1) The 1st Bundesliga
a. Review of the Matches
Results of the 9th matchday
Werder Bremen – Borussia Dortmund 0:2 (0:1)
FC Bayern Munich – Hertha BSC 4:0 (3:0)
Borussia Mönchengladbach – Bayer Leverkusen 2:2 (0:1)
VfB Stuttgart – TSG Hoffenheim 2:0 (0:0)
FSV Mainz 05 – FC Augsburg 0:1 (0:0)
VfL Wolfsburg – 1. FC Nürnberg 2:1 (1:0)
FC Schalke 04 – 1. FC Kaiserslautern 1:2 (0:1)
SC Freiburg – Hamburger SV 1:2 (0:1)
- FC Köln – Hannover 96 2:0 (1:0)
A few observations:
Werder Bremen played a great game against Borussia Dortmund. Already in the first half, they were closer to the lead, and even closer to the equaliser after the sending-off. Games don’t always end the way they should according to the ratio of chances or the share of the game. But not that this is an unpleasant side effect, no, on the contrary, it is to a large extent what makes football, sport in general, so attractive, so exciting, so entertaining. The unpredictability. Dortmund, however, had already played enough games in which they didn’t get the result they deserved, so it can go in their favour sometimes. But any attempt to restore justice there would also be doomed to failure. So there is not the slightest evidence of validity for the totally flat reporter’s slogan (which both coaches and players use from time to time) “everything evens out in the end”. Why should it even out? Above all: why in the course of a season? One team has a lot of bad luck in total, both in terms of referee (especially wrong) decisions in their favour and against them, but also in terms of missed scoring chances or unlucky, random goals conceded, one has some bad luck, a third has none at all, but also no luck, the fourth has some luck and the fifth has giant soup.
What is much more likely to be meant by this is – if players or coaches should say it – , that it is hardly worth bothering with. “What should we be thinking about, getting angry about or beating ourselves up about having been disadvantaged here or having only managed to get two crossbars out of four great chances there and conceding the goal at the back on the only shot on goal, which was also deflected? We have to keep trying to do as much as possible right. Then, we secretly hope a little bit, luck will favour us again. We can’t force it. But dwelling on missed chances can never be beneficial.”
Werder was unlucky, Dortmund was lucky. Even if they by no means played a bad game.
Bayern Munich should just be watched and enjoyed, even regardless of whether you squat on this or that side of the ones dividing the nation. Forget your passions and their shirt colour for a moment. Sit back, click your tongue and enjoy it, perhaps even, for the die-hard Germany supporter in terms of their chances in the top flight. In that case, Hertha had no choice but to play the role of extras. Seeing the smiling faces of the Herthans during the interviews after the game, one could almost get the idea that they themselves took a certain pleasure in being present in the flesh and in colour at such a gala performance (and perhaps even having made the small but necessary contribution). There was nothing to be done and nothing to be gained. The 0:4 is anything but an embarrassment. With such an overpowering opponent, other teams will go down to defeat.
What do the reporters – you should definitely avoid the ZDF Sportstudio, especially for the match summaries, because towards evening the gloating becomes even more violent due to the distance to the events through even greater sobriety – want again with the Hertha performance? “There was nothing going on. No pass arrived, no movement in the game, no duel behaviour, not a single goal-scoring chance, nothing forward and even less at the back.” That’s a brief summary of what we were forced to listen to. Unbearable, unbearably stupid, unbearably wrong, totally wrong. Don’t we realise that with this criticism we are at the same time totally destroying Bayern’s performance – which, by the way, is not only causing a stir in the country? Who would find it difficult to score a few goals against such a weak opponent? Freiburg or Wolfsburg or HSV could do the same, couldn’t they?
