Weather impacts on totals: Overrated by the public?

[CoachTony_Bets]

I've been thinking about this a lot lately as we head into the colder part of the NFL season. Every year I see the same pattern where the public hammers the under on games with bad weather forecasts, and I'm starting to wonder if weather is actually as predictive as people think it is or if it's just one of those narratives that sounds good but doesn't hold up in the data.

Obviously extreme weather like 40 mph winds or heavy snow has an impact. I'm not arguing that weather doesn't matter at all. But I think the public overreacts to moderate weather conditions like 20 degree temperatures or light rain or 15 mph winds. They see a weather forecast and immediately think under without considering that NFL teams practice in all conditions and offensive coordinators adjust their game plans accordingly.

I coached high school football for years and I can tell you that weather affects different teams differently based on their offensive philosophy and personnel. A team that runs the ball heavily and has a good offensive line might actually prefer cold wet conditions because it slows down pass rushers and limits what the defense can do. But the public just sees bad weather equals low scoring without any nuance.

I'm curious what everyone's experience has been betting totals in weather games. Do you automatically lean under when you see a bad forecast or do you think the public overreacts and creates value on the over?

 

[SharpEddie47]

This is one of those topics where the conventional wisdom is actually mostly wrong and the data proves it. I've tracked weather impacts on totals for over 15 years and here's what I've found.

Temperature alone has almost no correlation with scoring. Games played at 20 degrees score at virtually the same rate as games played at 50 degrees. The public sees a cold weather game and assumes the offenses will struggle but NFL quarterbacks and receivers practice in cold weather all season. They're professionals and they adapt. The dropoff in offensive efficiency in cold weather is maybe 2 to 3 percent which isn't nearly enough to justify the way totals get bet down.

Wind is the only weather factor that consistently impacts scoring and even then it needs to be sustained winds above 20 mph to have a meaningful effect. Light wind or gusting wind doesn't matter as much as people think. I've analyzed hundreds of games with wind forecasts and the correlation between wind speed and total points scored is surprisingly weak until you get above that 20 mph threshold.

Rain and snow are interesting because they do impact the game but not always in the direction people expect. Heavy rain can actually increase scoring in some cases because defensive backs can't change direction as easily and that creates opportunities for receivers. Snow games are unpredictable because it depends on when the snow falls and how heavy it is. A game that starts with no snow and develops heavy snow in the second half is very different from a game played in steady light snow throughout.

But here's the key insight. The books know all of this. When there's a weather forecast the total gets adjusted before most bettors even see it. So by the time you're looking at a game with a 38.5 total because of weather, that number already accounts for the expected impact. The question isn't whether weather matters, the question is whether the total is pricing weather correctly.

And in my experience the public consistently overestimates weather impact which means there's often value on the over in weather games. Not every weather game, but when I see a total that's been bet down 3 or 4 points from the opening number because of a weather forecast, I'm looking hard at the over because the public panic has probably created an overcorrection.

I tracked this specifically for three NFL seasons and my record on overs in games with notable weather forecasts was 89 and 67 for 57.1%. The public was hammering unders in those same games and getting crushed. Weather creates opportunity but not in the direction most people think.

 

[ParlayPrincess_88]

Okay so I definitely always bet the under when I see bad weather in the forecast lol. Like if there's going to be snow or heavy rain I just assume both teams are going to struggle to move the ball and score. Reading Eddie's post is making me realize I might have been doing this completely wrong.

I remember last year there was a Bills game with like a ton of snow and I bet the under and it went over by 20 points. I was so confused because I thought for sure all that snow would make it impossible to score. But both teams were just running the ball down each other's throats and scoring touchdowns anyway.

So are you guys saying that betting the under just because of weather is basically falling into a public trap? That's kind of frustrating because weather seems like such an obvious factor. Like how is the public wrong about something that seems so straightforward?

I guess the question is if weather doesn't impact totals as much as we think, what does? Like what should I be looking at instead of just checking the weather forecast before betting a total?

 

[FadeThePublic]

This is actually one of my favorite spots to fade the public. Weather games create massive public sentiment shifts and that's exactly when contrarian value shows up.

Eddie's right about the temperature thing being overblown. I've seen the same data and cold weather alone just doesn't kill scoring the way people think it does. The Bills and Chiefs play in cold weather every year and their offenses are still explosive. Patrick Mahomes isn't suddenly going to forget how to throw a football because it's 25 degrees outside.

