in the chart, five-star picks are hitting at 84.6 percent while accounting for just under 10 percent of all games since Week 5, specifically 9.3 percent. The pot of gold is simply a quick, quirky visual to flag those high-confidence spots. Digging a little deeper, the model is 5-0 when both the model and Vegas are within one to two points of each other and agree on the favorite. It is 6-2-2 when the predictions still fall within that one to two point range but disagree on who the favorite is.
On the other end of the spectrum are the one-star ratings, which I’m labeling the fade zone. The spilled pot of gold signals games that are worth considering as fades. As part of my personal approach, I try to be as honest and transparent as possible without giving away the recipe. If the data suggests fading the picker in certain spots, it only makes sense to acknowledge that. If I were to reclassify these one-star picks as fades, it would add five wins to the ATS season total, pushing it to 61 percent on the year. That’s nothing to scoff at.
So, welcome to the new fade zone picks.
I will note that I have not added a totals confidence. One not sure its 48% win rate warrants one and honestly I haven't narrowed down a pattern that structurally works i.e. more stars equals higher win percentage.
mgcolby
Go Eat a satchel of Richards!
Season Record & Week 16 Results
The picker having a two week slide here ATS, ironically as the totals are starting to come around. Also, a shit week to have its first Shamlock's gold loss when it agrees with Vegas (Jets game), the same week I introduce it. Seems par for the course. Still in the green for the season and overall having a good year ATS. EPR is rock steady, I'll have a comment on that later in the thread.
The picker having a two week slide here ATS, ironically as the totals are starting to come around. Also, a shit week to have its first Shamlock's gold loss when it agrees with Vegas (Jets game), the same week I introduce it. Seems par for the course. Still in the green for the season and overall having a good year ATS. EPR is rock steady, I'll have a comment on that later in the thread.
mgcolby
Go Eat a satchel of Richards!
I'm aware and in awe of Miami as you are or will be. I looked at and two things stand out. As you know its based on the last four games, well Miami still has two good games remaining in that window. I expect them to drop significantly with an asterisk next week because the best game in that window will drop off next week. The other part of the scenario, Miami is statistically doing well in the two highest weighted categories of the formula. So yes, I fully expect them to account for an EPR loss this week and they are a bit of statistical/situational anomaly.