Borussia Mönchengladbach played Bayer Leverkusen virtually up against the wall with an unbelievably great performance. When you see this Marco Reus marching so light-footedly through the opponent’s ranks, you wonder why he hasn’t been a regular in the national team for a long time. He really did miss a lot of scoring chances – as he had done in several previous games, by the way. But listen and be amazed at this judgement, which you would never hear, at least in this country, and which actually should not be pronounced at all: he has never done anything recognisably wrong with the conversion. He does it just great and should only do it the same way again next time. He is cool enough and hard-boiled enough, always keeps an overview, but the balls just didn’t go in a few times. The goal he did manage to score, by the way, was so well done that you just have to admit: he can do it. Keep it up, Marco Reus.
The equaliser shortly before the end (sure, it was a duel of 11 Gladbachers against 10 Leverkuseners at that time, so the superiority towards the end was explainable) was of course one of those dream goals – André Schürrle in his almost typical manner of the last season with a shot from the edge of the penalty area into the net – that can give you the joy of football. The fact that it fell on the “wrong” side in this case did not even cause any real ill-feeling, neither among the players nor the other officials, let alone the fans, who nevertheless gave a standing ovation for their fantastic team and for the entertainment provided.
Stuttgart against Hoffenheim, on the other hand, looked more like a fairly even game. That there was a winner was probably little more than one of those coincidences. Both teams have excellent offensive potential and hinted at being able to exploit it in the game, but this time the (lucky) pendulum swung in favour of Stuttgart.
In the case of Mainz against Augsburg, you only have to look at the face of Augsburg coach Jos Luhukay during the interview afterwards to measure the magnitude of the luck that befell Augsburg in this match. That glow expresses everything. Of course, he is totally satisfied with the fight his team put up, with the resistance they put up and with the few opportunities they created. However, he still feels that it was nothing but luck, even the scene that led to the penalty kick that ultimately meant the 1-0 victory. It’s only a matter of fractions of a second whether the defender gets to the ball first or catches the striker so unluckily that he goes down and the referee calls a penalty. To now accuse the defender of “stupidity” or “he shouldn’t go there like that” is all nonsense. The players are set up in such a way – and elicit a lot of admiration from someone who was once active himself — that they have to go after every ball. He does it, perhaps arrives a fraction too late, without being able to fully protect this beforehand, and the situation arises that in many cases is not even punished (and then would only bring in the terse comment: “Mainz were lucky, because there could have been a penalty kick here, no, actually there should have been”). The Mainz coach Tuchel also recognised very well and in the same way as the author, i.e. in his opinion correctly, that the Mainzers have not done much more wrong in all the games so far than they did last season, that in this season it is simply the results that are missing. One more example of the theory expressed above. I wonder if they’ll get it back this season? Why should they? Why wouldn’t they? A specially-arranged thought on this goes like this: even in terms of luck, there is no memory from fate. But one would only ever have the claim from now on, for the following season, for the future, that luck and bad luck balance each other out.
VfL Wolfsburg won against Club Nürnberg, which can also be described as somewhat lucky. Nuremberg had enough game shares and goal chances that they could easily have taken something with them. Once again, Wolfsburg could not really substantiate their claims to a higher position in the table. Nevertheless, it was a game on a very good Bundesliga level.
The game Schalke vs. Kaiserslautern is almost the one that needs to be told the most. Of course, the referee’s decisions were the focus of public attention. The penalty for Lautern was certainly justified. A red card, on the other hand, really does not seem appropriate for the situation, as one dares to pronounce here (as much as one otherwise likes to promote striker protection and would also have nothing against more sending-offs, as long as the really rude attacks and the many gross unsportsmanlike acts were thus eliminated for the future if possible). The reason, however, is not that a penalty is sufficient as a punishment, as is so readily and frequently stated (because this connection is nonsensical; why not a double punishment? In itself, the fan wants to see fair football and not have chances to score replaced by foul play and penalty whistles), but rather that the Schalke keeper does not quite reach the ball, but instead catches the opponent, but it was not deliberately in the direction of the legs, but rather in the struggle for the ball, with the aforementioned fact of being wafer-thinly too late. Penalty yes, red no.
