Comeback Kids

The Utah Jazz won their fifth consecutive road (away) game last night, beating the Portland Trail Blazers. In every one of those five games, they came back from a double digit deficit, this time 'just' 11 points. Portland traded as low as 1.16, and pre-game were -3.5 on most sportsbooks (-4 on one). Betfair was out of line with -2.5, and the Jazz were available at 2.06. Next road game is at the Clippers next Sunday, and for once it's an early game. Mind you, the way the Clippers are playing, one win in 14 games this season, and on a nine game losing run, it's unlikely that they'd be able to take a double digit lead if they were offered it, although the rookie number one draft pick Blake Griffin is playing well right now.

The regular season is 82 games long, so we're about 1/6th of the way through already. Some of the surprises so far have been the poor performance of the Miami Heat, and the strong performances of the New Orleans Hornets and the San Antonio Spurs. The Hornets have yet to lose at home, and the Spurs have yet to lose away. The Lakers had a poor spell, losing two games and playing poorly in more, and the line for their game later today with the Golden State Warriors which opened at 11.5 is now down to 6 in some places. Betfair have yet to put the line up.

Update 7:42pm: Darn it. Just received an e-mail from the SBP, and he's gone for the Warriors +12. Kiss of death?

Miller Time

A second minute own goal isn't the kind of start I was looking for at Crewe, even if I did have a small interest on the Overs. Mind you, by that time Nuremburg were already 0-2 down at home and about to concede a third, so it wasn't the best of starts to the afternoon schedule. When I backed Nuremburg, they were at 2.04, but following Football Elite making them a Recommended Bet, the price came in as low as 1.92. What I should have done as soon as they went odds-on was to lay them as they then qualified under the Bundeslayga System!

The early games were much better. Before I had backed Arsenal back, they went a goal up and it looked a loser until Tottenham's comeback, and in Scotland, both Rangers and Hearts won by the expected margins.

The strong draws suffered late hits. Hannover v Hamburg was heading to a 2-2 draw before a 90' winner, and Moenchengladbach v Mainz was 2-2 until the 88'. Close games - just not quite close enough, but Stockport v Torquay came in though, as did St Etienne v Auxerre.

Meanwhile, inspired no doubt by the Cassini Ratings, blue moon blogger Mark Iverson has come up with some ideas of his own. Check out Professional Sports Trader . It's always interesting to see how others lay out their spreadsheets and what ideas they have.

Losing Well

I must post up lower division tips more often. A Crewe Alexandra v Rotherham United tip gets more comments than the Netherlands v Spain World Cup Final.

A word on the reasoning behind the Crewe pick, and incidentally I quite often back at this level, even Conference matches, but don't comment on them as I didn't think the interest was there. Scott Ferguson of the excellent Sport is for Betting blog calls it:

an odd pick. I'm a Crewe fan - we've just broken a four-game losing streak by beating Gillingham who are terrible. Our 11 match unbeaten streak included seven draws. Rotherham are five pts above us on the table and have the best goalscorer in the league, Adam Le Fondre. Crewe clean sheets are about as common as England World Cup wins and the Millers have conceded just 6 goals on their travels this year.

I nearly stopped reading at "I'm a Crewe fan", since all credibility was gone at that point...joking aside - interesting that Rotherham United are five points ahead in the table, since my ratings have Crewe in sixth place and Rotherham down in 17th. The ratings have no respect for league positions, nor for goal difference for that matter. They simply reward a team that plays above itself, and punishes a team that plays below itself. A four game losing run in itself means nothing. It's who those four losses were against, and where, that affects the ratings. A quick check shows that two of those recent losses were one goal losses against 'high-flyers' Shrewsbury Town and Port Vale, neither of which did much damage to the rating. Rotherham, on the other hand, have under-performed in each of the last seven matches, and their last two away league wins came courtesy of a late penalty and a 92' winner. The ratings have Crewe superior by 1.24 goals, and at 2.42 appear to be good value. However the ratings are just a starting point - certainly if you are putting serious money on these games, and someone like Scott who 'knows' a team like Crewe is better able than myself to confirm whether the ratings are valid. In this case the answer is no

Can't see any value in it at all myself but hope you're right!

