1) The 1st Bundesliga
a. Review of the Matches
Results of Matchday 17
FC Bayern Munich – 1. FC Cologne 3:0 (0:0)
TSG Hoffenheim – Hertha BSC 1:1 (1:0)
Bayer Leverkusen – 1. FC Nürnberg 0:3 (0:2)
Hamburger SV – FC Augsburg 1:1 (0:0)
SC Freiburg – Borussia Dortmund 1:4 (1:2)
VfL Wolfsburg – VfB Stuttgart 1:0 (0:0)
FC Schalke 04 – Werder Bremen 5:0 (2:0)
1.FC Kaiserslautern – Hannover 96 1:1 (0:1)
Borussia Mönchengladbach – FSV Mainz 05 1:0 (1:0)
A few observations:
1) The king of reporters: Marcel Reif
Even the author of this article cannot deny that he has long since achieved cult status. A good acquaintance used to say that he liked to read the Bild newspaper. It would be an almost full-fledged MAD replacement (who still remembers MAD, Alfred E. Neumann?). So in the meantime Marcel Reif has really succeeded in generating ratings, just as perhaps a Dieter Bohlen succeeds in regularly making some candidate long in front of an audience of millions.
Marcel Reif simply MUST be listened to, only he (and also the broadcaster) should neither be aware of the occasion nor be happy about it. It is comedy, yes, even if it is only sarcastic. Here are a few excerpts of what he had to say about the match between Bayern and Cologne, the match on Friday evening where there is no German competition whatsoever, the “cream of the crop” of the whole weekend, so to speak.
First of all, he tried to set the record straight. Of course Cologne wouldn’t have lost there for 6 seasons, no, but “with respect,” he said, “Bayern are clear favourites after all.” Brilliant insight, to be sure. The tone has long been condescending, no, knowing. So, one concludes, nothing special would be expected ” and he doesn’t even hint at that with a syllable. Why does he do it? Well, his secret, because the 86.32% calculated by the computer was absolutely “customary”, in line with the market. If one knew something like that, one would at least have the chance to point out the size of the favourites’ position, thus the improbability of a surprise, which at 13.68% is still not beyond reality.
There was a first shot on goal by Bayern after 12 minutes. Ribery was played free, in the penalty area, and shot, but past/over. Marcel Reif’s insight: “Ribery is absurdly free.” A beautiful creation, a stroke of linguistic genius, only, what is he getting at? Should we have wished that the Cologne team would please defend halfway sensibly and not let any attackers stand around “absurdly free”? If there were no goal-scoring chances at all, would that be his wish? What is actually the goal? If Bayern does NOT create goal chances, they are “embarrassingly weak”, if they do create a goal shot, it is only possible with the kindest assistance of the opponents, by leaving attackers standing around “absurdly free”?
No, you can’t pull a herring off a plate with that, you can only point out the absurdity of the speaker delivering perfect comedy without his own knowledge. The nation is allowed to curl up in its armchair because a mentally handicapped person, convinced that he is the master of wisdom, is going wild in recognising shortcomings which, regardless of the final result, the course of the game or the actual quality of what is shown, will inevitably come to light ” and will be (supposedly) detected by him, him alone. Bayern WITHOUT scoring chances Bayern weak. Bayern WITH scoring chances Cologne weak.
Bayern dominated the game pretty much completely. Cologne, as you could see wonderfully in the DSF Doppelpass, had really operated with a five-man defensive chain, hoping for the miracle of maybe being able to make it that way. The possession figures have long been available everywhere. Marcel Reif read them out at one point as “high in the seventies”, per Bayern. When Cologne still didn’t get more game shares for the next 10 minutes, he concluded, known as a mathematical genius: “Ball possession now at 130%.” Yes, comedy. That MUST have been a joke, sure. But one wonders what one is supposed to laugh about?
Should we conclude that Cologne is so horribly weak that they already have negative possession times? Should we further conclude ” since the result was 0:0 — that even with 130%, i.e. a non-existent opponent, Bayern can’t score a single goal? Reminds one of the nice little joke: Bayern plays a football match against Ostfriesland. A train passes by, whistling. The East Frisians leave the pitch, thinking the whistle is the final whistle — 20 minutes later it’s 1:0 for Bayern.
That’s how stupid some are supposed to have been, how weak the others. Hard to conclude otherwise. One switches on to enjoy the greenness of the turf, he must be convinced.
Later, when Bayern was leading 2-0 and Cologne could find no means to put the defence under pressure, but Bayern, as we know, had one man less on the pitch, so in principle and completely normally they used their universally acknowledged superior skills to keep the opponent away from their own goal, Marcel Reif realised: “Watching the neighbour chop wood is more fun.” There, continuing to grope in complete obscurity, he really hit the nail on the head. After all, just about anything is more fun than having him explain a football match. Well, unless you intend to capture such “bon mots”.
How on earth would he have imagined this game to excite him? Any given scenario, if one is willing to look for it, could reveal flaw after flaw, provided one has the Reif glasses on. A clear win ” that’s totally boring and the opponent has embarrassed himself, exposed himself, put his Bundesliga fitness in doubt. A high-scoring game, regardless of which side scored the goals? That would definitely be ridiculous, above all weak, because the opponent would then have been “invited to score goals”. A 0:0? It is unthinkable that the stability of the defensive lines would be mentioned even once. Here, it can be guaranteed, it would be a cruel kicking game, to fall asleep anyway, like the other one, only this one serving as a special slapstick of the inadequacies of the strikers. It simply doesn’t work to play well under the stern gaze of the self-proclaimed demigod (oh, sorry, Mr. Reif, an insult; how many percent are missing to God? Surely not 50…).
