TheKingfish

A thank you to D-Town for his earlier-posted good wishes. I rarely get replies -- so much appreciate all those that come in. Adding one more pick:
1.5) Connecticut(+8.5)/Duke

Good luck,
TheKingfish

For the record; coming in with an update. Having an early-week hunch on these two regarding line movement -- I fortuitously waited until this morning to place:
1) Vanderbilt(-6)/Auburn
3) Louisville(-18)/California

No talent involved with that casual pause; just lucky. Also, via line movement, the algorithm has come to like UCLA/Nebraska. The Bruins would be slotted between Vandy & Clemson on the rank list. However, they are currently at +1, and the box is partial to them only if they get to >=2. So, please pencil me in for that if-come. Thank you.
Good luck,
TheKingfish

A lousy outcome here last Saturday (2-4-1, .333). Some close ones though! Does that count for anything? So, over ten weeks; three losers and an overall that is far less than stellar (68-63-1, .519). With the box able to examine them all, it sees these as worthy (all chalk this week):
1) Vanderbilt(-6.5)/Auburn
2) Clemson(-2.5)/FloridaSt
3) Louisville(-19.5)/California
4) NorthCarolina(-7.5)/Stanford
5) Akron(-10)/Mass             W
6) Alabama(-10)/LSU

Rank value. While it logged a loser in the top spot last week, the algorithm has gone 7-3 (.700) on the season.

We all have 51 on the board this week. Lots of opportunity.
Good luck,
TheKingfish

For the record.
Akron(-10)/Mass

Placed this morning @ -110, players are seeing considerable 'more value' in the Zips since then (-12.5). If it gets to -14, I will be pulling the lever on a middle gambit. My last try was 11/16/24, but I am forever-eager when the opportunity presents.....
Good luck,
TheKingfish

That is correct -- in the order the algorithm valued them.
Good luck,
TheKingfish

Purely in the name of algorithm output accuracy; a rank-change to convey:
1) California (+5)/Virginia
2) Tennessee(-2.5)/Oklahoma

This is a nuance of dealing with a rote mechanism -- like the history-based box. The algorithm actually ‘liked’ the Vols a bit more at -3. The Human Administrator deals with this on occasion. An example: where maybe a +8 dog is designated a best-bet at +7, but not at the higher number. Where, if in reverse, I’d need to wait on the larger number. If that sounds confusing, just please write it off to tech madness.....
Good luck,
TheKingfish

A small revision:
Tennessee(-2.5)/Oklahoma

I conveniently posted my full group on Wednesday because the Blue Raiders were going that night. However, I had not yet placed the Vols due to some vagaries observed in the odds. I got them at -105 this morning, but other-outlet odds suggest the number may yet flip back to -3 (???). One important element to all of this is recognizing optimum price/value points. But, you already knew that....
Good luck,
TheKingfish

A .500 outcome was had here last Saturday (9-9). Over nine weeks, just two were losers; though the record is far less compelling (66-59, .528). Evaluating each one for week #10, the box likes these:
1) Tennessee(-3)/Oklahoma
2) California (+5)/Virginia
3) MiddleTenn(+6)/JacksonvilleSt
4) Michigan(-21)/Purdue
5) Utah(-7)/Cincinnati
6) Texas(-3)/Vanderbilt
7) Stanford(+14)/Pittsburgh

The algorithm has shown some rank-value over the top eight, but has been gangbusters at the very top (7-2, .778). Statistically, the latter is a small sample size, so trust as you will.