Rest assured, I am not as stupid as I look (which was a great relief to my Mother) and if Crewe lose 0-3, there will still be food on the table.

There are a couple of 'strong' draws in League Two - Barnet v Northampton Town and Stockport County v Torquay United. Strong draws in the lower English leagues currently hit at 33%.

Update: A commenter (Blez - check his blog out here - it looks quite good, despite the author's name!) mentioned that "Crewe's goal scoring prowess is pretty much unrivaled across UK football at the moment. Dario Gradi's men are the ONLY side to have only failed to score 1 time so far this season out of the 92 sides."

One small correction is that "across UK football" is a stretch as Crusaders, Stranraer, and Albion Rovers have so far scored in EVERY league game this season, and last time I checked, they were all UK teams, but anyway, another interesting example perhaps of how we look for stats that we want to find. So yes, Crewe may fail to keep many clean sheets as Scott says, but you don't need a clean sheet to win. You do need to SCORE to win though, so perhaps the play here to keep every stat happy is Over 2.5 goals at 1.77? I'm on.

Blez can't be his real name, can it?

Motley Crewe

After a slow week for football, the weekend gets off to about as big a start as it could - no offence to Burton and Bury but Arsenal v Tottenham takes some beating. I'll let the always fascinating My Football Facts web site set the stage:

Spurs v Arsenal is now one of the great rivalries in World Football but the fixture had very different beginnings back in November 1887 when the clubs first met in a friendly played on Tottenham Marshes. Arsenal, then called Royal Arsenal, had been formed just a year earlier as Dial Square and were essentially the works team for the munitions factory situated in Woolwich, Kent, while Spurs who had been formed some five years earlier in 1882 still had many of the youngsters who founded the club playing for them. Spurs won that first encounter 2-1, although the game was cut 15 minutes short due to poor light conditions because of Arsenal turning-up late.

I doubt that anyone will be turning up late tomorrow, even if kick-off is a little early, so we should see a full 90 minutes plus of action. Conventional wisdom is that derby games are closely fought, and five of the last ten league matches between these two have ended even. Arsenal at 1.67 certainly seem a little short, so a lay with a view to trading out is my plan here.

In League Two, the value pick would appear to be Crewe Alexandra, available at 2.42 to beat Rotherham United. (Be honest, you weren't expecting that pick, were you?) I don't often look at the lower leagues, but if this turns out as good as it looks, I might well do more in the future.

In the top leagues, the 'strong' draw prospects appear to be Borussia Moenchengladbach v Mainz '05, Fulham v Manchester City, Nancy v Valenciennes, St Pauli v Wolfsburg, St Etienne v Auxerre, Hannover '96 v Hamburg, Lens v Olympique Lyonnais and Real Sociedad v Atletico Madrid.

The home value picks are: Nuremburg (2.04) v Kaiserslautern, Sunderland (2.8) v Everton, Deportivo la Coruna (2.3) v Malaga, Eintracht Frankfurt (2.32) v Hoffenheim, Stuttgart (1.56) v Koln, Bolton Wanderers (2.18) v Newcastle United.

An Open Or Shut Case?

Since day one of this blog, the privilege to post comments has been open to anyone, including Anonymous commenters. I guess in the early days, there was a desire to know whether anyone out there was actually reading my posts, and there was no reason to discourage anyone from commenting.

With an average of around 300 hits a day, that concern is no longer, and I need to decide whether leaving the door open for anyone to post comments is the right decision. Overwhelmingly it seems that Anonymous comments are negative in tone, not always, and on rare occasion they do add value to a debate, but in general they do not contribute anything positive. As you can see from the list of quotes below, it’s generally accepted that allowing negative comments detracts from a blog, and perhaps it is time that I stop allowing them.

