1) The 1st Bundesliga
a. Review of the Matches
Results of the 11th Matchday
SC Freiburg – Bayer Leverkusen 0:1 (0:0)
FC Bayern Munich – 1. FC Nuremberg 4:0 (3:0)
Borussia Mönchengladbach – Hannover 96 2:1 (1:1)
FC Schalke 04 – TSG Hoffenheim 3:1 (1:0)
VfB Stuttgart – Borussia Dortmund 1:1 (1:1)
VfL Wolfsburg – Hertha BSC 2:3 (1:2)
FSV Mainz 05 – Werder Bremen 1:3 (1:1)
- FC Cologne – FC Augsburg 3:0 (2:0)
Hamburger SV – 1. FC Kaiserslautern 1:1 (0:1)
A few observations:
SC Freiburg once again played a very good game against Bayer Leverkusen, but were not rewarded for it. Everyone, players and coaches of both teams agreed after the game that SC was the better team and that Leverkusen’s victory was lucky, with probably 21:6 shots on goal. Whether one could now seriously find even the slightest hint of a “quality problem” – as the media representatives will certainly make out – is far more than questionable. Cissé has long since proven his ability as an enforcer, and it will hardly be possible to point to anything other than bad luck as the reason for the defeat. So why should it not be allowed to be pronounced? It is also a real boon to do it that way. You know immediately that it’s the only way to get closer to the truth, as opposed to the put-upon fault-finding that unearths a cause for everything. “Results crisis” was already one of the intelligent word creations created in the coach’s brain. Freiburg has this one. Of course, one is still aware that with 21/3 relegated teams, it can still catch you out, even if you play at the same level as the rest of the league. But: there would be no other reasons to worry at Freiburg. The team is intact and plays good football. But this does not guarantee good results, especially since single goals decide whole games, like the 1:0 by Michael Ballack, who was duly praised not only last week in this space. Since Friday evening, plenty of experts have joined in.
FC Bayern has also been adored enough. It is simply irresistible how they combine forward and even 1.FC Nürnberg was left with nothing but the role of extras. The performance of the opponent should not be judged at all anyway (as coach Hecking did). One acknowledges that FC Bayern really plays in a different league, one is glad to have been there and to have taken the, albeit meagre, credit for the participation, without which the spectacle could not even rise (unless one turned Bayern into a kind of Haarlem Globetrotters of football) — and looks to the next tasks, in which one can measure oneself against opponents at eye level. The eternal “error analysis” before the very early 1:0 was annoying – with which it was acknowledged that the game took a one-sided course. Why do you look for it? Badstuber’s diagonal ball – even if you have already seen the pattern -, Schweinsteiger’s ball reception, Gomez’s run to the top, the precise and well-timed cross exactly on Gomez’s head and the perfect finish. Everything at the highest speed and with unique precision. Football can be so beautiful, so perfectly executed in a single attack. See, marvel and admire – and please leave out the fault-finding for once. There is nothing to do but break.
The highly praised Borussia from Mönchengladbach played host to the (former but perhaps soon to be renewed?) World Cup winners Hannover 96. And Marco Reus – feel free to dig out old texts or remember – showed everything that has already been said about him by the writers here: he has no weakness in finishing and plays at an absolute top level, with best prospects for the “Player of the Season” award if such performances are maintained (why not?). Twice he sinks the ball in a place where you just can’t expect it – especially, as you can see in the two scenes, the goalkeeper doesn’t, flat and exactly into what is actually the wrong corner, which just because of that means the special championship. Simply great!
FC Schalke 04 defeated TSG from Hoffenheim, but nevertheless the voices sounded through, not only because of Raul’s supposed hand goal, agreeing more and more: rather happy. Hoffenheim were well in it the whole time and perhaps would have deserved the one point.
VfB Stuttgart against Borussia Dortmund was a very intense game (as much as one dislikes using reporter’s phrases, which one can always be sure are placed without thinking, no matter if now and then, if, then by chance). No, Borussia was determined to build on the performances of the previous season – and did so for very long stretches. There were countless scenes – in the game watched live from half 2 onwards – in which you were absolutely sure that the ball was now in. From minute 70 onwards, the game became a bit quieter, so that Stuttgart were also able to make their presence felt a few times, but due to the 4 chances of the visitors in the last 2 minutes, where you actually – because you were commentating live on the phone – had the goal scream not only on your lips but already beyond them, the draw became really happy from Stuttgart’s point of view. One of them simply HAD to go in – but there are no consequences if it doesn’t happen. There was nothing wrong with what the attackers did. It was just bad luck. At one point, goalkeeper Ullreich held a ball on the line from close range but couldn’t hold on to it (more like a miracle that he held on at all) and three Dortmund attackers moved in to poke the ball over the line and the man with the octopus arms appeared – and cleared the situation. Unbelievable – but true.
The match between VfL Wolfsburg and Berlin Hertha, which was initially selected for observation, looked something like this: although Wolfsburg still failed to prove that they belong to the top half of the table and Hertha had already been convincing several times before and were by no means weak at the start of this match, the home team clearly had more of the game and the better chances, including a crossbar. Hertha had about half a chance and Wolfsburg six, but they did not belong to the “clear” category (apart from the shot from the crossbar). They were good, promising goal actions, often with a finish. Then came Hertha’s one good action forward and it was 0:1. Sure, Wolfsburg are struggling for form and it was by no means easy. It’s just that you can get the confidence you need even during a game. They actually managed to equalise and there was some hope (due to the betting) that Wolfsburg could now follow up. The spectators (among whom were quite a few thousand Berliners, who also made their presence felt) were well disposed and supported (just the Wolfsburg part) their team to the best of their ability.
However, there was another fast attack, it was ablaze, the goalkeeper could think of nothing better than to stop the already passed attacker irregularly, with his own hand on the opponent’s foot, and there could only be one decision: Red and penalty. Surely there is now again the tiresome discussion that the penalty would be sufficient after all (gross nonsense!). Unfortunately, a penalty is still the only possible punishment for violations of the rules in one’s own penalty area. But as long as this is the case, there is surely no reason to give an attacker even closer to the goal less protection than outside the penalty area? It is even unacceptable that occasionally the famous “emergency stop” is often deliberately applied – with sufficient “skill” – before the edge of the penalty area, whereupon a red is calculated in, but the penalty kick that would otherwise accompany it is avoided. This behaviour would even earn praise from teammates and coaches, despite the acknowledged gross unsporting behaviour that violated the rules). The goalkeeper got off with a yellow, the referee used his range of discretion. Nevertheless, neither the penalty nor even the continuation of the game was wanted afterwards – and switched to Stuttgart against Dortmund.
As was later discovered, Wolfsburg managed to score the 2:2 in the 84th minute, but Hertha scored the winning goal in their own next attack to make it 3:2. Amazing.
