Super Bowls are lost, not won!

[Jim Eshelman]

(Nov 21, 2015)

I'm only about half-way through the Super Bowl SMA study I've been doing on and off for the last couple of years, and trying to rush the rest through by the end of the year. I might make it, or might not. But there is something emerging in the part I have done that I want to share as a preliminary finding. (Obviously, if it doesn't hold up in the other half, I'll retract it.)

Based upon what I've done so far... Super Bowls are lost, not won.

This makes sense to me in a broad sort of way. Obviously there are screw-ups that cost games, and - when you have the current two best teams playing and bringing their best to it, it's not so much about them being good enough. (They're both always great teams.) It's about who is not good enough that particular time. - Do the committed sports buffs on here agree?

Why do I say this? Because (based on the data compiled thus far), it's not about benefics showing a winner. BOTH TEAMS GENERALLY HAVE AN ABUNDANCE OF BENEFICS. It's about who has the losing combination.

Simple summary: In the CapQ (the ONE technique we want to trust most for day-of-game), both winners and losers have an abundance of Venus and Jupiter. Along with Pluto, Venus and Jupiter are (by large stretches) the two most angular planets for both groups of teams on Super Bowl day.

And why wouldn't they? "We're at the f'ing Super Bowl, dude!" On the biggest party day of the year, there are especially lots and lots of parties in the two cities competing. No wonder Venus is the most angular planet in the CapQ for winners and losers combined, the most angular planet for losers, and (second to Pluto) the most angular planet for winners.

So far, this is no type of chart for Super Bowls where Jupiter is dominant for winners and not for losers. However, there are a couple of key ones where Saturn is dominant for losers and none where this is true for winners.

In the CapQ, there is very little Saturn for winners, and quite a bit more for losers.

In the Chart of the Year (Capsolar, or Cansolar serving as flow-through proxy), there are almost no occasions of Saturn angular for winners, but enough for losers to make a big spike on the graph when the two scores are subtracted.

BTW, everybody has a lot of Pluto, but winners have a lot more Pluto than losers. ("One for the record books," maybe?) This is particularly true in the Year and Quarter charts.

The Caplunars are bizarre. There is a huge predominance of angular Jupiters for the losers. Since this does not replicate in the Week charts, I have a theory: Everybody at the game is having multiple big wins leading up to the Super Bowl, so the Caplunar (when, as usual, it is not Chart of the Week) is showing their last big win of the season (the week before). BTW, the surplus is coming not from such an excess of Jupiters for the losers, but from the virtual absence of them in the Caplunar for the winners.

Another curio: Everybody has a lot of Neptune in the CanQ, but winners have a lot more than losers. (They're crazier?)

Anyway... that's the word so far. I'll tell you more when I get near the end, but, going with what's available now, I'd say we need to ignore signs of people having a good time, and look for who is going to lose.

[Jim Eshelman]

It makes total sense to look for a losing aspect instead of winning. Same may go for elections.
In sports, those who excel to the last games are generally doing very good like you've stated.

About Neptune for winners - Neptune is not always malefic. I would think it may stand for some kind of euphoric state of mind.

[Jim Eshelman]

That's what I meant by "crazier." Usual phrase is "the insanity of a crowd at a football game."

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim wrote:

Based upon what I've done so far... Super Bowls are lost, not won. This makes sense to me in a broad sort of way.

Yes, in a ‘broad sort of way.’ But the truth of the matter is: they are both won & lost. With SMA, all we can do is take the stack of charts and endeavor to weigh the symbolic factors to determine if the fans of a team city will experience more of, or less of, collective psychological effect for a win (benefic) or a loss (malefic). Weighing these factors for a more of, or less of, is somewhat a tricky business. IMO, we need to see a clear weight either favoring a loss or win with one of the two team cities involved. Or, in other words, clear winning symbolism for one city, and then clear loosing symbolism for another city. When we see this situation, we have better % for accurately predicting the outcome, but this ‘clear weight’ is not the case for a-lot of Super Bowls. Also, IMO, the Vegas Odds are an important separate factor to consider. When we see one team a clear favorite by Vegas then this means the team city which is a clear underdog does not actually expect to win the Super Bowl and vice- versa, and IMO, this situation plays an important separate factor with the psychologically of the fans on a collective level.