A little later, and who was surprised except the alien at the microphone, in a phase when Cologne, with dwindling playing time, strength and hope, further loosened their defence in order to make the miracle, in which they no longer believed, possibly possible, and Bayern, with the offensive players so highly praised by all sides, came to another goal chance even in a shorthanded situation, he orated: “The Cologne team wants another one.”
No, it doesn’t get any stupider than that, more missing the point, showing less football sense, that’s really not possible. What should Cologne have done? Play to 0:2, dare no more attacks, and, even if they did, would he expect Bayern never to get another chance on goal? When the expression was first used in public that “they begged for a goal against”, it was still supposed to be funny, possibly even escaping the mouth of a stern coach who felt that his team could not see out the first goal: 0, recognised a stupidity here, a mistake there and coined such a phrase out of anger: today it has found its way into the everyday jargon of reporters and, like every other phrase, is conjured up by Bible-thumping, completely independent of match situations and actual circumstances.
If Mr. Reif had indeed already been watching his neighbour chopping wood at the time, the only reason for this could have been that nothing would change in this match, not only the winner (as is always oracular as soon as the lead exceeds one goal, not only when Bayern do it), but also that one would no longer have had to reckon with goal scenes. This assessment was wrong, as it just turned out: Bayern had a chance to score. Now this was not right for him either, or does the “Cologne want another one” sound as if he was as eager as the famous flying fox or had any interest in football at all, which could be acted out especially in good offensive actions?
Furthermore, soon after the 80th minute, one heard: “We can console ourselves. Soon it will be Christmas.” There is no other way, it is hacked mercilessly until the end, until there is nothing left of quality, of joy, of beauty, of enthusiasm. Everything chopped up short and small ” with the kind assistance of the neighbour….
“McKenna with an action that is as necessary as an eight of spades, but at least it was a sign of life.” What is the author of this saying trying to tell us? “Why are you wasting your time with me”? Yes, there is something to it…
“Manuel Neuer will be ashamed.” That he changed his clothes, or what does that mean? You’d be willing to bet: he wasn’t ashamed. Why should he be? Cologne came as an underdog, quite a few teams have already lost in Munich, he had gone months without conceding a goal, when people were already starting to count the minutes until the absolute record, he himself, Marcel Reif had once said about him, at the beginning of the season, that one could not (and should not) judge him at all, because he had not been given anything to do. Now he’s suddenly supposed to be ashamed because he didn’t get anything to hold? No, he tries, he, Marcel Reif, to destroy everything that crawls and flies. The spectator has absolutely no right to enjoy anything of what is presented. He absolutely has to be told that, so that he can, yes, um, yes, what, actually? So that he will skip the set next week or cancel his subscription before then, on Monday? That must be it. A mole at Sky: One? Hundreds…
Another one here: “The good news: only 5 minutes to go. The bad news: five minutes to go.” Great, that boy. That’s how long HE has to suffer, the poorest one. Because: the viewer has the pleasant choice: switch off! Has he already? Oh yes, he has.
One more real praise, right at the end, and completely unexpected: at the score of 3:0 in the meantime (no, he didn’t hide when the ball was in). “Cologne want another one.” There was no quality to the dream goal. The tone dropped. Cologne want one more…) the final whistle sounded without stoppage time. Marcel Reif: “I have to say: Guido Winkmann, thank you very much. The whistle blew on time.” And relieved him of his (long since completely lonely) suffering….
2) Football and its rules
Sure: it gets boring at some point if you always talk about the same things. How often one has to hear that “there should have been a penalty”, and how rarely (never), on the other hand, that “this was not a penalty”, but it was awarded. No, you can’t be that blind not to see the principle behind it. YOU DON’T WANT TO GIVE A PENALTY. Any decision AGAINST a goal is a welcome one. Any reason is right to disallow a goal, already in the making.
The reason is a deeper psychological one, but also a completely unrecognised one, and, miracle of language, an unrecognised AND unacknowledged one. Psychology should not be mentioned at all, especially not in “jurisprudence”. Nevertheless, it is causally responsible, psychology: everyone feels ” so does the whistle-blower — that a goal for every action is too high a reward. The accompanying shift in chances is, the closer one gets to the final whistle, in football at most by the one goal given. It may also happen in handball or basketball, ice hockey or water polo, that a goal at the very end brings the victory by that one goal and thus the decision. Whether these laws also apply in such cases cannot be clarified here (the experts in these sports would have to be consulted), but it is a habit there to recognise goals because they are constantly scored anyway (here more, there less). Accordingly, it would be no problem to award late goals, even if they decide the game, because it is a kind of routine and there are no interpretations of the rules (mind you, only interpretations, no paragraphs, neither in football nor elsewhere) in the direction of preventing goals. Why should there be? This is a football-specific problem. It may even be that this drama in the final seconds is desirable in other sports, because it rarely, very rarely happens (when, please, would a basketball game be 70:72 seconds before the end and the home team could clinch victory with a three-pointer? When would a handball game be exactly 25:25 with 4 seconds on the clock?)
In football this peculiarity alone: quite a lot of games end for a long time, almost continuously, if they don’t end like that, between a one-goal gap or even (in the Bundesliga this season there are 91/153 that ended between a draw and a one-goal win; that’s 59.5% and, without knowing other statistics, this percentage is far higher than in all other sports with goal counting).
