Poker Forums

Two Plus Two General Poker Coaching/Training International Sponsored Support Limit Texas Hold'em No Limit Hold'em Tournament Poker Other Poker General Gambling Internet Poker 2+2 Communities Sports & Games Other Topics Forum Archives

Two Plus Two

Poker Magazine

Poker Books

PokerCast

Poker Blog

Current Issue April Issue March Issue February Issue January Issue December Issue

Differences in NBA Playoffs and Regular Season

by King Yao Two Plus Two Magazine, Vol. 6, No. 5

NBA teams act differently in the playoffs than they do during the regular season. The games are more important and players are more focused, especially on defense. In this article, I will discuss how sports bettors can use information of the general differences between NBA playoff and regular season games to their benefit or at the least to help steer them away from bets that seem to be positive-EV in the regular season but may be negative-EV in the playoffs.

Data

Poker Bonus
888 Pacfic Poker Bonus bwin Poker Bonus Everest Poker Bonus PKR Bonus Poker Time Bonus Paddy Poker Bonus Party Poker Bonus Bonus FAQ

Unless otherwise stated, the data used in this article are lines and results for playoff games from the 1990/1991 season to the 2008/09 season. In the 1990/91 to 2001/02 seasons, the first round in the NBA playoffs was a best of five series, but all other series were best of seven. In the 2002/03 season, the NBA went to a full best of seven for every series. For regular season lines and results, I used games from the 1992/93 season to the 2008/09 season. There are two more years worth of data for playoff games. I do not think this is makes a difference when comparing playoff numbers to regular season numbers. In the tables below, SU W and SU L stand for Straight Up Win and Straight Up Loss; a Win or a Loss in the game regardless of the pointspread. ATS W and ATS L stand for Against-the-Spread Win and Against-the-Spread Loss.

Home Court Advantage

A fundamental difference between playoff and regular season games is the increased value of playing at home. This could be due to the increased enthusiasm from home fans, increased urgency of players at home or any number of other reasons. Whatever the real reasons are, there is a clear increase in home court advantage in the playoffs. Home teams in the playoffs are a bigger favorite than they are in the regular season. Better-seeded teams do play a few more games at home than worse-seeded teams, but even when only the first four games are considered, home teams still have a bigger advantage in the playoffs than during the regular season. In the regular season, home teams are, on average, 3.4-point favorites. In the playoffs, they are, on average, 4.3-point favorites. In the first four games of the playoffs, home teams are, on average, 4.1-point favorites Actual results mimic the pointspread lines. In the regular season, home teams won 60.3% of the games. In the playoffs, home teams won 65.5% of the games. In the regular season, home teams outscored road teams by 3.2 points. In the playoffs, home teams outscored road teams by 4.7 points. In the first four games of the playoffs, home teams outscored road teams by 4.4 points.

Poker Authors Two Plus Two Store Poker Abbreviations Poker Book Translations Advertising Info

Pointspread / Money Line Relative Value

For the same pointspread, the money line is much higher in the playoffs than in the regular season. A logical reason for this difference is not obvious to me. It is obvious to me that the difference is there and it is real as it is present in a span of different pointspreads. The table below shows Against-the-Spread and Straight-Up records for playoff and regular season games. For each line, I included lines that were a half-point higher and lower. For example, -5 in the table below used games with lines of -4.5, -5 and -5.5. Each game was counted three teams in the table below, so I divided the number of games in the sample by 3. I think this is a fair way to represent the sample size. While the sample size for playoff games is much smaller than regular season games, I think the difference between the two is significant and consistent; I think the difference is real. The SU-ATS column is the difference between the SU and ATS percentages.