Jim wrote:

Why do I say this? Because (based on the data compiled thus far), it's not about benefics showing a winner. BOTH TEAMS GENERALLY HAVE AN ABUNDANCE OF BENEFICS. It's about who has the losing combination.

Bingo! In this case, what I would like to see is a Q malefic ON an angle for one city versus the same malefic not being ON an angle for the other city. Jim, you proved to me in the 2013 Auburn-Alabama game that the town of Auburn had better chances of winning because Jupiter was closer to being ON an CanQ angle verses Alabama (Tuscaloosa) for the same CanQ angle. In other words, when we have two cities in close proximity to each other, or little difference in latitudes, then we have to hone in on your written guidelines in ISR under ‘Aspect Orbs’ where you state:

The extent of partility (exactness) determines priority.

Jim wrote:

BTW, everybody has a lot of Pluto, but winners have a lot more Pluto than losers. ("One for the record books," maybe?)

An Ecellent Point! Also consider: When we see Pluto or Uranus, or a combination of both—then this is the time to allow much more of a factor based on the Vegas odds. If we see a team city as a heavy Vegas underdog with a dominating Uranus-Pluto theme then we are raising expectations of a major upset. It should clearly be understood, you can’t have a major up-set happening unless you see a heavy Vegas underdog. Games such as these are when a gambler can make a-lot of money with low-risk money for high reward money. The 2013 Auburn-Alabama game: Alabama was a 13 point favorite with Vegas offering 5-1 winning money for the better betting on Auburn to win the game. In other words if you would have bet $100 on Auburn to win the game—Vegas would have payed you $500. I could be wrong with my memory-but I think Auburn’s Caplunar featured a Uranus-Pluto Paran but for Alabama (Tuscaloosa) this Paran did not exist. I will later offer some more Uranus=Pluto Combos where major up-sets took place based on Vegas odds. IMO, we may be witnessing a possible major upset with the main aspect of Uranus-Pluto square in the heavens pertaining to the 2016 Rep Election and maybe the Prez, where the non-established DC beltway persons are leading the public opinion polls. If one of these persons happens to win—it would be considered a major-upset by Vegas first posted odds. I wish I had the dates, places, betting odds where ALL major up-sets took place in the sporting WORLD. This would be the best way to ‘separate the wheat from the chaff’ in this SMA major upsets matter with the betting odds.

[Jim Eshelman]

Continuing with the caveat that I've only gone through about half the data so far and that the picture could change...

Here is a set of graphs from the CapQs for 30 Super Bowls (about half of those are the earliest, and about half are the latest - it's the middle I haven't done <g>). You may have to save off the graphic to your local computer to see it.

[illustration lost]

Note that for BOTH winners and losers, Venus, Jupiter, and Pluto are the three most common - by quite a margin. proportionately. You can also see this in the final graph, which shows winners and losers combined. That Venus takes the lead even more than Jupiter suggests to me that the theme is "party" even more than similar Jupiter ideas but, in general, we have these three dominating. (The third graph also makes clear that, while both groups have Pluto, the winners have even more Pluto, again by a visibly large proportionate amount).

Yet look at the third graph, under the line. The Saturn bar is extended. Losers take the lead in angular Saturns in the CapQ (there are few among the winners). Similarly, winners take the lead (in the CapQ at least) with Sun (there are few among the losers).

These smaller bars are less convincing for the data pool size so far than the big bars, so mostly (for preliminary conclusions) I'm only looking at the biggest bars. (Bars below the center will be smaller for mathematical reasons, so the Saturn-below bar stands out about as much as the Pluto-above bar.)

Now look at a similar graph for the Capsolars:

[illustration lost]

The third graph is the most important. Again, look at the Saturn bar. Look back at Saturn in the first two, to put this in perspective. There are almost no Saturn occurrences for winners, and many more for losers, such that Saturn (also Moon) are very extended compared to the other lines. Most of these Capsolars were new, recent charts, though quite a few (in the early years of Super Bowl) were a year old and nearly expired, and yet (against my preconceptions) they give the strongest, clearest indications.

[Jim Eshelman]

Steve, to give you some fun, here are years identified thus far when Saturn was angular or aspecting Moon in the CapQ for the losing team, but not angular or aspecting Moon for the winning team. (NOTE: In this one post, I'm using "CapQ" as code, since the following could also include transits to Capsolar angles or Moon.)