We have 52 on the board this week, providing all of us tech cappers a mountain of opportunity.
Good luck,
TheKingfish

Adding yet another – which prompts a re-order for overall clarity.
1) WestKentucky(+3.5)/LouisTech        W
2) UtahState(+3)/NewMexico
3) ColoradoSt(+4.5)/Wyoming
4) WesternMich(+2.5)/MiamiOhio
5) Oklahoma(-4.5)/Mississippi
6) BowlingGreen(-7.5)/KentState
7) Memphis(+5)/SouthFlorida
8) IowaState(-2.5)/ BrighamYoung
9) GeorgiaSt (+6.5)/SoAlabama           L
10) Tulsa(+6.5)/Temple
11) Washington(-4.5)/Illinois
12) Arkansas(-2.5)/Auburn
13) LSU(+3)/TexasA&M
14) Vanderbilt(-2.5)/Missouri
15) VirginiaTech(-4.5)/California          W
16) Indiana(-24)/UCLA
17) MiamiFlorida(-30)/Stanford
18) WashingtonSt(-1)/Toledo

Good luck,
TheKingfish

For the record – adding two more.
1.5) ColoradoSt(+4.5)/Wyoming
9.5) Arkansas(-2.5)/Auburn

The algorithm also likes WesternMichigan, but only if they get to +3. The Broncos are currently at 1.5 -- and seemingly much-liked at that number.
Good luck,
TheKingfish

A winner was had here last Saturday (10-8, .556). And thus far, this slot has seen six winning weeks out of eight. Albeit, something less compelling in the overall (57-50, .533). Given the technical ability to assess them all, the turned-crank on the box yields these for week number nine:
1) WestKentucky(+3.5)/LouisTech
2) UtahState(+3)/NewMexico
3) Oklahoma(-4.5)/Mississippi
4) BowlingGreen(-7.5)/KentState
5) Memphis(+5)/SouthFlorida
6) IowaState(-2.5)/ BrighamYoung
7) GeorgiaSt (+6.5)/SoAlabama
8) Tulsa(+6.5)/Temple
9) Washington(-4.5)/Illinois
10) LSU(+3)/TexasA&M
11) Vanderbilt(-2.5)/Missouri
12) VirginiaTech(-4.5)/California
13) Indiana(-24)/UCLA
14) MiamiFlorida(-30)/Stanford
15) WashingtonSt(-1)/Toledo

So, with the season over half gone, can anything be said regarding systemic rank-value? Well, the top pick has shown some value (6-2, .750). And since the mentioned tech adjustment was made in week #6, the algorithm has brought a reasonable combination of success & volume to the top eight selections (16-8, .667).

However, do we have genuine-worth at the core? And, moreover, is any of that performance sustainable? I suppose the last six weeks will tell the tale. We have 53 on the board this week; certainly a robust amount of opportunity for one and all.
Good luck,
TheKingfish

Note: Posting a bit early this week due to the travel calendar. So, would appreciate a humane bump if I fall into oblivion (and someone feels the KF is deserving).

For the record – adding two more.
5.3) Clemson(-5.5)/SMU
5.6) SouthFlorida(-21)/FloridaAtlantic

Good luck,
TheKingfish

A winner here last Saturday (8-5, .615). In fact, the top eight went 6-2 (.750). So far, five winning weeks out of seven. Albeit, producing an overall of just .528 (47-42), which is barely above breakeven (.524). Assessing every game on the board, the box likes all of these:
1) CentralMich(+6.5)/BowlingGreen
2) SanJose(+4.5)/UtahSt
3) Connecticut(+2.5)/BostonCollege
4) Michigan(-5.5)/Washington
5) SamHouston(+3)/UTEP         L
6) Georgia(-6.5)/Mississippi
7) Iowa(-2.5)/PennState
8) Alabama(-8)/Tenn
9) Vanderbilt(-2.5)/LSU
10) NotreDame(-8)/USC
11) Rutgers(+17.5)/Oregon
12) Virginia(-17.5)/WashingtonSt
13) California(-10)/NorthCarolina
14) Duke(-2.5)/GeorgiaTech
15) Stanford(+18)/FloridaSt
16) UCLA(-2.5)/Maryland

The algorithm’s top two selections have gone 9-5 (.643).

