I achieved a life-long dream of going 5-9 against the spread last week, so I'm going to see if I can use the magic of Python scripting to help me make my picks this week. I've been teaching myself some rudimentary coding, and thought this was a good opportunity to practice. This is a really basic script that basically just choosing "randomly" between 0 and 1, like a coin flip. If it chooses 0, I pick the home team. If it chooses 1, I pick the visitor. I tell it how many games, and it prints out a list of "Home" and "Visitor" in some order. Then I just directly transpose that list onto my picks list.
I put "randomly" in quotation marks because computers actually have a really hard time with real randomness. They are too logical. For the nerds (from the python.org docs for the "random" library):
Almost all module functions depend on the basic function random(), which generates a random float uniformly in the semi-open range [0.0, 1.0). Python uses the Mersenne Twister as the core generator. It produces 53-bit precision floats and has a period of 2**19937-1. The underlying implementation in C is both fast and threadsafe. The Mersenne Twister is one of the most extensively tested random number generators in existence. However, being completely deterministic, it is not suitable for all purposes, and is completely unsuitable for cryptographic purposes.
Basically, I'm trying to take as much fun out of this as I can.
So here is what the script spat out:
Visitor, Visitor, Home, Visitor, Visitor, Visitor, Visitor, Visitor, Visitor, Home, Visitor, Visitor, Home, Home
Now, I give you Cal's week 8 Picks:
Mia @ NE(-7.5): The all-knowing Python script believes that like their perennially lackluster brethren in New Jersey, Miami will keep this one close enough.
Dolphins.
Det @ KC(-5.5): I'm not sure which way I would have gone on this one if I was deciding with reasons and stuff, but I'm not, so
Lions.
Cin @ Pit(+2.5): Fate has chosen the first of an alarmingly small number of home teams, and already I'm starting to doubt the sanity of this plan.
Steelers.
TB @ Atl(-7.5): You don't get to see spreads like this that often in this division. I'm strangely comfortable going with
whatever Tampa Bay's team is called.
NYG @ NO(-3.5): Is it just me, or did someone at CBS accidentally put a minus sign in there?
Giants.
Min @ Chi(+2.5): I might start a Cal's Sleeper of the Week pick, meaning I'll point out which game looks like it would be my favorite to nap through. Our inaugural contest? This one.
Vikings.
Ari @ Cle(+5.5): My idiotic script idea doesn't look so dumb now, does it?
Cardinals.
SD @ Bal(-3.5): This game must have been hard to handicap. Would I rely on either of these teams to beat anyone by more than a field goal after what they've done the first seven weeks? No. But thankfully, a complex mathematical algorithm imported into a very uncomplex program is making the decision for me.
Chargers.
SF @ StL(-8.5): What is wrong with you, Cal? Even you wouldn't be dumb enough to—
49ers.
Ten @ Hou(-.5 <-- :rotfl: ): Now that is a spread. A low-cholesterol spread whose resemblance to butter strains credulity.
Texans.
NYJ @ Oak(+6.5): I think my script has a thing for Jersey boys.
Jets.
Sea @ Dal(+6.5): The Cowboys fan is native to Texas, but can be found in the wild in every environment and climate of North America. They are known for their keen memory of the nineties and for eating their young.
Seahawks.
GB @ Den(+3.5): I've come this far. No turning back now. *closes eyes and clicks his mouse on*:
Broncos.
Ind @ Car(-6.5): This weeks picks contest will most likely be wrapped up on Sunday night again, because nobody in our pool is picking Indy, not even the soulless, dispassionate script.
Panthers.
