1) The 1st Bundesliga
a. Review of the Matches
Results of the 19th Matchday
Hannover 96 – 1. FC Nürnberg 1:0 (1:0)
FC Augsburg – 1. FC Kaiserslautern 2:2 (1:1)
Werder Bremen – Bayer Leverkusen 1:1 (1:0)
Hertha BSC – Hamburger SV 1:2 (0:2)
Borussia Dortmund – TSG Hoffenheim 3:1 (2:0)
FC Bayern Munich – VfL Wolfsburg 2:0 (0:0)
- FC Cologne – FC Schalke 04 1:4 (1:0)
FSV Mainz 05 – SC Freiburg 3:1 (3:0)
VfB Stuttgart – Borussia Mönchengladbach 0:3 (0:1)
A few observations:
1) A 3:0
In the match between VfB Stuttgart and Borussia Mönchengladbach, the market, so to speak, in recognition of Gladbach’s great performance this season, had already realised before the game that there were no favourites here from either side. It was regarded as an even match. This was remarkable in that on Matchday 1 of the season Stuttgart might have gone into the game as 1.70 favourites (and thus would have been clear favourites). The normally benevolent commentator Fritz von Thurn und Taxis, who originally stood out from the others in the sense that he did not combine everyone’s equally great cluelessness with narrow-mindedness and malice, seems to feel more and more obliged (or to follow a broadcasting requirement) to join the ranks of his godlike colleagues, who want to appear even greater through audacity and stupidity, by adopting their slogans.
The match was anything but a one-way street, even if one readily concedes that Gladbach added another to the series of outstanding performances. Stuttgart were fully in the game throughout, even after going behind – which these days is a big part of the layout of the game — and had created this or that favourable opportunity to equalise. The fans – as, incidentally, Matthias Sammer also remarked later on Sky90 – do not always give unconditional support but, reminiscing about previous title wins, set the bar a little higher and occasionally accompany unsuccessful actions with clearly audible grumbling – mostly in the form of whistles — which is by no means likely to give the kickers wings. So it is one of the famous “uphill battles” that inevitably do not always lead to a good end.
Gladbach, for their part, also created goal danger again and again – of course mostly via Marco Reus, who cannot be praised highly enough — and were thus lucky enough to virtually decide the game with the 2:0 in a scene well above the 80th minute. A great goal and not somehow different is football. As a neutral spectator, and above all as a commentator, one would have the chance to enjoy a goal at all, and a really beautiful one at that (even this is usually spoiled for the spectator with endless analyses of mistakes and emotionless explanations of “it had been announced”). A sympathy for the fate of the Stuttgart team, which really struggled over the 90 minutes at a very decent Bundesliga level, would be welcome.
It is understandable that, mindful of the reaction of the demanding fans, one or the other Stuttgart player hung his head for a moment, even if the coaches – especially the mental ones – do everything in their power these days to prevent even such understandable human behaviour. Now the stopwatch was running at Mr Thurn und Taxis. When Gladbach were able to play their way through once more – initiated, of course, with a wonderful run through the centre followed by a perfect pass to the outside, by Marco Reus -, who recognised the departing teammate in the centre of the attack and served him the ball just right, every football fan had only this one chance: to click his tongue. Surely everyone knows that at such a moment, after the score is 2-0 and the game is decided, not every opponent is covered in press, of course one knows that it is quite a bit easier than in the 1st minute, in which concentration and score as well as forces are at their peak, nevertheless there is the chance to enjoy such a wonderful action.
Mr Thurn und Taxis had obviously listened very carefully to his colleagues. Because, what did he do? He reported the hand-stopped seconds between goal 2 and goal 3, only to shoot afterwards that the Gladbachers would surely have been plenty surprised, as they would be used to meeting much more resistance from every training session alone than in this action. Yes, can you ruin a goal even more than with this absolutely out-of-place comment? When did this nonsense just take hold, which everyone of the speech bubbles seems to want to measure themselves against? There was certainly a situation when scoring a goal seemed as easy as in training – where, by the way, it still remains difficult at the highest level, where only the will or the acceptance of injuries to the opponents is mostly missing — but to make this a permanent slogan now, whose repetition lacks the entertainment effect anyway, but also any sensible approach of a good commentary? No, potentiated nonsense, and this opinion is supported by all sides, according to sufficiently conducted private surveys. You can’t stand it, so much joy-killing stupidity.
2) A hand goal
Even if at this point there is always a vote for letting the ball go, for whistling per striker, one still has to take the other perspective now and then, committed to the basic idea of justice.
When Bayern Munich, in the ultimate attack of the game, brought a promising counterattack to a conclusion, crowned it with the 2:0 by Robben. However, it is this goal which, in this opinion, was not legal. A lob over keeper Benaglio is cleared before the line, Robben charges in, the defender shoots at him, the ball bounces off Robben and bounces over the line.
Well, unspectacular perhaps, as long as you see it as meaningless, the goal anyway, because the victory is already sealed, it’s the last action. On the other hand, one remembers a goal scored by Markus Schroth in the Munich Lions’ kit, who once stormed towards the Hertha goal in a comparable manner. He wanted to celebrate the goal he thought was safe, and accordingly ran after the ball with his arms outstretched. When a Berlin defender made a great acrobatic save and knocked the ball off the line, it bounced off the approaching attacker’s arm and into the goal.
Well, as completely ridiculous as it may sound: the goal was not only recognised (thus securing the 1:0 victory for the Löwen), but in retrospect was considered by all the reporters to be just as regular. This handball was not foreseeable, not intended and therefore there was no infringement of the rules.