This week’s edition of (maybe boring) tech talk is -- weekly line movement. As in, does directional-movement over the five or six preceding days forecast a winner? The logic there is – the ‘collective mood’ of players moving the line ($) has value. Many years-ago I encountered at least two published studies that concluded there was no-edge in doing that watch. However, there’s never any harm in a current data dive to see if anything recent might be lurking.

And of course, a quick peek at the database tells all (2013-24, 7583 games). In doing so, I disregarded the magnitude of the movement; early line versus final line. First off, movement was evenly divided between the Home and Away teams, with only 15% (1134) of games having no movement. When the Away team gained points, it had a Success Rate of .516. Conversely, when it lost points, it’s SR was .510. Thus, it must be reported.......no (lurking) movement-edge to be had.

Sliding laterally on that study though, you might be curious just how often the Away team was victorious in that 11-year base. That would be .511 (3816-3648-119), suggesting a tiny-bit more value in the road team.

We have 59 on the board; once again surpassing the weekly-opportunity of all 2025 weeks past.
Good luck,
TheKingfish

SamHouston(+3)/UTEP

Not at the top, but the algorithm has the Bearkats in the upper echelon this week. Notable, these two programs have combined for a real dearth of cashed tickets in 2025.....

Good luck,
TheKingfish

Adding yet another (the KSU Wildcats), and doing a coherent re-order of the list.
1) Colorado(+4.5)/IowaState
2) Wisconsin(+3.5)/Iowa
3) Arizona(+2)/BrighamYoung
4) KansasSt(+2)/TCU
5) SamHouston(+8.5)/JacksonvilleSt
6) TexasA&M(-7)/Florida
7) LSU(-8)/SouthCarolina
8) Missouri(+3.5)/Alabama
9) MichiganState(-7.5)/UCLA
10) Oregon(-7.5)/Indiana
11) USC(-2.5)/Michigan
12) OregonState(+2.5)/WakeForest
13) Washington(-10.5)/Rutgers

The algorithm also quietly likes both EasternMichigan & GeorgiaSt (in the 5.5 position), but please pencil them in for me only if each moves up to +3. Both are currently hanging at 2 to 2.5. Thank you.

Good luck,
TheKingfish

For the record – am adding another.
2.5) Arizona(+2)/BrighamYoung

Truth be told, I actually have three (3) more waiting in the wings. In common.......the box insists they all need a bit-more incentive (points).
Good luck,
TheKingfish

A mild winner here last Saturday (7-6, .538). Despite just two losing weeks out of six, the full-season record is nothing to write home about (39-37, .513). NG. Turning that crank on the box, and looking at each game, these float to the top:
1) Colorado(+4.5)/IowaState
2) Wisconsin(+3.5)/Iowa
3) SamHouston(+8.5)/JacksonvilleSt
4) TexasA&M(-7)/Florida
5) LSU(-8)/SouthCarolina
6) Missouri(+3.5)/Alabama
7) MichiganState(-7.5)/UCLA
8) Oregon(-7.5)/Indiana
9) USC(-2.5)/Michigan
10) OregonState(+2.5)/WakeForest
11) Washington(-10.5)/Rutgers

Through the first six weeks, the algorithm’s top two selections are performing (8-4, .667). Alas, a small sample size and maybe just that blind-pig rummaging about for his acorns.....

Hey, consistent with this slot on the forum, how about some more boring data -- to satisfy that internal-curiosity of knowing how the categories are faring in 2025? Well, over 292 FBS non-neutral site games, Home Favs are 93-89-7 (.511), and Home Dogs are 50-51-2 (.495). So, we’d all be challenged to find any strategic direction in those numbers. As we know, these percentages all go to .500 over time.

Another dollop of boring; though maybe ominous in nature. SpreadMargin (SM) is the amount a team covers by -- or fails to cover. Over the last eleven seasons (7583 games), the SM was 12.23 points. This season, SM is 11.51; a reduction of six percent. Within our current realm of understanding, and grappling-with, Artificial Intelligence, I leave every capper to worry (or not-worry) about that six (6) percent.