It is clear why referees normally shy away from this: they are afraid of completely deciding a game and even – since it concerned the home team – making it a farce for the fans and possibly incurring their displeasure. The Schalkers, however, were not really irritated by this. With spectator support, they delivered a very passionate fight against an opponent who was almost better by then and forced a few goal chances. That was really impressive to see. For Lautern had almost dominated the game with utmost determination and passion coupled with the outstanding skills, of course (Shechter) and the lead was anything but fortunate. The way Schalke then countered was just great.
Now came the situation, which one actually foresaw as a writer with the experience of many thousands of watched games (without having had the notary at hand at that moment, who would have authenticated the statement): there was a somewhat similar situation in the Lauter penalty area. It was in the struggle for the ball, again, but the defender clearly (also!) has his hands on the opponent. Well, why should the verdict then always be “there they both pull, you can’t give a penalty”? No, the defender wants to do everything to keep the opponent off the ball. The striker defends himself because his chances are much smaller. Simply winning the duel would not mean scoring a goal, which would be infinitely far away. Nevertheless, it was clear that the defender had sinned. So a penalty was possible and the referee took this chance. The fact that he also gave red for it was of course just as wrong as the red card for the other team. When on DSF-Doppelpass (despite the relaxedness of the colleagues and even some radiated empathy, you can’t really bear it because the explaining of all phenomena is pushed even further. So on Monday evening you can explain EVERYTHING. The question raised by Thomas Helmer as to whether it was a concession decision, the referee’s answer must of course not be “yes”, and even otherwise it is difficult to acknowledge it, but it was undoubtedly a concession decision, we dare to say here. The referee is waiting to make amends because he always knows it was too harsh, goal against and red. Now he has the chance and he takes it.
That Lautern went for the win with 10 against 10 and with the score at 1-1 anyway was just great. That they actually managed the winning goal through Kouhemaha, who had been highly admired long before in the game, with a header against the direction of travel – always a challenge and always when it succeeds it looks so natural and so easy – of the goalkeeper, was just the crowning glory of an outstanding – but at this point a bit predicted – team performance. Hats off!
SC Freiburg’s defeat against Hamburger SV, on the other hand, was again a completely undeserved one, however well HSV put up a fight. Almost only Freiburg played, especially in the 2nd half, and actually one should have heard often enough after forcing the winning goal then (in the summary): “It was only a matter of time until the leading goal fell.” , to then play it in. Makiadi and Cissé in particular were simply unstoppable by the Hamburg defence and slipped through time and again with their undoubted elegance and agility. The goal did not come, but HSV scored it. The fact that Freiburg then got a penalty and that Cissé of all people put it next to the box only underlines how many black eyes Hamburg got away with. No, they didn’t really deserve the result, even if one could and had to admire the sovereignty and charisma, the serenity and calmness, the confidence proclaiming Frank Arnesen as interim coach on the sidelines.
Once again, 1. FC Köln showed off its diva-like moodiness with a great performance. Above all, Lukas Podolski has to be singled out, of course, who is always darting across the pitch, always demanding the ball, always on the move, everywhere to be found and almost never making a wrong decision, plus with the determination to aim directly for the bull’s-eye at every opportunity – and to hit it from all angles, no, this was a real Podolski gala, crowned with this Lothar Emmerich-like hammer from an impossible angle into the same. Even the speech bubble was breathless for a moment and he couldn’t help but express his enthusiasm. “Now is that a left-footed shot or is that not a left-footed shot?” of course only expresses this completely incompletely, but he could not suppress the euphoria in his tone (even if you somehow read out that he was struggling).
Hanover, however, was by no means weak. It was simply that they lacked luck, which of course also applies to this game. For the first half hour the game was fairly even and after the opening goal (from an almost equally beautiful free-kick by Podolski, where the ball whizzes over the wall, but immediately afterwards sinks again and comes into the far corner as a touchdown) one should apply somewhat different standards anyway – one has to, one doesn’t have to, so game shares can shift – and Cologne just had Podolski.
The “scandal”, if you like, was of course the disallowed goal by Hannover. Now, we could go on with the endless excursus about how often we have seen this and how great the – impossibly acted – horror of the players was after they learned of the disallowance of such a clear and indisputably regular goal, and in this respect already make sure by their behaviour that there was nothing, but also nothing at all wrong with it, but this time we will leave it at a few words on the subject: After the game, the (non-)goal scorer Pinto (quite calmly) complained about how only the linesman, who is clearly not in the right position, could be given the authority to decide on the correctness of the goal. That, he said, he simply could not understand.
Now, it has been said often enough here (or elsewhere, too, by the authors) that the linesman – upgraded to an assistant – should NEVER have the right to interrupt the game by waving the flag, but that he has had this right for a long time by customary law. So: when he waves, the defenders stop playing. With this behaviour they (morally) oblige the referee to stop the game. The first time they do it, they may do it cautiously, but gradually they do it with increasing certainty, self-evidence and self-confidence: “If I stop because the flag is up, he has to blow the whistle. Thus, infringements are gradually ruled out by the referee. This behaviour has become customary. That’s how it is, that’s how it is handled, everyone has to submit to this pattern, without rule paragraphs.
The rules still state that only the referee can interrupt the game with his whistle (or are there also new regulations in this respect?). Otto Rehhagel said it back then, when one of his players stopped playing after a flag was spotted, the ref didn’t interrupt, the opponent scored a goal instead (or, heck, the memory comes back: the Bremen defender took the ball in his hand; since play had not yet been interrupted, the ref gave a penalty against Werder), and he said it like this: “Offside is when the referee blows his whistle.” That is outdated when you look at today’s practice.
So: Hannover played the perfect attack via the left side. The ball, after reaching the baseline – thus achieving textbook kinship, so to speak — was put back to the edge of the penalty area, where the advancing player (that very Pinto) used his free shooting lane to take a direct shot at goal – the (imaginary) 1:1. The linesman – no, the assistant, abusing his role – raises his flag at the goal kick. Sure, yes, a Hanoverian player is almost on the goal line, i.e. offside, but he is standing quite far next to the goalkeeper – who, by the way, by the name of Rensing, said after the game with remarkable objectivity that he had noticed the player, but that the player had not irritated him in any way — so that he would not have actively intervened in the game (if this questionable criterion is to remain in the rules, which is also doubted here). You cannot score a goal more clearly, as already mentioned.
The common factor in such scenes is that new reasons are always sought (and accordingly found) to disallow goals. The extent to which this is conducive to both attractiveness and justice is precisely the point that is permanently being cast into the greatest possible doubt here: the opposite, it is claimed, is the case. In hindsight, it is said that the goal was regular, but there are only a few roosters who crow about it later. Bygones, don’t get angry, move on. But not getting annoyed is not applicable here, right behind the keyboard. It is a nuisance, even more so that it goes on and on in the wrong direction: disallow, disallow, disallow. It was learned that the assistants had been specifically instructed to assist in this way. They use it like this: to indicate an offside position (or anything else) as early as possible (and always if at all possible) in the attack. Then the game is interrupted in time and the even more critical decisions, because they are closer to the goal, are omitted (this is also the psychological interpretation).
Pinto is absolutely right: how should the man be able to judge from his perspective that the player seen offside is irritating the goalkeeper? In the old days – before Rudi Völler scored a goal against Bulgaria in the quarter-finals of the 1994 World Cup after Möller’s shot hit the post, celebrated the 2:0, and was abruptly stopped by the referee because he had indicated that Möller was in a recognisable offside position when he scored – it was quite simply said: that was a direct shot on goal. There were no considerations for offside. The rule was so simple, provided for more goals and clearly for more justice. The “irritation” of the goalkeeper is a modern invention that simply causes problems – as you can see – and does not contribute one bit to justice. In addition, fewer and fewer goals are scored.
Well, were those few words?
This entire text was written – credibility and/or verifiability considered – before the study of the kicker. Here are the chance ratios of the individual games:
Freiburg – HSV: chances: 11:3, corners 6:2. Proof enough for what was said before?
Cologne – Hannover: Chances: 4:3, corners 1:5. Yes, close, but Podolski.
Bayern – Hertha: Chances: 12:1, Corners 3:2.
Werder – Dortmund: Chances: 6:5, corners 11:3. Well, Dortmund wasn’t bad and a defeat doesn’t automatically become a victory if you avoid it, there’s also a draw…
Gladbach – Leverkusen: Chances: 9:3, corners 4:3. A clear thing, but the Gladbach chances are somehow counted too close by the kicker.
Wolfsburg – Nürnberg: Chances: 6:6, corners 1:3. Well, exactly, Nürnberg or none.
Schalke – Lautern: Chances: 7:9, corners 4:5. Everything speaks for Lautern, doesn’t it? Even if it’s close.
Stuttgart – Hoffenheim: Chances: 4:5, corners 3:3. Yes, a draw or, in an emergency, the 2nd leg.
Mainz – Augsburg: chances: 4:5, corners 9:4. Well, here the picture is different from the one drawn. Only it was the case that at least 2 of Augsburg’s chances came after the 1:0 (scored in the 88th), when Mainz completely opened up. Nevertheless, it does not quite correspond with the coaches’ opinions. These felt a clear superiority of Mainz, no matter how many real goal chances they created.
Tuesday and Wednesday were Champions League, if I may add this little story. Well, on Tuesday we had the pleasant opportunity to watch a match with a commentary that was not purely German (and we took advantage of it, in contrast to Wednesday). The choice fell on the match FC Basel – Benfica Lisbon. It may be gladly and not entirely unjustly claimed that one appreciated the additional advantage of encountering a German-speaking commentator there as well – who otherwise had next to nothing to do with a not only -speaking but also -resident –, nevertheless there were additional reasons for choosing this game of all games (the involvement in a bet mentioned first).
This speaker had nothing more in mind than to enjoy one of the special days with a team from his country, with a game at the very highest level — and thus almost inevitably at the very same level. He was enthusiastic and passionate throughout, but never lost his objectivity. “His” FC Basel – to which he of course unconditionally committed himself, even when trailing, where one can already observe a turning away often enough in this country, quasi with the attitude that anyone who is identified as being responsible for a deficit, a defeat, heck, for no purely German high victory, is a kind of traitor to the people and is thus put directly in the dock – was invited to the showdown with the European top and had already won there with a 3: 3 at Manchester United, after trailing 0:2 and leading 3:2 in the meantime, not only caused a stir, but also showed that they could keep up with one of the top candidates for the title, and even in a foreign stadium.
This created a sense of anticipation that was far from turning into such a tiresome, even torturous, but also common expectation in the neighbouring country. The opponent was always treated with the necessary respect, the great actions admired throughout, but the own team never dropped. When the 0:1 came after a dream combination, in which finally Pablo Aimar passed the ball directly to an even better-positioned teammate with his heel in the penalty area and the latter found the net with a well-considered and well-placed finish, he only tipped his hat and admired the opponent for this perfection. There was no need to find fault or blame. You clicked your tongue like any fan who loves the game of football first and foremost. That is what makes these evenings so beautiful, so unique, even if it hurts that you had to concede the goal yourself.
FC Basel gradually really got into the game so well, swept away spectators and announcers – and even the lonely listener sitting in this country listening and feverish – until the consistently benevolent announcer let it be known after about 70 minutes, after a few really successful attacks, that by now the equaliser would be deserved, because in the first half too the difference was essentially made up by this one action, even if one admired the technical perfection of the Portuguese throughout.
After about 80 minutes and numerous really promising Basel attacks – mostly initiated by the outstanding Shaqiri – Benfica managed to make it 2-0. Not that he now went in search of mistakes or noted anything negative. It was just not meant to be, the opponent was at no point even remotely maligned, on the contrary, praised and admired, so that the recognition of another goal was not the least bit difficult. It was a great game, a great fight, this time it was not rewarded, but the opponent’s victory was nevertheless by no means undeserved. Sadness and/or regret are welcome to come through, which would never happen in this country.
