NCAAB: Betting Conference Tournaments – Part II

All the major conferences will be in action this upcoming week, with there league tournaments


2008-03-12

All the major conferences will be in action this upcoming week, with there league tournaments, which are guaranteed to have more surprises and upsets then any episodes of American Idol, Big Brother or Oprah’s The Big Give combined.

Last week we covered, situations revolving around specific events that can take place, along with how particular conference broke down as favorites and underdogs. In addition, we covered how favorites and underdogs managed when either (+) or (-) 6.5-points.
This week our focus shifts to certain rounds in college basketball tournaments, which are most profitable and which to avoid. Also, we’ll take a look at what teams are the best Play On teams or what teams are best to Play Against, along with Totals. Here is the information needed on very sharp angles that are consistent winners for those betting on college basketball tournament action.

The Atlantic-10 Conference has seen the weaker teams in the league be no match, as favorites dominate the first round action at 25-12 against the spread and 14-5 ATS record the last five seasons. Along these same lines, the favorite has been the selection for the league championship contest also, with 8-1 ATS mark, the last nine seasons.
The Atlantic Coast Conference and the Big Ten have witnessed upheaval in the early rounds of their respective post-season tournaments. As compared to the A-10, the teams at the bottom of the conferences are not that far removed from the average to slightly better then average teams. In the ACC, in the first round and the quarterfinals, the underdog has covered the oddsmakers spread 70.9 percent of the time with 22-9 record. The Big Ten has similar type results at 19-10 ATS in the opening round, including 11-4 ATS the last several seasons. The Big Ten’s unusual seeding process because of 11 teams in the league has created more balance in the early going of the conference tournament.
The Big 12 is another companion league in the early going, with favorites just 4-15 ATS in round one, causing players that prefer the higher seeds to lose serious cash. The trend picks up once again in conference championship game, were the underdog is 4-1 ATS, including Kevin Durant and Texas taking Kansas to overtime in losing 88-84 as 7.5-point dogs in 2007.
Conference USA has been a league worth monitoring when it comes to its league championship games since March of 2003. With Memphis a virtual certainty to make the C-USA finals, the Tigers have encountered extravagant numbers by linemakers in the past, daring foolhardy bettors to back them. This strategy has worked as many stubborn bettors have thrown caution to the wind and supported John Calipari’s club. Title game faves are only 1-4 ATS the last five years.
Some of the best profits of all have popped up in the in the Big Sky, in the semi-final round of action. Here we find underdogs cut off at the pass and not emerging successfully. The Big Sky has stood for big profits out West, with the chalk covering eight of 10 times.
The Mountain West has had more than its fair share of upsets, especially in the title game to determine the automatic qualifier. In this contest, the favorite has bumbled, stumbled and fumbled opportunity, being only 1-6 ATS.
The Southeastern Conference has had a severe case of favoritism the last several years. In the first day of action, the favored team has controlled the action, with 22-11, 66.7 percent against the spread record. In a league that has been as competitive as this one, this information really stands out and can be put to great use.
The Western Athletic Conference has the proper acronym of WAC, as in the wacky results this league has manufactured in tourney play. In the opening round, the favored squads are only 1-6 ATS. By the time two teams make it to the championship game, it is a complete turnaround; with the favored club 4-1 ATS the last five seasons. Look for this year’s results with New Mexico State the host in Las Cruces.
Next is a look at the best and worst teams against the spread in conference tournaments. The focus is on teams that have shown they win or lose in the long term and not just with a particular class that produces short term numbers. These results are based on teams whose tournaments have not been completed.
Best Spread Teams – Last 10 Years (Units won basis)
1) N.C. State 17-5
2) Kentucky 17-7
3) G. Washington 15-6
4) Oregon 10-2
5) UAB 14-6
6) Syracuse 15-7
Worst Spread Teams – Last 10 Years (Units lost basis)
1) Marquette 3-12
2) Texas 7-15
3) Bowling Green 4-12
4) Utah 3-11
5) Tennessee 4-10
6) Georgia 3-9
Tournament play also creates excellent Over/Under opportunities based on style of play by particular teams. Here the list of teams that function best in these situations.
Top OVER Teams - Last 10 Years (Units basis)
1) LSU 13-4
2) UNLV 11-3
3) Arkansas 13-5
4) BYU 10-3
5) Auburn 10-3
6) UMass 9-4
Top UNDER Teams - Last 10 Years (Units basis)
1) Georgetown 3-14
2) Tulsa 3-12
3) Pittsburgh 6-15
4) Wisconsin 5-13
5) SMU 1-8
6) Tulane 3-10
A trio of systems plays that could occur and are worth following should they arise.
First up is “Bad Dogs”. Here look for underdogs of three or more points with a win percentage of 43 percent or less, taking on a team with a winning percentage of 57 percent or higher. Play Against these poor pooches who are 107-142, 43 percent.
Another to watch for is higher seeded teams in the first or quarterfinal rounds, which are favored by six or fewer points. In the last three seasons, these teams are 95-67, 58.6 winners. The general belief would be the better team covers against weaker opponent in a manageable point spread.
From our friend Marc Lawrence at Playbook.com, he sends us this momentum gathering system. In conference tourney action, seek to find favored teams off win-no-cover as double digit favorite in last game; these teams are nicely profitable 133-91-6 ATS (59.3%). If we take this same team and match them up against another conference tournament foe off a straight up win, the number rise to 115-68-4 ATS (62.8%). We start to stack the deck in our favor better then two-thirds the time if our team is favored in this contest by seven or less points. (58-28-1 ATS, 67.4%)
Money Line and spread players need to play attention to the next two points. If our team is facing this same opponent that has a winning percentage of less .600, our play of choice is 29-5 SU and 23-10-1 ATS (69.6%). Finally, we look to slam dunk the oddsmaker if our opponent met all the criteria and won that last game by 10 or fewer points. This leads to 21-2 SU Winner and 17-5-1 ATS (77.2%) play, that is tough to conquer come tourney time.

This article and the prior should have you loaded with all the right ammunition to succeed during conference tournaments.

NCAAB: Betting Conference Tournaments – Part II News

Click here to read latest College Basketball news