After all, in the pairing of Mainz 05 against Werder Bremen, they had taken a clear position: Werder would in any case go for the win and see no reason whatsoever to somehow hide despite playing an away game. Mainz, on the other hand, had nothing more than a results crisis, much like Freiburg, but Werder could still be expected to win — and actively and pecuniarily backed up this view by placing a bet, in contrast to the nonsensical demigods who always want to explain the inevitability and predictability of a result after the event. The Mainz crowd, at any rate, very rarely let the almost proverbial carnival mood be spoiled, especially not when the home team took the lead. You could already see your own money going down the drain when Pizarro’s flash of inspiration – coupled with a fair amount of luck, as the ball that had already gone astray fell right back at his feet while he was dribbling – and the chipped ball half around, half over the goalkeeper that only really top-class players manage now and then, brought the score level again. After that Werder took command, even if Mainz should hardly blame themselves: again well played, again no points. It was a good game, no, a very good game, and Werder played to their class. Nevertheless, any other result would have been almost as possible – as the oddity of the equaliser alone suggests. Even with the acknowledgement of this, it remains possible to say something (and not just “oh, the grass is nice and green” and “anything can happen here”). Werder was a nuance better and had the necessary luck on this day to use it to win.
One of the main matches of the weekend – from the point of view of passionate weather – was the pairing of 1.FC Köln against FC Augsburg, with the focus on the diva from the Rhine, who had been devoted to capriciousness many decades ago. Well, unfortunately, the view of half 1 was omitted, only you could hear quite clearly that it was quite an even game until 1:0. Since Cologne soon followed up with the 2:0 (by the way Marco Reus only slightly, if at all, followed Lukas Podolski), hardly any insights could be read from half 2. Fact also here: Cologne had another chance and took it, while Augsburg failed to capitalise on several good opportunities. Afterwards, it was good to see (Augsburg’s) coach Jos Luhukay, who did not believe in a turnaround in the game, but nevertheless emphasised that his team had worked very well for the one goal, had really deserved it, and if it had been scored, it would have given a boost to their self-confidence for the following games – especially for centre forward Mölders: you can score goals. It would have been nice if such considerations had been included in the live commentary instead of just hearing the annoying “lid on, the game is over”. Both continued to play football, some of it good football, and had the intention of fulfilling the aim of the game: Round into the square.
Another great match brought the final game of the weekend, Hamburger SV against 1. FC Kaiserslautern. Both teams fought with sacrificial passion and hardly ever forgot to combine well. That is Bundesliga at it’s best. The red card against Rajkovic was, in this opinion, absolutely justified, because he pulls up his elbow and hits Tiffert in the face. The fact that the latter, despite the gaping wound, immediately stood up and did not make a drama about his injury – which was later patched up in minutes of surgical work next to the pitch – and also half-exonerated his opponent of his guilt in an interview after the game, does him particular honour. At least one likes to hear and see something like that (apart from the blood, perhaps), even if it doesn’t change the assessment of the scene. Red. You just don’t want to see these permanent flying elbows that basically permanently take opponent injuries, no, really. By the way, we also had to think about this: the player who was sent off with a red caused an injury by his action. The treatment of the same – bear in mind that Tiffert is one of, if not the, key players and desperately wants to continue, which his coach supports – now takes 10 minutes and the overtime is meanwhile only a theoretical one. Does that seem fair?
HSV became the slightly better team when outnumbered (which, by the way, they were not before, but for 10 minutes they were allowed to continue playing with 10 against 10; see above). The passionate spectators played their part, who gradually chose the referee as their enemy. Nevertheless, Lautern took the lead with an incredible beam from de Wit – who had fired a similarly dangerous one before, which suggests that he can simply do that – after excellent preparation by Fortounis, who not only has the eye for the teammate but also manages the exact timing, the greatest art of it, so that the rich shot was made possible in the first place.
HSV did not let themselves be discouraged and played forward with determination. For a while, Lautern were unable to capitalise on their superior numbers, and in the middle of the second half, after the fully deserved equaliser, for a while one had the feeling that HSV might even manage the miracle of turning a game around with 10 against 11. The 1:1 is felt to be fair, even if the kicker counted chances of 9:4 per Lautern (which absolutely does not correspond to one’s own feelings). Sure, Drobny defused the one or other action, but it didn’t seem as if Lautern had any plus. Another little curiosity: Guerrero had already scored a goal before the equaliser, which was disallowed. The reason: he is said to have taken the ball from the air more with his hand than with his chest. Even if at this point (rather unusually, as it is directed against the goal action, which one normally always wants to encourage) one is of the opinion that the whistle was justified, but in the discussions about it highly divided views were picked up, the question remains to the kicker: is this counted as a goal chance? Even if the referee’s decision was approved, this opinion would certainly remain: of course it would have to be counted as a goal-scoring opportunity. Because: obviously there was a (much more than small) chance that the referee would not blow the whistle (as many thought was right). At least, in that case, the conclusion of the action would no longer be in doubt. After all, the ball was in.
All in all, really a fantastic match day that reminds you why you chose football as “your game” in early childhood and makes you look forward to the next one. If only there weren’t those insufferable commentators who can’t do, don’t know and can’t see anything except score goals, count points and read off standings.
b. The table situation
Sp S U N Pkt T GT Diff
1 FC Bayern Munich 11 8 1 2 25 30 – 3 +27
2 FC Schalke 04 11 7 0 4 21 22 – 16 +6
3 Borussia Dortmund 11 6 2 3 20 21 – 8 +13
4 Werder Bremen 11 6 2 3 20 20 – 14 +6
5 Borussia Mönchengladbach 11 6 2 3 20 13 – 8 +5
6 VfB Stuttgart 11 5 3 3 18 17 – 9 +8
7 Hannover 96 11 5 3 18 14 – 15 -1
8 Bayer Leverkusen 11 5 2 4 17 13 – 14 -1
9 TSG Hoffenheim 11 5 1 5 16 14 – 12 +2
10 Hertha BSC 11 4 4 3 16 15 – 15 +0
11 1.FC Köln 11 5 1 5 16 18 – 23 -5
12 VfL Wolfsburg 11 4 1 6 13 14 – 20 -6
13 1.FC Kaiserslautern 11 3 3 5 12 9 – 14 -5
14 1.FC Nürnberg 11 3 5 12 12 – 18 -6
15 FSV Mainz 05 11 2 3 6 9 13 – 22 -9
16 Hamburger SV 11 2 3 6 9 13 – 23 -10
17 FC Augsburg 11 1 5 8 8 – 20 -12
18 SC Freiburg 11 2 1 8 7 14 – 26 -12
280 280 0
Total number of games 99
Goals ø 2.83
The nonsensical questions to HSV coach Torsten Fink after the game (“Didn’t you say you had to win today?”) are exposed as such just by looking at the table. After all, HSV would have reached relegation if the season was now over, whereas before they were still in a direct relegation place. Well, even if they continue to have problems (which one wouldn’t want to deny by any means, but on that subject there will be some figures later on how big they are), then in any case the competitors still have something more. Dieter Hecking, coach of Nuremberg, was also convincing on Sky 90 with his comment that the word “relegation battle” absolutely did not suit him at the current stage of the season. The statement that “we have to win” (as rubbed in Fink’s face, whereupon he only meant that he wanted the team to understand that he believed in them) would definitely not be adequate for this moment and he also referred to match day 28, 29, from which such phrases could become justified – as pointless as it would be to call them out, because it could only mean that in order to reach the target, one would perhaps even have to be prepared to use unfair means, i.e. unsporting behaviour. This addition is an opinion expressed by the coach himself (and not ewa said this coach Heckung).
c. The title question
Explanation: these figures are the result of a computer simulation, which is based on the current playing strengths of the teams given below. The games are simulated individually on the basis of goal expectations (also given in the text below) and the final table is used to determine the winner.