Super Bowl 8
Super Bowl 36
Super Bowl 39 (2 Saturns)
Super Bowl 40
Super Bowl 46
Super Bowl 49

Of these, Jupiter was on a CapQ angle or aspecting Moon for the winner and not the loser in these years:

Super Bowl 36
Super Bowl 46
Super Bowl 49

Flipping it around, Saturn was "up" for the winner in the CapQ (but not for the loser) in the following years so far:

Super Bowl 11
Super Bowl 34
Super Bowl 37
Super Bowl 39

Of these, Jupiter was on a CapQ angle or aspecting Moon for the loser and not the winner one time: Super Bowl 37.

[Jim Eshelman]

Switching to the Chart of the Year (Capsolar unless dormant; then use Cansolar), Saturn was angular or aspecting Moon for the loser (but not the winner) in the following years:

Super Bowl 5
Super Bowl 8
Super Bowl 33
Super Bowl 36
Super Bowl 40
Super Bowl 44
Super Bowl 46
Super Bowl 47
Super Bowl 49

Of these, Jupiter was angular or aspecting Moon for the winner (but not the loser) in the following years:

Super Bowl 33
Super Bowl 40
Super Bowl 46
Super Bowl 49

Let's switch to the other side: Saturn "up" for the winners, but not the losers occurred only once:
Super Bowl 11. Because both the Capsolar and Cansolar were dormant for the loser, nothing was angular, so there was only one year (so far) where Saturn was "up" in the Year Chart for the winner and not the loser, and no years where this was true AND Jupiter was up for the loser.

PS This Super Bowl 11 outcome did not look good for winning Oakland, and seems to be an anomaly. Not only was Saturn angular in the Cansolar, but in the CapQ. Oakland only had one positive chart (the Libsolar), and it was compromised - the rest was all losing indications, or worried-anxious indicators, or neutral. Losing Minneapolis had nothing tipping strongly either except double Venus for the Capsolar, so I would have called this one quite wrong and said Oakland is a loser, Minneapolis shows more happy parties. Is there anything about this particular game that makes this understandable, or is it simply a miss? Raiders won 32-14 (not close, not a last minute pulling ahead, lead mostly established before halftime).

[Jim Eshelman]

Here's another: Super Bowl 14, loser has Saturn on CapQ angle, no other Jupiter or Saturn tips on either side. (And, more generally, the CanQ was particularly ugly for losing St. Louis.) Winner charts overall had nothing particular to say, but the Saturn on CapQ (among other factors) was a clear signature.

And another: Super Bowl 16, loser has Saturn angular in Capsolar (and also CanQ). Several Jupiters also present for loser, but I'm learning to ignore these. No distinctive Saturn factors for winner.

[Jim Eshelman]

Very interesting analysis Jim. What we have to remember—even if SMA analysis was to prove a reliable % method for picking a winner or loser---in most cases this still would not give the bettor an advantage because of the Vegas point spread. For example: If a team is favored by 9 points and SMA tells us with high % the team favored by 9 points is going to win—a gambler still can’t make a bet because to win the bet the SMA projected winner would have to win by more than 9 points in order to win the bet. If the projected SMA winner won by less than 9 points the bettor loses his bet on the SMA winner. As a seasoned gambler, this is why my SMA mind leans toward a method which predicts major upsets, simply because betting on an upset the bettor never has to give points—the bettor is always taking the points on the underdog. When the bettor bets on the underdog with a projected SMA winning the game, there will be cases when the bettor could still win their bet even if the SMA predicted winner did not win the game--because of the Vegas point spread. In other words, we need to set up our SMA analysis to project when a Vegas underdog wins the game. This complicates matters unless SMA can predict major upsets. I would be very interested to see your SMA analysis on the biggest up-set in Super Bowl History:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_III

The Colts were a 19 point favorite over the Jets, with 12-1 Vegas Odds if you bet on the Jets to win the game. Joe Namath, the Jets flamboyant QB, guaranteed the Jets would win the game and became a laughing stock in the sports betting world, but Hollywod Joe got the last laugh when the Jets won the game, fairly easy.