So: a single goal always causes a gigantic shift in the odds of the game’s outcome (in the sense of 1-X-2) when the game is tied (very often the case, since that’s how it starts and goals are only scored on average less often than every 30 minutes) or the team trailing by one goal equalises. The closer to the final whistle this event takes place (better: the possibility would exist for such a goal, because it is in fact permanently prevented, decided against), the greater the shift in chances. Remember in particular the Champions League final Bayern ” ManU, when the first goal in injury time caused a shift from almost 100% Bayern victory to about 50-50, the second for the next jump from 50-50 to 0-100. These were recognised (there was no possibility of disallowance?) ” but from then on the game became one of the most cited in football history (this in turn shows how rare such a case is).
Intuitively, in the referee’s skin it looks like this: the game stands as it stands. This state of affairs is taken as a given, almost unchangeable, as German sports reporters have been doing for a long time, only to be totally surprised when a goal is scored. When a goal is about to be scored, it is almost perceived as a sensation. We had settled in so nicely with this state of affairs, and suddenly things are supposed to be completely different? That which an ordinary spectator only feels (and the German reporter tries to make him feel at the same time), “that’s the way it is and that’s the way it will stay”, is supposed to change with the referee’s decision? No, he is somehow against it. He doesn’t want to bear this responsibility, this state of affairs should not be changed through his fault. And here, of course, is the ultimate crux: the danger of culpably changing the situation is what prevents him from voting for the goal, for the goal action.
The cross enters the penalty area ” the whistle sounds. Somewhere an attacker will have had at least one hand on the opponent’s shirt, even if it is only to defend him, somewhere there will have been a scuffle, which the defender does not have to take solely for his own account, there are many reasons for this. The whistle is blown by the media “and also by the referees. The failure to blow the whistle in the event of a goal and the entitlement to do so, no, the obligation to do so would be verifiable, in retrospect, oh dear and shame on him. That could mean the end of his career. So it resounds, again and again. And: the earlier in the development of the goal action ” this is a modern development ” the less the perceived damage done. “The game was already interrupted” is heard again and again from the reporters. “No excitement.” follows, which belongs to another topic (what actually makes a football match exciting?), followed by “he must have seen something.” You can’t see it, nor does a reporter’s eye or slow motion shed any light on it. Something remains something. Soon the sponge is over it, mostly without a slow-motion replay, because the replayer wouldn’t know which scene to play and the reporter wouldn’t know what to look for. “I can’t see anything wrong with the rules” is what you hear from time to time, but it doesn’t attract anyone, at most a few of the apparently dying species of justice fanatics. Where are they?
b. The standings
Sp S U N Pkt T GT Diff
1 FC Bayern Munich 17 12 1 4 37 43 – 10 +33
2 Borussia Dortmund 17 10 4 3 34 35 – 12 +23
3 FC Schalke 04 17 11 1 5 34 38 – 22 +16
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 17 10 3 4 33 25 – 11 +14
5 Werder Bremen 17 9 2 6 29 30 – 31 -1
6 Bayer Leverkusen 17 7 5 5 26 22 – 22 +0
7 Hannover 96 17 5 8 4 23 20 – 24 -4
8 VfB Stuttgart 17 6 4 7 22 23 – 20 +3
9 TSG Hoffenheim 17 6 4 7 22 19 – 19 +0
10 1.FC Köln 17 6 3 8 21 27 – 35 -8
11 Hertha BSC 17 4 8 5 20 24 – 26 -2
12 VfL Wolfsburg 17 6 2 9 20 23 – 34 -11
13 Hamburger SV 17 4 7 6 19 21 – 27 -6
14 FSV Mainz 05 17 4 6 7 18 22 – 29 -7
15 1.FC Nürnberg 17 5 3 9 18 17 – 28 -11
16 1.FC Kaiserslautern 17 3 7 7 16 13 – 21 -8
17 FC Augsburg 17 3 6 8 15 15 – 28 -13
18 SC Freiburg 17 3 4 10 13 21 – 39 -18
438 438 0
Total number of games 153
Goals ø 2.86
Schalke is really getting involved. Astonishing somehow, from a feeling point of view, that they are already on a par with Revier neighbours Dortmund, but the performances, whenever you could see one, were exceptionally good. Gladbach still in it, then some gaps in the points yields. If you apply the golden rule again: 2 points per game ” title candidate, 1 point per game ” relegation candidate, you see plastic evidence for it at the end of the Hinrunde: Bayern with just over 2 per game on 1, Schalke, Dortmund with 2 per game each within striking distance and Gladbach, just under 2, in a lurking position. At the back Freiburg, Augsburg, Lautern with less than one point per game, all on the relegation places (even if 16 entitles to relegation), in front Nürnberg and Mainz with just more than one point per game, but far from “off the Schneider”.
c. The title question
Explanation: these figures are the result of a computer simulation based on the current playing strengths of the teams given below. The games are simulated individually on the basis of goal expectations that are also calculated (also given in the further text) and in each case the final table is considered 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 3521 70.42% 1.42
2 Borussia Dortmund 1220 24.40% 4.10
3 FC Schalke 04 195 3.90% 25.64
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 59 1.18% 84.75
5 Werder Bremen 4 0.08% 1250.00
6 Bayer Leverkusen 1 0.02% 5000.00
As much as one does not like oracle: it is developing more and more into a battle between the “usual suspects”, the usual suspects. Schalke, of course, has opened the door a little wider. Werder and Leverkusen almost out.