Team Number of German champions in 5000 simulations Championships in percent Fair odds as reciprocal of probabilities
1 FC Bayern Munich 4245 84.90% 1.18
2 Borussia Dortmund 563 11.26% 8.88
3 FC Schalke 04 66 1.32% 75.76
4 Werder Bremen 42 0.84% 119.05
5 Bayer Leverkusen 39 0.78% 128.21
6 VfB Stuttgart 18 0.36% 277.78
7 Borussia Mönchengladbach 12 0.24% 416.67
8 Hannover 96 11 0.22% 454.55
9 Hertha BSC 3 0.06% 1666.67
10 TSG Hoffenheim 1 0.02% 5000.00
The Bavarian dominance made vivid in numbers.
Change in chances compared to the previous week due to the results of matchday 11
Team Win/loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/loss percentage
1 FC Bayern Munich 366 7.32%
2 Bayer Leverkusen 19 0.38%
3 FC Schalke 04 15 0.30%
4 Werder Bremen 14 0.28%
5 Borussia Mönchengladbach 3 0.06%
6 1.FC Kaiserslautern 0 0.00%
7 1.FC Cologne 0 0.00%
8 1.FC Nuremberg 0 0.00%
9 FC Augsburg 0 0.00%
10 FSV Mainz 05 0 0.00%
11 Hamburger SV 0 0.00%
12 Hertha BSC 0 0.00%
13 SC Freiburg 0 0.00%
14 VfL Wolfsburg -3 -0.06%
15 TSG Hoffenheim -13 -0.26%
16 Hannover 96 -23 -0.46%
17 VfB Stuttgart -23 -0.46%
18 Borussia Dortmund -355 -7.10%
After the short slump last week, now the reversal. Bayern (almost) recovers the lost chances.
d. The title chances in development
It’s funny to see how all the recorded curves of the supposed competition move towards the zero line.
e. Comparison of title chances with the betting exchange betfair
Back Lay Probability (Back)
FC Bayern Munich 1.21 1.22 82.64%
Borussia Dortmund 9.2 11 10.87%
Bayer Leverkusen 55 70 1.82%
VfL Wolfsburg 250 780 0.40%
Hannover 96 200 350 0.50%
Werder Bremen 100 160 1.00%
FC Schalke 04 30 36 3.33%
Hamburger SV 1000 0.10%
VfB Stuttgart 150 290 0.67%
FSV Mainz 05 1000 0.10%
Borussia Mönchengladbach 190 290 0.53%
TSG Hoffenheim 160 300 0.63%
1.FC Nuremberg 1000 0.10%
1.FC Cologne 230 1000 0.43%
SC Freiburg 1000 0.10%
Hertha BSC 600 0.17%
1.FC Kaiserslautern 1000 0.10%
FC Augsburg 1000 0.10%
Now almost the advice to play Bayern AND Dortmund. Both prices on the stock exchange just above fair. Whatever it may mean, it is not a serious recommendation. The title question is simply not an exciting one at the moment. Whether it will be again?
The changes in betfair’s odds estimates
FC Bayern Munich 3.28
Borussia Dortmund -4.76%
Bayer Leverkusen -0.18%
VfL Wolfsburg -0.10%
Hannover 96 -0.83%
Werder Bremen -0.25%
FC Schalke 04 0.00%
Hamburger SV 0.00%
VfB Stuttgart -0.33%
FSV Mainz 05 0.00%
Borussia Mönchengladbach -0.31%
TSG Hoffenheim -0.28%
1.FC Nuremberg 0.00%
1.FC Cologne 0.33%
SC Freiburg 0.00%
Hertha BSC 0.02%
1.FC Kaiserslautern 0.00%
FC Augsburg 0.00%
(The order according to the original estimates of the ranking)
The computer sees Bayern’s gain much higher. Only: one must urgently take into account here what amounts betfair is dealing with. Presumably there is little to no trading in this category, so that a few smaller amounts simply “survive” there. The bet is not accepted because no one even looks there. Whether it is “Lay Bayern” or “Back Bayern”: neither this nor that is attractive. This means: no trade and low importance of the numerical values there.
f. Direct Champions League qualification via 2nd place
The probability distribution for 2nd place after matchday 11
Team Number of 2nd places in 5000 simulations 2nd places in per cent
1 Borussia Dortmund 2576 51.52%
2 FC Bayern Munich 571 11.42%
3 FC Schalke 04 561 11.22%
4 Bayer Leverkusen 335 6.70%
5 Werder Bremen 277 5.54%
6 VfB Stuttgart 188 3.76%
7 Borussia Mönchengladbach 177 3.54%
8 Hannover 96 144 2.88%
9 TSG Hoffenheim 88 1.76%
10 Hertha BSC 45 0.90%
11 VfL Wolfsburg 18 0.36%
12 1.FC Cologne 10 0.20%
13 1.FC Nuremberg 7 0.14%
14 FSV Mainz 05 2 0.04%
15 1.FC Kaiserslautern 1 0.02%
16 Hamburger SV 0 0.00%
17 SC Freiburg 0 0.00%
18 FC Augsburg 0 0.00%
Dortmund, of course, remain clear favourites. More interesting perhaps: did they win or lose with the 1:1? After all, Bayern has moved further away as a competitor. From Dortmund’s point of view, they have, so to speak, secured themselves upwards for second place, although somehow they would have preferred to be downwards…
The changes compared to the previous week:
Team Win/Loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/Loss percentage
1 FC Schalke 04 212 4.24%
2 Werder Bremen 89 1.78%
3 Borussia Dortmund 81 1.62%
4 Bayer Leverkusen 57 1.14%
5 Borussia Mönchengladbach 41 0.82%
6 Hertha BSC 20 0.40%
7 1.FC Cologne 4 0.08%
8 1.FC Nuremberg 3 0.06%
9 FC Augsburg 0 0.00%
10 SC Freiburg 0 0.00%
11 1.FC Kaiserslautern -1 -0.02%
12 Hamburger SV -1 -0.02%
13 FSV Mainz 05 -5 -0.10%
14 VfL Wolfsburg -23 -0.46%
15 VfB Stuttgart -51 -1.02%
16 Hannover 96 -63 -1.26%
17 TSG Hoffenheim -65 -1.30%
18 FC Bayern Munich -298 -5.96%
In fact, the effect of having got Bayern (in the wrong direction) at a distance predominates for Dortmund. There was a gain, although Schalke logically scored a much higher one, they still gained the place in the real table.
g. The relegation question
The distribution of relegation percentages
Note: There would also be a detailed breakdown across the individual places. Here, places 17 and 18 count as fully relegated (i.e. in total as 1, for relegated in each case, otherwise the term is “direct relegation”), and a further third of relegated teams are added through relegation, whereby the first division team is generally rated as 2/3 to 1/3 favourite over the second division team. This makes the total number of relegated teams equal to 233.33%. In individual cases, of course, it would be different in reality. So if, for example, Frankfurt were to finish 3rd in League 2 and Augsburg 16th in League 1, one could perhaps speak of a balanced pairing.