[Jim Eshelman]

Super Bowl III wasn't clear cut with the "Saturn in Capsolar or CapQ shows in loses" rule. Let's see if it was callable. (1969 Jan 12, Miami, FL)

Winner: New York, NY
Year: Jupiter Uranus Pluto (Saturn). Moon-Neptune Jupiter-Uranus Saturn-Pluto.
-- Half Year: Jupiter Neptune. Moon-Sun Moon-Mars Jupiter-Neptune.
-- -- Quarter: Pluto (Jupiter Uranus). Jupiter-Pluto Uranus-Pluto.
Month: (Dormant.) Moon-Mars.
-- Week: Neptune (Pluto). Moon-Sun Moon-Saturn.
Day (Capsolar): Venus Uranus (CapQ). Venus (transit).
-- Day (CanQ): Jupiter. Moon-Sun.

Loser: Baltimore, MD
Year: Pluto (Venus Uranus). Moon-Sun Venus-Uranus-Pluto.
-- Half Year: Jupiter Neptune. Moon-Sun Moon-Mars Jupiter-Neptune.
-- -- Quarter: Jupiter (Mars Uranus Pluto). Jupiter-Pluto Uranus-Pluto.
Month: (Dormant.) Moon-Mars.
-- Week: Neptune. Moon-Sun Moon-Saturn.
Day (Capsolar): Venus Pluto (CapQ). Venus Pluto (transits).
-- Day (CanQ): Uranus Pluto. Moon-Sun Uranus-Pluto.

By conventional "what's good/bad" rules, the day is clearly better for New York, and, though parties are occurring in Baltimore, there are more signs of upset. That's shooting from the hip, but it's pretty straight forward.

Breaking it down more...

This is difficult because the factors are more pointing to happy people than unhappy people, and it's less reliable to pick from "who wins the game" than from "who loses the game." But, if that's all we have, we go for it.

YEAR: The Capsolar is far better for the winner than the loser. It also has "long shot windfall" indicators in its core Jupiter, Uranus, and Pluto close angularities vs. the simple Pluto of the loser.

OTHER SOLAR INGRESSES: The Cansolar has no difference between locations. The Libsolar is hard to call because the loser has the Jupiter but both charts speak of upsets and surprises. Slight tip to the loser, but unsure.

LUNAR INGRESSES: No real difference between locations.

DAY: I'd like it better if somebody was losing this... but, without that, we look for somebody winning it. Both have Venus strong in the CapQ/transits, but the winner has Venus with Uranus while the loser has Venus with Pluto. Loser is likely to get ruder shocks and upsets. I also don't trust Venus that much (especially alone) since both sides have lots of parties. Normally I'd skip the CanQ but, since the Cap doesn't give a clear answer, I look to the Can and find Uranus and Pluto for the loser (upsets), Jupiter for the winner (victory).

It goes back and forth and doesn't have what I'd like most, but the flow of analysis leads to the idea that New York wins in the end. If I'd known the odds were against them, then I'd have looked to see if there was sufficient Uranus and Pluto, and find that, yes, there is.

[Jim Eshelman]

Another clear cut case: Super Bowl 31.

Boston had Saturn on a Capsolar angle and Saturn transiting the Capsolar angle on the day of the game. Two of the two possible "this team loses" indicators are in place. Nothing offset it on Green Bay's side.

If I'd gone step by step, it would have been harder to call this. But the "these two things show losers if not matched on the other side" key is holding up almost perfectly as a way to cut through the details.

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim wrote:

If I'd known the odds were against them, then I'd have looked to see if there was sufficient Uranus and Pluto, and find that, yes, there is.

Exactly! What I am glimpsing associated with major sporting up-sets is a clear Uranus-Pluto signature, and only the Vegas Odds allows us to classify a major upset. In this case SMA projects NY a winner, but even if the Colts won the game with a wrong projected winner by SMA, as long as the Colts don’t win by more than 19 points, the bettor still wins a bet taking NY + 19 points. We know Uranus is associated with the “unexpected,” and combined with Pluto we get “shocking” “unexpected” upsets, which BTW, does not occur often. However, if a bettor was able to track all the major sporting events in the World with Vegas odds, SMA may be able to isolate 1-2 major sporting events a year where betting odds could really favor the bettor with knowledges of SMA.

Jim wrote:

If I'd gone step by step, it would have been harder to call this. But the "these two things show losers if not matched on the other side" key is holding up almost perfectly as a way to cut through the details.

Beautiful!

