[DC 86]

I don't have the ATS stats, but it sure seems Stanford has consistently outperformed expectations against Under Stanford Control (again), probably more than any other program it faces.  And this has happened with a lot of turnover on both sides.  Sure Under Stanford Control (again) could cover a 7pt spread or more, but historical results suggest it is highly unlikely.

The betting public seems to agree with me, because the line is now down to -6.5 from a high of 7.

Stanford has consistently outperformed expectations against almost every opponent during the Shaw era, although the market may be adjusting (Stanford was 7-6 ATS last year).

Under Shaw, Stanford's best ATS records are against UCLA (6-1) and Cal (5-1).

My argument is not about Stanford's likelihood of covering the spread or winning the game, it is about the relevance of historical results (especially going back 26 years), which absolutely influences public betting, but in a negative fashion. Data mining reveals that following historical trends is a losing proposition ATS and that being a contrarian in this area is more profitable.

[DC 86]

I don't have the ATS stats, but it sure seems Stanford has consistently outperformed expectations against Under Stanford Control (again), probably more than any other program it faces.  And this has happened with a lot of turnover on both sides.  Sure Under Stanford Control (again) could cover a 7pt spread or more, but historical results suggest it is highly unlikely.

The betting public seems to agree with me, because the line is now down to -6.5 from a high of 7.

Stanford has consistently outperformed expectations against almost every opponent during the Shaw era, although the market may be adjusting (Stanford was 7-6 ATS last year).

Under Shaw, Stanford's best ATS records are against UCLA (6-1) and Cal (5-1).

My argument is not about Stanford's likelihood of covering the spread or winning the game, it is about the relevance of historical results (especially going back 26 years), which absolutely influences public betting, but in a negative fashion. Data mining reveals that following historical trends is a losing proposition ATS and that being a contrarian in this area is more profitable.