Very similar, just to bring this part to a close, was the case with Robben’s goal, who allegedly played the ball with his stomach (his own view is different, but it would almost not matter, because he does not have his arms on his body and thus forced the chance to play the ball with his hand).
In both cases, the generally accepted view that these are regular hits cannot be endorsed in any way. The rule paragraphs with which one endeavours to declare all actions predictable (by assigning them to a paragraph) only ensure that common sense is lost. Now and then there is a good intention behind it, but as a rule (!) these attempts are doomed to failure.
It does not matter for what reason or with what previous behaviour (which may have been in accordance with the rules) a player gets his hand on the ball. It is much more about the effect he achieves with it. If you score a goal with your hand, it simply no longer matters whether the handball was scored with an unnatural movement or unintentionally or with the arm halfway raised. You cannot score a goal with your hand. Full stop.
Sure, you are making an attempt to introduce a sensible paragraph yourself here, it may sound like. But it would be much better to leave this part of the rule out completely. Everyone would immediately understand when a goal is scored with the hand, regardless of how it would have happened if it were disallowed. You don’t need a single rule to hide behind (except perhaps that the game is called “foot” ball). You decide it that way and everyone would be unanimously right.
3) A handball by the defender
Above all, this is illustrated by another small scene: when in the Werder vs. Leverkusen match a defender thought to take a shot from the edge of the penalty area by turning his body into the shot, and was successful in so far as his arm was able to intercept the ball, the speaker commented (analogous to above) that this could of course never, ever be counted as handball. He turned his body into it, and thus could not see the ball at all (the ultimate logic; all defenders become handball goalkeepers, who basically never really consciously block a shot with their hand), apart from which it would not be, in his view, an unnatural arm movement if the arm “flicked away” (this is the actual expression used) when turning.
Now here is the almost decisive question: does the reporter really believe that this arm would inevitably be in the position indicated – “flicking away” from the body – if the defender were aware of the consequences of a penalty kick in the event of the arm being hit? The answer, simply postulated at this point, is: “No,” You know very well what you are doing, even with your arm. And if the alarm signs were great enough, one would simply hold it against the body.
It should be interesting to watch football matches from the 50s or 60s. No, in the penalty area, every defender had his arms to his body. Because he knew: if the ball came against him, there would be a penalty kick. That must have been a wonderful evolution that took place, which makes it impossible for a player today to continue this behaviour. The arms are somewhere. Mostly on the opponent (also the absolute exception in the past), and in the given exceptional cases they are “flapping” around elsewhere.
The prognosis for the future, in view of the reporters’ words, is: the arms will soon flap much more and get balls in many more possible or impossible situations. All of which will go unpunished and so “evolution” will take its course. That this happens within a single generation may be considered one of nature’s miracles.
4) Survey results
Yes, the Sky channel has really brought a few splashes of colour to the otherwise much duller football television landscape (this really only applies to Germany). So they came to the conclusion that a certain blondness can be beneficial for sales. And lo and behold, the one or other thoroughly pleasing female face can provide stimulation for the male fans in a completely different way. By the way, their different, certainly somewhat more conciliatory view of the situation would be good for football, the media landscape and, last, but definitely not least, the broadcaster – as long as the fair femininity has not either been infected by the male side or, presumably even more so, obliged to adopt its tone. Pretty, please, with pleasure, friendly too, yes, open-minded, even better, in every (even the most frivolous) respect, but please always keep your fingers in the wounds, yes? Humanity? Out of place.
Sky has launched one of those completely pointless polls that could have regularly driven the author up the wall in the same context before – if one had not long since displayed the detachment that one inevitably puts on, and which, elsewhere, is also often referred to as “thick skin”. The poll was: “Who will be German champion?” A fad has taken hold from (the motherland of football, beloved not only for its so excellent reporting) England, which is; create buzzwords, with wit and background. These days, the only talk is of the “Fantastic Four”, who will probably decide the title fight between themselves. So which of the four, it was thought, would make it by poll?
Let’s briefly discuss the nonsense of such a poll: let’s assume that one team would, by all accounts, be the razor-thin winner and thus, purely theoretically, have 51% of the chances. This would be, eerily, clear to every respondent. Since the voters do not receive any quota and no other reward is to be expected – except for the occasional car or whatever it may be, to whose raffle every participant is invited anyway – but only the question of who will do it, one would have to vote for the favourite, in the sense of maximising the chance of being right, the expected voting verdict would be clear: 100% for the favourite. Although the chances are rated by all equally at (correct) 51%.
This example only serves to illustrate that such a poll is in no way suitable for reflecting the chances of the teams in the correct ratio. For this, one would have to look at the betting exchange (as is regularly and carefully done here). Because: there the reward is the odds. Those who take the underdog, such as Gladbach, receive a princely reward (see below) if the sensation succeeds. In this respect, the bettor at the stock exchange has sufficient motivation to place a bet, in stark contrast to the caller, who is merely rewarded for increasing the odds in the poll result by one milliprocent (or however many there may be, especially callers whose motivation cannot be so easily ascertained). He receives no reward, except perhaps a pat on the back from his colleagues.
This makes the result achieved by Sky all the more astonishing. Sure, the two top favourites were clearly ahead, but no more than the computer did. The Gladbach team’s chances were even rated a little higher – according to the poll results — and those of the Schalke team were by no means considered too small. The exact figures are not remembered, perhaps even changing by the minute. But astonishment —followed by the most sensible thinking possible– was nevertheless triggered.
