Derby della Madonnina

Another weekend coming up, and a full slate of quality football. Looking at the strong draws, and there are only four so it won't take long, the selections are Real Zarazoga v Sevilla, Wigan Athletic v West Bromwich Albion, Bari v Parma and Stoke City v Liverpool. Other 'weaker' draw selections are Everton v Arsenal, Caen v Lille, Kaiserslautern v Stuttgart and Lorient v Paris St Germain.

Value home picks include Bologna (2.22) v Brescia, Cagliari (2.34) v Genoa, Sampdoria (2.0) v Chievo Verona, Koln (2.18) v Borussia Moenchengladbach, Wolfsburg (2.36) v Schalke '04, Brest (2.04) v Sochaux, Montpellier (2.22) v Toulouse and Auxerre (2.44) v Rennes.

The Milan derby is interesting. The basic ratings have Inter (2.74) as better by 1.3 goals, but after adjusting for form they are 'only' favoured by 1.06 goals. Inter and AC are first and second in the Serie A ratings but in the 'official' League table, AC Milan are three points and three places above Inter at the top. Inter's form is actually the worst in Serie A, whereas AC Milan's form is behind only Juventus and Udinese. AC Milan are at 2.94, with the draw at 3.3. The ratings make a back of Inter value, but this is one example where the value could be too good to be true.

Behind The Numbers

Joep again, who asks:

Why do you use your own handicaps in your Elo system while judging by this blog you mostly use the 1X2 market to bet on. Wouldn't it make more sense to use the 1X2 results in your rating system as well?

I'm not sure I totally understand the question, but I don't use the handicaps in my ratings. The handicaps are a product of the ratings. When I say that a team is -1.15 or whatever, I mean that for each team's rating to remain the same, this is the margin of victory that is required. A victory by less than the required margin will reduce that team's rating slightly, while a victory by more will raise it. I do usually use the ratings on the match odds markets, but I do occasionally venture into the world of Asian Handicaps or the over / under markets. No joy on the strong draw pick today, with Param scoring in the 84' minute, although at least the game finished under. It seems like there are a lot of late goals right now, but the 'strong' draws are still running at an impressive 35.29% in the top leagues.

I thought of something that I wish I had thought of a few days ago, and included in my Managing Expectations post from a couple of days ago.

Joep had asked how it was that Barcelona had overtaken Real Madrid in my La Liga ratings, and the answer was that while both teams had won at the weekend, Barcelona exceeded expectations, whereas Real Madrid fell short.

It occurred to me later, better late than never, that this is very similar to the business world, where a company announces its results, and the share price reacts. Anyone who follows these things knows that making a £50 million quarterly profit isn’t necessarily going to boost the share price. It all depends on the market’s expectations. If analysts were predicting profits of £25 million, then by exceeding expectations, the share price would likely jump, but if the expectations were for profits in the £100 million range, then by disappointing the market, the share price would likely fall. (There are other factors, but this is the basic idea).

Another parallel between football ratings and share prices is that results are not the whole story.

When a company reports its results, there is a lot more to it than just the bottom line of how much the company made. Analysts and investors look behind the numbers to gain an insight into the company’s future prospects, and so a company reporting an expected profit would see its share price plummet if something in the results indicated a bleak future. (Coincidentally, after I started writing this post, I saw this article regarding Cisco’s latest report).

It’s similar with football. The results are important, but other factors should also impact a team’s ratings. Some examples.

If a team wins, but a star player is injured and likely to miss several games, this should impact the ratings.

If a team loses, but had two players sent-off in the first five minutes of the match, this result should impact the ratings differently to the same result achieved in a match where the opposing team had two players sent off in the first five minutes!

If a team loses but had more shots on goal and more corners than the winning team who won the game on a dubious penalty, this should be factored in.

The star player wants to leave. The club are late paying wages. The young up-and-coming manager is being sought after by bigger clubs. All these things should somehow be factored in. The problem is finding the time to do all the research, which is a good argument for specialization, and then turning these subjective factors into meaningful numbers.

And Joep, sorry for messing up your name. The blog has been edited.

Different Night, Same Story

An example of how no lead is safe in the NBA came in last night's game between the highly rated Orlando Magic and the not-so-highly-rated, but perennially good, Utah Jazz. Orlando led by 18 points and looked beaten, before the visiting Jazz began to chip away at that lead. 

With 2:41 left in the third, they went on a run, and took the lead in the fourth and in the end won by 10. You can see from the screenshot just how much money was traded at low prices on the Magic. (Not as much as the night before). 

Anyway, another lay pays dividends, and incidentally, this was the third game in a row that the Jazz have trailed by 18 points, yet come back to win. On Saturday they beat the Los Angeles Clippers after spotting them an 18 point lead.

As I keep telling anyone who will listen, prices are always being driven too low in the NBA. Backing the Magic at 1.01, (or laying the Jazz at 1000 as someone did, ouch), thus opposing a team that rallied from down 22 just 24 hours earlier playing one of the best teams in the NBA, is asking for trouble.

Turning A Prophet

An example of how no lead is safe in the NBA came in last night's game between the highly rated Miami Heat and the not-so-highly-rated, but perennially good, Utah Jazz. Miami led by 22 points and looked beaten, before the visiting Jazz began to chip away at that lead. In the last minute they hit at least three 3-pointers and the game ended up going to overtime. You can see from the screenshot just how much money was traded at low prices on the Heat, and some of that came after a fat finger thought the game was over in regulation and backed the Heat at 1.01. My opportunistic lay was thus devoured, and a nice green-all-over achieved.

