Evaluation of the bets from the 33rd matchday
Pairing 1 X 2 % Average
| Hoffenheim | Nürnberg | 1.94 | 3.65 | 4.20 | 102.75% |
| Kaiserslautern | Dortmund | 6.80 | 4.60 | 1.51 | 102.67% |
| Leverkusen | Hannover | 1.93 | 3.65 | 4.10 | 103.60% |
| Schalke 04 | Hertha | 1.59 | 4.40 | 6.20 | 101.75% |
| FC Bayern | Stuttgart | 1.54 | 4.70 | 6.40 | 101.84% |
| Freiburg | FC Köln | 2.36 | 3.65 | 3.10 | 102.03% |
| Gladbach | Augsburg | 1.82 | 3.85 | 4.50 | 103.14% |
| HSV | Mainz | 2.14 | 3.50 | 3.65 | 102.70% |
| Wolfsburg | Werder | 2.14 | 3.70 | 3.50 | 102.33% |
Goals scored 1.61
Goals scored 2
Money score 1.07
Must have been a mistake after all, not just playing all the games shown? Regarding the colour selection: only the dark blue and the dark red bets were played for evaluation, the light blue and the light red were both displayed and recommended, but explicitly not submitted for evaluation. Accordingly, of the 3 bets actually played, 2 came true and one did not, of the other 5, 4 came true and one did not. The balance would therefore have been far more favourable if all the indicated bets had simply been played.
Incidentally, the comment was also made here that it is hardly considered possible any more, after the experiences of previous years (expressly NOT true for many years), for all teams to line up properly and play properly until the end, so that no accusation of distortion of competition could make the rounds. This was confirmed, even if Bayern, as the only team, again played with their B-team, but, as predicted in the previous week, did so with normal ambition, as the victory ultimately proves.
Leverkusen, however, the one of the bets actually selected, was not an outstandingly good bet. Sure, they won the game, may even have been the slightly better team overall, however for a 1.93 you just don’t like the bet. On the other hand, of course, one should not complain about bets that are won by luck now and then, because the other way round happens often enough. Nevertheless, the verdict: not a good bet.
Gladbach against Augsburg was not good either. For a while you had the feeling that Gladbach didn’t really want to hurt Augsburg. Although when there was a decent goal-scoring chance, it went to Gladbach. The two concerns about the bet were that if Schalke were in the lead, a win might not help Gladbach at all, and Luhukay was, after all, once coach at Gladbach. On the other hand, it was also true that if Schalke were leading, Augsburg’s worries would be considerably less, especially as Freiburg were leading against Cologne at the same time. Well, the bet was really bad – and was well and truly lost.
Wolfsburg against Werder was again an excellent bet. The price was over 2 – always worth considering at this point with teams of equal strength –, Wolfsburg with their home strength and Werder with a more than shaky recent series, everything just fitted. The game was won, so all was well.
Schalke were also, as announced, very good. They did everything to consolidate their third place and give Raul a worthy send-off. If anything, they were indifferent to Hertha’s fate. By the way, the course had fallen a lot by Saturday, so that one may say that the market also realised that it was a normal football match.
The price on Bayern, on the other hand, rose considerably when it became known that the B-team had been sent onto the field. For the better rate (over 1.70), one could not resist even – and was even rewarded. For the balance sheet, the victory doesn’t count, but objectively speaking, Stuttgart probably had enough chances to force a different result.
Freiburg, too, did not want to be accused of distorting the competition. On the other hand, Cologne didn’t look nearly as bad as the result suggests. They were close to a 2:2 (and had deserved the 1:1 before), only towards the end Freiburg took advantage of the counter-attacking chances, in which the Cologne defence really didn’t look that well organised.
The bet on Mainz would have been ok as well, because they did as much as you could trust them to do. It wasn’t won, but it wouldn’t have hurt.
Overall, the omitted bets were almost the better ones compared to the placed ones. Since there was a plus result, one should not complain either way.
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 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 |
| 32 | 6 | 1 | 2.8 | -1.80 | -4.07 |
| 33 | 3 | 2 | 1.61 | +0.39 | +1.07 |
At least we were in the black again, which is encouraging. With the missed ones, the balance would have looked much more favourable, but what the hell.
Overall 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 |
| 201 | 72 | +14.37 | 7.15% | 76.95 | -4.95 |
| 204 | 74 | +15.44 | 7.57% | 78.56 | -4.56 |
There seems to be a profit left over for the whole season after all. And 7.5% is still something to be proud of. From next season onwards, the evaluation will be refined.