The interpretation was this: the moment for this survey is optimally chosen. It is exactly the moment when Bayern’s chances tilt a little. Some, of course, always go with the underdogs, hoping and rooting for them; another clientele is certainly pro-Bayern, but the third is explicitly anti-Bayern (the big ones divide the nation into like or hate, smaller ones you like or don’t care about). The narrowness of the table contributes its share, which has systematically developed in this direction: weakening of the supposed number 1, approaching of the others. The start of the second half of the season with a sufficient number of upcoming games, a defeat of Bayern at Gladbach for the opener, partly exhilarating performances, both additionally by Schalke and even more Dortmund, the victory of Dortmund in Munich (with the additional realisation that Bayern have to play away for the second leg), it adds up that the outsiders are given the numbers of calls reflecting their chances.
To prove this, of course, this poll would have to be repeated, for example after a matchday on which Bayern wins a superb game while the competition loses. Would there then be a result roughly corresponding to the odds?
6) A few more scenes…
b. The standings
Sp S U N Pkt T GT Diff
1 FC Bayern Munich 19 13 1 5 40 46 – 13 +33
2 Borussia Dortmund 19 12 4 3 40 43 – 14 +29
3 FC Schalke 04 19 13 1 5 40 45 – 24 +21
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 19 12 3 4 39 31 – 12 +19
5 Werder Bremen 19 9 4 6 31 31 – 32 -1
6 Bayer Leverkusen 19 8 6 5 30 26 – 25 +1
7 Hannover 96 19 6 9 4 27 21 – 24 -3
8 TSG Hoffenheim 19 6 5 8 23 20 – 22 -2
9 VfL Wolfsburg 19 7 2 10 23 24 – 36 -12
10 VfB Stuttgart 19 6 4 9 22 24 – 26 -2
11 Hamburger SV 19 5 7 22 24 – 33 -9
12 FSV Mainz 05 19 5 6 8 21 27 – 33 -6
13 1.FC Nürnberg 19 6 3 10 21 19 – 29 -10
14 1.FC Köln 19 6 3 10 21 28 – 40 -12
15 Hertha BSC 19 4 8 7 20 25 – 30 -5
16 1.FC Kaiserslautern 19 3 9 7 18 15 – 23 -8
17 FC Augsburg 19 3 7 9 16 17 – 31 -14
18 SC Freiburg 19 4 4 11 16 23 – 42 -19
489 489 0
Total number of games 171
Goals ø 2.86
It was truly amazing to watch Dortmund “sneak up” during the parallel matches. Sure, they were in the lead for quite a while and Bayern were not – to that extent they were on 1 (in the flash table) for that time anyway. However, in principle, the question was much more whether they could possibly manage to make up for the advantage in goal difference during the games. In the 55th minute they scored the 3:0 and were within one goal. Bayern scored 1:0 in the 60th but still it seemed conceivable that Dortmund would score two (or more) more goals (and thus be even at 1 by number of goals scored). Instead, they conceded one, while Bayern added the one (already described) in injury time, so that it was four goals again and thus the old gap. Nevertheless, it showed that things can happen very quickly. Of course, this live opportunity was also a sign of the market reaction described above. “Only two more goals and Dortmund is suddenly ahead, even if Bayern wins. Man, it’s close.”
At the back, again, the swap of places between Augsburg and Freiburg. Of course, Augsburg’s 2-2 was a sense of achievement, as they played well and scored. Nevertheless, it was of course too little to make up ground, as Lautern are in 16th place and Augsburg were at home.
Freiburg had practically no chance, as they had the first action, which looked really good, but Mainz scored directly on the counterattack, after almost exactly 2 minutes, 1: 0, and after 6 minutes with the penalty and sending off (discussed on Sky90, whether penalty AND red, even if there was contact; certainly, if it is an emergency stop and one should, as is advocated here, always punish strictly, as it would simply cause you to see a lot and good football; nevertheless, of course, it should not be started suddenly in a game, abruptly and out of the blue; an instruction to referees and players beforehand, then it was already fitting, so it was clearly too harsh, in relation to what usually goes through; penalty yes, sending off no) already decided.
Nevertheless, it was understandable that Streich, the new coach, complimented his team after the final whistle. They put up an excellent fight and, with 10 against 11 from that point on (i.e. over 84 minutes, almost an entire game), held on to a 1-1 draw. May no one please claim that Mainz “spared” their opponents. There is no such thing anymore. They wanted to, but Freiburg were equal for long stretches.
Hertha really got themselves into it at the back with a home defeat against a direct rival. I won’t dwell on hindsight, but this much: the team looked excellent for a long time in the first half of the season. Hertha, however, has a long tradition of self-destruction behind it. Here, one clearly has the feeling that the quarrels and the change of coach could not have done any good to a functioning team. Although Hertha was well off towards the end and actually deserved the equaliser, with enormously pressure-filled play in the final phase.
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 2243 44.86% 2.23
2 Borussia Dortmund 2136 42.72% 2.34
3 FC Schalke 04 433 8.66% 11.55
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 188 3.76% 26.60
Contrary to the claims of quite a few experts, the computer remains somewhat stoic: Bayern, despite being in 2nd place in the playing strength rankings and a gradual creeping up of the competition – which influences the experts emotionally, without any true rational background – still have the better chances. Surprising, especially since Dortmund receives the Munich team at home and this season by no means confirms the trend that more goals are scored at Bayern, making wins somewhat more likely compared to draws and defeats (as explained in the opening text before the season). Schalke and Gladbach with marketable but halfway realistic chances.
Change in chances compared to previous week due to matchday 19 results.