Utah is also at the centre of the latest book I am reading. Written by Jon Krakauer, and if you haven't read "Into Thin Air, or Into The Wild", I highly recommend them both, the book is a true story called "Under The Banner Of Heaven - A Story of Violent Faith". As you may have guessed, it's about the Mormon religion, a religion even more peculiar than most of them, and there is a piece in there which touched on gambling and amused me, although when it comes to religion, I am admittedly, easily amused.

Referencing one of the central characters, the paragraph in question reads:

In one of Ron's revelations, God had, in fact, instructed him to send his brother Mark to Nevada to wager on a horse race to raise funds for the City of Refuge. With the Lord letting Mark know which mount to bet on, it seemed that they couldn't lose. But they did. Afterward, Onias couldn't resist telling the brothers, "I told you so," causing relations between Ron and the prophet to deteriorate even furter.

Apparently the omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent God isn't too good at picking winners. I wonder if anyone has mentioned Exchange Betting to him? The Premium Charge shouldn't be a problem for him.

Just the one football match yesterday which saw Stoke City (at 2.14) throw away a two goal lead, before winning their match versus Birmingham City with an 85' goal. Football Elite had these on the Short List as well - always a welcome boost to see that I'm on the same page.

I suggested yesterday that Liverpool were value at Wigan tonight, but Adam begs to differ:

Will certainly be against you on Wigan - a vast overreaction to one stuttering performance and a couple of impressive ones. Woy relishes being the underdog, but very rarely justifies big favouritism. I don't think Pool are anywhere near they were last season as yet, confidence has been slightly restored, yes, but I can't have them odds on for this game.

I love backing Wigan when they are a generous price, but they are the ultimate team to avoid when favourites.

I love backing anyone when they are a generous price, but I don't agree that Wigan, at 4.9, are a generous price at all. (Cue a Wigan 2-0 win!) My ratings don't often predict strong away winners, but when it does, they don't often lose - just 8.3% all season in fact, from an admittedly small sample, leading me to Lay Wigan at 4.9 yesterday. They have drifted since, possibly because I tipped up Liverpool yesterday. On current form, I have Liverpool rated second currently, with Wigan, perhaps surprisingly, rated fifth, so it makes for an interesting game. Appreciate the positively toned comment too.

Oh, and the suggestion that Wigan drifted because of this blog was a joke.

Managing Expectations

Joep asked:

How did Barca regain the lead in your ELO ratings last weekend when Real beat a much stronger team, albeit at home? Real match not incorporated in the ratings yet due to the late KO time?

Firstly, my ratings do not have Atletico Madrid as a "much stronger team" than Getafe. They are stronger, but not hugely, and the teams would be rated even closer were it not for Getafe's disaster in the Europa League last week. Secondly, a win does not mean that a team will gain points. What matters is meeting expectations. At the start of the weekend, Real Madrid had a narrow lead over Barcelona in the ratings, and were expected to win by 2.33 at home to Atletico Madrid. Barcelona were away to Getafe, and expected to win by 1.36. The bottom line is that Barcelona exceeded expectations while Real Madrid fell short. The subsequent adjustments mean that for the moment at least, Barcelona reign in Spain.

Some midweek league action in England and Italy this week, and no surpise that the Manchester derby is a strong draw. In Italy the top draw pick is Parma v Sampdoria on Thursday, with the games at Brescia (v Juventus) and Cesena (v Lazio) weaker draw predictions. A weaker draw in England is the West Ham United v West Bromwich Albion game. Interestingly, every expected draw has the away side slightly favoured.

Home value picks are Roma (1.83) v Fiorentina, Chievo Verona (2.1) v Bari, Stoke City (2.14) v Birmingham City and Newcastle United (2.0) v Blackburn Rovers.

For an away value pick, Liverpool (1.84) at Wigan Athletic look value.

BBC - Stoppage Time Not Included

For the second week in a row, Sunday's football proved disappointing. Real Zaragoza v Mallorca looked to be heading to a draw, and was a draw according to BBC Sport, but we actually lost that one to a 94' minute penalty.

Football Elite had West Bromwich Albion v Manchester City as a Recommended Bet, but I didn't follow this one, as I was already on the draw. In the end, we were both wrong. I had West Bromwich Albion as the top form team and Man City as the worst form team, but in the end, class told in this one.

None of the 'weaker' draws worked out either, and the best pick of the day was Stuttgart at 2.58 who crushed Werder Bremen 6-0. Palermo were also a winner at 2.1, but Lazio, Levante (a short-list selection from FE) and Sampdoria all failed to win.

The EPL ratings have West Ham United, Blackpool and Wigan Athletic as the bottom three, with Newcastle United up to ninth.

In La Liga, Barcelona regained top spot in the ratings from Real Madrid, and in the Bundesliga, Borussia Dortmund are breathing down Bayern Munich's neck.

Sevilla v Valencia tonight is rated a weak draw.

NBA Trading

A couple of days ago, John wrote

I watched my first NBA game last night (Bulls v Celtics on ESPN). Seems like it may be a sport I could trade and I'm interested to know how you go about it. Did you have a live stream of those games or do you simply use a live scoreboard? I was watching the odds on Betfair at the same time as the game and although it's fast paced the movements seemed to be slow due to the scoring which makes me think a live feed is not a requirement. Would love to hear your thoughts on this?

For me, the NBA is the best sport for trading. Liquidity in most games is good, there is frequent scoring and the price movements, except for late in close games, tend not to be too extreme. There are plenty of pauses in play when the prices will settle, timeouts, end of quarters, free-throws etc. I have traded blind in the past, i.e. using a live scoreboard, but my personal preference is to find a live feed and get a feel for the game.

I wouldn’t recommend going in too big if you are only just getting into the NBA, but the best way to learn is to play with small sums. The NBA is very much about momentum, but in my opinion, the markets tend to overreact to runs. It’s not unusual to see a team that starts at around 1.7 to take a 10 point first quarter lead and be trading in the 1.3s. 10 point leads are nothing in the NBA – well, not in the first quarter they’re not.

The thing about runs is that they come to an end. Typically a coach will call a timeout when his team is on the wrong end of such a run, the idea being to break the momentum, and re-group, so if you're on the wrong end of a run, it's important to keep a clear head.

Not many games see the favourite head straight to 1.01 and win. It does happen occasionally, but more often than not, the price at some point is driven too low.

A couple of other tips – keep track of the foul count, and who the fouls are on. Players in foul trouble early are usually benched for a while and if the player concerned is one of the ‘stars’, this can be significant. Even when they are back on the court, players in foul trouble, similar to football players on a yellow card, are a little restricted in how aggressive they can be. It’s also important to know when teams are “in the penalty”, and thus when fouls will result in free-throws.

Finally, the last minute of an NBA game can last for a long time. Deliberate fouls, missed free-throws, the three-point option – all these mean that a lead of single digits is not safe even close to the end of a game.

Bolton v Tottenham

Sports Trading Life had an interesting, if not totally accurate, comment on the Bolton Wanderers v Tottenham Hotspur match yesterday, in regard to the history behind this fixture.

He wrote: 

Also, this match between Spurs and Bolton was a key example of why you should do your research before trading or betting on football. From reading forums on Friday and Saturday morning there were plenty of people lumping on to Spurs following their fantastic win against Inter Milan. However, a quick look at the head to head record between the teams would show you that Spurs have NEVER won at the Reebok stadium before. They also haven’t beaten Bolton away since 1996. So with spurs priced at about 2.50 pre-match it was a no-brain decision to lay them and not back them. A price of 2.50 on something that has never happened before? I will oppose that all day!

Leaving aside for the moment the fact that Spurs HAVE won at the Reebok before (in October 2004, they beat Bolton 4-3 after extra-time in a League Cup third-round tie), just how relevant is it that Spurs had never won a Premier League game at the Reebok, or won a League game at Bolton since March 1996? 

There have been 10 games since that last win, with Bolton winning six, and four draws, but there were also a number of other stats to choose from. Some examples: Spurs have conceded a goal in their last nine Premier League matches. 

Bolton have failed to score just once since opening day in the Premier League. Spurs have not lost consecutive league games in over a year. Bolton have won only one of the last nine meetings with Spurs in all competitions. Kevin Davies has scored four goals in his last three games against Spurs in all competitions at the Reebok Stadium.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but a bet on Kevin Davies to score the first goal now looks good! Not that I have ever in my life bet on first goalscorer, and don't intend to now.

Anyway, as I have written before, it's always interesting to read that a team hasn't won somewhere in x years, but I don't find that statistic particularly relevant. If it was the same players involved each time, then yes, it would be something to consider, but over the past 14 years both teams will have changed completely and the statistic is simply a curiosity for me.

My ratings had Spurs by .13 for this game and thus a strong draw. Form is factored in to that, but unless someone shows me any evidence that history going back 14, or 6, years has any relevance, I have no plans to adjust the spreadsheet.

Fragility

Overall, Saturday was a good day, with Football Elite the star of the day. The three Recommended Bets were all winners to nil, Sunderland (2.12), Real Sociedad (2.2) and Espanyol (1.94).

The Short-List had Bolton at 3.15, and Nuremberg at 2.06 with draws at Birmingham and Fulham.

Only one strong draw at 3.15 from four selections, (Sochaux v Auxerre) so a small loss on those today, and the strike rate drops to 38.1%. For those who are new to this blog, when I talk about 'strong' and 'weak' draws, strong draws are those matches where the ratings predict a result of 0.1 of a goal or less, while weaker draws are matches that fall in the 0.2 to 0.5 range. Adam at 2010 And Beyond (blog added to blog roll) was asking what the sample size is for the strong draws. The 38.1% is just for this season, as last season strong and weak draws were lumped together (hitting at a combined 38.67% for 2009-10 in the EPL).

My value home winners had two losses at Birmingham City and Rennes, but four winners at Blackburn Rovers (1.85), Bologna (2.0), Real Sociedad (2.2) and Nuremberg (2.06). More and more, I find myself finding the value above, or at least close to, evens these days.

The 'big wins' predicted by the ratings for Manchester United and Internazionale never came close, with the former scraping home with a very late winner and the latter failing to even win. It's not a new idea to oppose teams involved in European action the preceding week, but it may be a legitimate one. Injuries didn't help. I think I used up all my goals with Celtic, who were expected to win by 3 and won by 9! Incidentally, on checking the spreadsheet, it turned out that the Man U margin should have been 3 and not 4 - I must have been smoking something good when I ran the numbers for that game!

With regard to why the AH markets are thin, Adam commented that it's

because 5% commission doesn't work with Asian Handicaps. The BETDAQ liquidity is mostly false and put up by a bot anyway. The liquid AH markets are at Pinnacle, SBOBET and 188bet.

There was also a question from 'John' on trading the NBA, but no e-mail address for me to reply to. Trading the NBA picked up again last night, and we're now back to positive territory for the season with every win restoring that too-easily dented confidence. It's a fragile thing, confidence.

Fireworks In Phoenix

The NBA continues to stand for Negative Balance Adjustments with a third losing night, although losses were trimmed significantly on the just-ended double overtime game between the Suns and Grizzlies, who traded at 1.1 for several thousand before losing. Apart from that, it just seems like nothing is going my way right now. None of the trades are ones that I have that instant 'what the hell am I doing' feeling running through me when they are placed, but value lays are just not working out.

Take the Orlando Magic game v New Jersey Nets. It's a one point game and the Magic are trading at a 'too low' 1.17, but the Nets choose that moment to fall apart, and in the space of a few minutes are down by 20. Very frustrating, and however much I tell myself that these will be profitable in the long run, it still dents the confidence, at least for a few minutes. Most nights there isn't time to feel sorry for yourself - there's another game to trade coming right along. What's most upsetting is that the SBP did better than me last night! He had a winner.

Plenty of good football this weekend, and Sunday's matches have come under the Cassini Microscope. There aren't too many strong draws expected, just two. Real Zaragoza v Mallorca is one and West Bromwich Albion v Manchester City is the other. Weaker draws are expected at Bari v AC Milan, Lens v Montpellier and Paris St Germain v Olympique Marseille.

Lazio look value at 2.56 in the Rome derby game, and Sampdoria at 1.96 v Catania look good along with Stuttgart (2.58) v Werder Bremen, Levante (2.4) v Deportivo La Coruna and Palermo (2.1) v Genoa.

Big wins are expected for Arsenal (-2.5), Juventus (-2.83), Bayer Leverkusen (-2.71) and Real Madrid (-3.33).

Remember Remember

Still very busy with work, and it's only today that I've been able to find time to catch up the ratings. I've not looked at the projected results beyond Saturday yet, but for today and tomorrow the following are rated strong draws - Bolton Wanderers v Tottenham Hotspur, SC Freiburg v Mainz '05, Arles v Caen and Sochaux v Auxerre. Strong draws in the major leagues are striking at 39% for the season.

The best value home winners appear to be Birmingham City (2.02) v West Ham United, Blackburn Rovers (1.85) v Wigan Athletic, Bologna (2.0) v Lecce, Rennes (2.84) v Lyon, Real Sociedad (2.2) v Racing Santander and Nuremberg (2.06) v Koln.

Big wins are expected for Manchester United (-4) and Internazionale (-3) but at 1.25 and 1.29 respectively, the Asian Handicaps would be my preference here. Man U (1.9) and Inter (2.02) both -1.5 on BETDAQ look good to me. Why are the AH markets so thin on Betfair?

I'll look at Sunday's games later.

The new NBA season started well for me, but the last two nights have been disappointing, leaving me only slightly ahead for the season. Not as bad as the SBP though. He has started the NBA season in the same awful form as all his other sports. The Denver Nuggets -3.5 were his first selection on Wednesday (lost by 1), and last night he went for the Chicago Bulls giving 6.5. Both teams not only failed to cover the spread, but failed to even win, so he was 4 points off in the first game and a whopping 15 points out of the money on the second. But with his staking plan we'll be well ahead when game three is a winner. Someone should tell him that the only true measure of a system is the return from level stakes.

Enjoy the fireworks, and if you've never experienced a Sussex Society Bonfire night, get down there! Lewes is of course the biggest and best, but I have great memories of fireworks nights down in Battle in the 1980s. http://www.battelbonfire.co.uk/

Moving Into Movember

After a busy weekend with work, including back-to-back all-nighters that I am far too old for, which was followed by two days of training, I am almost back to 'normal', albeit clean shaven for Movember.

I'm behind with updating the ratings with the results from the weekend, but I'll catch up before next weekend. The results from the weekend were mixed. The strong draws were poor, with only Monaco v Bordeaux coming through out of six selections, both away picks won, and the home stand-outs were great on Saturday going 3 for 3 at 2.0, 2.24 and 2.68 but then awful on Sunday when I couldn't buy a winner in four games. Laying odds-on in the Bundesliga saw a winner as Werder Bremen (1.55) lost 2-3 to Nuremberg although Hoffenheim (1.69) beat Hannover rather easily. The strong draw games were all close, with no more than one goal in five of the six matches, and West Bromwich Albion perhaps a little unlucky to lose with the two sendings-off.

Football Elite had a losing Recommended Bet in Catania, with Bolton and Mainz also losing from the Short-List. There were two winners here in Brest at 2.68 and Racing Santander at 2.16.