Change in chances compared to the previous week due to the matchday 16 results
Team Win/loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/loss percentage
1 FC Schalke 04 47 0.94%
2 Borussia Dortmund 13 0.26%
3 Borussia Mönchengladbach 11 0.22%
15 VfB Stuttgart -1 -0.02%
16 FC Bayern Munich -20 -0.40%
17 Bayer Leverkusen -25 -0.50%
18 Werder Bremen -25 -0.50%
It is almost more interesting to ask whether Bayern’s succession of own victories helps against victories of the competition. A year ago, in the case of Dortmund, it was argued that victories are almost always advantageous for the leader (in the sense of a positive development of chances), as one moves a little closer to the finish line, even if the competition wins at the same time. Here it looks a little different: the finish line is still a little too far away (this phenomenon would perhaps prevail from matchday 25 onwards), at the same time the victories of the competitors were clearer, which is good for their development of playing strength (from the point of view of the self-fed computer; there is hardly any objectivity there) and in this respect their chances grow disproportionately compared to those of Bayern (well, Bayern lose, Dortmund Schalke win).
Please consider: Schalke won 5:0 against a rival (before the match it seemed), Dortmund 4:1 away, while Bayern beat Cologne “as expected” (only Marcel Reif had others, it seemed?!) 3:0, thus doing less for the match than the other two. Leverkusen and Werder with maximum losses, at the same time almost all away.
d. The title chances in development
Here it looks more like stagnation, but at least, in contrast to previous matchdays, both top teams finished as winners this time.
e. Comparison of title chances with the betting exchange betfair
Back Lay Probability (Back)
FC Bayern Munich 1.38 1.39 72.46%
Borussia Dortmund 5.4 5.9 18.52%
Bayer Leverkusen 180 220 0.56%
Werder Bremen 150 210 0.67%
FC Schalke 04 19 21 5.26%
Borussia Mönchengladbach 25 38 4.00%
Furthermore, the computer rates Dortmund’s chances as slightly better than the market. Lay Bayern or Back Dortmund the recommendations.
The changes in betfair’s odds estimates
FC Bayern Munich -1.61%
Borussia Dortmund 0.34
Bayer Leverkusen -0.87%
Werder Bremen -0.51%
FC Schalke 04 1.81%
Borussia Mönchengladbach 1.73%
(The order according to the original estimates of the ranking)
It is astonishing, however, that the market immediately sees Bayern’s chances sinking. Is it only due to the interference of Schalke, who are now being granted a share?
The development at betfair in the graphic
The twitching of the Schalke curve looks a little more significant. Also the small step backwards at Bayern…
f. The direct Champions League qualification via 2nd place
The probability distribution for 2nd place after matchday 17
Team Number of 2nd places in 5000 simulations 2nd places in per cent
1 Borussia Dortmund 2595 51.90%
2 FC Bayern Munich 1152 23.04%
3 FC Schalke 04 820 16.40%
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 322 6.44%
5 Werder Bremen 67 1.34%
6 Bayer Leverkusen 36 0.72%
7 VfB Stuttgart 4 0.08%
8 Hannover 96 3 0.06%
9 TSG Hoffenheim 1 0.02%
“Business as usual” at the top. Even if Schalke “gets in the way”.
The changes compared to the previous week:
Team Win/loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/loss percentage
1 FC Schalke 04 213 4.26%
2 Borussia Dortmund 53 1.06%
3 FC Bayern Munich 39 0.78%
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 14 0.28%
10 VfL Wolfsburg -1 -0.02%
11 1.FC Cologne -2 -0.04%
12 Hertha BSC -2 -0.04%
13 FSV Mainz 05 -4 -0.08%
14 Hannover 96 -4 -0.08%
15 TSG Hoffenheim -5 -0.10%
16 VfB Stuttgart -7 -0.14%
17 Werder Bremen -125 -2.50%
18 Bayer Leverkusen -169 -3.38%
Schalke with a huge gain. The other three at the top are also gaining. How? Quite simple: they settle it among themselves, if you like. Leverkusen AND Werder have eliminated themselves first with clear defeats. That part of the cake goes to the top four.
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 favourites 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 SC Freiburg 64.66% 4.42% 69.08%
2 FC Augsburg 50.22% 5.39% 55.61%
3 1.FC Kaiserslautern 30.28% 5.61% 35.89%
4 1.FC Nuremberg 19.42% 4.63% 24.05%
5 Hamburger SV 8.48% 2.59% 11.07%
6 FSV Mainz 05 7.90% 2.59% 10.49%
7 1.FC Köln 6.64% 2.52% 9.16%
8 VfL Wolfsburg 5.14% 2.03% 7.17%
9 Hertha BSC 3.60% 1.47% 5.07%
10 TSG Hoffenheim 1.56% 0.81% 2.37%
11 VfB Stuttgart 1.06% 0.66% 1.72%
12 Hanover 96 1.00% 0.54% 1.54%
13 Bayer Leverkusen 0.02% 0.05% 0.07%
14 Werder Bremen 0.02% 0.02% 0.04%
15 FC Bayern Munich 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
16 Borussia Dortmund 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
17 Borussia Mönchengladbach 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
18 FC Schalke 04 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
200.00% 33.33% 233.33%
Freiburg with extension of top position. Of course, because Augsburg got a point, away from home, while Freiburg lost at home (and lost significantly).
The change in chances due to the results of matchday 17 in relation to relegation
Team Change in chances
1 1.FC Nürnberg 20.67%
2 VfL Wolfsburg 5.32%
3 TSG Hoffenheim 0.15%
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 0.02%
5 Borussia Dortmund 0.00%
6 FC Bayern Munich 0.00%
7 FC Schalke 04 0.00%
8 Werder Bremen -0.03%
9 Bayer Leverkusen -0.04%
10 Hannover 96 -0.21%
11 Hertha BSC -0.68%
12 VfB Stuttgart -1.00%
13 Hamburger SV -1.92%
14 FSV Mainz 05 -2.57%
15 1.FC Kaiserslautern -2.65%
16 1.FC Köln -2.65%
17 FC Augsburg -2.97%
18 SC Freiburg -11.45%
Another example that it’s not only the “big points” that get you ahead. Unexpected points scored away from home against highly rated teams can bring even more than (home) victories against direct competitors. Of course, this also presupposes the correctness of the assumption that good results actually change the chances for the coming game, i.e. that the (assumed, but also proven) change in playing strength corresponds to some extent to reality. Someone could be of the opinion that the teams are as good as they are and that nothing changes at all, which, from a theoretical point of view, poses the only serious problem of correctly recognising the true playing strengths? In this case, there would be no need for “redrawing”.
Now this is only a theory, which may even have been valid many years ago. Today it is the case (probably a little more so since Boris Becker): matches are decided in the mind. Many teams have long since had their mental coaches who try everything to tease out the performance that is in the players. Nevertheless (or precisely because of this) there are runs. You start with good results and from then on you are floating on cloud nine, capable of different, better performances than would have been the case in the original assessment. There are definitely developments, so the model used certainly has a reasonable background. By the way, it is also the case that all teams are in reality very close to each other (originally it is the players; exception clearly Bayern, over decades; proof the development at Gladbach; a year ago, beaten on 18, now, with almost the same squad, on 4 with connection to the top) and one can use smaller successes to build/expand self-confidence: “You can do it, you can do it!”, and try to maintain this maxim as long as possible (as mental coach). With the struggling ones, of course, you have to make an effort to turn other gears….
Nuremberg won 3:0 in Leverkusen. Away at a difficult opponent ( maximum win of over 20%. Augsburg even loses chances (of staying in the class). Two reasons: the three-point rule is unfair and the competition (Nürnberg!) has achieved even better results.
h. The relegation question in development
The only thing that can be reliably read: the oscillator effect remains for a long time. This means at the same time: the tension in the relegation question.
i. The point expectations and the deviations
Explanation: for each match, the computer has calculated the chances for 1, X and 2. On the basis of these, a point expectation is mathematically calculated for each team per game according to the formula probability of victory * 3 points + probability of draw * 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 23.72 33 9.28 9.28
2 FC Schalke 04 26.45 34 7.55 7.55
3 Werder Bremen 25.30 29 3.70 3.70
4 1.FC Köln 19.02 21 1.98 1.98
5 Borussia Dortmund 32.95 34 1.05 1.05
6 FC Augsburg 15.38 15 -0.38 0.38
7 FC Bayern Munich 37.54 37 -0.54 0.54
8 TSG Hoffenheim 22.58 22 -0.58 0.58
9 Hannover 96 23.92 23 -0.92 0.92
10 Hertha BSC 21.16 20 -1.16 1.16
11 Bayer Leverkusen 27.77 26 -1.77 1.77
12 1.FC Nürnberg 19.78 18 -1.78 1.78
13 Hamburger SV 21.24 19 -2.24 2.24
14 1.FC Kaiserslautern 18.31 16 -2.31 2.31
15 VfB Stuttgart 24.99 22 -2.99 2.99
16 VfL Wolfsburg 23.45 20 -3.45 3.45
17 FSV Mainz 05 21.83 18 -3.83 3.83
18 SC Freiburg 18.68 13 -5.68 5.68
ø Deviation 2.84
Gladbach remains the surprise team. Competition meanwhile from Schalke. Surprising/not surprising? Well, how could one expect a surprise? But: the question of whether it is surprising that Schalke is in second place in the surprise table after seeing the original table is the real question. After seeing this one, it makes perfect sense (precisely because no other team comes into question). You probably wouldn’t have come up with it just like that.
Werder remain in 3rd place, and the number of points they scored is (surprisingly) respectable after last season’s mess. The goal difference is a bit different….
Freiburg at the back, for sure. The gap is still bridgeable, with only 5.68 points missing.
The international 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 are bad at their trade)
Rank Country League 1 ø Point deviation Change from previous week Number of games
1 Germany, 2.BL 6.26 0.24 171
2 England 1 4.05 0.38 169
3 France 1 3.36 -0.38 190
4 Spain 1 3.10 0.44 160
5 Italy 1 3.04 0.17 160
6 Germany, 1.BL 2.84 0.22 153
The deviations are small internationally this season. The 2nd division is ahead, the 1st division behind. The fact is, however, that the really big surprises have failed to materialise this season (exception: Gladbach).
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 Borussia Mönchengladbach 23.29 25 23.39 11 14.10
2 FC Schalke 04 25.54 38 20.95 22 11.41
3 FC Bayern Munich 38.32 43 14.71 10 9.39
4 Borussia Dortmund 29.14 35 14.67 12 8.53
5 Hertha BSC 22.00 24 25.96 26 1.97
6 TSG Hoffenheim 22.68 19 24.03 19 1.35
7 VfB Stuttgart 27.14 23 24.83 20 0.68
8 1.FC Köln 22.88 27 31.56 35 0.68
9 1.FC Kaiserslautern 19.03 13 26.98 21 -0.05
10 FC Augsburg 15.24 15 27.17 28 -1.07
11 Hamburger SV 22.78 21 26.86 27 -1.92
12 Werder Bremen 27.82 30 25.23 31 -3.59
13 FSV Mainz 05 23.15 22 25.73 29 -4.42
14 Hannover 96 23.75 20 22.95 24 -4.80
15 1.FC Nürnberg 19.76 17 25.82 28 -4.94
16 Bayer Leverkusen 27.51 22 21.04 22 -6.47
17 SC Freiburg 20.59 21 28.38 39 -10.21
18 VfL Wolfsburg 23.74 23 24.10 34 -10.65
434.36 438 434.36 438 0.00
Goals ø expected: Goals ø scored: ø Deviation 5.35 2.84 2.86
Almost the same picture here as with the points: Gladbach in the lead, Schalke in 2nd place. Certainly understandable, because apart from the high points tally, Schalke did quite a bit for the goal difference with the 5:0. Bayern already on 3, Dortmund right behind, on 4. You can see from this that Bayern is having a good season, with a lot of high wins (which of course were anything but coincidence).
Wolfsburg remain behind, but they still have a bad goal ratio with 23:34, i.e. many goals conceded (with quite high expectations). Goals scored fulfilled, goals conceded far exceeded. Freiburg only just ahead, but Leverkusen already almost at the bottom. The 0:3 certainly didn’t do any good.
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 9.09 0.22 171
2 Germany, 1.BL 5.35 0.55 153
3 England 1 4.97 0.66 169
4 Spain 1 4.05 0.57 160
5 France 1 3.54 0.48 190
6 Italy 1 3.25 0.28 160
It remains the same here: League 1 and 2 from Germany at the top. There are just high and surprising results in both leagues (in many cases both are fulfilled at the same time).
k. The playing strength ranking
Note: The playing 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.
Team For Against Quotient For/Counter Change in Quotient Shift
1 FC Bayern Munich 2.21 0.87 2.54 +0.05 +0
2 Borussia Dortmund 1.89 0.79 2.40 +0.07 +0
3 FC Schalke 04 1.69 1.20 1.41 +0.09 +0
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 1.41 1.17 1.20 +0.02 +1
5 Bayer Leverkusen 1.52 1.30 1.17 -0.13 -1
6 Werder Bremen 1.66 1.60 1.04 -0.06 +0
7 VfB Stuttgart 1.46 1.48 0.98 -0.02 +0
8 Hannover 96 1.34 1.40 0.95 +0.01 +0
9 TSG Hoffenheim 1.24 1.34 0.92 -0.01 +0
10 Hertha BSC 1.40 1.54 0.91 +0.01 +1
11 FSV Mainz 05 1.35 1.52 0.89 -0.01 -1
12 VfL Wolfsburg 1.41 1.62 0.87 +0.01 +0
13 Hamburger SV 1.23 1.50 0.82 -0.02 +0
14 1.FC Köln 1.45 1.81 0.80 -0.01 +0
15 1.FC Nürnberg 1.13 1.56 0.73 +0.07 +2
16 1.FC Kaiserslautern 1.01 1.45 0.69 +0.00 -1
17 SC Freiburg 1.19 1.84 0.65 -0.02 -1
18 FC Augsburg 0.94 1.52 0.62 +0.01 +0
25.50 25.50 +0
Goals ø expected 2.83
Gladbach moves past Leverkusen. Now, for one’s own sensibilities, this only means: the playing strength updates are very reasonable. Even if you still attribute a high potential to Leverkusen: the 0:3 was too much to stay with the conviction that they are better than Gladbach. The timing of the changing of the guard is ideally chosen. Doesn’t mean for a long time, of course, that Leverkusen can’t take back the place….
l. The frequency of tendency changes
Note: a “change of tendency” is considered to be a goal that equalises a lead or scores 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
Total 2132 991 337 270 1598 0.750
Balance of the 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
1 1st Bundesliga 10 5 0 1 6 0.600
2 France 20 11 5 3 19 0.950
3 2nd Bundesliga 9 7 1 2 10 1,111
4 Italy 21 12 5 2 19 0.905
5 Spain 9 4 2 2 8 0.889
6 England 20 11 0 7 18 0.900
Total Balance 89 50 13 17 80 0.899
France, Italy and England had match days during the week, hence the higher number of matches. The 1st league a bit limp at the weekend with only 6 TWs, France with a balance of almost one per game on the 20, so there it went high. In the 2nd division even over one per game, but only on 9 games. Italy was also doing well with 19 in 21 games and even England barely behind with 18 in 20. That means: all over Europe there was something going on on the pitches, if you take the changes in tendency (which have never been listed elsewhere) as an indicator of tension – and accept the same.
The overcritical (especially German) sports reporters, however, might, as usual, emphasise the negative, if they ever come up with such a statistic: if there were many, it would mean, regardless of the entertainment value for the fans, that “the teams are not able to hold on to leads.
Trend changes in the major leagues in the 2011/2012 season.