Team Direct relegation (17th or 18th place) Relegation by relegation Total
1 FC Augsburg 64.48% 4.65% 69.13%
2 SC Freiburg 48.92% 5.47% 54.39%
3 Hamburger SV 23.00% 4.75% 27.75%
4 1.FC Kaiserslautern 19.36% 4.99% 24.35%
5 FSV Mainz 05 19.88% 4.43% 24.31%
6 1.FC Nuremberg 11.64% 3.08% 14.72%
7 1.FC Köln 5.52% 2.13% 7.65%
8 VfL Wolfsburg 3.90% 1.59% 5.49%
9 Hertha BSC 1.22% 0.82% 2.04%
10 TSG Hoffenheim 0.80% 0.55% 1.35%
11 Hannover 96 0.48% 0.29% 0.77%
12 Borussia Mönchengladbach 0.34% 0.15% 0.49%
13 VfB Stuttgart 0.18% 0.18% 0.36%
14 Bayer Leverkusen 0.12% 0.13% 0.25%
15 Werder Bremen 0.12% 0.08% 0.20%
16 FC Schalke 04 0.04% 0.03% 0.07%
17 FC Bayern Munich 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
18 Borussia Dortmund 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
200.00% 33.33% 233.33%
It is certain that the table situation is responsible for the majority of the chance ratios. So there are only minor shifts compared to the table (even if this table is upside down here). Kaiserslautern, for example, “cheated” their way past Nuremberg and Mainz, who are behind them in the real table, so their chances of relegation should be greater than those of the teams actually closer to relegation. In any case, one has to take into account that the computer uses the real outstanding matches (of course also the completed ones) for its simulation, so there can be occasional shifts due to the ratio of home/away matches, but also due to the fact that certain top teams are still ahead of one but already behind the other in terms of time.
The change in chances due to the results of matchday 11 in relation to relegation
Team Change in chances
1 1.FC Cologne 9.53%
2 Hertha BSC 3.41
3 1.FC Kaiserslautern 2.91%
4 Hamburger SV 1.77%
5 Borussia Mönchengladbach 1.04%
6 Werder Bremen 0.42%
7 VfB Stuttgart 0.40%
8 Bayer Leverkusen 0.26%
9 FC Schalke 04 0.13%
10 Borussia Dortmund 0.00%
11 FC Bayern Munich 0.00%
12 Hannover 96 -0.12%
13 TSG Hoffenheim -0.15%
14 VfL Wolfsburg -0.99%
15 1.FC Nuremberg -1.93%
16 SC Freiburg -2.69%
17 FSV Mainz 05 -4.43%
18 FC Augsburg -9.57%
The big winner is 1.FC Köln. This is mainly because they demoted a rival (while Hertha defeated a less tough competitor in Wolfsburg). Of course, it counts that Cologne won 3:0 and Hertha “only” 3:2, the latter being more or less outweighed by the facts that Cologne is at home, Hertha away and Wolfsburg the stronger opponent (as you can read later in the match strength development).
Augsburg and, as you can see, Köln almost exactly drew the chances they won from Augsburg’s slackening ones.
h. The relegation question in development
It’s zigging and zagging. The rest are rising, by the way, because the unlisted Mainz are among them. Gladbach and Hoffenheim, on the other hand, are approaching the zero line. Looking at the table (and remembering their performances), who would “trust” either of them with relegation? Just remember last season, when Frankfurt was similarly brilliant (not only in the standings but also in terms of performance) and that other diva from the river that rhymes with the other (Reim-Rhein-Main) is now among the (ambitious) second-division teams. However, one does not want to paint any devils on walls by any means and not even on Halloween.
i. The points expectations and the deviations
Explanation: for each match, the computer has calculated the chances for 1, X and 2. Based on these, a point expectation is mathematically calculated for each team per game according to the formula probability of winning * 3 points + probability of drawing * 1 point. The deviations given below compare the points actually achieved with those expected by the computer.
In total, the deviation does not have to be 0 for all teams, as the number of expected draws does not have to be congruent with those that have occurred (nor can it even be), but an imbalance is forced by the three-point rule. Too many points scored means that there were too few draws.
Team Name Points scored Deviation Deviation absolute
1 Borussia Mönchengladbach 14.93 20 5.07 5.07
2 FC Schalke 04 16.90 21 4.10 4.10
3 1.FC Köln 12.78 16 3.22 3.22
4 Hertha BSC 13.00 16 3.00 3.00
5 Werder Bremen 17.09 20 2.91 2.91
6 Hannover 96 15.53 18 2.47 2.47
7 TSG Hoffenheim 13.62 16 2.38 2.38
8 VfB Stuttgart 16.07 18 1.93 1.93
9 FC Bayern München 23.97 25 1.03 1.03
10 1.FC Kaiserslautern 12.12 12 -0.12 0.12
11 Bayer Leverkusen 17.13 17 -0.13 0.13
12 1.FC Nürnberg 12.65 12 -0.65 0.65
13 Borussia Dortmund 21.39 20 -1.39 1.39
14 FC Augsburg 10.75 8 -2.75 2.75
15 VfL Wolfsburg 15.80 13 -2.80 2.80
16 Hamburger SV 13.26 9 -4.26 4.26
17 SC Freiburg 12.26 7 -5.26 5.26
18 FSV Mainz 05 14.97 9 -5.97 5.97
ø Deviation 2.75
The Gladbach Borussia is once again (or continues to be?) the top club. Sure, yes, they got a win against a team that is also clearly on the plus side. 5.07 points are impressive, but far from the surprise teams of last season in terms of absolute deviation (which could be negative or positive). Even at the lower end, the deviations remain moderate. It is curious, if you like, that the two teams at the bottom are, as was simply claimed above, only in a results crisis, i.e. they are there because of bad luck, while at the top you would by no means have the feeling that these teams (not even Schalke, Cologne or Hertha) are there because of good luck. So where, please, did Freiburg and Mainz get their bad luck from? Who benefited? Is that simply swallowed up in the table?
The foreign comparison for the average point difference
Note: the theory is that the German Bundesliga is the most exciting of Europe’s top leagues. This finding is rather intuitively derived, but so far “accepted” both in this country and abroad. Of course, the higher goal average is an indication of this, as well as the(perceived) lower predictability when it comes to the title, relegation, but also other issues. Balance is a criterion and possibly the main reason for this.
The measure used here for the deviation in average points expectation provides measurable information about this, but it was probably a “problem” specific to the 2010/2011 inaugural season (the fan thanked) that the Bundesliga produced a particularly large number of surprises. This was reflected in the figures. Now the phenomenon can be observed further. Is the Bundesliga also exciting in this respect? More exciting than elsewhere?(At the same time, a large deviation in this category could simply mean that computers or feeders don’t know their business very well)
Rank Country League 1 ø Goal difference Change from previous week Number of games
1 Germany, 2.BL 4.98 0.38 117
2 France 3.68 -0.07 120
3 England 3.01 0.09 99
4 Italy 2.83 0.53 90
5 Germany, 1. BL 2.75 0.61 99
6 Spain 2.41 -0.18 100
The number of games can now be gradually ignored when interpreting the table, as they are all in a similar order of magnitude (although nevertheless the two leagues in first place have the highest number of games; hmmm…).