What I love about weather games is how predictable the public reaction is. The forecast comes out three days before the game showing wind or rain or cold temps. Immediately you see the betting percentages shift heavily toward the under. By game day you'll have 75% or 80% of tickets on the under in some cases. That's when you know the total has been pushed too far.

I don't automatically bet every over in weather games but I definitely look harder at overs when I see massive public action on the under because of weather. The books are smart enough to set the total accounting for weather so when the public then bets it down even further, they're creating value on the other side.

The wind thing Eddie mentioned is real though. I avoid totals entirely in games with sustained winds above 20 mph because it actually does affect passing games significantly. But people treat 10 mph wind the same as 25 mph wind and those are completely different conditions.

Princess to answer your question about that Bills snow game, here's what probably happened. The public saw snow and hammered the under. The total dropped from maybe 47 to 41 or something like that. But both teams could still run the ball effectively and the offenses were prepared for the conditions. The total should have been 44 or 45 accounting for the weather but public panic pushed it to 41. That's when the over becomes a good bet even though there's snow.

The key is distinguishing between weather that actually matters versus weather that just scares the public. Heavy sustained wind matters. Everything else is mostly noise that the public overreacts to.

 

[CoachTony_Bets]

I want to add some context from a coaching perspective because I think the way weather impacts the game is more nuanced than just looking at total points scored.

Weather absolutely affects how teams play but it doesn't necessarily mean lower scoring. Like Eddie and Fade said, cold weather alone isn't that impactful. But what cold weather does do is favor running games and ball control offenses. If you have two teams that like to run the ball anyway, a cold weather game might actually produce more sustained drives and more scoring because the defenses can't sit in pass defense the whole game.

Wind is the big one from a playcalling perspective. When I see sustained winds above 15 or 20 mph I know that's going to limit what offensive coordinators can do in the passing game. Deep shots become very difficult and you'll see more short passes and more running plays. That does tend to lower scoring but again it depends on the teams involved.

Rain impacts ball security more than anything. You'll see more fumbles and sometimes that creates turnovers that lead to short fields and more scoring. Other times it kills drives. It's unpredictable which is why I generally avoid betting totals in heavy rain games.

The other factor people don't consider enough is field conditions. A game played on a well-maintained field with good drainage in the rain is very different from a game played on a torn up field that's muddy and slippery. Field quality matters as much as the weather itself in some cases.

Princess your question about what to look at instead of weather is a good one. I focus on offensive and defensive efficiency, pace of play, and situational factors like whether teams are playing to their full roster or resting starters. Weather is one factor but it's probably fifth or sixth on my list of things that actually predict whether a game will go over or under the total.

The Bills snow game you mentioned is a perfect example of public overreaction. Bills fans and players are used to snow. They practice in it all the time. The visiting team might be more affected but even then, these are professional athletes who've played in all conditions. The public sees snow and thinks disaster but the teams just adjust and play football.

 

[SharpEddie47]

Tony makes excellent points about the coaching adjustments and field conditions. This is why I track weather games so carefully because there are multiple variables beyond just the forecast.
To Princess's question about what to look at instead of weather, here's my framework for handicapping totals. Weather is one input but it's not the primary input unless we're talking about extreme conditions.

The factors that actually predict totals in order of importance are offensive and defensive efficiency metrics particularly in the red zone, pace of play and plays per game, recent scoring trends over the last four to six games accounting for opponent quality, home versus road splits because some teams play very differently at home, and then finally weather but only if it's actually extreme conditions.
When I'm looking at a weather game I first ask whether the weather is severe enough to matter. If it's just cold or light wind, I ignore it completely. If there's heavy wind above 20 mph or driving rain or snow, then I factor it in but I'm also looking at how the public is reacting. If the public is overreacting and the total has dropped significantly, that's often a signal that the over has value.

The other thing to consider is that weather impacts some teams more than others. A dome team going on the road to play in freezing rain is going to be more affected than a team that's used to those conditions. But even that is often priced into the total by the time you're betting it.
Fade's point about this being a great contrarian spot is accurate. Weather games are one of the few areas where I'll take a position contrary to heavy public action because the public response to weather is so predictable and so often wrong. But I'm only doing that after I've done the work to understand the actual expected impact of the weather versus the perceived impact.

One more thing worth mentioning. Weather forecasts three days out are often wrong. I've seen games where the forecast called for heavy rain and game day was sunny. Or vice versa. So even if weather did matter as much as people think, you're betting based on a forecast that has significant uncertainty. That's another reason to be skeptical of making weather your primary handicapping factor.

