Week 14 2020 picks
Show me a good loser and I’ll show you a loser.
- Kyle
My good and wise friend, Kyle, hilariously said that to me once. I thought about that last week after suffering not 1…not 2…but 3 “bad beats”. The Bengals, Texans, and Falcons all had the ball in the red zone, in the last 2 minutes of their respective games, with the backdoor so wide open it had a doorman holding it! All we needed was a score from each of them. Alas, all of them turned the ball over and failed to cover the spread. Arrrrgh!! In a week that had so many value-taking opportunities, and fewer weeks remaining to make up ground, it hurts more than a little to suffer those losses.
Loyal readers might remember a prior blog post I wrote called “Shallow Highs and Really Deep Lows”, where I commented on the nefarious effect loss aversion has on our decision-making (one reason we should all delete investing apps from our phones!). Loss aversion’s psychological evil cousin is what poker players and stock traders call “going on tilt”. Tilt is the state of being so emotionally frustrated by an adverse (and unexpected) outcome that you unravel mentally and your ability to make rational decisions is completely lost. If you’ve played pinball before you might recall tilt is what happens when you hit the side of the machine too many times trying to coerce the steel ball in your direction. Tilt ends the game. Investors on tilt turn into reckless gamblers. Athletes on tilt choke. If loss aversion is the tendency to be too conservative, going on tilt manifests in being overly aggressive, usually in a vain attempt to remedy the unlikely event (e.g., a bad beat).
Without the pain of losing, the desire to improve would diminish. However, allowing yourself to be tormented by your misfortune sets you down a dark path. Think like a tennis player—you don’t need to win every point to win the match. Likewise in picking ATS winners in the contest, 60% is sufficient to keep you competitive (you’d be top-25 in the Westgate’s SuperContest through Week 13!).
So what we’re going to do heading into Week 14 is to put the agony of those three games behind us and look ahead. Undoubtedly, we benefitted from balls bouncing our way earlier in the season so maybe we ought to be grateful for having the other shoe drop and still be in a competitive position.
Speaking of competitive positioning, check out the graph below illustrating our performance relative to the current leader:
Cumulative Weekly Contest Performance
Raw algorithm picks:
LAC +2.5 ★★
CIN +3.5 ★⇧
WSH +3 ★
CHI +1 ★
MIN +6.5 ★
Sharp/Contrarian Sides:
NE (@LAR) - Moderate - This is an interesting game. For starters, my algo matches the contest line exactly, Rams -5.5. The line opened Rams -6.5 but has shifted quite significantly towards the Patriots, closing at Rams -4.5 even though only tickets are split 50/50 and apparent money is coming in on the Rams. Very curious to me—while I am of the mindset that a public plurality can shift the market, it’s sharp money that drives most of the movement. So to see the money on the Rams and the line’s shifted towards the Pats is puzzling. The algo would like to back the Pats here too except this game has triggered my “travel” watch out signal. However, NBC Sports is reporting the Pats are staying on UCLA’s campus between last week’s game at the Chargers and the Rams on a short week. This is probably a stay away game for me as getting 5.5 isn’t enough on the road for a second-straight week on short rest.
ATL (@LAC) - Moderate - Honestly, who are the Falcons? I don’t have a good pulse on them at all. We’ve yet to earn a point in the contest backing the Falcons. Terrible ROI! This week seems sharps and squares alike haven’t a strong opinion either. The algo likes the Chargers catching 2.5 at home and off an embarrassing 45-0 shutout last week. The market opened this a pick ‘em but moved to Falcons -1 even though the public slightly prefers the Chargers. Is it telling that the contest line is Falcons -2.5? I don’t think so. Technically, the Falcons are the contrarian play getting fewer than 50% of the public tickets and seeing the market line move in their direction, but I don’t see a compelling narrative not to follow the algo. Chargers are the play.
WSH (@SF) - Moderate - I actually like Washington here mostly because it turns my gut. Ok, they “won” last week but that game was more the Steelers laying flat than it was Washington’s stellar play. Meanwhile, the 49ers didn’t inspire a lot of confidence in their play last week losing versus the Rams. Per raw algorithm, ‘Niners are slightly favored to win. My gut would’ve agreed more closely with the opening number 49ers -4.5 but the wiseguys have moved this to a FG even though the public is split here. I’m leaning Washington.