Germany 2 in front, by some margin, suggesting many surprises there (remember Duisburg and Bochum in negative, Paderborn and FSV Frankfurt in positive). France behind, here, for friends of foreign football to remember, that some highly touted teams like Marseille and Bordeaux are absolutely not getting going.
Nevertheless, this table looks fairly normal (compared to the previous season), i.e. the deviations are by no means out of the ordinary, which means that the really big sensations have been absent so far (look at England and Spain, where the teams expected to be at the top are also there; in England, only Newcastle is at the top, who were expected to be further back). Enough has been said about the 1st division in Germany. The table picture is well ordered, as is that in Spain (Real and Barca in front, there only Levante has “interfered”).
j. Goal expectations and their deviations
Explanation: Almost the same applies to goals as to points. The expected goals scored and the expected goals conceded are compared with reality. Too few goals scored count negatively just as too many goals conceded count negatively, the reverse counts positively in each case. Here, the sum of the deviations must be 0, because all expected and not scored goals were not conceded somewhere. However, the goal average may show a deviation.
Team Name Goal expectation Goals scored Goals conceded expected Goals conceded Total deviation
1 FC Bayern Munich 24.35 30 9.75 3 12.41
2 VfB Stuttgart 17.12 17 15.74 9 6.62
3 Borussia Mönchengladbach 15.17 13 16.12 8 5.95
4 TSG Hoffenheim 14.14 14 16.48 12 4.34
5 Hertha BSC 14.04 15 17.87 15 3.82
6 Borussia Dortmund 19.01 21 9.60 8 3.58
7 FC Schalke 04 16.21 22 13.56 16 3.35
8 Werder Bremen 17.83 20 14.87 14 3.04
9 1.FC Kaiserslautern 13.02 9 17.77 14 -0.25
10 1.FC Köln 14.50 18 18.74 23 -0.76
11 Hannover 96 15.40 14 14.81 15 -1.59
12 1.FC Nürnberg 12.63 12 16.88 18 -1.75
13 Bayer Leverkusen 17.32 13 14.41 14 -3.91
14 FC Augsburg 10.41 8 16.77 20 -5.64
15 Hamburger SV 14.65 13 18.10 23 -6.55
16 VfL Wolfsburg 15.42 14 14.52 20 -6.89
17 SC Freiburg 13.44 14 18.40 26 -7.04
18 FSV Mainz 05 15.07 13 15.34 22 -8.73
279.73 280 279.73 280 0.00
Goals ø expected: Goals ø scored: ø Deviation 4.79 2.83 2.83
Bayern are ahead by a wide margin here, and they are extending their lead with games (and results) like this, although once again you got the feeling that, given the tough Wednesday game, they took it out of at least one gear after the 3-0). Stuttgart and Gladbach “in the places”, Stuttgart mainly thanks to the favourable goal difference (of course), which however did not quite convert into points.
At the bottom are the “usual suspects” with Freiburg and Mainz, but Wolfsburg is also heavily involved.
The international comparison for the average goal difference
(Note: crazy results do not necessarily have to be reflected in the tendency. So a 5:3 or even a 7:0 may cause large deviations here, in terms of goals, but not at all in terms of points, since, for example, the favourite would have won in each case. So there is an alternative method of comparing with other countries: are there the most “surprises” in the Bundesliga in this respect too)?
Rank Country League 1 ø Goal difference Change from previous week Number of games
1 Germany, 2.BL 7.75 1.05 117
2 Germany, 1.BL 4.79 0.65 99
3 England 1 4.41 1.18 99
4 France 1 3.51 -0.11 120
5 Italy 1 3.20 0.37 90
6 Spain 1 3.05 -0.26 100
Here too, the 2nd division is clearly ahead, actually even more so. The 1st division, however, is already in 2nd place, which only confirms the impression that things are very lively in the Bundesliga and one is always waiting for an outlier result – in terms of amount and tendency – even, for neutrals, hoping, for fans rather praying that it will turn out for their team and not against it.
England has a connection, which is not surprising if one remembers a 1:6 (ManU against Man City) or Chelsea’s curious 3:5 against Arsenal at the weekend. So: the English league is pretty eventful in that respect at the moment too.
k. The playing strength ranking
Note: match strength is measured in goals expected against the average team (which does not exist in practice). There is offensive strength, which is measured in expected goals scored, and defensive strength, which is measured in expected goals conceded. The quotient of these two values is the measure of playing strength. The more expected goals scored, the higher the value; the fewer expected goals conceded, the higher the value.
Goal expectations Team For Against Quotient For/Counter Change in quotient Shift
1 FC Bayern Munich 2.24 0.80 2.80 +0.11 +0
2 Borussia Dortmund 1.76 0.82 2.15 -0.00 +0
3 Bayer Leverkusen 1.56 1.25 1.25 +0.02 +0
4 FC Schalke 04 1.52 1.22 1.25 +0.08 +0
5 Werder Bremen 1.64 1.45 1.14 +0.04 +1
6 VfB Stuttgart 1.58 1.42 1.12 +0.01 -1
7 Hannover 96 1.41 1.37 1.03 -0.02 +0
8 Borussia Mönchengl 1.30 1.30 0.99 +0.01 +1
9 TSG Hoffenheim 1.36 1.36 0.99 -0.04 -1
10 Hertha BSC 1.37 1.44 0.95 +0.04 +1
11 VfL Wolfsburg 1.39 1.47 0.94 -0.03 -1
12 FSV Mainz 05 1.32 1.63 0.81 -0.04 +0
13 1.FC Köln 1.43 1.83 0.78 +0.03 +2
14 1.FC Nürnberg 1.20 1.54 0.78 -0.04 -1
15 Hamburger SV 1.24 1.65 0.75 -0.00 -1
16 1.FC Kaiserslautern 1.07 1.53 0.70 +0.00 +0
17 SC Freiburg 1.18 1.76 0.67 -0.02 +0
18 FC Augsburg 0.87 1.60 0.55 -0.04 +0
25.43 25.42 +0
Goals ø expected 2.82
This confirms what was said above: Hertha wins even more than Cologne with +0.04 compared to Cologne’s +0.03. So it is further confirmed that Cologne’s gain was achieved by the type of the defeated (Augsburg as a competitor) and not by the amount of the win (one had intentionally not looked at the above, only thought it possible that the gain would not differ).
The Bavarians are running their circles quite lonely, but Dortmund at least has the otherwise often sufficiently high quotient of over 2.0. At the back Augsburg with a widening gap.
l. The frequency of tendency changes
Note: a “change of tendency” is considered to be a goal which equalises a lead or gives a lead. The 1:0 is not counted, because without this goal it would not even begin to have anything to do with tension in the goal sequence. Every now and then, a statistical comparison is made here with other countries. This shows that there are more changes of tendency in Germany than elsewhere, which on the one hand points to perceived tension in the Bundesliga – which is possibly envied abroad – and on the other hand points to possible tactical deficiencies, which, following an old tradition, make one advise to urgently go for a second goal after a 1:0 – and not to dull and insipidly, as is usual abroad, rock this goal over time. International comparisons provide more information about the effectiveness or weakness of German behaviour.