I had to miss the conclusion of the World Series, but made a profit after some kind soul offered the San Francisco Giants at 1.43 after they were already 2-0 up in the series.

October saw a profit, but for the twelth month in a row, the profits were down on the same month a year earlier. On the plus side, it was my best month since May, but it certainly appears to be getting steadily harder to make decent money on Betfair. Other pluses were that my BETDAQ account had its best ever month (with a little help from me) and that the Premium Charge is also being held at bay, with the Total Charges right now at 20.58% - just above the threshold.

Historically, November is my third most successful month of the year, but I will be pleasantly surprised if I meet last November's total.

Get Inter The Groove

Always nice to start the weekend off with a winner, and Internazionale were expected to win by 0.7 at Genoa. At 2.22 this was a value bet.

As some of you may have noticed, I have a tendency to focus on draws, or value home selections, but away picks at this rating (of -0.7) or above have only lost once all season from 19 selections, and of course, that one loss was in the unreliable Bundesliga. Other selections in this range this weekend are Chelsea (1.48) who are -1.35 to win at Blackburn Rovers and Real Madrid (1.35), who are -1.67 to win at Hercules.

The ratings expected Bayern Munich to beat Freiburg by two, and won by exactly that 4-2, but at 1.33 this was too short for me. Odds-on favourites in Germany are usually to be opposed.

In the NBA, the Dallas Mavericks traded at 1.05 before losing by one point at home to the Memphis Grizzlies, and the Lakers / Suns Under 218.5 traded at 1.07 - it ended up at 220 points.

Unfortunately, I have to work extra hours on the day job this weekend, and I'm expected in the office as well which seems a little unreasonable, but that's life as a part-time trader.

Full-Time Trader Ben at Sports Trading Life had a post yesterday about making gambling pay. Rather provocatively titled Is This Why 99.9% Of Sports Gamblers Lose?, he writes about the importance on giving systems time before discarding or modifying them, and this is spot on in my opinion. It's certain that any off-the-shelf 'system' is going to work for too long, and it's up to the individual to put the time and effort in to finding something that works for them. Ben writes

I firmly believe that one of the main reasons why most people fail at gambling is because they never fully expect to be successful at it which means they will never give it the full amount of time and effort required to make it work.

I have to agree. There's no website that you can go to and find a winning system, but if you have the time and a certain amount of intelligence, it is quite possible to eke out an edge, but it's important to maintain a positive approach. Beating the odds is a challenge, but Betfair's Premium Charge is proof that several people achieve this. You can either rise to the challenge, come up with ideas, modify them as needed and become profitable, or you can be half-hearted about it, which in betting, as with most challenges in life, will doom you to failure. Henry Ford's quote sums it up "If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right."

Bats Heat Up

The ratings predict two strong draws, two weak draws, and six bankers in the EPL this weekend. The strong draws are Bolton Wanderers v Liverpool on Sunday, and Blackpool v West Bromwich Albion on Monday. The other major leagues all have just one strong draw each; in Germany Koln v Hamburg, en France Monaco v Bordeaux, in Serie A Brescia v Napoli and in La Liga it's Deportivo La Coruna v Espanyol.

The ratings have the following as value: Malaga (3.75) v Real Sociedad, Wolfsburg (2.25) v Stuttgart, Brest (2.7) v St Etienne, Auxerre (2.0) v Nice, Palermo (2.4) v Lazio, Catania (2.8) v Fiorentina and Aston Villa (1.88) v Birmingham City.

The NBA continues in pleasing fashion. My main focus is on trading the match odds market, but I play the handicap and over/under markets pre-game where I perceive value. The total points are 3-2 at the moment, which is nothing to get excited about, but the handicaps are currently 8-2.

I got a bit lucky on the World Series last night. The Over 6.5 runs bet did not look good with just 2 runs on the board heading to the bottom of the eighth inning, but the Giants hit 7 more to seal the game and take the total over. They've also taken a 2-0 lead in the series, and historically such teams win the World Series 78.4% of the time (1.28). I'm on at 1.43. After being one of the lower scoring teams of the year, the Giants have certainly chosen the right time to get hot with the bats.

Value Betting For Dummies

Anonymous from Romford, or perhaps it's George from Romford who just happens to share the same IP address as Anonymous, was asking about value, and yes, again I am breaking my rule, but only because I found this very informative article about value betting which is well worth reading if you are still confused about value. The only thing I would add is that only time, or your account balance, will tell if value is imaginary or real.

If the bookmaker's odds are unfair, how can a punter ever win? Given the disadvantage the overround imposes, it is no surprise that as many as 95% of gamblers fail to win at fixed odds sports betting over the long term. There is no denying that most bookmakers, particularly the well-established firms, are very good at setting prices, estimating the true chance of sporting results and locking in a profit margin.

Nevertheless, sports are not statistically quantifiable, in the sense that cards or other forms of casino gambling are, where simple laws of probability govern the outcome of games like blackjack, roulette and craps. I know that I have a 1/37 chance of landing a number 36 on a European roulette wheel (1/38 chance on an American wheel). But how can I know what the true probability is of Ronnie O'Sullivan winning the world snooker championship again? And if I think I know what his chances are, how can I be sure that my estimate is more accurate than the bookmaker's?