CIN (DAL) - Moderate - Per DVOA, the Bengals have one of the lowest performance variances in the league while the Cowboys have one of the highest. Whether this game is a “play” or not comes down to game theory. If you need to rely on high variance to make up ground, the Cowboys are your team. If you’re in a position of strength, you’re looking for low variance. We need to look at variance plus value. In this case, the algo thinks the ‘Boys will win straight up but gives them the lowest possible confidence. In addition, the Bengals have the Pythag advantage here and with the low variance expected, getting the FG hook in the contest is far too valuable.
MIN (@TB) - Moderate - Given how disinterested many bettors seem to be for other games on this week’s docket, I find it curious that the contest is only giving the Vikes 6.5 when the market line’s been steamed to a full TD and the public has weighed in. Since the contest has to post lines on Wednesdays, my thinking goes that they need to anticipate where the market will go. For games with minimal action that can be challenging, but for games where there is early interest, the contest line can be a precursor for where the market ends up. The Vikings are clearly the contrarian play here. In fact, since we’re talking variance, the Bucs have the highest variance of all NFL teams so far this season! The algo loves the Vikings and even though versus the market line 6.5 feels short, it comes down to perspective. The algo shows value up to Bucs -4.5 so the value getting 6.5 with the Vikings goes without saying and keeps the OT cover in play.
NYG (@ARI) - Weak - These two teams are trending in opposite directions. Maybe that’s why Uncle Colin said “everyone” is on the Giants this week. But I don’t quite know what he’s talking about. The public is backing the Cardinals at nearly a 2:1 clip and with the opening number sitting unchanged at Cardinals -2.5, I’m not surprised not to see the line move. It’s bad practice to lay points on the road, but only laying 1.5 versus a market line that’s trending towards 3 seems like solid value.
DEN (@CAR) - Strong - My best play of the week. The public is on the Panthers at a 3:1 clip! I haven’t seen those numbers since like week 4! And guess what…the line’s moved from Broncos +4 to +3, which is the prototypical sharp move. The algo has this at Broncos +2.5 so there’s value there too. We’ve backed the Broncos 4 times so far this season and they’ve cashed for us 3 times! Here’s to making it 4/5!
JAX (TEN) - Moderate - Public is on the Titans at a 2:1 clip. Line hasn’t budged from the 7.5 point opening number (favoring Titans). The variance play likes the Jags but the algo and the money are backing the Titans. In fact, the algo shows 2 full points of value versus the contest line of Titans -7.5.
MIA (KC) - Strong - Here again we see the sharp pattern setup: Line’s moved from Chiefs -7.5 to -7 even though a slight public majority favor the Chiefs (55%). This also backs the thinking that books don’t necessarily need or even want balanced money. The money seems heavily behind the Chiefs, while the line’s moved towards the Dolphins? Wouldn’t that invite more action on the Chiefs? Yes, and that’s why the book is keeping their Chiefs liability open, because they’ve probably gotten respected opinions taking the ‘Fins. For what it’s worth, the algo thinks 5.5 is the fair line for this game so I’ll be taking the 7 points at home here.
CHI (HOU) - Weak - Really the only thing going for the Bears here is the algo showing them with a 55% chance of winning. Given the line at Bears +1 and the market opening Bears EV moving towards Texans -1.5, the contrarian value slightly likes the Bears. The public has the opposite opinion backing the Texans at a 54% clip. Pythag shows advantage towards the Texans but not enough to throw the indicator. The guys over at Football Outsiders calculate these two teams as two of the lowest variance teams in the league so certainly not much value laying the points with the Texans on the road but given the low variance and small yet definitive value on the Bears we’ll suggest them if you can stomach it, or pass.
IND (@LV) - Moderate - Ok, here the algo doesn’t take a side either way but if we read the market tealeaves, it appears bettors are backing the Colts laying the points on the road. Unlike in the Chiefs-Dolphins matchup where the money was lopsided on the favorite and the line moving toward the ‘dog, here the money is backing the favorite and the line’s made a definitive move following the money. That gives me more confidence in the direction of movement but this one comes down to who will win the game. I show the Colts with a 63% chance of victory so I’d lean backing them.
PIT (BUF) - Weak - The Steelers are the contrarian play in this matchup, which is odd considering they’ve only lost 1 game this season (last week). The line opened Steelers -2.5 but has been bet convincingly in the Bills’ direction, now sitting Bills -2. The contest thinks this will move even further and my numbers actually thinks that’s fair (Bills -2.5 is the algo’s handicap). In this situation, I’ll chock up the early movement to the sharps cleaning up the bad number. Given the fair value per the handicap and no apparent value, it’s a pass on either side.
Unofficial Plays: