So, which which two people are using a sports betting system to put bets down on all sorts of sports, everything from American football to basketball. is better, the multiple regressions or the statistical anomalies?
Let 's look at the differences between the two first:
• multiple regressions use historical data collection
• historical data tends to give much more accurate types of results
• neether can let anyone call games with 100% accuracy
• both are affected by unforeseen factors
• the better the data, the better the chances of predicting a sport & # 39; s exit
• multiple regressions use team changes, injuries, losing / winning streaks, past 10 results of games, away / home records for games, win to loss ratios, losses and wins
• statistical anomalies focus on common factor deviations
• statistical anomalies offer advantages that are competitive
• statistical anomalies use conversions, missed points, safeties, injuries, team psyche, weather conditions, public opinion, stadium types and atmospheric conditions in relation to their effects on teams & # 39; and players & # 39; statistics
In fact, as many bookies will attest to, winning and losing is based on so many factors that in reality the chances of having a successful bet is about 50-50. If you want to up your chances, using the historical data, combined with the psyche of the teams and players can work wonders if applied cautiously and without high expectations. multiple regressions sports betting system, you can probably increase your winning ability even more.