Unfortunately, the answers to these questions only come with time and experience, by acquiring a "knowledge" of a sport and its betting market, and a familiarity with the way bookmakers set their odds. The good news, however, is that whilst bookmakers are very good at setting odds for sporting events, they, like punters, can make mistakes, sometimes very glaring ones, which knowledgeable bettors will snap up without a moment's hesitation. William Hill, for example, astonishingly offered 200/1 on Primoz Peterka, the back-in-form Slovenian ski jumper, to win the opening ski jumping World Cup competition of the 2002/03 season at Kuusamo, Finland, despite the fact that he had won the qualifying competition the night before, and had been double world champion in previous seasons. The true odds, by contrast, were likely to be nearer to 10/1, and most other bookmakers had priced accordingly. Peterka won, and William Hill ceased offering odds for the ski jumping World Cup thereafter. Of course, such large mistakes are relatively rare, but smaller pricing errors do and must exist to account for the few per cent of gamblers who are profiting regularly from fixed odds sports betting.

Punters differ in the methods they use to acquire a sports betting "knowledge". Some like to adopt a more mathematical approach by using rating systems based on past performance to predict future outcomes. Others spend hours each week poring over sports journals and Internet sites to glean as much information as they can about a particular event, including news about the weather, and team or player injuries and morale. Still others base their judgement on a subjective feel for the forthcoming event, relying on an inkling or a hunch about what may happen. And finally there are punters who simply pay others to do the thinking for them, by subscribing to one or more sports advisory services.

There is no right or wrong approach to seeking a betting edge. Ultimately, the best one is the one that works for you, one that returns a profit. However, what each approach has in common is a shared aim of finding "value" in the odds, where the true chance of a win is greater than that estimated by the bookmaker. Many punters fail to appreciate the importance of value betting, preferring to subscribe to the "back winners, not losers" school of gambling. Betting on Liverpool at Anfield to beat Sunderland at 4/11, it might be argued, is surely preferable to betting on Sunderland to beat Liverpool at 13/2, even if the bookie has restricted Liverpool's odds but been generous with Sunderland's. Liverpool, simply, are too good, however poor the price.

This analysis is confused because the punter has failed to assess Liverpool's chance of a win in probabilistic terms, but instead rather simply by whether he thinks they will or won't be victorious. "Winners" cannot win all the time, no matter how much a punter is convinced that they can. The important question a punter should instead be asking is whether the true chance of a winner is greater than that which the bookmaker has unfairly (in his mind), but potentially mistakenly (in the punter's mind), estimated it to be. In other words, is the bookmaker's price greater than that which the punter considers to be the fair price? If it is, then he has found betting value, provided he can estimate prices better than the bookmaker, of course.

A value bettor will be generally unconcerned about backing the underdog, or perhaps more relevantly backing a team which he thinks will not win (underdog or not), provided there is value in the bookmaker's odds. A value bettor estimating the likelihood for the Liverpool win to be 70%, with a 15% chance of a Sunderland win would back the away team, despite believing that Liverpool should win. According to these estimations, the fair odds for the two teams are 1.43 and 6.67 respectively. If the punter is right, and the game could be played 100 times, a 13/2 bet on Sunderland each time would, on average, return £12.50 profit from 100 £1 stakes. By contrast, backing Liverpool at 4/11 would, on average, lose him £4.55. He might believe that Liverpool should win each time, but in this case so does the bookmaker, who has cut his odds. Equally, however, the bookmaker has underestimated the chance of a Sunderland win, offering odds that the value bettor considers, in this case, to represent value.

Since odds are just probabilities, value betting offers really the only way to beat the bookmaker. A punter can back as many "winners" as he likes, but if he fails to take into account the bookmaker's prices, it may not be enough to return a profit. There will always be some losers. Really, the argument about value betting is a hypothetical one. The "back winners, not losers" philosophy is itself inherently all about finding a betting edge. If a punter is finding winners and making a profit with them, it means simply that he is winning more bets than the bookmaker believes the punter ought to be winning, according to the odds the bookmaker had set. If this is the case, the punter has found value and established a betting edge, whether he quantitatively set out to do so or just followed his hunches. Successful betting, then, is really all about understanding and managing probabilities. Know the true chances of a sporting win, and there may be profitable opportunities waiting at the bookmakers. As Geoff Harvey says in his book Successful Football Betting, "Find the value, [and] the winners will take care of themselves."

Number Of The Beast

The football over the last evenings was of little interest to me, but the start on the new NBA season was. I layed a nice sum at 1.01 in the first game fairly late on between the Miami Heat and the Boston Celtics, but the big win eluded me as the Heat got within three, but never closer. Still, a nice profit to start to season.

I've written before that, year after year, the price is driven too low, too early by greed, and presumably by people who don't understand basketball. Incidentally, the 1.01 lay was on BETDAQ who had this game in-running, and yet the following Lakers v Rockets game wasn't in-running. It makes no sense.

The Lakers received their Championship rings before this game, and invariably it seems the recipients take a while to settle down after all the hoopla, and so it was with the Lakers who, after starting at a ridiculous 1.29, were down by 11 points and trading at 2.68 by half-time.

Last night I was able to lay the Celtics at 1.21/1.22 before they went on to lose to the Cleveland Cavaliers, and the new season is off to a good start. Some way to go to match my best season of 2008-09 but hope springs eternal, especially at the start of a new season.

