Computer Picks

[PURPLE 4EVER]

It flat out amazes me how someone can add the word computer to their "pick" and have many people think that some kind of science or superior intelligence is involved. The fact of the matter is that computer formulas are "tweaked" or modified every week to get the results the programer wants, which makes them no better than two drunks in a bar debating the next state champion (doesn't matter what week of the season). There are an infinite number of factors that decides who wins a game. The human brain is far superior on some factors, the computer is lightning speed faster on other factors. It is still a guessing game. We are not even a millionith of a fraction of being able to write a computer code that can accurately predict the outcome of a football game.

Just like the BCS computer rankings, so-called gurus try to give credibility to their computer rankings, but refuse to publish their code. They claim to not publish their code for fear that someone will steal their ideas, but the truth is they refuse to publish it because it would get shredded in any public debate by the most unintelligent arm-chair quarterbacks.

I dare anyone who thinks they have a "good" computer program for predicting football scores (or any sport for that matter) to wrap their code in an application or executable and publish it before the season starts (I promise not to disassemble it). Then we can see how an unmodified code will work. I will say with a 100% confidence that the code will be no better than .600, but probably under .500. That's about the same odds I would give to any person that has an IQ over 80.

Well put....

I am right at 80% predicting and I have missed games even though you would be sure the losing team was better.  No one can predict lucky plays, heart, the bounce of the ball, and everything else that goes into a game.  I was for sure Lumberton would win over Waller after taking out LaMarque, but you just can't assume this.  From the few highlights I saw of the Waller vs Lumberton game, on Waller's long runs there was almost always one broken tackle.  The Raider defenders were there, but it just looked like the Waller players wouldn't be denied and broke loose.  Once the tide starts turning like this it is just hard to stop, and as the game progressed the Waller team just got more and more confidence.

As far Dayton....

The big victories have to have an effect on padding a point spread in a computer generated prediction.

It is just amazing that the Broncos keep on piling on the points and just shutting down very good offensive teams.

Hopefully this trend continues.

[bronco1]

It flat out amazes me how someone can add the word computer to their "pick" and have many people think that some kind of science or superior intelligence is involved. The fact of the matter is that computer formulas are "tweaked" or modified every week to get the results the programer wants, which makes them no better than two drunks in a bar debating the next state champion (doesn't matter what week of the season). There are an infinite number of factors that decides who wins a game. The human brain is far superior on some factors, the computer is lightning speed faster on other factors. It is still a guessing game. We are not even a millionith of a fraction of being able to write a computer code that can accurately predict the outcome of a football game.

Just like the BCS computer rankings, so-called gurus try to give credibility to their computer rankings, but refuse to publish their code. They claim to not publish their code for fear that someone will steal their ideas, but the truth is they refuse to publish it because it would get shredded in any public debate by the most unintelligent arm-chair quarterbacks.

I dare anyone who thinks they have a "good" computer program for predicting football scores (or any sport for that matter) to wrap their code in an application or executable and publish it before the season starts (I promise not to disassemble it). Then we can see how an unmodified code will work. I will say with a 100% confidence that the code will be no better than .600, but probably under .500. That's about the same odds I would give to any person that has an IQ over 80.

These calprep scores have been the same all year. They don't change weekly, you could have pulled these scores up week one.

[liltex]

if winners can be picked over 65% of the time lets pool some big money & bet it in vegas w/the bookies.to many variables-injuries-ineligible-weather conditions-rumors of coaching changes-arrests-death of a teamate.put your faith in a team playing w/speed-heart-will to sacrafice.