We have 56 on the board this week – the most weekly-opportunity thus far.
Good luck,
TheKingfish

Am adding yet another that was forgotten earlier – with a re-order in order.
1) SanDiegoSt(-5.5)/ColoradoSt
2) Maryland(+6.5)/Washington
3) SouthAlabama(+2.5)/Troy
4) Akron(+8.0)/CentralMich
5) UAB(+7.0)/Army
6) Florida(+7.5)/Texas
7) FloridaSt(+4.5)/ MiamiFlorida
8) Temple(+ 6.5)/UTSA
9) CentralFlorida(+4.5)/Kansas
10) NoIllinois(+5.5)/MiamiOhio
11) NewMexico(+2.5)/SanJoseSt
12) WestKentucky(+2.5)/ Delaware
13) Clemson(-14)/NorthCarolina

As scatterbrained as I seem to be this week, I can’t guarantee there won’t be more....
Good luck,
TheKingfish

For the record -- one more to add.
12) Clemson(-14)/NorthCarolina

Also, for the record; am still holding cash on the Friday night Lobos & Hilltoppers. Put me down for +3 on both…….if the number ever gets there. And, thank you to Mr. JJWoods for the support!
Good luck,
TheKingfish

A winner posted here last Saturday (8-7, .533), bringing the full season to an anemic 32-31 (.508) record. It seems I’m providing little value thus far. As ever, evaluating every game on the board (and this week eschewing the chalk), the box placed all of these on the ticker tape:
1) SanDiegoSt(-5.5)/ColoradoSt
2) Akron(+8.0)/CentralMich
3) UAB(+7.0)/Army
4) Florida(+7.5)/Texas
5) FloridaSt(+4.5)/ MiamiFlorida
6) Temple(+ 6.5)/UTSA
7) CentralFlorida(+4.5)/Kansas
8) NoIllinois (+5.5)/MiamiOhio
9) SouthAlabama(+2.5)/Troy
10) WestKentucky(+2.5)/ Delaware
11) NewMexico(+2.5)/SanJoseSt

Through five weeks, the top two selections have performed profitably (6-4, .600). The tweaked latter-portion of my 2024 season was also profitable -- possibly a reflection of the more-mature power ratings. That was hard to know though, given the small sample size. Nonetheless, the Human Administrator made an algorithm ‘adjustment’ this week; trying to coax some similar sunshine. Nine weeks left in the trenches.....

Hey, how about some boring tech-stuff serving as a shameless distraction? Middles. I attempted one last November, but hadn’t actually tried one since 2021. I have placed seven of them since 2018; hitting just once. That one had some exceptional payoff odds (36/1) so, by that math, I can wade-in about 29 more times before I reach the breakeven ($). Conventionally though, the payoff is more like 24/1, so a revised-future would be less lofty than that 29-attempt cushion.

My MIN gap-criteria for a middle is four (4) points. And of course, one needs to also be on the right side of the play; holding a team that’s grown more attractive at the earlier-placed line. Concluding with some geeky data-collection, it naturally rolls to ask how often that >=4 point movement happens (???). My database captures only the early & final lines, so I can’t account for what happens in between; likely presenting slightly more opportunity.

Anyway, here’s the cheap-thrill data payoff. During seasons 2023-4 (1469 games), there were 71 games with movement of four points or greater (4.8%). This year (242 games) has seen 11 such games (4.5%). That movement is proportionally weighted toward the away team gaining points; roughly twice as often. Bottom line – middles are tough to pull off. However, it’s a totally sweet-gambit for players who are both watchful & nimble. And, did I mention..…..lucky?

We have 50 games on the board this week -- an abundance of opportunity. Enjoy the ride.
Good luck,
TheKingfish