One of the problems with Anonymous comments is that it can be hard to distinguish between them. There are well-meaning and decent Anonymice out there, but one individual in particular (same IP address anyway) keeps returning to this blog, (which is curious since he claims to think I’m clueless in regard to betting – “Time after time you show you don't understand some fairly basic points of gambling”), yet never has anything good to say. It’s one thing to insult me, but it’s another to insult other readers, who, although I have never met them in person, come across as decent, well-intentioned and basically friendly individuals.

That Anonymous has issues with the success of others is obvious from his incessantly negative tone. Contrast a successful, well-balanced individual who does not need to hide behind anonymity and make snide remarks. He is confident, pleasant, and not in the least jealous of the success of others – or if he is, he keeps it to himself and uses it as motivation to improve as a trader / bettor.

As you can see from the list below, it’s generally accepted that allowing negative comments detracts from a blog. Here are a few comments from other bloggers who have had similar problems.

Individuals who provide relevant and helpful comments don't disguise who they are.

Anonymous commenters don't have the integrity to be held accountable for their behavior or their questionable facts. People who form opinions based on research or direct experience with an issue don't need to hide who they are.

Blogs that allow anonymous bullies drive away participation by reasonable people. This hurts the blog's credibility. Blogs that refuse anonymous comments are more credible, because they have set a standard that commenters must be willing to stand behind what they say.

I used to read it regularly when it first launched last Spring. I occasionally posted a comment. But as the tone of the discussion went downhill, I stopped participating. Soon, I stopped reading.

If you want the discussion on your blog to be interesting and civil, the solution is simple. Don't Allow Anonymous Comments.

And this lengthier post on the subject:

I've yet to find a reason for why so many blog writers keep allowing comments without even requiring a name/handle. It is just as good as, or better than an open invitation to spam your website. Maybe it's the default setting on your blog software that allows anonymous comments. Maybe you are new to blogging and feel that commenting should be encouraged in every way possible and that anonymous comments might encourage more people to freely express their opinions. All I can say to that is I've found that respectable bloggers and commenters do not try to hide or run away after leaving behind their opinions. People who post credible information do not hide behind a nonsense handle or an invalid e-mail ID. It's those who leave behind a trail of crap who're too scared to let their identities come out in the open. And don't fall for that "Freedom of Speech" nonsense. Freedom of Speech does not include pissing on private property, anonymously or not. Since anybody with a half-decent internet connection has the freedom create their own blogs (hint: http://www.blogger.com/start :roll: ) and even remain completely anonymous in the process, the "freedom" point is moot and doesn't hold water in this context. Point is, there are plenty of legitimate opportunities to express one's opinions, no matter how idiotic they might be. Anonymous hate-mongering on other blogs' commenting areas is not one of them.

I, for one, do not allow anonymous comments on my blog. My definition of anonymous commenters in this context is
1. People who leave behind no e-mail ID and/or website URL and
2. In my judgment, are merely trying to bait me or my readers for their pleasure.

If I find such comments, my first instinct is to delete. I don't care if people cry "censorship". The point is: submitting feedback on any website is a privilege, not a right. And I have every right to clean out what I consider spam on my website. If these cowardly anonymous hypocrites don't like it, that's no skin off my nose.
The bottom line is that anonymous insults not only hurt the author, but the other regular readers of a blog as well. They are an unproductive waste of space, add nothing to your blog and you are better off without them. So what if a few well-intentioned, but misguided idealists criticize you for that decision in the name of "censorship" or "Free Speech" and expect you to tolerate insults in order to uphold their principles? :Twisted.

Hard to argue with the above, but if anyone has any good reason why I should continue to allow Anonymous comments, let me know. I’ve added a poll through the end of November, and I’ll leave it as is until then.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, though there’s not much football this week, other than Scotland winning their local derby, there is plenty of NBA action to look at. The SBP had another loss with Dallas Mavericks needing to win by 3 ½ ending up winning by three. Dirk Nowitzki missed the second of two free-throws at the end to cost his clients a win, and the New Orleans Hornets became the last team to lose a game this season.