 

[ParlayPrincess_88]

This is really helpful actually. I've definitely been one of those public bettors who sees a weather forecast and immediately thinks under without considering anything else. Sounds like I should basically ignore weather unless it's really extreme and even then I should check if the public has already overreacted and pushed the total too low.
The thing about weather forecasts being wrong is a good point too. I've definitely bet games based on weather forecasts that ended up being totally different on game day. That's frustrating when you bet the under because of rain and then it doesn't even rain lol.
So just to make sure I understand, you guys are saying that cold weather doesn't really matter, light wind doesn't matter, light rain doesn't really matter, and the only weather that actually impacts games significantly is heavy sustained wind above 20 mph or really extreme conditions like blizzards? And even then the public probably overreacts so there might be value going the opposite direction?
That's kind of mind blowing because I've been betting weather unders for like two years thinking it was an obvious edge. No wonder I've been losing money on totals.

 

[FadeThePublic]

Princess you just described exactly what the public does and why it's profitable to fade them in weather games. The public sees any weather and thinks under. Sharp money sees weather, checks if it's actually going to impact the game, and if the public has overreacted they bet the over.

Here's a concrete example from earlier this season. There was a Chiefs game where the forecast showed 15 mph winds and temperature in the low 30s. Not extreme conditions but enough to scare the public. The total opened at 50.5 and by game time it was down to 47.5 because of massive public action on the under. The game went over easily and finished at 56 total points.

The public saw weather and panicked. The sharp money saw a total that had been pushed 3 points below where it should be and hammered the over. That's the pattern that repeats over and over in weather games.

Now I'm not saying you should blindly bet every over in weather games. You still need to do the work Tony and Eddie described about checking the offensive efficiency and pace and whether the specific weather will actually matter. But when you see a total that's been crushed by public weather panic, that's a huge red flag that there might be value on the other side.

The other thing I'll add is that weather betting is one area where the public never seems to learn. Every year the same thing happens. Weather forecast comes out, public hammers under, total drops too far, over cashes. You'd think eventually people would figure it out but they don't. The narrative that bad weather equals low scoring is just too ingrained.

That's why I love weather games. It's one of the most reliable contrarian spots in all of sports betting. The public is predictable, they're wrong, and they never adjust.

 

[CoachTony_Bets]

I think we've covered this topic pretty thoroughly. The consensus seems to be that weather matters less than the public thinks it does, and when the public overreacts to weather forecasts it creates contrarian value on the opposite side.

The one thing I'd add is that you should also consider the specific teams involved and their style of play. A team like the Ravens that runs the ball heavily might actually benefit from bad weather because it neutralizes the opponent's passing game. A team like the Dolphins that relies on speed and precision passing might struggle more in wind or rain. Context matters.

Princess I'm glad this thread is helping you think about weather differently. The key takeaway is don't make weather your primary handicapping factor unless it's truly extreme conditions. And even then, check if the public has already moved the total so far that the other side has become the value play.

Weather is just one piece of the puzzle. Team tendencies, coaching adjustments, offensive and defensive efficiency, all of those things matter more than whether it's going to be cold or windy. Use weather as one data point among many, not as the sole basis for your decision.

 

[SharpEddie47]

Princess I want to emphasize one more time that you should track your weather bets separately going forward. Log every total bet you make in a weather game and see what your actual results are. My guess is you'll find that your weather unders have been losing money and that will give you the data you need to stop making that mistake.
This is exactly why tracking is so important. Without data people continue making the same errors year after year because they remember the times they were right and forget the times they were wrong. If you track everything you'll see the pattern clearly and you can adjust accordingly.

For everyone else reading this, the lesson is that conventional wisdom in sports betting is often wrong. Weather seems like it should matter a lot but the data shows it matters less than people think. The public consistently overestimates weather impact and that creates opportunity for bettors who understand the actual correlation between weather and scoring.
Don't bet based on narratives or what seems obvious. Bet based on data and systematic analysis. Weather is one of many factors that can influence a game but it's rarely the determining factor unless conditions are truly extreme.

 

[FadeThePublic]

One last thought on this. Weather games are also great for live betting if you're into that. Often the public panic continues during the game. If it's raining or snowing and the score is tied at halftime, the live under is going to be hammered even though nothing about the first half suggests the second half will be different.
I've made good money on live overs in weather games where the public sees precipitation and keeps betting under even as both teams are moving the ball effectively. The in-game weather narrative can be even stronger than the pregame weather narrative.
But yeah, main takeaway is weather is overrated by the public and that creates contrarian opportunities. Track your results and you'll see it.