Team Win/loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/loss percentage
1 Borussia Mönchengladbach 51 1.02%
2 Borussia Dortmund 50 1.00%
3 FC Schalke 04 39 0.78%
16 Bayer Leverkusen -5 -0.10%
17 Werder Bremen -5 -0.10%
18 FC Bayern Munich -130 -2.60%
No right winners, no losers, except Bayern, who had the easiest task and didn’t really do anything for the goal difference. But of course very moderate changes as all four won. Werder and Leverkusen slowed each other down, but didn’t have much to give away.
d. The title chances in development
But, very vividly, the convergence of the curves. Schalke is clearly lifting itself off the bottom, while Gladbach is the only remaining representative of the “rest” curve. These too in an upward trend.
e. Comparison of title chances with the betting exchange betfair
Back Lay Probability (Back)
FC Bayern Munich 1.78 1.79 56.18%
Borussia Dortmund 3.45 3.5 28.99%
FC Schalke 04 11.5 12 8.70%
Borussia Mönchengladbach 15.5 16 6.45%
Here Bayern remains even more ahead than with the computer and as reflected by the expert opinions read. However, one has to watch the market carefully here – and considerable shifts can also occur in the course of the week, since the opinions are published and the time – like that for the survey – is optimal for placing bets, insofar as movements are definitely pending.
The changes in the odds estimates at betfair
FC Bayern Munich -5.93%
Borussia Dortmund 1.59%
FC Schalke 04 1.29%
Borussia Monchengladbach 1.69%
(The order according to the original rankings)
Well, here’s a clearer drop for Bayern this time, although this development must not have been completed on Monday — as these figures were recorded.
The development at betfair in the graph
f. The direct Champions League qualification over 2nd place
The moderate market reaction illustrated, over all phases of the season. However, there are currently good reasons to trust the computer a little more. Of course, and the programmer is well aware of this, one of many possible developments, but a random one.
The probability distribution for 2nd place after the 19th matchday
Team Number of 2nd places in 5000 simulations 2nd places in per cent
1 FC Bayern Munich 1714 34.28%
2 Borussia Dortmund 1708 34.16%
3 FC Schalke 04 944 18.88%
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 612 12.24%
5 Bayer Leverkusen 13 0.26%
6 Werder Bremen 9 0.18%
This is the first time that Bayern has come out on top in the battle for second place. Of course, from their point of view, this is not necessarily the goal they were aiming for. But it is understandable: Dortmund has added plenty of title chances, but remains slightly behind. The competition is not asleep and is busy scoring points, with Bayern having a very slight advantage overall – so this is also transferred to second place, from which Dortmund can be ousted even slightly more easily if worst comes to worst.
The changes compared to the previous week:
Team win/loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/loss percentage
1 Borussia Mönchengladbach 122 2.44%
2 FC Bayern Munich 40 0.80%
12 Hannover 96 -1 -0.02%
13 VfB Stuttgart -1 -0.02%
14 TSG Hoffenheim -2 -0.04%
15 Werder Bremen -19 -0.38%
16 FC Schalke 04 -20 -0.40%
17 Bayer Leverkusen -23 -0.46%
18 Borussia Dortmund -96 -1.92%
While Robben is scoring with his arms, Gladbach’s Borussia is robbing itself. Of course, 3-0 away at a still good team is a huge “boost” for all chances, including confidence, match strength and goal difference. It could be even more so if everyone else didn’t win in parallel….
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 by the relegation, whereby the first division team is generally rated as 2/3 to 1/3 favourite compared to 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 61.48% 4.85% 66.33%
2 SC Freiburg 61.12% 5.03% 66.15%
3 1.FC Kaiserslautern 30.12% 6.07% 36.19%
4 1.FC Köln 11.18% 3.62% 14.80%
5 1.FC Nuremberg 11.28% 3.50% 14.78%
6 Hertha BSC 9.28% 3.01% 12.29%
7 FSV Mainz 05 4.86% 2.05% 6.91%
8 Hamburger SV 4.00% 1.70% 5.70%
9 VfL Wolfsburg 2.48% 1.18% 3.66%
10 VfB Stuttgart 2.50% 1.15% 3.65%
11 TSG Hoffenheim 1.44% 0.91% 2.35%
12 Hannover 96 0.26% 0.23% 0.49%
13 Bayer Leverkusen 0.00% 0.01% 0.01%
14 Werder Bremen 0.00% 0.01% 0.01%
200.00% 33.33% 233.33%
Augsburg and Freiburg in a neck-and-neck race. Sure, they are tied on points and not much else separates them, although emotionally you might see Freiburg slightly (more) ahead. Now, of course, one would have to take a closer look at the remaining schedule and the home/away ratio. Who has who at home, who away? Etcetera.
