I know you heard about revenge in many places in betting on sports, although does revenge, when it comes down to NFL picks, have anything to do with winning by making right football picks?
Well, it does sometimes, sometimes it doesn't, just like with any other sport.
When researching this trends, i get it done starting with all applicable games.
Making an examination at last twenty seasons at teams which lost in their last encounter with their opposition and were favorites in that last game, You will find out that there's no actual edge for teams that are on revenge. This is true in both situations whether last matchup was played in current or one of previous seasons.
However lets have a look what goes on if this game should be be referred to as "dog revenge" i.e. if team failed to win that last matchup as a dog. It seems that dogs get small edge. (51.7% win against the spread). This is a stunner, don't you think?
If we go on in our quest for favourable NFL picks, and take a look at teams which are on a double "dog revenge" i.e. they lost last 2 matchups vs. their opposition as a dog, we come to a profitable information: in 53.7% cases, its gonna be worthwhile to bet on that team. You must admit this is even more stunning!
You might ask why doesn't it work out like in some of other sports, when losing favourites get extra boost in following game? Simply said: cause teams have small amount of games. And they don't get excited and fired up for a revenge cause so much time has passed.
And why do former dogs get so fired about a rematch? The truth is they truly aren't all that excited to get revenge. Because my observances are made looking at a closing line odds, the only explanation is: line move. Required line movement is just 1 point to get us this sort of gain. It is very expected because casual handicappers put importance on past encounters.
This plain pro football system will give you 50-60 plays every year and one must have a good argument to go against it.