Of course, it is and will remain desirable that “something happens”, that games ripple back and forth, that teams that take an early lead nevertheless still lose later, that teams come back from two or three goals down in dramatic comebacks, equalise or even still win. The claim here: it actually happens too rarely in football. It would be desirable to allow more goals so that there is more drama in this point as well. More goals guarantee more changes of tendency, but it is possible that there is an upper limit. So: in ice hockey there are more goals and thus more changes of tendency, no question. But are there more in handball, for example, than in ice hockey? Probably not. Because: if there are a lot of goals, one team can be in the lead by five, six, seven without ever thinking of a comeback by the losing team.
For comparison, here are the statistics from last season. You can at least compare them a little bit to see if the tendency is similar this season.
Country Matches Compensation HF AF Total per match
1st Bundesliga 306 158 60 49 267 0.873
England 380 198 66 46 310 0.816
2nd Bundesliga 306 145 56 41 242 0.791
Italy 380 169 58 48 275 0.724
France 380 175 49 40 264 0.695
Spain 380 146 48 46 240 0.632
Country Matches Equalisation Home Leading Goals Away Leading Goals Total per Match
1 1st Bundesliga 99 51 20 15 86 0.869
2 France 120 63 14 13 90 0.750
3 Italy 90 41 13 67 0.744
4 2nd Bundesliga 117 48 16 13 77 0.658
5 Spain 100 38 14 8 60 0.600
6 England 99 38 9 12 59 0.596
Total balance 625 279 86 74 439 0.702
Balance of trend changes from last week:
Instead of listing the changes of tendency, from now on a small table with the changes of tendency from the past weekend will be included here.
Country Matches Equalisation Home Leading Goal Away Leading Goal Total per match
1st Bundesliga 9 7 2 3 12 1,333
England 10 7 1 4 12 1,200
2nd Bundesliga 9 4 1 6 0,667
Italy 20 11 4 2 17 0.850
France 10 3 1 1 5 0.500
Spain 20 11 4 4 19 0.950
Balance from WE 78 43 13 15 71 0.910
In the 1st Bundesliga – thus the intuitive expression of a highly eventful, entertaining (but also high quality) match day – there were a sensational 12 changes of tendency (the peak since records began was still 13, but that was in Spain in 10 matches). In England there were also 12 (Chelsea against Arsenal, among others), but these were also in 10 games.
In Spain and Italy there were also high values (with 19 and 17), but there was a matchday during the week, so the number of pairings doubled. The values are nevertheless high (as you can see from the quotient). So: there is something going on in Europe on the football fields, The 0.91 in the overall balance is in any case a very high value.
m. The mathematical review of the results of matchday 11
Note: here the deviation of the expected goals with the goals scored is calculated for each match. To determine the total deviation, the values are added up in absolute terms (not visible here, this column). So: if one team deviates positively by 0.35 goals, the other negatively by -0.62, then the absolute total deviation is 0.35 + 0.62 = 0.97 goals. To determine the average deviation, all these values are added up and divided by the number of pairings – usually 9.
Goal expectation Home Away Total Deviation
Freiburg Leverkusen 1.26 1.68 2.94 0 1 -1.26 -0.68
FC Bayern Nürnberg 2.66 0.59 3.25 4 0 1.34 -0.59
Gladbach Hannover 1.45 1.12 2.57 2 1 0.55 -0.12
Schalke 04 Hoffenheim 1.55 1.08 2.64 3 1 1.45 -0.08
Stuttgart Dortmund 1.06 1.47 2.54 1 1 -0.06 -0.47
Wolfsburg Hertha 1.59 1.10 2.69 2 3 0.41 1.90
Mainz Werder 1.51 1.60 3.11 1 3 -0.51 1.40
FC Köln Augsburg 1.65 1.00 2.65 3 0 1.35 -1.00
HSV Kaiserslautern 1.53 1.09 2.63 1 1 -0.53 -0.09
14.27 10.74 25.01 17 11 2.73 0.26
Expected goal total Expected goal average Scored goal average 25.01 2.78 3.11
ø expected goal difference 1.86 ø goal difference 1.53
The number of goals this time was again a little too high (thus partly responsible for the perceived richness of events), but the expected goal deviation was ((clearly)) undercut. This means that the results were still fairly normal. The goal average, however, was only exceeded by the number of home goals (17 instead of the expected 14.27).
n. The determination
Note: The determination is calculated for each match as the sum of the squares of the individual probabilities. This measures how much one can commit to a favourite in a certain pairing. The higher the favourite position, the higher the sum of the squares, but also the more “certain” the occurrence of the (favourite) event. The mathematical question in itself is even more how far one can commit, since one cannot really determine this value. Events are predicted whose probabilities are unknown. Nevertheless, one can check the quality of the estimates made here in the long term by comparing expected/occurred. This is done week by week, but of course also overall.
The determination expected
Pairing 1 X 2 Determination
Freiburg Leverkusen 29.03% 23.23% 47.73% 36.61%
FC Bayern Nürnberg 81.37% 12.68% 5.95% 68.17%
Gladbach Hannover 45.18% 25.29% 29.53% 35.53%
Schalke 04 Hoffenheim 48.76% 24.57% 26.68% 36.92%
Stuttgart Dortmund 27.69% 25.32% 46.99% 36.16%
Wolfsburg Hertha 49.12% 24.25% 26.64% 37.10%
Mainz Werder 36.42% 22.90% 40.68% 35.06%
FC Köln Augsburg 52.99% 23.85% 23.16% 39.13%
HSV Kaiserslautern 47.82% 24.72% 27.46% 36.52%
4.18 2.07 2.75 3.61
Average expected commitment: 40.13%
To repeat only above the expected figures given in last week’s text.
The determination arrived
Pairing 1 X 2 Tendency
Freiburg Leverkusen 29.03% 23.23% 47.73% 2 47.73%
FC Bayern Nürnberg 81.37% 12.68% 5.95% 1 81.37%
Gladbach Hannover 45.18% 25.29% 29.53% 1 45.18%
Schalke 04 Hoffenheim 48.76% 24.57% 26.68% 1 48.76%
Stuttgart Dortmund 27.69% 25.32% 46.99% 0 25.32%
Wolfsburg Hertha 49.12% 24.25% 26.64% 2 26.64%
Mainz Werder 36.42% 22.90% 40.68% 2 40.68%
FC Köln Augsburg 52.99% 23.85% 23.16% 1 52.99%
HSV Kaiserslautern 47.82% 24.72% 27.46% 0 24.72%
4 2 3 3.93
average determination received: 43.71%
Further note: No comparable model has yet been discovered in mathematics. Not even by a mathematician who had set himself the task of proving to the author that there was guaranteed to be nothing new.
The average expected determination was exceeded, thus confirming that the results, although somewhat too high, were nevertheless somewhat normal in terms of tendency. In mathematical terms (and not even ironically or punningly), a little too normal. About half a surprise was left out, missed. The Hertha victory in Wolfsburg was it (not for the Hertha fans, of course, one must assume), and the two draws in Stuttgart and Hamburg. The rest were favourite events, and thus a little too many.
o. Overall league statistics
Note: such a statistic is regularly produced by the computer. It is generally used for quality control of the individual figures. Each figure has its meaning and is explained in more detail. The goal average is not repeated here. The home advantage is calculated by dividing the goals scored by the home team by half of the total goals. In this way, you can see how many more goals the home teams score than they would score without home advantage. 1,116 is 11.6% more for the home team, 11.6% less for the away team.