The change in chances due to the results of the 19th matchday with regard to relegation
Team Change in chances
1 Hamburger SV 7.36%
2 FSV Mainz 05 5.96%
3 FC Augsburg 1.13%
4 Hannover 96 0.90%
5 Werder Bremen 0.03%
6 VfL Wolfsburg 0.03%
11 Bayer Leverkusen -0.01%
12 TSG Hoffenheim -0.21%
13 1.FC Kaiserslautern -0.56%
14 VfB Stuttgart -1.02%
15 1.FC Nuremberg -2.19%
16 1.FC Köln -2.50%
17 Hertha BSC -2.59%
18 SC Freiburg -6.32%
HSV, of course, made the biggest advance. A win in an away game at a rival is optimal. Mainz also managed a (at least temporary) liberation in one of the battles among themselves. Augsburg improves while Lautern loses? Certainly a bit curious, but the computer, as usually, surely has its good reasons. An intuitive reasoning? Well, Augsburg had a lot of percentages with them, some of which they could give away, and the biggest competitor – even if there are two fixed relegations – lost. They could help themselves to that. The Lauter loss had other reasons. For example, the victory of Mainz, a rival that previously had the same points.
h. The relegation question in development
Well, it remains a lot of entertainment.
i. The point 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 26.07 39 12.93 12.93
2 FC Schalke 04 30.10 40 9.90 9.90
3 Werder Bremen 28.30 31 2.70 2.70
4 Borussia Dortmund 37.32 40 2.68 2.68
5 Hannover 96 26.82 27 0.18 0.18
6 1.FC Köln 21.09 21 -0.09 0.09
7 Bayer Leverkusen 30.79 30 -0.79 0.79
8 Hamburger SV 23.12 22 -1.12 1.12
9 1.FC Nürnberg 22.15 21 -1.15 1.15
10 TSG Hoffenheim 24.63 23 -1.63 1.63
11 FC Augsburg 17.87 16 -1.87 1.87
12 FC Bayern Munich 41.90 40 -1.90 1.90
13 VfL Wolfsburg 25.57 23 -2.57 2.57
14 1.FC Kaiserslautern 20.88 18 -2.88 2.88
15 FSV Mainz 05 24.66 21 -3.66 3.66
16 Hertha BSC 24.14 20 -4.14 4.14
17 VfB Stuttgart 27.15 22 -5.15 5.15
18 SC Freiburg 21.26 16 -5.26 5.26
ø Deviation 3.37
Furthermore, there is only one real sensation team in the positive, which nobody equals in the negative. Even if Freiburg and Stuttgart are over 5 points below expectation – Stuttgart so far behind for the first time – it is still a bridgeable deficit. Bayern remains in the red in terms of points. Hertha, too, now has a quite clear deficit.
In front, of course, Schalke is still on 2, with an overachievement cushion almost 10 points thick. These two rough plus mountains make it clear that negative values are already on the books from 6th place onwards.
The international comparison for the average point deviation
Note: the theory is that the German Bundesliga is the most exciting among 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 0.00 171
2 France 1 4.13 0.46 210
3 England 1 4.07 0.00 220
4 Germany, 1.BL 3.37 0.25 162
5 Spain 1 2.95 0.18 189
6 Italy 1 2.84 0.01 189
The 1st Bundesliga this season with a very moderate deviation, even if Italy and Spain are still a little quieter. The 2nd division is upside down. At least play resumes next weekend.
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 25.60 31 26.28 12 19.68
2 FC Schalke 04 29.27 45 23.31 24 15.04
3 Borussia Dortmund 32.96 43 16.05 14 12.09
4 FC Bayern München 42.90 46 16.45 13 6.54
5 TSG Hoffenheim 24.67 20 27.25 22 0.58
6 1.FC Kaiserslautern 21.28 15 29.43 23 0.15
7 Hertha BSC 25.00 25 28.62 30 -1.38
8 FC Augsburg 17.26 17 29.50 31 -1.76
9 1.FC Köln 25.57 28 35.39 40 -2.19
10 VfB Stuttgart 29.52 24 28.16 26 -3.36
11 1.FC Nürnberg 22.17 19 28.77 29 -3.40
12 FSV Mainz 05 26.26 27 28.72 33 -3.54
13 Hamburger SV 24.78 24 30.12 33 -3.66
14 Werder Bremen 31.01 31 28.06 32 -3.95
15 Hannover 96 26.36 21 25.31 24 -4.04
16 Bayer Leverkusen 30.73 26 23.89 25 -5.84
17 VfL Wolfsburg 26.59 24 28.50 36 -10.09
18 SC Freiburg 23.26 23 31.39 42 -10.87
485.21 489 485.21 489 0.00
Goals ø expected: Goals ø scored: ø Deviation 6.01 2.84 2.86
The top 4 again in front, the only 4 teams with clearly positive goal averages. At the back, Freiburg and Wolfsburg continue. Hertha remain in the top half here, as they have a goal difference of only -5.
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 big 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 0.00 171
2 Germany, 1.BL 6.01 0.55 162
3 England 1 5.87 0.00 219
4 Spain 1 4.41 -0.01 186
5 France 1 3.54 -0.09 210
6 Italy 1 3.60 0.23 187
Here, both German leagues are further ahead. Yes, there are outstanding results, especially concerning the altitude.
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 the offensive strength, which is measured in expected goals scored, and the 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 Borussia Dortmund 2.02 0.81 2.49 -0.00 +0
2 FC Bayern Munich 2.14 0.91 2.34 +0.00 +0
3 FC Schalke 04 1.82 1.17 1.56 +0.08 +0
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 1.52 1.12 1.36 +0.10 +0
5 Bayer Leverkusen 1.55 1.31 1.18 +0.01 +0
6 Werder Bremen 1.59 1.54 1.03 -0.00 +0
7 Hannover 96 1.27 1.33 0.96 +0.01 +1
8 FSV Mainz 05 1.41 1.55 0.91 +0.03 +2
9 TSG Hoffenheim 1.20 1.34 0.90 -0.01 +0
10 VfB Stuttgart 1.40 1.58 0.89 -0.06 -3
11 VfL Wolfsburg 1.34 1.54 0.87 +0.00 +0
12 Hamburger SV 1.31 1.53 0.86 +0.03 +1
13 Hertha BSC 1.33 1.58 0.84 -0.03 -1
14 1.FC Köln 1.38 1.86 0.74 -0.04 +0
15 1.FC Nürnberg 1.11 1.50 0.74 -0.01 +0
16 1.FC Kaiserslautern 1.00 1.44 0.69 +0.01 +0
17 SC Freiburg 1.16 1.85 0.63 -0.02 +0
18 FC Augsburg 0.94 1.54 0.61 +0.00 +0
25.50 25.49 +0
Goals ø expected 2.83
Dortmund remains at 1. Here, however, is the small readable proof of Bayern’s still considered top position as far as chances are concerned: the computer still has them slightly ahead in goal expectation – despite the slightly less favourable quotient. With more goals scored, one also achieves slightly more victories and the slightly more frequent draws of the competition cannot quite make up for this in terms of points.