Country Matches Equalisation Home Leads Away Leads Total per match
1 1st Bundesliga 153 82 28 21 131 0.856
2 France 190 100 28 25 153 0.805
3 2nd Bundesliga 171 79 26 22 127 0.743
4 Italy 160 66 20 18 104 0.650
5 Spain 159 65 28 15 108 0.679
6 England 169 74 21 27 122 0.722
Total balance 1002 466 151 128 745 0.744
Germany 1 holds the lead they had in the previous season. But, still, it is an indication. Germany is aiming for the goal of the game: To score goals (and not the one proclaimed above: score one if possible and then stonewall, in new German “manage the lead”). The spectator appreciates it anyway and tactical deficiencies could be identified less than ever internationally at the moment.
m. The mathematical review of the results of matchday 17
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
FC Bayern FC Köln 3.51 0.81 4.33 3 0 -0.51 -0.81
Hoffenheim Hertha 1.53 1.18 2.71 1 1 -0.53 -0.18
Leverkusen Nuremberg 2.01 0.78 2.79 0 3 -2.01 2.22
HSV Augsburg 1.53 0.85 2.38 1 1 -0.53 0.15
Freiburg Dortmund 0.71 1.73 2.43 1 4 0.29 2.27
Wolfsburg Stuttgart 1.68 1.48 3.16 1 0 -0.68 -1.48
Schalke 04 Werder 2.03 1.24 3.27 5 0 2.97 -1.24
Kaiserslautern Hannover 1.19 1.19 2.37 1 1 -0.19 -0.19
Gladbach Mainz 1.77 1.09 2.86 2 1 0.23 -0.09
15.97 10.34 26.31 15 11 -0.97 0.66
Expected goal total Expected goal average Scored goal average 26.31 2.92 2.89
ø expected goal deviation 1.89 ø goal deviation 1.84
Quite moderate deviations, which may mean, among other things, that the computer values are currently quite reliable. This time the home teams scored a little too few goals, the away teams a little too many. All in all, however, everything went well as expected, including the goal deviations.
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
FC Bayern FC Köln 86.32% 8.81% 4.87% 75.52%
Hoffenheim Hertha 45.71% 25.03% 29.25% 35.72%
Leverkusen Nuremberg 66.26% 20.14% 13.61% 49.80%
HSV Augsburg 53.58% 25.59% 20.83% 39.59%
Freiburg Dortmund 14.91% 23.10% 61.99% 45.99%
Wolfsburg Stuttgart 42.64% 23.24% 34.13% 35.22%
Schalke 04 Werder 55.78% 21.21% 23.01% 40.91%
Kaiserslautern Hannover 36.27% 27.51% 36.22% 33.84%
Gladbach Mainz 53.43% 23.18% 23.39% 39.39%
4.55 1.98 2.47 3.96
average expected determination: 44.00%
To repeat only above the expected numbers given in last week’s text. However, the Cologne vs Mainz pairing is excluded here. Since it was a fairly even match, the average expected commit on the remaining 8 games goes up a bit (38.74% vs. 38.41% that would have been expected if all games had been played).
The determination arrived
Pairing 1 X 2 Tendency
FC Bayern FC Köln 86.32% 8.81% 4.87% 1 86.32%
Hoffenheim Hertha 45.71% 25.03% 29.25% 0 25.03%
Leverkusen Nuremberg 66.26% 20.14% 13.61% 2 13.61%
HSV Augsburg 53.58% 25.59% 20.83% 0 25.59%
Freiburg Dortmund 14.91% 23.10% 61.99% 2 61.99%
Wolfsburg Stuttgart 42.64% 23.24% 34.13% 1 42.64%
Schalke 04 Werder 55.78% 21.21% 23.01% 1 55.78%
Kaiserslautern Hannover 36.27% 27.51% 36.22% 0 27.51%
Gladbach Mainz 53.43% 23.18% 23.39% 1 53.43%
4 3 2 3.92
average determination arrived: 43.54%
It was, after all, a very clear favourite matchday, and essentially practice confirmed this assessment. Bayern and Dortmund won, as the highest favourites, but Schalke and Gladbach were also above 50% — and realised it. Nuremberg, on the other hand, were glaring underdogs and the three draws were also below expectation (in the sense of the level of expectation), so that the expected probability was nevertheless just undercut.
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.
o. League statistics
Note: such a statistic is regularly produced by 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 no longer has any 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 deviation of 3.98 goals) and carry out this procedure for each match result, you get the expected average goal deviation.
The statistics of the results so far Matches Hsiege Drais Asiege Htore Atore Heimvort
arrived 153 71 39 43 264 174 1,205
expected 153 71.11 34.93 46.94 246.6 187.6 1.136
abs deviation 0 -0.11 4.07 -3.94 17.40 -13.60 0.07
rel. Deviation 0 -0.15% 10.44% -9.16% 6.59% -7.82% 5.77%
Determination expected Determination received 40.36% 39.93% ø Goal deviation ø Goal deviation expected 1.85 1.88
Draws continue to rise, contrary to the start of the season, so that one should almost be worried by now. More than four too many. But if you look at the games that ended in draws, you rarely had the impression that they were specifically played for a draw. If it was, it was the referees’ clamminess (stated and explained much further above) that ensured that the (re)mi(e)sen score was maintained.
p. Review of the betting recommendations
More explosive, however, was always this question: which bets should/must have occurred according to the computer? Where would it 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
FC Bayern FC Cologne 1.16 9.40 23.00
Hoffenheim Hertha 1.99 3.60 4.10
Leverkusen Nuremberg 1.54 4.30 8.00
HSV Augsburg 1.63 3.95 6.20
Freiburg Dortmund 6.20 4.00 1.64
Wolfsburg Stuttgart 2.70 3.65 2.64
Schalke 04 Werder 2.12 3.70 3.65
Kaiserslautern Hannover 2.38 3.50 3.35
Gladbach Mainz 1.86 3.60 4.60
Goals scored 3.13
Goals scored 3
Money evaluation -0.54
The bet on Hertha was justifiable, even if it didn’t happen. The equaliser came just before the end, but at least it was a 4.10, which doesn’t happen every day. For that, they did enough, performed enough, showed enough.