Note: For arithmetic foxes, here is a brief explanation of the calculation method for the expected goal deviation: The computer gives each result from 0:0 to 20:20 a probability (it is actually sufficient up to 10:10, as the rest has no significant probability). There would be a goal deviation for each result. So if you multiply the probability of, for example, a 3:4 by the deviation that would then occur (in the case of the match Mainz – Gladbach, with goal expectations of 1.77:1.25, this would be 3 – 1.77 = 1.23 for Mainz plus 4 – 1.25 = 2.75 for Gladbach, i.e. a total of 3.98 goal deviation) and carry out this procedure for each match result, you get the expected average goal deviation.
1st Football Bundesliga 2011/2012 Statistics of the actual results
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals conceded Home advantage
99 47 20 32 166 114 1.186
Statistics of expected results
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals Conceded Home advantage
99 45.81 22.75 30.42 158.5 121.1 1.134
Statistics of absolute deviations
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals Conceded Home advantage
0 1.19 -2.75 1.58 7.5 -7.1 0.05195
Percentage deviation statistics
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals Conceded Home advantage
0 2.53% -13.75% 4.94% 4.52% -6.23% 4.38%
Determination expected Determination arrived 39.89% 40.21% ø Goal difference ø Goal difference expected 1.91 1.88
For thisw week, the goal average has exactly matched, which immediately earns you a self-missed pat on the back (and not incense).
Nevertheless, the home team scored 7.5 goals too many and conceded 7.1 too few. So on average it works out, but the distribution is wrong, unfavourable. Whether this is a trend, however, is rather in doubt here. Let’s see what happens next.
The expected determination is also a little exceeded (but only again since this week), which may be related to the shifted home advantage: usually the home team is favourite, after all.
p. Review of the betting recommendations
More explosive, however, is always this question: which bets should/must have occurred according to the computer? Where would he have messed with the betting market? And: if he messes with it, with the great mass intelligence, does he have good reasons for it? Could one possibly win, can one even prove long-term advantages? Up to now, such “dry swim” exercises have been made for oneself, if at all. Now, at least, it is documented.
Pairing 1 X 2
Freiburg Leverkusen 3.75 3.70 2.10
FC Bayern Nuremberg 1.19 8.00 20.00
Gladbach Hannover 2.10 3.55 3.90
Schalke 04 Hoffenheim 1.97 3.60 4.40
Stuttgart Dortmund 3.40 3.55 2.26
Wolfsburg Hertha 2.18 3.60 3.50
Mainz Werder 2.78 3.60 2.65
FC Cologne Augsburg 1.96 3.75 4.10
HSV Kaiserslautern 1.95 3.65 4.30
Goals scored 2.79
Goals scored 2
Money score -3.39
The result is of course unpleasant with a loss of 3.39 units. Nevertheless, the games (and bets) should be calmly reviewed:
The bet on Freiburg was perfect, so to speak. Because: it is impossible to play a 3.75 and hope that this team will be in control throughout. If you want to win such a bet under normal circumstances, you would have to accept some kind of defensive battle and hope for a lucky counter-attack goal, at least you should not expect a plus in game shares. On the other hand, it is readily conceded here that Leverkusen were in front from minute 2 onwards and thus quite deliberately left the field and the ball to their opponents. Nevertheless, it is clear that from Leverkusen’s point of view they were not satisfied with the performance, that it was classified as a lucky victory and that they never wanted to concede so much, but rather wanted to provide pinpricks themselves from time to time, which did not happen. By the way, according to the kicker, the chance ratio was 7:2 for Freiburg.
Nuremberg in Munich was also a one-way street from minute 2 with the 1:0. So there is no need for a judgement on the quality of the bet (which is also appropriate with a 20.0; how should one measure the quality? “They were hopelessly outclassed,” one would have to say, “but that’s what I expected. But they were only hopeless with a 15.0, not at all with a 20.0.” A somewhat shaky argumentation).
Not so much can be said about Hoffenheim at Schalke. The voices that it was a deserved victory are preferably ignored anyway (because for stupid reporters the phrase that goals count is the only criterion, insofar as every result is demonstrably deserved). Nevertheless, the kicker counts 8:2 chances. Well, at least the 1:0 was controversial (hand or not?). But what did it matter whether Raul intentionally (or not) moved the ball with his hand? If it goes over the line and the hand was on it, there is only one decision, even if it is again against the goal. On the other hand, defenders should of course also be penalised for this, since they do not consciously steer their hand in the direction of the ball, but consciously do not have their arms on their body, and therefore always not only accept the handball, but provoke it much more).
The Dortmund bet in Stuttgart was excellent and it was not much more than bad luck. Not mentioned so far was the clear penalty that Dortmund was denied (as everyone agreed; what consequence do you think the ref has to fear? Oh, yes, a 3 instead of a 2 in the grading, right; and furthermore the question: did the kicker count the situation as a goal-scoring opportunity?) But even without this and that, Dortmund had 10 goal chances, compared to 5 on Stuttgart’s side, whereby it is also doubted here that the 4 goal chances at the end – partly from the same situation, rebound, follow-up shot – were all counted as such. So: a super bet.
Wolfsburg also had more chances against Hertha with a reported 9:6. However, one may very well let one’s own feelings flow in here, but also mention the fact that one might expect a somewhat clearer favourite at a rate of 2.18 (which, by the way, was higher at kick-off). Verdict: not a good bet and again Wolfsburg responsible for it.
Perhaps enough has already been said about the Werder bet in Mainz. The teams were on a par before the game (you also got about 2.65 for Mainz, sometimes up to 2.85), and the chance ratio of 6:5 is pretty even (and here it’s more your own feeling that counts, which assumes Werder to have the slightest advantage). The bet was altogether ok – and actually won, which always makes one judge a bit more mildly, if a winner thinks about it at all.
Cologne against Augsburg was not so great after all. Augsburg were initially well in the game, and also later, after going behind, rather more active than Cologne. Nevertheless, from a score of 2:0, the chance ratio no longer counts so much (with 4:4 quite favourable for Augsburg and speaking against the quality of the bet), and after all, one really made the bet to a large extent because of Podolski, who makes a goal out of no chance from time to time (like his fabulous hammer into the angling from an impossible angle against Hoffenheim). After all, the rate was quite favourable at 1.96 and one would make the bet again immediately.
The bet on Lautern was also pretty good. Lautern started very well and they kept HSV away from their own goal for a long time. It was strange that their game got a break after the sending off, but also compliments to HSV. Sure, a game 10 against 11 is always hard to judge for the quality of a bet, but the kicker comes to 4:9 chances (which you didn’t feel that way) and you had odds of 4.30, which were still above those on Freiburg.
All in all, the bets were very good, but this time the favourable result failed to materialise.
Recommended bets Statistics of the individual match days
Matchday Nr 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
Light still clearly predominates. Nevertheless, one likes to mention that good runs cannot last long enough. The weekend would certainly have deserved a much better, actually positive result.