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 9 4 0 2 6 0.667
2 France 10 4 1 2 7 0.700
3 2. Bundesliga 0 0 0 0
4 Italy 0 0 0 0
5 Spain 10 6 2 3 11 1,100
6 England 10 3 1 0 4 0,400
Total balance 39 17 4 7 28 0,718
Spain had something going on, France average, the 1st division remained a bit lukewarm by their standards. It was limited to the events in Augsburg, where Lautern turned the game around and Augsburg still managed to draw 2-2, Leverkusen’s equaliser in Bremen and Schalk’s victory in Cologne, which came after going behind. Regarding this match, it should be said that Cologne played very well until the Schalke equaliser and that the equaliser was neither in the air nor really deserved. Rather, it seemed in this phase as if Cologne could soon follow up.
Trend changes in the major leagues in the 2011/2012 season
Country Matches Equaliser Home Leading Goal Away Leading Goal Total per match
1 1st Bundesliga 171 87 29 23 139 0.813
2 France 210 107 30 28 165 0.786
3 England 220 103 29 36 168 0.764
4 2nd Bundesliga 171 79 26 22 127 0.743
5 Spain 199 82 34 20 136 0.683
6 Italy 199 77 25 18 120 0.603
Total balance 1170 535 173 147 855 0.731
No major shifts (to be expected). The 1st division at the top, as in the year before.
m. The mathematical review of the matchday 19 results.
Note: here the deviation of expected goals with 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
Hanover Nuremberg 1.56 0.98 2.55 1 0 -0.56 -0.98
Augsburg Kaiserslautern 0.99 0.92 1.91 2 2 1.01 1.08
Werder Leverkusen 1.73 1.49 3.22 1 1 -0.73 -0.49
Hertha HSV 1.61 1.23 2.84 1 2 -0.61 0.77
Dortmund Hoffenheim 2.18 0.61 2.78 3 1 0.82 0.39
FC Bayern Wolfsburg 3.01 0.72 3.73 2 0 -1.01 -0.72
FC Cologne Schalke 04 1.30 1.70 3.00 1 4 -0.30 2.30
Mainz Freiburg 1.99 1.26 3.24 3 1 1.01 -0.26
Stuttgart Gladbach 1.32 1.30 2.62 0 3 -1.32 1.70
15.69 10.20 25.89 14 14 -1.69 3.80
Expected goal total Expected goal average Scored goal average 25.89 2.88 3.11
ø expected goal difference 1.87 ø goal difference 1.79
Exceeded the goal expectation, yet did not exceed the expected average goal deviation. In other words, the results were fairly “normal”. The away teams were mainly responsible for the extra goals, so that the argumentation of the previous week is somewhat confirmed: there is no fundamental problem with the home advantage. It’s been a bit too big this season, but it can easily correct itself. A random swing, probably temporary in nature.
n. The determination
Note: The fixing is calculated for each game 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
Hanover Nuremberg 50.84% 25.33% 23.83% 37.94%
Augsburg Kaiserslautern 36.16% 31.62% 32.22% 33.46%
Werder Leverkusen 43.47% 23.13% 33.40% 35.40%
Hertha HSV 46.39% 24.46% 29.14% 36.00%
Dortmund Hoffenheim 73.63% 17.45% 8.92% 58.06%
FC Bayern Wolfsburg 83.00% 11.14% 5.87% 70.47%
FC Cologne Schalke 04 29.47% 23.74% 46.80% 36.22%
Mainz Freiburg 54.31% 21.67% 24.02% 39.96%
Stuttgart Gladbach 37.37% 26.19% 36.43% 34.10%
4.55 2.05 2.41 3.82
Average expected fixing: 42.40%
Always as a reminder, the expected values from the previous week’s text. What has reality brought?
The determination arrived
Pairing 1 X 2 Tendency
Hanover Nuremberg 50.84% 25.33% 23.83% 1 50.84%
Augsburg Kaiserslautern 36.16% 31.62% 32.22% 0 31.62%
Werder Leverkusen 43.47% 23.13% 33.40% 0 23.13%
Hertha HSV 46.39% 24.46% 29.14% 2 29.14%
Dortmund Hoffenheim 73.63% 17.45% 8.92% 1 73.63%
FC Bayern Wolfsburg 83.00% 11.14% 5.87% 1 83.00%
FC Cologne Schalke 04 29.47% 23.74% 46.80% 2 46.80%
Mainz Freiburg 54.31% 21.67% 24.02% 1 54.31%
Stuttgart Gladbach 37.37% 26.19% 36.43% 2 36.43%
4 2 3 4.29
average determination received: 47.65%
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 definitely nothing new.