Incidentally, if there is a tipping service out there that deserves to be treated with contempt, it is this one. It’s a complete scam. A system that can lose 67% of games and yet claim a 100% success rate – now that’s marketing!

As I have written before, if a system doesn’t make profits to level stakes, no staking plan in the world is going to help you. Staking plans can improve profitable systems, but until the laws of mathematics are re-written, no staking plan can make a losing plan profitable.

Thunder Rolls

When I said in the last post that

Football Elite doesn't actually tell its subscribers how many points or percentage of the bank to bet. That is entirely up to the individual

- that wasn't actually correct. I meant that when the selections come out, there is no differentiation between bets in the same category - either Recommended or Short-List. Unless I haven't noticed, the stake on Recommended Bets is always 1 point.

Joep remembers more, and says:

FE does advise on staking plan, for instance the 8.12 points profit he made this year equals 32% ROC, which would be correct for a 25 point staking system.

http://www.football-elite.co.uk/total_results.html

Also remember Matt saying in an email he advises a 25 point bankroll, think it was in last email of last season or the first one of this season. (40 points for the shortlist bets).

Another internationals week which means no decent football until the weekend.

Another Utah Jazz game last night, and again they went down by double digits, (13), but this time at home. The Thunder traded as low as 1.21 before the Jazz began their sixth successive comeback, but unfortunately this time they came up a little short, closing to within three before finally losing by seven. Not before we saw a flip-flop though.

When a team plays their first home game after a long road trip, it's not unusual to see them under-perform.

One other NBA statistic of note is that this season, 'dogs are currently winning at 61.8%. Early season games in most sports are often unpredictable, but that number is quite remarkable. Even the New Jersey Nets won as 'dogs on the road against a Western Conference team last night. When was the last time THAT happened? - 23 games ago.

Football Hoi Polloi

Laying at 1000 on the exchanges doesn't seem to me to be the best way to make your money. A few weeks ago, someone laid 'no corners' for 1000 in the Wigan v Chelsea game back in August, and yesterday the Correct Score of Sunderland 3:0 at Chelsea was matched at the maximum also. While the 'no corners' lay was actually value, I have my doubts that the 0:3 Correct Score was a value lay. Regardless, I made a little on this game laying Chelsea in-play and backing the Over 2.5 goals. Chelsea's rating has decreased in each of the last six matches and my ratings show their form to be the worst in the league. The best? Surprisingly, it's Bolton Wanderers. Combine that with one draw coming in at Lorient, and wins for Bologna and Auxerre, but losses elsewhere, (Milan, Cagliari, Sampdoria, Everton and Bari - who missed a penalty) and the net profit for the day's football was a whopping £2.74. I guess I have to continue working my day job, at least for a few more days.

Reading the Trading Times blog, this post on laying-the-draw caught my attention:

Ian Erskine's FTS and system 3 what can you say about that this weekend? If anybody who reads this subscribes to his picks then I bet it was a proper brown trouser weekend. Finally after a good part of the season is gone I can say in proper Theo style .... "Im Out"

The results for the weekend were poor but more than that I just cannot see any profit being made following picks that even I could come up with. The lay the draw games are always big odds on favs, with high draw odds and then when the 'dog scores first its just wait and see if it hits the fan. The system 3 picks are laying 1-1 scorelines and again at odds of 7/1 a couple in a row mean a long wait to get back in profits. I actually think from studying the picks that your best actually backing the draw, you have a much smaller liability and if the 'dog does score first the odds come in, not out, so giving a green book opportunity. The picks for the weekend were Man City the odds were about 5.2 on Betfair laying that for £100 gives a £420 liability, the other games were just as bad and today's pick was 0-0 until the 93rd minute which would have been another hefty loss, and even though both 1-1 lays today were winners you would have had to wait to the 85th minute. Its just not worth it. So that's my take on the situation.

My draw picks are having a tough time of it right now, with just two winners form 14, but the risk to reward ratio is within my comfort zone. Laying the draw is fraught with problems. As Eddy says above, it the underdog scores first, the draw odds don't shorten, and then if the favourite equalises, the draw price is still shorter than they were at the start, and you have less time on your side. I know Ian Erskine claims to have made a million from trading football, and well done to him if he has, but you just never know where these draws are going to come from. 8.68% of matches in the five major leagues are scoreless this season, although you could reduce that number by excluding the French Ligue 1. Anyway, it's hardly a 'back swan' event.

Anonymous continues to miss the point that Football Elite are named Football 'Elite' and not 'Football Hoi Polloi' for a reason. Understanding that in the real world where most of us reside, no one is going to be able to consistently find value across a large number of matches, FE specialise. They focus on what they are good at. Currency traders specialise. Commodity traders specialise. McDonalds do not sell software. Stock-analysts do not cover every stock in the market - they specialise, and similarly Matt specialises on the matches where he can find an edge. Perhaps (long-shot) Anonymous doesn't work for NASA, but it's not that hard to understand. I am much happier subscribing to a service that offers a few quality selections than a list of 49 tips each weekend. That would not inspire confidence. But then

Time after time you show you don't understand some fairly basic points of gambling.

If you truly don't understand why someone who apparently is constantly reaping a double digit ROI is not having enough bets then there's little hope. Maybe another reader would care to explain.

Yes, I must just be on a lucky run - since 2005. Amazing. On another blog, Anonymous is no doubt advising Usain Bolt that because he's a great sprinter, he should enter Marathons as there are so many of them. Joep did try to explain, with a well-considered comment, but still the points continues to escape our Anonymous friend, or more likely he doesn't want to admit that he's being somewhat naïve on this one.

Here's Joep's comment

As a subscriber to FE I'll give it a shot. For starters, Matt does offer more bets than the recommended bets listed on the website, he also offers so called "short list" bets, on average about 5 a weekend, that are on average so far profitable, yet not as profitable as the main picks. I personally see them as value picks, yet second rate compared to the recommended picks.

Secondly, FE recommends 4% stakes (or a 25 point roll) for every recommended bet. A tipster that uses such an agressive betting strategy needs to have a rather large edge in his bets.

Say for instance the average odds of FE picks 2.5, according to Kelly the picks need to win at least 42.4% of the time, which equates to a little less than 2.36 average odds. This means that the payout needs to be over 10% of the true odds (in this example) to be able to use such an aggressive betting strategy. If one would incorporate weaker tips, say those where the payout is only 5% over the true odds, according to Kelly, no more than 2% of the total bankroll in the same scenario. In order to maintain the same absolute profits in this system, the number of picks should be more than doubled with all long term profitable picks, which is a hard thing to accomplish in my opinion.

So by increasing the number of bets provided, even when they are slightly profitable, due to the increased volatility, you're forced to reduce betsize and thereby losing ev instead of gaining it.

I know that FE historically offers more value than needed in order to use optimal Kelly using a 25 point system, but I'm sure that's a choice Matt made to build in some security into his system, which would also be incorporated if he would choose to include weaker tips. Also, I think most, if not all, long term successful tipsters only use a fraction of Kelly instead of full Kelly, so his choice here is also very reasonable.

I hope that story made some sense to you and that my math isn't off :).

Correction: Oh, I did err on the safe side by using 5% edge on all bets in the 2nd example, could get rather complicated due to 2 unknown variables otherwise and I'm not exactly a math expert.

Thanks Joep, although here's the reply:

I'm not quite following your explanation fully.

One point. If the staking plan is based on Kelly, then why is each bet the same size (in % terms).

Even if you aim for, say, 10% value for each bet (too high, just an example), your perceived edge on each bet won't be precisely 10 % so therefore stakes should vary if using Kelly.

Football Elite doesn't actually tell its subscribers how many points or percentage of the bank to bet. That is entirely up to the individual.

A slightly bigger profit was achieved in the NFL action today, so I can afford the commute to work at least. The SBP went three out of six, a reasonable outcome for a coin-toss - and I actually made most of my NFL profits today on a team he had picked - the Seattle Seahawks, who seemed excellent value to win the NFC Division game at the last placed Arizona Cardinals. I picked up a little on the Miami Dolphins win over the Tennessee Titans and on the late game where the New England Patriots continued their tremendous record in games following a defeat - one loss since 2006.

A quiet day in the NBA with the Utah Jazz not in action after their unbelievable road trip, (it'll be interesting to see how they play later today at home to Oklahoma City Thunder) and only five games to choose from. In-form Minnesota Timberwolves covered the spread via the back door in the early game at the even more impressive Atlanta Hawks, and the Los Angeles Lakers again started too short (1.22), this time against the Phoenix Suns, but I messed this one up and managed to turn a good position into a bad one.

Quality v Quantity

Anonymous, not his real name I suspect, recently suggested that Football Elite, with their proven track record of the past few seasons, could learn from him, and that "they are having nowhere near enough bets. I think the non-backing of odds-on shots has been discussed here before. It's nonsensical."

Well, my thoughts on the subject were that it was the comment was nonsensical. There are 49 games across the major leagues of Europe most weekends. Football Elite has found a subset of these matches that provide long-term profitability. The folly of suggesting that this subset should be expanded to include already disregarded matches from the initial set should be obvious. Anyway, I was pleased in a way that Matt took time out from his perusal of next week's fixtures to address the comment directly himself, although I am also slightly concerned that Matt is not spending the time trying to make me more money! Get back to work please Matt.

Here is Matt's reply in full:

Hi Anonymous, if that is your real name :-)

If I thought I could make a good return betting in 1000 games a season then of course I would do it. I dont think there are that many games that have those opportunities though.

The type of bets that I dropped 2 and a half years ago were all making losses or only very, very slight profits (or in the case of lays would have been more profitable if I had backed to win instead of taking insurance on the draw)

My personal opinion is that it's better to focus on the one area that obviously has the significant edge rather than pad it out with other less strong or even loss making bets.

Regarding odds-on betting, it's not a case of 2.0 yes, 1.99 no. I just found that over the years I couldn't make a profit on short priced favourites in top class football. Thats not me saying there isn't value for anyone else just that I am rubbish at finding it at that end of the market.

I'm guessing the reason why is there is more "mug" money on short priced faves in top class football than any other betting markets so odds in general are artificially lower.

The sort of side I focus on (my niche I guess) is home sides in games where there isn't a strong favourite so there arnt going to be odds-on bets by the very nature of the games I focus on.

Obviously though I wouldn't rule out a bet because it was 1.95 and not 2.0. It's just the principle of not backing short priced faves rather than not backing odds-ons.

At the end of the day its just my approach. You might be right I might be going wrong somewhere but it works for me which is all that matters really!

For followers of the US code of football, the not-so-highly-esteemed Rich Allen (aka SBP) sends me his selections for today's upcoming games.

Minnesota Vikings -1
Indianapolis Colts -6.5
Tampa Bay Buccaneers -6.5
Seattle Seahawks +3.5
Kansas City Chiefs -1
St. Louis Rams +6.5

All That Jazz

It's starting to get ridiculous. For the fifth game in a row, the Utah Jazz spotted their opponents, this time Michael Jordan's Charlotte Bobcats, a double digit lead, and came from behind to win. The lead this time was 19 points, but Utah clawed that back and won by a single point. The market didn't go as low as it has on other nights, partly because Utah were favoured to win the game at tip-off, but possibly plenty of people were wary of another comeback. I believe the lowest they traded was at 1.08, but another very profitable night. If only it was always this easy.

The football wasn't good, with just Montpellier at 2.22 winning out of the four home value selections. Brest repeated their Arles-Avignon game of two weeks ago, and gave the visitors their first away point of the season. Laying odds-on home teams in Germany gave winners as Werder Bremen and Mainz 05 both failed to win, and the unpredictable nature of the game there was further shown by Koln's 0-4 home defeat to Borussia Moenchengladbach, with all four goals coming in the second half.

