Criticism / Suggestions » ay, Michael A

About this time two years ago Cheap John Carlson Hat , I watched as on one of the fine betting sites there was a not-so-subtle back and forth of the validity of the so-called zigzag NBA playoff system.

The method simply says go with the team off of a loss. A critic came back after the first week or so gleaming over the fact the technique zagged and sagged more than it zigged. It lost money. Then as the playoffs went on, the proponent got the last laugh while the cynic wrote articles on other topics telling you he is smarter than everyone else.

Having been in the industry since the 1980s and having been a supporter of computer systems since prominent statistician Dr. Mike Orkin wrote his Pointspread Analyzer software, where does Center of the Handicapping Universe stand?

We agree with the theory, but less so the etched-in-stone considerations. First of all, let us give a quick refresher of the difference. A system can be measured objectively because the parameters are concrete. The zigzag is an example. Going with a double digit favorite off a single digit loss would be another hypothetical.

Of course there can be modest variances depending on when and where a database gathers lines, but over any statistically significant period it does not make a huge difference.

A theory is much like a system but does not have objective parameters. Our theory is the better the team is that the zigzag system favors and the bigger the margin the loss was, the more compelling it is to "go with the team off a loss."

True one could come up with a system to measure our upgrading of the methodology. An example would be going with a team with a winning percentage of .575 or higher off a loss of eight or more. The problem is we believe a mental sliding scale combining and most importantly, weighing the two factors works best. It allows for a mixing and matching of the two parameters.

For example, this year as in most years, it would not apply or would only be weighed slightly if we are talking about the bottom three seeds in each conference off a loss. There is a reason they are called "mismatches".

No. 4 versus five and the next three rounds of the playoffs (barring huge first round upsets), it is weighed much heavier. Remember we told you the mocker grew conspicuously quieter as the postseason went on. Now you know why.

It?s one of those theories that almost make too much sense. During the regular season of every sport we remind you of the Golden Rule to not merely go with the "team that needs it more" if said team is fighting just to make the playoffs.

We call attention to the fact if a team were proficient at winning "must win" games they would not be playing in must-win games late in the year.

Conversely, a one through five seed, especially as the playoffs go deeper, has shown the ability to rebound from adversity and respond when their backs are to the wall.

To the handicapper there is a titanic difference between desperate elite teams and equally desperate inferior teams playing in a crucial contest. It?s like the difference between seeing Jennifer Lopez and Rosie O?Donnell in a string bikini.

Okay, I don?t follow the analogy myself, but the exemplification of the distinction is infallible. From a handicapping standpoint one can?t measure the success of the zigzag if Phoenix coming off a loss is given the same weight (no pun intended Rosie) as Washington or Golden State following a setback.

Likewise, the margin of the loss is applicable for at least two obvious reasons. As we have said many times, nothing affects public perception more than the last game they have seen. It?s not uncommon for a blowout in the previous game to influence an opening line by 2-3 points and more times than not, the closing line by more.

Plus, no matter how motivated and well-coached a squad is, it defies human nature to approach a game with as much vengeance off a 22-point win as it is for the team off the huge setback.

So to friends and foes alike of zigzag, a .700 or better team off a loss is not even close to being the same as the below .520 teams zigging. Nor is mindset the same for a team that lost a game that went down to the wire the same as one that got humiliated on national television.
"

GLASGOW, Britain, Oct. 31 (Xinhua) -- Four gymnasts including China's Fan Yilin, shared the women's uneven bars title with equal points of 15.366 at the 2015 World Gymnastics Championships on Saturday.


The other three are Russia's Komova Viktoriia, her compatriot Spiridonova Daria, and American Kocian Madison.


Douglas Gabrielle, also from the United States, finished fifth with 15.133 points with China's Shang Chunsong sixth with 14.900.


Shang was followed by Britain's Harrold Ruby on 14.766 and Germany's Scheder Sophie on 14.600.

"

By Justice Lee Adoboe


ACCRA, March 22 (Xinhua) -- Low level of financing and the pollution of water bodies have been identified as the two major challenges facing sustainable water service delivery in both urban and rural Ghana.


The Ghana Water Company Ltd (GWCL) says it needs 2 billion U. S. dollars to build up enough treatment plants and rehabilitate old dilapidated plants to ensure increased water production in order to attain 100 percent coverage nationwide.


The company also has to deal with water pollution by illegal miners, sand winners, unorthodox farming methods and fecal pollution that keep cost of production at a high level.


In an exclusive interview with Xinhua on Friday, Michael Agyeman, chief manager in charge of public relations of the GWCL, said while the demand for the whole country was 249 million gallons of water per day (249 mgpd), what the company is able to produce stands at 150 mgpd.


Using 2009 as the base year, the Annu. Kirk Cousins Jersey Authentic Josh Rosen Jersey Josh Allen Womens Jersey J.J. Watt Womens Jersey James Conner Youth Jersey Derek Carr Youth Jersey Dak Prescott Kids Jersey Christian McCaffrey Kids Jersey Carson Wentz Eagles Jersey Calvin Ridley Falcons Jersey