The expected determination was exceeded quite clearly. So: there were too many favourite victories. Clearly, the theme was that the Fantastic Four marched in lockstep. However, it is more than questionable whether it is conceivable that one is also animated to win by the victories of the competition, due to the recognition of the need, and can thus improve one’s chances (insofar as the too high value arose systematically, so to speak). Although there can certainly be such an effect from time to time (in sport in general).
o. Overall league statistics
Note: such statistics are 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 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 171 81 43 47 292 197 1,194
expected 171 79.37 39.17 52.45 275.6 209.5 1.136
abs deviation 0 1.63 3.83 -5.45 16.40 -12.50 0.06
rel. Deviation 0 2.01% 8.91% -11.60% 5.62% -6.35% 4.86%
Determination expected Determination received 40.35% 40.48% ø Goal deviation ø Goal deviation expected 1.87 1.88
Surely it is enough to simply look at the comparison arrived/expected from time to time. Especially as the shifts become smaller in the second half of the season due to the decreasing influence of a single matchday. At least one can be quite reassured that both the average expected determination and goal deviation were fulfilled very neatly, which suggests good forecasts overall. However, one will only be able to really gauge this if one keeps an eye on previous or subsequent values (for entire seasons).
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 doing so? 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
Hanover Nuremberg 2.30 3.50 3.50
Augsburg Kaiserslautern 2.64 3.45 3.00
Werder Leverkusen 2.34 3.60 3.25
Hertha HSV 2.48 3.50 3.05
Dortmund Hoffenheim 1.37 5.30 11.50
FC Bayern Wolfsburg 1.22 7.80 17.50
FC Cologne Schalke 04 4.10 3.85 1.99
Mainz Freiburg 1.75 3.75 5.40
Stuttgart Gladbach 2.68 3.50 2.82
Goals scored 1.51
Goals scored 1
Money score -1.70
A disappointing result, of course. One may at least mention that in the previous week’s side bets on Dortmund and Bayern were still exempt (from a computer point of view vis-à-vis the market, so to speak, so they were at no disadvantage, for lovers, so to speak), which would have made for a brightening of the result if they had actually been placed. In addition, Gladbach was closer much closer than Stuttgart (the fair odds were 2.74, the market odds, shown above, 2.82, so if, then Gladbach).
Of course, one should also avoid talking up a bad record in this way. The truth is on the betting slip and only the ones you have made count. Apart from that, the record for the season remains exaggeratedly good anyway.
The bets in detail: Hannover was certainly ok so far, as they dominated the first half (as you heard, not saw in person) and were close to 2-0. Towards the end it was certainly some luck that Nürnberg didn’t equalise.
Hertha were miserable in the first half, from everything you heard and saw (especially Skibbe’s coaching judgement). In the 2nd half they proved Bundesliga fitness and were close to 2:2 with a couple of good chances just before the end (which is representative, anyway). But a draw would not be the victory we were hoping for. That means: the bet was not good. HSV has been stable since Fink and has only conceded the one defeat. Their player potential, which was criticised so harshly at the beginning, is probably higher than that of the Berliners.
The bet on Cologne was definitely good, perhaps the best of all. There is Lukas Podolski, who clearly makes the difference, and has done so throughout the season. Already in the 4th minute he made one of his irresistible solo runs, which he converted with an absolutely typical – thus anything but accidental – finish with his left from 20 metres exactly into the bottom right corner for 1:0. After that, it was quite quiet around Schalke for quite a long time. Shortly before the 1:1 it looked like it would soon be 2:0. In any case, that was quite a bit of bad luck. Nevertheless, a “collapse” did not take place, but Schalke took advantage of the newly won self-confidence and the favour of the hour and added to it themselves. The verdict on the quality of the bet remains unchanged: 4.1 was far too much (and the market also corrected towards kick-off).
The bet on Freiburg cannot really be judged because of the early goals conceded and the sending-off. Afterwards, however, they showed so much positivity that one hardly tends to doubt. A 5.10 would be quite rare to hit even if things went differently (but hopefully more often than once in five attempts), so such bets can’t be assessed quite so easily anyway (on the other hand: which ones could? If one had played the 1.22 on Bayern – and won the bet. Would one then be satisfied with it? Probably not, because it was too tough for that. But the money would still be there).
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
18 7 3 2.57 +0.43 +2.34
19 4 1 1.51 -0.51 -1.70
The one plus sign recently seems much more like a slip now?!
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
114 41 +20.12 17.65% 41.95 -0.95
118 42 +18.42 15.61% 43.46 -1.46
The 15.61% is achieved from above, but still well above expectation. For the next season, the expected profit must be calculated and reported as a matter of urgency. Herewith the promise to do it.
q. The preview of the 20th matchday
Note: According to a specially developed – of course explainable and highly logical – algorithm, the computer calculates the goal expectations (and the individually maintained home advantage not shown here) into 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 competitive for goal number bets on the betting market.
Home Away Total
Nuremberg Dortmund 0.73 1.82 2.55
Wolfsburg Gladbach 1.20 1.26 2.46
Hoffenheim Augsburg 1.44 0.72 2.16
Schalke 04 Mainz 2.24 1.00 3.24
Hertha Hannover 1.35 1.24 2.59
Leverkusen Stuttgart 1.91 1.18 3.08
HSV FC Bayern 1.00 1.99 2.99
Freiburg Werder 1.45 1.61 3.05
Kaiserslautern FC Cologne 1.52 1.25 2.77
12.83 12.07 24.91
Expected goal total Expected goal average 24.91 2.77
The last predicted “under” game at Augsburg turned out to be the most entertaining game ever, due to the abundance of scoring chances and the back and forth nature of the result. Whether this means that you can do little(more) with these predictions is up to the player. In any case, it should be a high-scoring game in Schalke – where one is inclined to share this view –, in Leverkusen and in Freiburg, whereby in the latter game there are rather lighter doubts. At Werder it has happened less lately, and Freiburg, especially without Cissé, seems to be more of an “under” team?
