Sagarin's numbers are out

Donate To GopherHole
F

Frales

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
112
Reaction score
16
Points
18
Gophers will get +3 at Iowa
If Wisc game was this weekend we'd get +6

Only favored to win the Northwestern match-up by 20 or so

Yikes!
 

Sagarin still have us as a dog against Iowa State or Michigan State too?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Seems fair. Beating PSU doesn't make those games easier...
 

Did Sagarin have us as home underdogs against Penn State?
 

RememberMurray said:
Did Sagarin have us as home underdogs against Penn State?
Click to expand...

14 point dogs IIRC. Based on what we know about Sagarin which isn’t much (ie what goes into his formula) it’s probably among the least least accurate “popular” football predictors because there simply aren’t enough data points. From what I’ve been able to glean he looks at an extended tree of who beat who by how much and probably massages the data in other ways. Does it look at broad based matchups - strengths and weaknesses of individual teams? Efficiencies and explosiveness data, defensive havoc factors? I doubt it.
 


Well, his formula is used by Vegas. Like I said earlier this morning, opening line at Iowa.... Gophers get 3
 

Frales said:
Well, his formula is used by Vegas. Like I said earlier this morning, opening line at Iowa.... Gophers get 3
Click to expand...

What does that term even mean “used by Vegas?” As if there is a person, company, or some other singleminded entity called “Vegas,” and this entity makes conscientious choices for its self. I hope we all realize this isn’t a picture of reality. If so why do we use this term?
 

Pompous Elitist said:
14 point dogs IIRC. Based on what we know about Sagarin which isn’t much (ie what goes into his formula) it’s probably among the least least accurate “popular” football predictors because there simply aren’t enough data points. From what I’ve been able to glean he looks at an extended tree of who beat who by how much and probably massages the data in other ways. Does it look at broad based matchups - strengths and weaknesses of individual teams? Efficiencies and explosiveness data, defensive havoc factors? I doubt it.
Click to expand...

It's pretty hard to take seriously when these seem so off in spots.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom