Evaluation of the bets from the 31st matchday
Pairing 1 X 2
| Stuttgart | Werder | 1.93 | 3.80 | 4.20 |
| Kaiserslautern | Nürnberg | 2.80 | 3.60 | 2.46 |
| Schalke 04 | Dortmund | 3.25 | 3.60 | 2.30 |
| Wolfsburg | Augsburg | 1.80 | 3.85 | 4.70 |
| HSV | Hannover | 2.44 | 3.55 | 3.15 |
| Leverkusen | Hertha | 1.56 | 4.20 | 6.40 |
| FC Bayern | Mainz | 1.32 | 5.80 | 12.50 |
| Gladbach | FC Köln | 1.52 | 4.40 | 7.20 |
| Freiburg | Hoffenheim | 2.34 | 3.65 | 3.20 |
Goals scored 1.47
Goals scored 1
Money score -2.07
Certainly an unpleasant result. On the other hand, one can hardly find any disadvantages in the bets, as much as they had even been warned against.
The Stuttgart bet had been proclaimed “match of the week” anyway. This has arrived and with the weighted evaluation (with 5/10 on Stuttgart) the balance would already look much friendlier.
The bet on Hannover was certainly not good, that should be noted. Here were the doubts whether Hannover would actually tear themselves apart in this game to push HSV into the abyss. Well, at least they resisted in half 2, so what the hell, a losing bet for a pretty good rate – nothing to complain about.
The bet on Hertha must have been perfect, after all, as Hertha not only actually and almost won the game, but that they won it (ie: turned it around) with 10 men, one goal down and only on 30 minutes. The 3:3 was of course anything but undeserved for Leverkusen and even a win was still possible for them in the last minutes. Nevertheless, with a 6.40 you can hardly expect more in equity than to be in the lead 5 minutes before the final whistle.
The Hoffenheim win was also an excellent bet for this course. As good as Freiburg was in half 1 – better than Hoffenheim but not toweringly superior — Hoffenheim had much to counter in half 2. The goal was even almost possible in the final minute, a penalty was denied (like so many others, in all games, where it is always just said: “Should have been mandatory penalty”, but again and again without any consequence, which would have been first and foremost mental work: why is there really none? It has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with overlooking. You don’t want to be a referee, for reasons long and often discussed), so the bet was excellent.
Good bets, bad result. Do you have to live with it?
Evaluation of the individual match days
This is the evaluation of the individual match days, sorted chronologically.
Matchday No. Number of bets Number of hits Expected hits Hit deviation Win/loss
| 1 | 7 | 5 | 2.84 | +2.16 | +7.96 |
| 2 | 7 | 3 | 2.77 | +0.23 | +1.75 |
| 3 | 2 | 0 | 1.00 | -1.00 | -2.00 |
| 4 | 3 | 1 | 1.14 | -0.14 | -0.28 |
| 5 | 6 | 2 | 2.54 | -0.54 | -2.33 |
| 6 | 8 | 3 | 2.29 | +0.71 | +8.10 |
| 7 | 8 | 4 | 3.55 | +0.45 | +0.00 |
| 8 | 5 | 1 | 1.28 | -0.28 | -2.16 |
| 9 | 7 | 3 | 2.36 | +0.64 | +5.60 |
| 10 | 7 | 1 | 1.92 | -0.92 | +2.20 |
| 11 | 8 | 2 | 2.79 | -0.79 | -3.39 |
| 12 | 7 | 1 | 2.07 | -1.07 | -2.00 |
| 13 | 6 | 4 | 2.77 | +1.23 | +5.37 |
| 14 | 7 | 2 | 2.63 | -0.63 | +4.68 |
| 15 | 6 | 1 | 2.18 | -1.18 | -4.65 |
| 16 | 6 | 2 | 2.13 | -0.13 | -0.53 |
| 17 | 7 | 3 | 3.13 | -0.13 | -0.54 |
| 18 | 7 | 3 | 2.57 | +0.43 | +2.34 |
| 19 | 4 | 1 | 1.51 | -0.51 | -1.70 |
| 20 | 6 | 2 | 2.32 | -0.32 | +0.63 |
| 21 | 8 | 2 | 3.02 | -1.02 | -3.73 |
| 22 | 8 | 4 | 2.85 | +1.15 | +2.19 |
| 23 | 5 | 1 | 2.19 | -1.19 | -3.24 |
| 24 | 9 | 2 | 3.24 | -1.24 | -0.30 |
| 25 | 6 | 2 | 2.63 | -0.63 | -1.67 |
| 26 | 7 | 5 | 2.54 | +2.46 | +8.43 |
| 27 | 7 | 3 | 3.51 | -0.51 | -0.94 |
| 28 | 6 | 1 | 2.21 | -1.21 | -3.10 |
| 29 | 6 | 3 | 3.21 | -0.21 | +0.55 |
| 30 | 5 | 3 | 2.03 | +0.97 | +3.27 |
| 31 | 4 | 1 | 1.47 | -0.47 | -2.07 |
Total betting statistics
This is the running total after evaluation of the individual match days
Total number of bets Total number of hits Total balance G/V in% Total expected hits Total hit deviation
| 7 | 5 | +7.96 | 113.71% | 2.84 | +2.16 |
| 14 | 8 | +9.71 | 69.36% | 5.61 | +2.39 |
| 16 | 8 | +7.71 | 48.19% | 6.61 | +1.39 |
| 19 | 9 | +7.43 | 39.11% | 7.74 | +1.26 |
| 25 | 11 | +5.10 | 20.40% | 10.28 | +0.72 |
| 33 | 14 | +13.20 | 40.00% | 12.57 | +1.43 |
| 41 | 18 | +13.20 | 32.20% | 16.12 | +1.88 |
| 46 | 19 | +11.04 | 24.00% | 17.40 | +1.60 |
| 53 | 22 | +16.64 | 31.40% | 19.76 | +2.24 |
| 60 | 23 | +18.84 | 31.40% | 21.68 | +1.32 |
| 68 | 25 | +15.45 | 22.72% | 24.47 | +0.53 |
| 75 | 26 | +13.45 | 17.93% | 26.54 | -0.54 |
| 81 | 30 | +18.82 | 23.23% | 29.31 | +0.69 |
| 88 | 32 | +23.50 | 26.70% | 31.94 | +0.06 |
| 94 | 33 | +18.85 | 20.05% | 34.12 | -1.12 |
| 100 | 35 | +18.32 | 18.32% | 36.25 | -1.25 |
| 107 | 38 | +17.78 | 16.62% | 39.38 | -1.38 |
| 114 | 41 | +20.12 | 17.65% | 41.95 | -0.95 |
| 118 | 42 | +18.42 | 15.61% | 43.46 | -1.46 |
| 124 | 44 | +19.05 | 15.36% | 45.78 | -1.78 |
| 132 | 46 | +15.32 | 11.61% | 48.80 | -2.80 |
| 140 | 50 | +17.51 | 12.51% | 51.65 | -1.65 |
| 145 | 51 | +14.27 | 9.84% | 53.84 | -2.84 |
| 154 | 53 | +13.97 | 9.07% | 57.08 | -4.08 |
| 160 | 55 | +12.30 | 7.69% | 59.71 | -4.71 |
| 167 | 60 | +20.73 | 12.41% | 62.25 | -2.25 |
| 174 | 63 | +19.79 | 11.37% | 65.76 | -2.76 |
| 180 | 64 | +16.69 | 9.27% | 67.97 | -3.97 |
| 186 | 67 | +17.24 | 9.27% | 71.18 | -4.18 |
| 191 | 70 | +20.51 | 10.74% | 72.68 | -2.68 |
| 195 | 71 | +18.44 | 9.46% | 74.15 | -3.15 |
A balance of now 9.46% can be seen under all circumstances, and this is what one should look at overall.