Both 'strong' draws came up short with under 2.5 paying a conosolation prize as Wigan Athletic and Stoke City both won at home. One out of two for the 'weaker' draws though, although Kaiserslautern looked dead and buried at 0-3, before a Jazz-like comeback.

I had an Anonymous comment that I will mention, because it draws attention to the Statto web site which is excellent and a great source of information, and he makes it sound so easy to make money on football. He writes:

Great blog and love the articles. I do think the fact you come up with similar selections to Football Elite is that anyone who does value betting will generally come up with the same selections. That is surely logical. Every week I spend a few hours looking at the Soccer Stats at Statto website, compare the last 8 for the matches in each league and then look at the currently available prices. Guess what?, almost without fail the selections I make are very similar to yourself and Football Elite. I don't keep a spreadsheet with stats or anything and it takes up very little of my time. If anyone is reading the blog just and have a look and see what I mean. Bologna are unbeaten at home, Brescia haven't won in 8, Bologna are 2.22. It took me 2 mins, no fancy spreadsheet or ratings, very simple. I keep a record or my results and I'm doing very nicely. Trust me, the stats on Soccer Stats and Statto along with team news are all you need to gauge form and value. I implore everyone to do it and see what I mean. More importantly if you compare your home value picks for this weekend to the Statto website, all but one (Cagliari which has their price about right) are down as value picks, so basically anyone could just go on there, run down the match odds list in 1 min and they would have the same selections as you. People out there are trying to sell it to us as rocket science but it really isn't.

I do think it's great that you do post up your selections though so don't get me wrong. It's very generous and you come across as someone who knows a hell of a lot about trading, write great articles and I'm sure put plenty of work in to get where you have got. I just wanted to point out to people that it's a lot easier than you think to find value. Most of Football Elite's selections and yours are unsurprisingly the same as the value selections on Statto. I dare say that because when you put the stats together in a spreadsheet they all come out pretty much the same if it's yours, Statto's, Football Elite's etc. There can only be so many variables.

Using Statto to determine my picks would certainly save me a lot of time, but if the value on there was really significant, I suspect that word might have got out by now. I just don't see how a popular web site can be the answer to the great puzzle of making money consistently from football, but it is certainly a great web site. The key to it is that myself and Statto and possibly Football Elite all have different values and variables. My ratings are similar to Stattos, in fact the top nine in the EPL are identical in sequence, but their values are closer together than mine, and there is less volatility, which probably means they put a greater emphasis on form when determining true odds than I do, but anyway, our determination of a value bet is by quite different means. If we come up with the same selections, then all the better. Their odds on the Milan derby are way off when compared with the bookies: Internazionale 1.86, AC Milan 6, Draw 3.35. I have Inter at 1.99, and the current Betfair price is 2.66. For the record, I have the draw priced at 3.45, AC Milan at 4.8 and a small interest on Inter.

Tout Le Brest

One of my picks for today, Brest, are the subject of a blog post on BBC Sport. Titled “Revolution on the rampage in France's Ligue 1”, the post details Stade Brestois 29’s rise to the top of the league, although to suggest there’s a ‘revolution on the rampage’ is ridiculously premature. We’re 12 games in to the season, not 32, and with Paris St Germain just two points behind, and Marseille three back (with a game in hand), to suggest that Brest are anything but a flash-in-the-pan team seems a little ridiculous. It's a good story though; the club were in the Fourth Division just 11 seasons ago. If you think the blog post isn't premature, Brest can be backed at 130. For those who like backing goalscorers, Romain Poyet is on a run with goals in the last three Brest games.

The reason the price today is so generous is no doubt because Brest have only won two of their five home games, and annoyingly for me, I picked them to easily beat hapless Arles-Avignon a couple of weeks but were held to a 0-0 draw – Arles’ only away point all season so far.

Adam (Mouldhouse) commented:

I have Inter down as a strong back and also I like Brest (boom boom) - good luck this weekend.

