Detroit @ Milwaukee -12.5
Fiserv Forum, Milwaukee, WI
April 14, 2019, 4:00 PM PDT
Among the most popular and oft-cited NBA playoffs betting systems around is Tony Salinas' Zig Zag Theory. Salinas' model entails the following:
Backing the home team to cover game 1,
Siding with the SU loser of game 1 to cover game 2,
Taking the home team ATS again in game 3, and
Betting on the loser of the prior game to beat the number in games 4 through the end of the series
Of note, Salinas debuted his system prior to the computer era, so backtesting such a theory would have been cumbersome, to say the least. Today though, thanks to big data, it is possible to assess the approach's efficacy. We examine the component steps below.
Zig Zag Theory, Game 1:
Data from BetLabsSports since 2005 indeed validates a home team advantage in the first game of a playoff series, as Salinas hypothesized. Teams in their own building have covered at a 54% clip in the first game of playoff sets, for a return on investment (ROI) of roughly 5%.
A detail that escaped Salinas' initial analysis is that double-digit home favorites have been particularly solid ATS bets in NBA post-season game 1's, delivering an 11% ROI, on a 57% cover rate.
The Bucks are favored by 12.5 as of the time of this writing.
Consistent with the notion of the home cover in Milwaukee Sunday, the Bucks went 14-7-3 ATS in the regular season laying at least ten, including an 11-6-2 ATS run at Fiserv Forum as a big favorite. The Pistons are 1-2 ATS taking ten or more points on the road.
Milwaukee is also 4-2 ATS in their last half dozen hosting Detroit.
We are sweating our play on the Bucks at least a tad though, as the good analysts at The Action Network have observed that away teams that only watched the playoffs last year have fared well ATS in the first round facing teams that did have a role in the prior year's post-season ceremonies.
This system has been especially prescient in game 1's, notching a lights-out record of 26-10 ATS from this spot. We can only hope that after the scorching 9-1 showing of the last four seasons, reversion is due (OK, maybe this is merely gambler's fallacy).
Zig Zag Theory, Game 2:
In the face of the Zig Zag Theory, we observe that backing game 1's straight up loser to cover game 2 has been an ineffective strategy since 2005, registering a 47% cover rate and -8% ROI. This rule has seen nine losing seasons and only five winners over the last 14 completed playoff campaigns.
As an alternative to naively playing for a reversal in the second contest of a playoff series, we observe that home favorites have been modestly profitable in game 2's, broadly speaking, and even more so after a win. Thus, we expect better profitability to picking spots, and betting on home favs to cover after a SU win.
In instances where a team dropped game 1 in their own building, backing the home team to recover in ATS has been nominally profitable, delivering a 2% ROI. However, the gains from this spot have entirely accrued during the second and Finals rounds of the post-season.
Zig Zag Theory, Game 3:
Also counter to Salinas' thinking, the home team has not exhibited an edge in game 3's in aggregate. Rather, home and road teams have split covers almost exactly evenly since 2005.
Teams playing in their own building have been very profitable wagers in playoff game 3's when favored off losses, however. Bettors have collected an 11% ROI supporting this position.
In contrast, it has been wise to avoid home teams heading into game 3's after collecting a road win. Such squads are 24-27 ATS (47%).
Zig Zag Theory, Games 4-7:
As for zig-zagging after game 3, the SU loser of the third game of a playoff series has covered the next game an unimpressive 49% of the time.
The home team has exhibited a slight edge in game 4, however, covering at about 53% and generating a 3% ROI. Profitability improves to a 4% ROI when the team at home in game 4 is coming off a straight up win.
Bettors have been paid to adhere to Salinas' system in game 5's though, as the team that lost game 4 is 90-75-5 ATS in their next out.
Broadly speaking, zig zagging loses its luster again thereafter, submitting a 48% cover rate in game 6 and a 50% ATS win rate in the last possible game of a series.
Alternately, it has proven quite profitable to back the team with home court advantage in the last two contests of the round, as these teams tend to lock in after dropping two or three games to a series underdog.
Getting down on the higher seeded teams to cover games 6 and 7 has been good for a 13% ROI historically.
Summary:
So, while Tony Salinas Zig Zag Theory is the most hyped professional basketball playoff betting system we are aware of, a look back through history suggests this approach leaves much to be desired.
Salinas starts off on the right track (by backing the home cover in game 1), however his guidance for handicapping game 2 of a series has not been valuable in recent years.
Instead, we advocate greater selectivity in the second contest of a playoff series, and tend toward home favorites off straight up wins.
If the higher ranked team prevails in game 2, we like the home team in game 3, particularly when favored to win.
History also says side with the home team in game 4, especially after collecting the straight up "W" in game 3.
Salinas' advice for game 5 holds true, and we like the idea of supporting the team that lost game 4.
And finally, we like the team with home court advantage in the last two games of a set (i.e. the road team in game 6 and the home team in game 7).
Bottom line: Contrary to Salinas' set of rules, bettors have been paid to mostly zig (i.e. back the home team) and to rarely zag betting the NBA playoffs--a notable exception to this generalization is when the new playoff entrants hit the scene and are pitted against the old guard. Nonetheless, we expect the disparity is so dramatic in the case of Milwaukee and Detroit, that any impact of the Bucks underestimating the underdog's competitive spirit will not impact the ATS outcome for game 1. Accordingly, we are start the Bucks Pistons series in alignment with the tenets of the Zig Zag Theory. However, if game 1 goes as expected, we anticipate deviating from Salinas' prescription as soon as game 2.
Happy betting!!