[Jim Eshelman]

Another example - and not a good one. The signals were crossed. We probably wouldn't have called this game but, if I had, I'd have called it correctly.

Super Bowl 28: Loser Buffalo has Saturn angular in the Capsolar, made all the more poignant because winner Dallas has Jupiter angular in the Capsolar.

Here's the problem: Rule #2. Winner Dallas has Saturn angular in the CapQ. This is very rare for a winner. We might note, though, that Buffalo also had Jupiter transiting a Capsolar angle, and the loser had nothing either way in the CapQ.

One year earlier, same teams, same outcome - much the same astrological pattern. In Super Bowl 27, loser Buffalo had Saturn widely angular in the Capsolar and exactly transiting Capsolar angles for the day. The thing is, winner Texas also had Saturn transiting a Capsolar angle for the day (one had it on the MC, the other square Asc), and also had Saturn on a CapQ angle. It was Saturn all over the place. There was too much Saturn everywhere to call it.

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim wrote:

There was too much Saturn everywhere to call it.

With my limited research, we will see this type situation several times, and this is why, imo, we need to look for games with sharp clear symbolism with one team showing malefics and the other team showing benefics; otherwise, the bettor should not make a bet. Even if we find sharp contrast of symbolism, most likely, the Vegas point spread will prohibit a bet. The only thing that makes sense to me is to isolate symbolism which predicts up-sets which would allow a wager, but up-set symbolism will not happen often.

[Jim Eshelman]

Actually, I'm only doing this secondarily to be able to call the game. Primarily, I'm doing it to add a chapter in SMA on sports outcomes, and, if we get a clear statistical predominance (even something that is correct three-fourths of the time), that would be impressive.

And yeah, it would be good to be able to call the game

[Jim Eshelman]

(Nov 28 2015)

OK... after several years of working here and there when I had a few minutes... I've finished all the chart breakdowns for both teams for all 49 Super Bowls to date.

First thing to say: The pattern that started this thread did not come through unscathed. In the collective, the CapQ surplus of Saturn did not hold up (by the end, there were nearly as many winners with Saturn on a CapQ angle as losers). However, the Capsolar effect did come through strongly (though not perfectly).

This doesn't mean that Saturn on a CapQ angle was irrelevant. It became more case-by-case. For example (working from both ends and finishing somewhere in the middle), the very last Super Bowl I processed was Super Bowl XVIII from 1984. Loser Washington, DC had Saturn on a CapQ angle; winner Oakland did not and, in fact, had Jupiter and Uranus. Barring anything upending it, this was a case where we would have picked the winner correctly at a glance. (Though lunar ingresses were much less helpful than solar ingresses, in this case we also had Washington's Week chart having Mars and Saturn in the immediate foreground.)

I will now go game-by-game to try to work out methodology, but here are some of the more interesting observations from the set of every Super Bowl ever played to date:

GENERAL PROCEDURE. There are a very few indicators that come close to being "single key" determinants of the outcome, e.g., Saturn on a Capsolar angle without Jupiter for one team , and Saturn absent (and, preferably, Jupiter present) on the Capsolar for the other. Absent this, the best procedure is to compare each layer of the stack side-by-side for the two teams, e.g., compare their years, then their months, then their weeks, then their days. Don't just count total numbers of Jupiter vs. Saturn (e.g.) because the real key isn't in whether somebody has a good day, so much as whether they have a better day than the other guy.

LOSSES vs. WINS. Everybody is a winner at the Super Bowl. They are already champions to get there, and there is a lot of money flowing on both sides. So, for the most part, the charts show that Super Bowls are lost more than they are won. Positive indicators alone do not indicate a win, though negative indicators alone do indicate a loss. The best procedure, I think, is to pick the loser when we can and, absent that opportunity, then pick the winner.

YEAR. Everybody had lots of Pluto, though winners (on balance) had more Pluto than losers. The real signal, though, is the marked surplus of Saturn on Capsolar angles for losers. This might be the single strongest (and is certainly the single most useful) marker in the entire set.

QUARTER. Quarter charts are substantially the same as Year charts (and, most of the time, were the same chart), with one interesting exception: Quarter charts for losers have more angular Moons than anything (even more than Pluto), and a moderate surplus of Moons over winners. See MOON below for why I think this is so.