Statistics in total
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
From the number of bets and the number of hits you can see that mostly outsider odds are played, you have by far not won half of all bets (this would be 34), but nevertheless you have achieved a plus. Since the number of hits is only minimally positive at 0.53 above expectation, while the financial plus is 15.45 units, one concludes further (and quite logically) that one has hit too many high odds so far.
q. Preview of the 12th matchday
Note: The computer uses a specially developed – of course explainable and highly logical – algorithm to calculate the goal expectations (and the individually maintained home advantage not shown here) to these goal expectations. These in turn are offset against the probabilities of occurrence, in the past by simulation, today long since by a function derived from the simulation results). These goal expectancy values have also long since proved to be competitive in goal number betting on the betting market.
Goal expectation Home Away Total
Mainz Stuttgart 1.49 1.65 3.14
Dortmund Wolfsburg 2.20 0.70 2.90
Nuremberg Freiburg 1.81 1.17 2.98
Hertha Gladbach 1.37 1.05 2.42
Werder FC Cologne 2.52 1.33 3.85
Hoffenheim Kaiserslautern 1.60 0.87 2.47
Leverkusen HSV 2.04 0.97 3.00
Hannover Schalke 04 1.42 1.27 2.68
Augsburg FC Bayern 0.53 2.19 2.72
14.98 11.18 26.16
Expected goal total Expected goal average 26.16 2.91
More goals are expected than the average has been so far, so some rather high-scoring pairings are on the way. Mentions of this include Mainz v Stuttgart and even more Werder v Cologne with 3.85 goals. The outliers on the downside: Hoffenheim and Hertha, which suggest an under bet (maybe added to the stats here soon? In any case, the computer seems even better equipped for this type of bet compared to the simple 1-X-2 market).
Note: The determination is calculated as the sum of the squares of the individual probabilities. This measures how much one can commit to a favourite in a certain pairing. The higher a favourite position, the higher the sum of the squares, but also the more “certain” the occurrence of the event. The mathematical question in itself is even more how far one can commit, since one cannot really determine this value. Events are predicted whose probabilities are unknown. Nevertheless, the quality can be checked in the long term by comparing expected/occurred events.
The determination expected
Pairing 1 X 2
Mainz Stuttgart 35.21% 22.74% 42.05% 35.25%
Dortmund Wolfsburg 71.93% 17.59% 10.48% 55.93%
Nuremberg Freiburg 52.89% 22.39% 24.72% 39.10%
Hertha Gladbach 44.76% 26.23% 29.01% 35.33%
Werder FC Cologne 63.61% 17.72% 18.67% 47.09%
Hoffenheim Kaiserslautern 54.93% 24.49% 20.59% 40.40%
Leverkusen HSV 62.46% 20.31% 17.23% 46.10%
Hanover Schalke 04 41.10% 24.81% 34.09% 34.67%
Augsburg FC Bayern 7.61% 16.63% 75.76% 60.74%
4.35 1.93 2.73 3.95
Average expected fixing:
The average expected determination points to a clear favourite matchday. Sure, yes, you have two over 70% favourites in Bayern and Dortmund, and Werder and Leverkusen are also over 60%.
The fair odds
Note: the fair odds are just the inverse of the probabilities. However, this is how the games are offered on the betting market or traded on the betting exchanges (“betfair”). You can gladly compare what the computer guesses. The deviations will not be enormous, but theoretically every bet is a good bet (from the computer’s point of view) if the odds paid on the market are above the fair odds. “Good” is the bet insofar as it promises long-term profit. If you consistently make bets in this way, you should make a profit in the long run. Of course, there are no guarantees for this either.
Pairing 1 X 2
Mainz Stuttgart 2.84 4.40 2.38
Dortmund Wolfsburg 1.39 5.68 9.54
Nuremberg Freiburg 1.89 4.47 4.05
Hertha Gladbach 2.23 3.81 3.45
Werder FC Cologne 1.57 5.64 5.36
Hoffenheim Kaiserslautern 1.82 4.08 4.86
Leverkusen HSV 1.60 4.92 5.80
Hannover Schalke 04 2.43 4.03 2.93
Augsburg FC Bayern 13.14 6.01 1.32
Comparison with the betting exchange betfair
(The betting recommendations)
Pairing 1 X 2 % Average
Mainz Stuttgart 2.84 3.50 2.72 100.54%
Dortmund Wolfsburg 1.36 5.30 11.00 101.49%
Nuremberg Freiburg 1.80 3.90 5.00 101.20%
Hertha Gladbach 2.26 3.55 3.40 101.83%
Werder FC Cologne 1.54 4.50 7.20 101.05%
Hoffenheim Kaiserslautern 1.75 3.85 5.50 101.30%
Leverkusen HSV 1.71 4.10 5.50 101.05%
Hannover Schalke 04 2.92 3.50 2.64 100.70%
Augsburg FC Bayern 20.00 7.00 1.22 101.25%
Goal expectation 2.07
A short comment on the betting recommendations:
Stuttgart at Mainz can definitely be recommended. The odds are around the same as the Werder odds last time and Stuttgart also have a similar quality (as the match strength ranking also reveals, even if Werder are now ahead). Mainz lost last time and even if the performance was anything but bad, a defeat certainly cannot boost self-confidence.
Wolfsburg at Dortmund can hardly be rated now with odds of 11.0, would be rather technical game. But: at least they had 9 chances to score against Hertha and Dortmund had a Champions League game during the week; a not really deserved 1:0 against Olympiakos. So: you play it even though the supporters for Wolfsburg don’t really get good food.
Freiburg at Nuremberg is now immediately identified as an excellent bet. At such a rate, a team that always plays well, and this against an opponent who recently lost 0:4? No, you don’t need to say any more about it: up with the dough.
Cologne in Bremen is also played, of course, and already much more than technically. Cologne won at Leverkusen, scored enough goals, Werder have clear strengths going forward but can always concede one at the back, and Podolski is in over-form. Cologne are expected to make a breakaway, that’s for sure, but whether they succeed is written in the stars….
Leverkusen against HSV is the shakiest recommendation. Has the market been so involved in the outcome of the victory? Is it all about Torsten Fink and HSV, who finally have to win? No, so Leverkusen have the potential, that’s for sure. And they certainly don’t have anything to give away. They played well in Valencia on Tuesday, but unfortunately lost. Still. the signs (despite the fitness problem) were clearly pointing to improvement. The rate of 1.71 is too high, the game will be played.
Hannover should be able to beat Schalke after Bayern? Well, the fans will believe it, the players will have the confidence. How big should the difference between Hannover and Schalke be? Already small before the season, in the table too, and now you get over 2.90? No, this has to be played, no ifs, ands or buts.
Not a word should be said about the bet on Augsburg. The unit is in the rubbish. There can hardly be any talk of “planting”. Can it?
2) The 2nd Bundesliga
a. The table situation
b. The chances of promotion
Note: the simulation of League 2 runs exactly like that of League 1. 5000 runs were also made. Third place logically gives a 1/3 chance of promotion, although it might still depend on the pairing. Since the top favourites are ahead here, it could well be 50% that the second division third place team has against the first division third last.
c. Point expectations and discrepancies
d. Evaluation of the 5th second division matchday
e. Preview of the 7th Second League Matchday