Breaking my rule (again) to ignore Anonymous comments the question of why so many publications use form going back 6 matches is interesting. He wrote:

The amount of people I have seen who say they use the last 6 games form in one way or another is uncanny. Some people base whole systems around it.

There must be a sheep mentality at work. Was 6 the number of games the pools predictions used to have the WXLDXX for in the newspapers? I wonder if it's subconsciously derived from that.

To the best of my knowledge, the number six has no special significance when assessing football form.

Personally, I chose six for the reasons stated yesterday - it seems like this is a big enough number to smooth out any abnormal results, yet small enough to be meaningful. It's a manageable number, and also a number that's likely to include three home / three away games, or at least two home or two away games.

Although I agree that six has no special significance for rating teams, I'm hard-pressed to come up with a better number to use. Four isn't bad, five and seven are unbalanced and eight is getting into the realm of being too far back to be meaningless. If I did go back that far, the weighting would diminish their value so their impact would be negligible.

Besides, I like the number 6. It's the number of (old) pennies I used to get for my pocket money. It's the smallest perfect number. It's the only even perfect number that is not the sum of successive odd cubes. It's the only number that is both the sum and the product of three consecutive positive numbers. It's a triangular number (as is its square) and England won the World Cup in 66. Six is a great number, and the devil in me likes 666 - Here is wisdom, let him that hath understanding... Well, it is nearly Halloween.

Personal Touch

Geoff at full-time betting asked

Hi- fascinating reading as always- what are you basing the "strong draws" research on? is it your own stats or something that is widely available?

I also had an e-mail from Steve who wrote

Thanks for the reply below my system is still going although the last week has seen a slight drop in the strike rate. On the blog you mention that you consider past form etc. Are you able to give any advice on how you incorporate past form into the ratings? Do you also consider past meetings between two teams?

Since the questions overlap a little, I'll address them together.

The answer is that strong draws, along with all my football picks, are generated from my own statistics. The main component is each team's basic rating from an Elo based but personalised system, modified by recent form and historical home / away record.

As for how to incorporate form, to me it seems logical to put more weighting on the most recent result and reduce the weighting as you go back. I use the most recent six games for this. Why six? - it seems like this is a big enough number to smooth out any abnormal results, yet small enough to be meaningful. Besides, the ratings themselves are a record of long-term form.

Also, I don't just use the result, but I use the result relative to the expected result, so for example, Crystal Palace losing at Chelsea would penalise Palace a lot less than Palace losing at home to Brighton. When I see form shown in the manner of WwLDdl, to me, it's almost meaningless. I use the difference in ratings after each result so that I have something like +6, -3, +3, -5, +12, -9 and then weight them.

As for whether or not I consider previous meetings between the two teams, the answer is no. I don't believe that this adds anything to the ratings. Teams usually play each other just twice a season, (excluding the Scottish Leagues), and while it's mildly interesting to know that it's been x years since team A beat team B, with teams changing year by year, it really means nothing. There might be a case for a 'derby game' adjustment though.

Another nice winner last night with Real Sociedad (-1.1) comfortably beating Deportiva La Coruna at 2.14. Football Elite were on this one also, and as he commented in his update, the price on this game plunged late to around 2.0 at kick-off. 2.0 would have been close to taking this one off the value list, but getting on a couple of days ago at 2.14 meant this was comfortably value.

It was a good weekend for Matt's Football Elite picks. The three Recommended Bets all won with clean sheets. In addition to Real Sociedad's 3-0 win last night, Villareal won 2-0 on Sunday, and Sunderland beat Aston Villa 1-0 on Saturday.

Over Staking

I mentioned a few posts ago that there are some odd things that happen when trading in-play on BETDAQ.

A week ago, I wrote:

Aside from the generally low liquidity, there's another strange thing on BETDAQ which is that one minute it looks like a liquid market, with prices three deep, but the next instant, all the bids and offers vanish, and it's a ghost market.

Apparently this is nothing new to longer-time users of BETDAQ, and it has been complained about as far back as November 2007.

From the Bookmakers Review :

Multiple Betdaq customers complained about the exchange using fake amounts to make its markets look more active and attract bettors. The large amounts available on minor markets regularly disappear as soon as a real bettor tries to match a bet.

It's definitely odd, although another possible explanation could be this -

We all know BETDAQ allow bookmakers to put their prices up on the exchange - sometimes through Betdaq tools, and I honestly think some of them are quite clunky in the way the do it. If they change a price I think they remove their offers, do some kind of recalculation - and pop them back up a few minutes later.

We all know this? I can't say that I knew it, but BETDAQ's very much a secondary exchange for me although I do find myself using it more and more these days, and the balance after Sunday's NFL reached a new high, so it's fast becoming my 'lucky' exchange.

The weekend was one of my better ones, but it should have been much more. I layed the Philadelphia Phillies at 1.24 in their NLCS game v the San Francisco Giants but went in for an amount that was above my comfort level with the result that I traded out too soon at a price that was less than value. They were 2-0 up at the time, but it was far too early in the game to be backing at that kind of a price, but a four figure red does things to the brain, and the urge to protect the bank proved stronger than making the correct decision to hold on to it. Of course the Giants rallied, and won 3-2. One day I'll get the hang of this trading game.