Do you have a spreadsheet or document with the strong draw bets on, or the home value picks? It's quite clear that there's a lot of quality in the picks by the fact you so often front-run Football Elite. Appreciate the "This is NOT a P&L blog" tagline at the top so fully aware of the possibility of being told to **** off.

Cheers :)

Right then - **** off. Ah, just kidding. Yes, I do keep a spreadsheet with all my bets on. I’d be surprised if anyone serious about making money didn’t. You have to. If you don’t keep accurate records, you’re not going to get anywhere. Apart from making it easy to see what’s working and what isn’t, it’s all part of a disciplined approach to investing. Human nature is to remember the good things in life, and erase the bad. Gamblers remember winning bets easier than losing bets.

It’s also quite a compliment to be compared with Football Elite. They are the only service I, use and have a proven track record making profits every year. It would be hard to imagine how anyone could find fault, but of course, there’s always one, although clearly, once again, he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. It’s always good to come up with my value picks and then find Football Elite have the same opinion. It’s when we differ, as we did last week on the WBA v Manchester City game, that I have a decision to make.

John had a comment / question too (my e-mail was busy yesterday):

I just wondered how often you change/tweak your ratings system? At first I thought it would be a good idea to build a basic rating system then build on it and let it grow but now I'm not so sure. At the end of the day any rating system is a measuring device and therefore changing it will give you strange results. You wouldn't start building your house one measurement then change it once you get half way through, so is it then a bad idea to start tweaking a ratings system once you have begun collecting data? More importantly, does it actually matter if a rating system is accurate? Is it not more important for it to be consistent and allow you to take a more precise measurement of what's happening. If you are consistently off the mark with a prediction system that's better than mixed bag of results because you kept moving the goalposts so to speak.

Could the most basic of ratings systems kept as-is from day one provide more details than a regularly tweaked one. Shouldn't we be looking at and studying the results compared to the ratings to try and work out 'why' rather than tweaking the system to match the past results.

He raises a good point. It’s certainly true that my forecasts from last season cannot be directly compared to my figures for this season, but I think overall, this is a small price to pay for achieving better numbers going forward.

It’s also important to be clear that the formula for calulating the ratings has not changed from day one. All that has changed is the accuracy (mathematically) to which the expected outcomes of matches is displayed.

You say that you “wouldn't start building your house one measurement then change it once you get half way through”, but I think I actually would. If something’s not working, or not working as well as it could, then I have no issue with making a change, whether it’s to a ratings system, a home improvement project, my job or my personal life. Doing something the same way because “it’s always been done that way”, is simply not a good enough reason not to make a change.

The only thing that matters is being profitable, and by making the changes I made during the close season and early this season, I have made it much easier to identify value.

The big change was to improve the accuracy of the ratings so that they now give a figure to 0.1 of a goal rather than round to a whole number as they did last season. Yes, this means I can’t directly compare the numbers, but that’s ok. The other big change was to automatically factor in form, and here – if I do say so myself – I have been rather clever. I modified the spreadsheet so that the original number is still generated, (allowing comparisons with earlier versions), alongside a new ‘with form’ value.

I may well adjust the form weightings if I see that form is more or less important than I have estimated, but again, the important thing is that the ratings formula has been the same since inception. I do agree that changing this would not likely be useful.

Think of it like the game of football. The rules change very infrequently, but the data that is collected on matches is far more, and used quite differently, than was the case just a few years ago. Similarly, my ratings calculations stay the same, but the way I use them changes.

Appreciate the comment and the question though, and here’s a final comment from Greece:

You have maybe the best blog out there right now for all of us BF addicts, and soccer maniacs - keep up the good work!

Thank you, although I would take out the ‘maybe’ and the ‘right now’, but other than that I have to say I totally agree with you.

And finally, the Utah Jazzz won their fourth game in a row, all on the road, after trailing by double digits beating the Atlanta Hawks. Don't say I didn't tell you. They were available +4.5 at 1.82 pre-game.

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.