Playoffs Line -5 -5.5 -6 -6.5 -7 -7.5 -8 Games ATS 99 92 82 68.3 60.7 50 51 Regular Season Line -5 -5.5 -6 -6.5 -7 -7.5 -8 Games ATS 683 SU SU

SU Moneyline SUATS 16.50% 20.70% 24.20% 27.40% 26.90% 28.00% 27.80%

51.20% 67.70% -210 50.70% 71.40% -250 49.40% 73.60% -279 50.20% 77.60% -346 51.10% 78.00% -355 51.30% 79.30% -383 55.90% 83.70% -513 SU

Moneyline SUATS 13.10% 15.80% 18.70% 20.90% 21.60% 24.60% 26.80%

51.00% 64.10% -179

654.3 50.90% 66.70% -200 672.7 49.90% 68.60% -218 644 595 580 50.30% 71.20% -247 50.00% 74.60% -294 49.20% 76.00% -317 634.7 50.60% 72.20% -260

The table below shows the difference in the SU and SU-ATS columns between the playoffs and the regular season. The numbers are consistent throughout the range of lines. The average difference in SU column is 5.4%, and the average difference in the SU-ATS column is 4.3%.

Difference between Playoffs and Regular Season Line SU -5 -6 -7 -8 3.6% 5.0% 5.8% 7.7% -5.5 4.7% -6.5 6.4% -7.5 4.7% SU-ATS 3.4% 4.9% 5.5% 6.5% 5.3% 3.4% 1.0%

This is a major difference between the playoffs and the regular season. I believe this is the most important data shown in this article as it is the one that sharp bettors are most likely to make a mistake of thinking they have edge when they probably do not. Looking at moneylines in the first round of the 2010 playoffs, it looks like the market agrees that the moneyline-pointspread relationship is different in the playoffs. For example, in Game 5 of the Lakers-Thunder series, the Lakers were a 6-point favorite at home, but one could bet the Thunder at +300 in the moneyline. This relationship is much more consistent with the historical data from the playoffs than the historical data from the regular season. Similarly, in game 5 of the Celtics-Heat series, the Celtics were a 7-point favorite, but the mid-market on the moneyline was around Celtics 350. Further research on the moneyline-pointspread relationship with respect to the stage in the series could be interesting. However, any such research would whittle down the sample size even further.

Games are lower scoring in the Playoffs

The average playoff game is lower scoring than the average regular season game. This may be due to increased intensity on defense when the games are more important in the playoffs. In the regular season, the average betting total was 194.7 In the playoffs, the average betting total was 191.6 In the regular season, the average actual combined score was 194.3 In the playoffs, the average actual combined score was 190.7 The lower scoring in the playoffs is due to lower field goal percentages as well as fewer possessions per game. The following table is data from the 2004/05 to the 2008/09 season only. Unfortunately, I could not get data for previous years.

Regular Season Points per game 197.1 FG% Possessions game 45.7% per 211.1

Playoffs 192.3 44.9% 205.2

The formula I used for Possessions per game is: Field Goal Attempts + (0.44 x Free Throw Attempts) Offensive Rebounds + Turnovers Looking at these statistics, I think it is fair to say the lower scoring games in the playoffs is due to a combination of a slower pace (fewer possessions) and worse shooting (lower field goal percentage). From a betting perspective, it is important to know that generally the playoffs are lower scoring than regular season games. Bettors should consider making adjustments when looking at playoff teams statistics during the regular season.

Zig-Zag Theory

In the playoffs, in general, there is a tendency for the losing team of any game to have a better chance of winning the next game than if they had won their previous game (one exception is when a team is on the verge of being swept). NBA teams do not play series during the regular season. Thus, it is not possible to compare or contrast the zig-zag theory in the playoffs to any games in the regular season. In all NBA playoff games after Game 1, the team that lost the previous game won 51.1% of their next game. If we take out the teams that are on the verge of being swept (and I do think this is a justifiable subset to take out, more on this situation later), then it improves to 51.5%. The average line in those games was -0.05, basically the same as pick'em. This slightly positive record is not enough to bet on blindly; it would be a losing strategy against -110 lines. Some specific subsets have a stronger zig-zag to them. However, in general, the market seems to have a good understanding of these subsets. The lines are generally accurate, and there is no edge in blindly betting those subsets. I do think it is useful to understand how lines are likely to move in different situations; it could be useful in betting into opening lines, line movement projections, series line pricing and futures pricing. Here are some situations where line movement is strong due to zig-zag. Again, the market generally has a good handle on them. Line movement and actual results do match up pretty well. There is also one situation when the zig-zag does not seem to apply.