Leverkusen was not a good bet, but it was only made to provide some action, otherwise the taxes had already destroyed the advantage. Nuremberg, however, had earned a favourable result due to previous, not often bad performances. The bet unquestionably not good.
Augsburg at Hamburg seems to be a good bet, considering that Augsburg was leading after all. However, the share of the game was clearly in favour of HSV, so that with 11:3 chances according to Kicker, it is not necessarily a great bet.
Dortmund won, but like Leverkusen, it was a pure action bet. In between, it was anything but clear and also the chance ratio does not clearly speak for quality (it was 6:5 for Freiburg). It wasn’t a great bet, but it hadn’t been justified much either.
Wolfsburg won against Stuttgart and last week’s reasoning was good: for these odds, you just have to play it. The kicker counted 9:4 chances. There are hardly better bets, this one had the added merit of coming in.
Schalke’s win – this bet called the best of the season so far – also gives little room for scepticism. A 5:0 as a start-finish victory without any real opposition. What more could you want?
Hannover at Kaiserslautern, on the other hand, was again somewhat questionable. Hannover was leading, just like Augsburg, but the distribution of chances (with 7:1) as well as the match shares speak a clear language: in this form the bet was not good.
Recommended bets Statistics of the individual match days
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
The red numbers predominate in frequency, with 9:8, but they are often only small, so that black predominates in total.
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
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% 31.38 +0.62
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
This leaves a rather proud 16.62% for the first round, which is more than one could ever expect. The hit expectation in the minus: just means that the high odds on hits outweighed (since the overall balance is positive).
q. The preview of the 18th matchday
Note: The computer uses a specially developed algorithm – which can of course be explained and is highly logical – 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
Gladbach FC Bayern 1.04 1.54 2.57
HSV Dortmund 0.77 1.65 2.42
Hoffenheim Hannover 1.38 1.05 2.43
Nürnberg Hertha 1.40 1.40 2.80
Schalke 04 Stuttgart 2.08 1.03 3.12
Kaiserslautern Werder 1.34 1.47 2.81
Wolfsburg FC Cologne 2.18 1.37 3.55
Leverkusen Mainz 1.71 1.14 2.86
Freiburg Augsburg 1.41 1.03 2.44
13.32 11.67 24.98
Expected goal total Expected goal average 24.98 2.78
Quite few goals in total, which is surely due to the specific pairings again. Many goals in Wolfsburg and Schalke, few in Hamburg, Hoffenheim and Freiburg.
But one should take into account that the start of the second half of the season (within the transfer window) in any case starts under different conditions.
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 is, 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
Gladbach FC Bayern 25.63% 25.54% 48.84% 36.94%
HSV Dortmund 17.30% 24.34% 58.36% 42.98%
Hoffenheim Hannover 44.53% 26.96% 28.51% 35.22%
Nürnberg Hertha 37.43% 25.20% 37.37% 34.32%
Schalke 04 Stuttgart 61.46% 20.51% 18.03% 45.23%
Kaiserslautern Werder 34.52% 25.13% 40.35% 34.51%
Wolfsburg FC Cologne 56.08% 20.38% 23.53% 41.15%
Leverkusen Mainz 50.78% 23.83% 25.39% 37.91%
Freiburg Augsburg 45.85% 26.75% 27.40% 35.69%
3.74 2.19 3.08 3.44
Average expected commitment: 38.22
In terms of committing, a pretty even matchday. Bayern and Dortmund are also away, whereby Bayern will be looking for revenge. Otherwise, Schalke is supposed to be the highest favourite. Is that what you think, especially against Stuttgart? Well, in any case, there will be a bit of a shuffle, although the winter break is only short this season (because of the European Championship).
The fair odds
Note: the fair odds are only 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
Gladbach FC Bayern 4.07 3.96 1.99
Hoffenheim Hannover 2.25 3.71 3.51
Nuremberg Hertha 2.61 3.97 2.74
Schalke 04 Stuttgart 1.67 4.76 5.22
Wolfsburg FC Cologne 1.84 4.81 4.02
Freiburg Augsburg 2.18 3.74 3.65
Kaiserslautern Werder 2.90 3.98 2.48
HSV Dortmund 5.78 4.11 1.71
Leverkusen Mainz 1.94 4.22 4.03
Comparison with the betting exchange betfair
(The betting recommendations)
Pairing 1 X 2 % Average
Gladbach FC Bayern 5.50 3.95 1.76 100.32%
Hoffenheim Hannover 2.02 3.65 4.10 101.29%
Nürnberg Hertha 2.24 3.55 3.55 100.98%
Schalke 04 Stuttgart 1.92 3.80 4.50 100.62%
Wolfsburg FC Cologne 1.86 3.85 4.50 101.96%
Freiburg Augsburg 2.22 3.45 3.80 100.35%
Kaiserslautern Werder 3.00 3.60 2.50 101.11%
HSV Dortmund 4.60 3.80 1.92 100.14%
Leverkusen Mainz 1.86 3.75 4.90 100.84%
Goal expectation 2.57
A short comment on the betting recommendations:
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