MONTH. Everybody has more Sun than anything else, but winners have substantially more instances of closely angular Sun or Moon-Sun aspects than losers. (See below for my thinking on why.)

WEEK. Here is an example of where research of the big picture is important, rather than case-by-case: In previous attempts to predict, I thought the Week chart was one of our most important tools. (Theory: It's one of the very best tools of SMA in general, and narrows the focus to a tight period, generally excluding the other games that got them to the Super Bowl in the first place.) But this approach is wrong: Lunar ingresses aren't nearly as important, at least not in the win-lose angle. Two things come out of Week charts. (1) Venus and Jupiter are the most common angular planets for losers! (2) Sun and, to a lesser extent, Mercury lead for Winners.

DAY (Capsolar). The rule stands that we read the day from the CapQ + transits to Capsolar if we can and, in that case, ignore the Cansolar techniques completely. Only if we don't get a clear answer from the CapQ/transits do we look at the CanQ/transits. Though the highly decisive Saturn crossing of CapQ angles evaporated when all data was considered, it still shows in individual cases as highly determinative. Everybody has Pluto on the CapQ, and everybody has Venus - there are parties galore. On balance, winners tend to have more Uranus and Neptune, but not a huge surplus.

DAY (Cansolar). These are fascinating! I would not emphasize these results at all were it not for their persistence every step of the way. (There was no point in the study where the following facts were not evident.) First, CanQ and transits to Cansolar are best used as fallbacks when we can't get daily information from the Cap charts - otherwise, you are better off ignoring them. (Repeatedly, Saturn would be angular in a CanQ for a winner, but the game had already been "decided" correctly at the CapQ level.) Second, the CanQ angularities etc. are fascinating! Both winners and losers have Neptune and Mars as their two most angular planets, but with a difference: Winners have a high spike of Neptune angularities, while losers have a high spike of Mars angularities. This is not replicated for any other layer of the stack.


SUN. The American athlete is an expression of the archetypal hero, borne tall and proud. Barring afflictions that would dethrone it, Sun signifies winners. - Strongest for winners in Month & Week charts.

MOON. In contrast to Sun, Moon tends to contribute to losing. Probably, Moon is a wuss - too soft, too uncompetitive. (In Gauquelin assessment of natal charts, Moon and Mars show for opposite traits, opposite groups, e.g., Moon avoids angles for eminent athletes as much as Mars clusters on the angles). - Moon is most common planet for losers in Quarter charts.

VENUS. Everybody has Venus in the CapQ. With Jupiter, strongest for losers in Week charts. There are parties everywhere, so Venus alone should not at all be taken as a winning factor. (As the Week charts show, it can be a sign of losing - perhaps as being anti-competitive.)

MARS. Mars is a malefic! Despite its rulership of sports overall, it shows more for losing than winning. (Mars-Jupiter aspects foreground are another matter, showing "victorious athlete.") Mars is not so strong a loser signal as Saturn, but supports severity and hardship (and probably angry fans as well).

JUPITER. With Venus, strongest for losers in Week charts. Overall, Jupiter does not show winning except by extreme contrast, especially when one team uncompromised Saturn charts and the other has uncompromised Jupiter charts for the same critical level of the stack. But in general, there is enough fame and money going around, even for losers, that Jupiter in isolation means very little about winning.

SATURN signals losing, especially in the Year chart (whether Capsolar or Cansolar) and in the CapQ (or, absent clear CapQ signals, in the CanQ).

URANUS can support Pluto for upsets. Generally, Uranus describes excitement and surprises, and is not consistent on which kind of excitement. Uranus seems to favor the Winner on Year and Day charts, but appears most for losers on Month charts.

NEPTUNE is not a malefic for this purpose. It shows the insanity, madness, craziness, irrepressible emotion of the crowd. Unless involved in afflictions, it tends to mirror winning, at least at the day level (the immediate period of insanity): Both the CapQ and CanQ have Neptune surpluses for winners.

PLUTO. Highly present for both winners and losers in several layers of the charts, but even more common for winners. (On the other hand, aspects like Venus-Pluto foreground, or, to a lesser extent, Moon-Pluto, show a shock or emotional blow coincidental with losing.) Pluto's basic function is to single out, to beat the odds, so it is already isolating these highly distinctive, odds-topping teams. Pluto strong for one and not the other is consistent with upsets or odds-displacement.