Zig-Zag: Game 2

There were 213 instances when the better-seeded team won at home in Game 1. In those instances, the better-seeded team was, on average, 7.5-point favorites in Game 1, but only 6.9-point favorites in Game 2, a decrease of 0.6 points. There were 72 instances when the better-seeded team lost at home in Game 1. In those instances, the better-seeded team was, on average, 5.5-point favorites in Game 1, but became 6.2-point favorites in Game 2, an increase of 0.7 points. The market expected the teams that won Game 1 to have a lesser chance to win Game 2 than their chance to win Game 1. The market also expected the teams that lost Game 1 to have a greater chance to win Game 2 than their chance to win Game 1. The zig-zag theory fits the line change from Game 1 to Game 2 very well. The Game 2 results are consistent with the line movement, as seen in the table below.

Record of Better-Seeded Team in Game 2 Avg Line in Avg Line in SU W G1 G2 Won Game -7.5 1 Lost Game -5.5 1 -6.9 -6.2 156 57 SU L 57 15 SW W% ATS W ATS L ATS W% 73.2% 99 79.2% 42 102 28 49.3% 60.0%

The sample size is small; there are less than 300 total games. However, the difference in the line change looks dramatic and the results certainly back up the line movement. All else equal, it certainly looks like a better-seeded team is more likely to win Game 2 if they lost Game 1 than if they had won Game 1. Better-seeded teams who lost Game 1, on average, were smaller favorites (-5.5 favorites in Game 1) than those that won Game 1 (-7.5 favorites in Game 1). So one would suspect those teams that lost Game 1 had a smaller edge over their opponents than those that won Game 1. However, those that lost Game 1 won a greater portion of Game 2s. Even though it is a small sample size of less than 300 games, the combination of the result and the line movement is strong evidence that the market believes the zig-zag theory works from Game 1 to Game 2.

Zig-Zag: Game 3 when Better-Seeded team is up 2-0

Game 3 in the NBA playoffs when the better-seeded team has won both Game 1 and Game 2 also reflects a zig-zag line movement, at least compared to the line in Game 4.

Results in Games 3 for worseseeded team when they are down 0-2 SU W SU L 1990/91 2008/09 94 62 SU W% ATS W 60.3% 87 ATS L 66 ATS W% 56.9%

Average line in Games 3 for worseseeded team when they are down 0-2 G2 1990/91 2008/09 7.1 G3 -1.0 Change G4 G2-G3 8.1 0.7 Change G3-G4 1.7

Game 3 for a team that is down 0-2 in the series is a must-win game. They come through by winning 60.3% of their games while only being 1-point favorites. This ATS record reflects this. Before you run to the betting window the next time the betterseeded team wins both games 1 and 2, realize that since the 2005/2006 season, home teams in game 3 down 0-2 are only 15-13 ATS. They have seen a line change of +6.7 in Game 2 to -1.7 in Game 3, a change of 8.4 points. If there was an edge in the past in blindly betting this subset, possibly the bookmakers have caught up and the edge no longer exists.

Zig-Zag: Game 4 when Better-Seeded Team was up 2-0 after Two Games.

Regardless of who wins Game 3 (after the better-seeded team won the first two games), on average, the line shifts a little towards the better-seeded team in Game 4 When the better-seeded team wins the first two games and then the worse-seeded team wins the third game, the line for game 4 shifts towards the better-seeded team by 1.6 points. This suggests there may indeed be an added value in Game 3 for the worse-seeded team down 0-2 based on the zig-zag theory or a zig-zag from Game 3 to Game 4 due to the better-seeded team losing Game 3.

Average line in Games 3 and 4 for worseseeded team when they won Game 3, and the series is 1-2 G3 1990/91 2008/09 -2.2 G4 -0.6 Change 1.6

On the other hand, if the worse-seeded team that had lost the first two games also loses the third game, the line moves even more against them in Game 4 than if they had won. This is the opposite of what the zig-zag theory suggests. I believe the exception is due to the mentality when facing a 0-3 deficit and a real chance of being swept in the series. There were a total of 27 games when the home team in the fourth game was down 0-3. They won 12 and lost 25, with an ATS record of 13 and 22.