Strength In Numbers

The draws keep coming. The three strong draws predicted here for today were Parma v AS Roma, Bologna v Juventus and Udinese v Palermo. It says something about these picks when I am actually disappointed when one of them fails to come in. The games at Parma and Bologna both delivered at 3.35 and 3.75 respectively, but the shortest priced of the trio ended 2-1 to Udinese. So four winners from six picks this weekend at an average price of 3.45.

In the EPL, there were further signs that the ratings are clicking with Manchester United -1.2 @ Stoke City, and Liverpool -1.1 v Blackburn Rovers both winning by the expected margin (or as close to it as the scoring system in football allows).

Manchester City blotted the EPL copybook by slumping to a 0-3 defeat when they were rated higher by 0.5, and playing an intra-group rival. The early red-card is one of those things that happen, and no ratings system in the world is going to help when something like that happens.

In Serie A, Chievo were -1.2 v Cesena (won 2-1), Lazio were -0.9 v Cagliari (won 2-1), Lecce were -0.6 v Brescia (won 2-1) and in the late game Internazionale are a full -2 v Sampdoria. It doesn't get much better than that.

La Liga wasn't bad either. Almeria v Hercules was a weaker draw prediction which finished 1-1 at 3.4. Espanyol were -1 v Levante and won 2-1. Getafe were -1.3 v Sporting de Gijon and won 3-0, and Sevilla were -1.2 and won 4-3.

In the late game I have Villareal at -0.8 at 2.34 v Atletico Madrid.

Ligue 1 wasn't so good. Lyon were -1 to win at Arles, but could only draw, and Paris St Germain were -0.9 v Auxerre, yet lost 2-3. Lille are -0.6 at 2.56 in the late game.

And then there's the Bundesliga - the problem child of the Majors. Laying the odds-on favourite continues to pay the bills with Borussua Dortmund failing to beat Hoffenheim and Bayer Leverkusen losing to Mainz 05 although Stuttgart did beat St Pauli. The ROI on this system now stands at a solid enough 17.26%, and while a profitable method shouldn't be knocked, I much prefer the finesse of using the ratings for my picks. The Bundesliga seems to be as good as any other league when it comes to strong draws, hitting at over 40%, but very weak when it comes to teams with an expected superiority in the 0.5 range. In fact more than 56% of such games result in an Away win, compared with 20% in the EPL or La Liga. But this is good information to know. All leagues have their own personalities as has been noted here before. The trick is to use the ratings to their strengths and if this means using the numbers in different way for certain leagues, then so be it.

Einstein

As tipped up here earlier, Freiburg won at 2.32 and Hannover 96 at 2.16 for a nice profit, although 'long-shot' Eintracht Frankfurt could only draw with Schalke 04

Another winner from the 'strong-draw' stable in Wigan Athletic v Bolton Wanderers at 3.35, making it 2 from 3 for these so far this weekend. Three more games tomorrow, but already in profit.

A major drift in price in the imminent Fiorentina v Bari game. Bottom of the table La Viola were 1.78 two days ago, but have now drifted to 2.0.

The intra-group matches are also ahead, with Tottenham Hotspur drawing 1-1 with Everton, although West Ham United lost to Newcastle United 1-2.

In baseball, the Texas Rangers eliminated the New York Yankees in 6 games, while the San Francisco Giants try to do the same later today in Philadelphia.

Texas play in their first ever World Series after winning the American league after 50 years of trying. If it wasn't for the George W Bush connection, I'd almost be pleased for them. I had the misfortune to spend a year living in the Dallas-Fort Worth area several years back, and Texans are strange people. I did have fun telling the following joke while I was there, and seeing how many people completely missed it and joined me in a high-five before it finally sank in.

Albert Einstein's at this party. He goes up to the first man and says "Hi, I'm Albert Einstein, what's your IQ?" and the guy answers "240".

"That's great", says Einstein, "We can talk about pulsars, quasars, black holes, inter-stellare space travel. We can have a great conversation".

So they chat for a while before Einstein says "Well, it's a party, so I'd better go and circulate", and walks up to a second guy, He says "Hi, I'm Albert Einstein, what's your IQ?" and the guy answers "140".

"I guess that's OK", says Einstein, "We can talk about politics or religion". So they chat for a while before Einstein says "Well, it's a party, so I'd better go and circulate", and walks up to a third guy. He says "Hi, I'm Albert Einstein, what's your IQ?" and the guy answers "40".

Albert Einstein looks at him for a few seconds, before raising his right hand, and saying "How 'bout them Cowboys!".

Back to baseball, and the Giants may find it hard to join the Rangers in the World Series today with Jonathan Sanchez matching up against Roy Oswalt who pitched very well in game two against the Giants, although Oswalt's appearance as a relief pitcher in Game 4 was a disaster. I'm hoping some doubt has crept in. The Phillies are 1.63 and, while I think they will win, I don't like beacking at those prices in baseball. The value for me is on laying with a view to trading out early if Oswalt looks sharp.

In the NFL tomorrow, Betting at Betfair pick the New England Patriots +2.5 at 2.02. I'm not convinced. The Chargers have a 2-4 record, but all four defeats have come on the road, with the home games being easy wins, by 25 points and 31 points.

There's also a major mismatch with the Patriots defense (American spelling) ranked 29th in the league against the pass facing the Chargers who are first in the league in total offense, first in passing yards averaging 315 per game in the air.