Hoffenheim is supposed to be a lower-scoring team. Well, Augsburg are at the start again, who will now perhaps play “all or nothing” more often, as they are seen as the underdogs everywhere anyway? So in any case, no clear “pro” for an under bet.
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
Nuremberg Dortmund 14.40% 22.09% 63.52% 47.29%
Wolfsburg Gladbach 34.95% 27.13% 37.92% 33.95%
Hoffenheim Augsburg 54.14% 26.98% 18.88% 40.16%
Schalke 04 Mainz 65.37% 18.97% 15.66% 48.78%
Hertha Hannover 39.57% 26.29% 34.14% 34.22%
Leverkusen Stuttgart 54.37% 22.22% 23.41% 39.98%
HSV FC Bayern 18.45% 21.21% 60.34% 44.31%
Freiburg Werder 34.61% 23.88% 41.51% 34.91%
Kaiserslautern FC Cologne 43.60% 25.04% 31.36% 35.11%
3.59 2.14 3.27 3.59
average expected determination: 39.86%
A balanced matchday as three of the top 4 play away, most notably Bayern and Dortmund.
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
Nuremberg Dortmund 6.95 4.53 1.57
Wolfsburg Gladbach 2.86 3.69 2.64
Hoffenheim Augsburg 1.85 3.71 5.30
Schalke 04 Mainz 1.53 5.27 6.39
Hertha Hannover 2.53 3.80 2.93
Leverkusen Stuttgart 1.84 4.50 4.27
HSV FC Bayern 5.42 4.71 1.66
Freiburg Werder 2.89 4.19 2.41
Kaiserslautern FC Cologne 2.29 3.99 3.19
Comparison with the betting exchange betfair
(The betting recommendations)
Pairing 1 X 2 % Average
Nuremberg Dortmund 6.40 4.20 1.63 100.78%
Wolfsburg Gladbach 3.00 3.55 2.52 101.18%
Hoffenheim Augsburg 1.64 4.10 6.40 100.99%
Schalke 04 Mainz 1.64 4.20 5.90 101.73%
Hertha Hannover 2.50 3.50 3.10 100.83%
Leverkusen Stuttgart 1.79 3.90 5.00 101.51%
HSV FC Bayern 6.60 4.50 1.57 101.07%
Freiburg Werder 3.25 3.60 2.26 102.79%
Kaiserslautern FC Cologne 1.83 3.80 5.00 100.96%
Goal expectation 2.32
A short comment on the betting recommendations:
At least a bit livelier than last time. The bets in detail:
Unconditionally you can back Dortmund, no question. Nuremberg may have been better recently with two wins before the 0:1 in Hannover, but Dortmund is Dortmund and they will be able to play to win as well as dominate the game easily, regardless of the away role. Such bets, even given the tightness in the table, are always favourable and recommended if the computer even switches to favourites (as it otherwise has a slightly greater propensity for underdogs). 8/10 is the recommended betting level.
Augsburg at Hoffenheim is also good to recommend. The value is high and Hoffenheim did have some bloodletting in the winter break. Augsburg have already advertised with a good performance, even if it was not a victory. After all, two goals were scored and Sascha Mölders only misadjusted his visor in one scene from 5 metres in front of goal – which earned him an immediate substitution, the Augsburg team the equaliser within seconds through Hain, who came on for Mölders, and the substitute a warm hug from colleague Tobias Werner, who showed a lot of understanding for the substitute’s feelings. Maybe he will score this time? In any case, Hoffenheim’s great striker hope, Ryan Babel, hasn’t scored for a while (either). 3/10 as a suggestion.
Schalke against Mainz is exactly comparable to the Dortmund bet, and not just in terms of the course. The Schalke team is just as close to the front, must not let anything slip, the fans will be there anyway, the self-confidence is at its maximum, the opponent hardly plays a role (as long as it is not one of the direct competitors). Unconditional “yes” to this bet for a very decent rate. 8/10 if you like.
In any case, HSV have proven their upheld good form, despite the 1:5 against Dortmund, when they kept up very decently until the 0:3. Bayern is perceived everywhere as slightly weakening, whereby it is quite clearly recognised here that Bayern are the only ones who practically always have to deal with identically set opponents: tight at the back and the good Lord helps up front. Even Dortmund’s victory made no real difference, despite all the proven class of the winner. The opponents still play along with Dortmund’s performances (at least they struggle), which gives their performances the ease that is currently denied to Bayern (and can confirm this from a local perspective: the game is static). Accordingly, one can calmly recommend HSV, but at most with 2/10 units.
Freiburg against Werder seems an even better bet. Werder certainly still has a few injury worries and their recent performances were anything but glamorous (0:0 in Lautern, 1:1 at home against Leverkusen). Freiburg were more convincing in their last home game and brought Augsburg to their knees. The fans will be there and Freiburg will definitely not approach the game from a passive role. This opponent can be tackled, so the conviction goes, this opponent should be tackled in order to gain some breathing space in the relegation battle. Verdict: a courageous 4/10 (for quite high odds).
The course on Cologne in Lautern is also absurdly high. The performance against Schalke was by no means poor, on the other hand Podolski should be missing?! Well, it remains: a 5.0 is definitely way over the top in a do-or-die game. At least 3/10.
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