Average line in Games 3 and 4 for worseseeded team

when they lost Game 3, and the series is 0-3 G3 1990/91 2008/09 0.1 G4 2.2 Change 2.1

The change from Game 3 to Game 4 is similar whether the worse-seeded team won Game 3 (after having lost both Game 1 and Game 2). While it seems contradictory, I think a reasonable person could claim the line change when the worse-seeded team won Game 3 was due to the zig-zag theory and at the same time claim the line change when the worse-seeded team lost Game 4 was due to a I give up mentality.

2010 Results So Far

Below are the lines from each of the first four games in the first round of the 2010 playoffs, which were not included in any of the data previously presented in this article. Note the movement of the line between Game 1 and 2 as well as between Game 3 and 4. In almost every series, the line moved according to the zig-zag theory. The change from Game 2 to 3 is tougher to identify due to the change in home court. The Denver-Utah series and the Phoenix-Portland series are interesting in that they did not follow the zig-zag as the other series did. Also, note the opposite of the zig-zag in Game 4 of the Boston-Miami series and the Orlando-Charlotte series due to the chance of a sweep.

Cleveland versus Chicago Game Line Result 1 2 3 4 CLE wins 96-83 11.5 CLE wins 112-102 10.5 -4 -5 CLE 108 loses 106-

Los Angeles Oklahoma City Game 1 2 3 4

Lakers

versus

Line Result -7.5 LAL wins 87-79 -6 3.5 1 LAL wins 95-92 LAL loses 96-101 LAL loses 89-110

CLE wins 121-98

Atlanta versus Milwaukee Game Line Result 1 2 3 4 -8.5 ATL wins 102-92 -7.5 ATL wins 96-86 1 ATL loses 89-107 loses 104-1.5 ATL 111

Denver versus Utah Game 1 2 3 4 Line Result -5.5 DEN wins 126-113 -6 2.5 2.5 DEN loses 111-114 DEN loses 93-105 DEN loses 106-117

Boston versus Miami Game Line Result 1 2 3 4 -4.5 BOS wins 85-76 -1 4.5 1.5 BOS wins 106-77 BOS wins 100-98 BOS loses 92-101

Dallas versus San Antonio Game 1 2 3 4 Line Result -4 -3 3.5 3 DAL wins 100-94 DAL loses 88-102 DAL loses 90-94 DAL loses 89-92

Orlando versus Charlotte Game Line Result 1 2 3 4 -10 -9 -2 -4 ORL wins 98-89 ORL wins 92-77 ORL wins 90-86 ORL wins 99-90

Phoenix versus Portland Game 1 2 3 4 Line Result -8.5 PHO loses 100-105 -8.5 PHO wins 119-90 1.5 -2 PHO wins 108-89 PHO loses 87-96

Conclusion

NBA teams perform a bit differently in the playoffs than they do in the regular season. In this article, I showed many differences, all of which are important for bettors in understanding what the base should be for the playoffs compared to the regular season. A bettor that ignores the differences would be in danger of making zero-EV bets.

Discuss the Magazine Articles May 2010 May Publisher Note

by Mason Malmuth

Contribute to the Magazine

Book Excerpt - "Drawing Inferences" from Harrington on Online Cash Games

by Dan Harrington and Bill Robertie

Card Removal in Razz, Part 2

by Dan Abrams

Stud: Using Exposed Cards to Weight an Opponents Range

by Matt Glassman

No Such Thing as a Free Hunch

by Andrew Brokos

Bluffing the River in Low to Mid-stakes Limit Hold em

by Carl Sampson

Review of The Poker Face of Wall Street

by Nick Christenson

Omaha 8 or Better- Continuing with a Skimpy Flop Fit, Part 1

by Frank Jerome

Status of Las Vegas Poker- Spring, 2010

by Bryan Clark

Differences in NBA Playoffs and Regular Season

by King Yao

Chess: The Principle of Two Weaknesses

by Pierre Boutquin

Classic Article: Why (Some) Morons Do Better Than You

by David Sklansky

Poker Strategy

Privacy

Feedback

Terms

About Us

Sitemap

Copyright 2009, Two Plus Two Interactive