Well, the one loyal viewer who reluctantly but not entirely unjustifiably could be called “German” now meanly switched away and went to the “conference” option, in the knowledge that the Swiss would probably not save the game – actually a “nogo”, as one readily admits, but permission was granted.
Immediately, one was pulled back into one’s German reality. The first comment he picked up, from the match SSC Napoli – Bayern Munich, which had just been selected on the conference call, was: “A weak game.” No, that was far too bland for him, it just wasn’t enough. He had to run his mouth, improve himself because it came across far too positively, and added: “A very weak Champions League game.” Then you knew it all over again.
Where are the criteria written down that are responsible for the “weak”? How did he arrive at this judgement? It was learned that FC Bayern had 8:0 shots on goal in the second half, including a missed penalty. Was it so weak because they didn’t convert any chances? Was it so appallingly weak because the opponent allowed so many shots on goal? Was it just “weak”, felt so weak because the usual celebratory mood of a German victory was spoiled by the tired kickers down there who just didn’t want to hit the goal? No, honestly: what made this game so bad? Was he thinking anything at all? Is he even capable of thinking anything apart from spouting permanent nonsense? The doubts are quite considerable.
Not enough of that: it was switched to the Manchester City v Villarreal game. There, too, the judgement that “nothing really works here”, “neither for them nor for them” and that there is only “football to fall asleep to”, and “the first half was already weak, but the second, well,” he could think of no more words to increase this “weak”. The simple “even weaker” was not enough for him and for a short time the imagery failed. It was much more than just his feet that were falling asleep, as one had to realise, because his mouth also obviously had to request a time-out with such lousy kicking. It was practically an imposition to have been assigned here as a speaker – although surely no other game would have suited this Dubel there either. After all, the score was 1-1, which for a German automatically means that both teams are weak, while in a match where one team is leading, at least only the team behind is weak, the other team has failed in all areas of the team – until in this lethargy the equaliser is scored, and thus both teams would have been equally stupid again.
The best thing is always when, after an attack which, as is usual in about 99% of attacks, does not lead to a goal, you hear the request: “Take a look at this. It’s like that all the time.” No, but strangely enough, you don’t want to watch it at all, and if you did, then only and exclusively without the sound. Then you would get to see real Champions League level WITHOUT having your mood spoiled all the time.
b. The table situation
Sp S U N Pkt T GT Diff
1 FC Bayern Munich 9 7 1 22 25 – 1 +24
2 Borussia Mönchengladbach 9 5 2 2 17 11 – 6 +5
3 Borussia Dortmund 9 5 1 3 16 15 – 7 +8
4 VfB Stuttgart 9 5 1 3 16 14 – 6 +8
5 Werder Bremen 9 5 1 3 16 16 – 12 +4
6 FC Schalke 04 9 5 0 4 15 18 – 15 +3
7 Hannover 96 9 4 3 2 15 11 – 12 -1
8 Bayer Leverkusen 9 4 2 3 14 12 – 13 -1
9 TSG Hoffenheim 9 4 1 4 13 12 – 9 +3
10 1.FC Köln 9 4 1 4 13 15 – 18 -3
11 Hertha BSC 9 3 3 12 12 – 13 -1
12 VfL Wolfsburg 9 4 0 5 12 11 – 16 -5
13 1.FC Nürnberg 9 3 2 4 11 10 – 12 -2
14 1.FC Kaiserslautern 9 2 2 5 8 7 – 13 -6
15 FSV Mainz 05 9 2 2 5 8 12 – 19 -7
16 FC Augsburg 9 1 4 4 7 7 – 16 -9
17 SC Freiburg 9 2 1 6 7 14 – 24 -10
18 Hamburger SV 9 2 1 6 7 11 – 21 -10
233 233 0
Total number of games 81
Goals ø 2.88
Even the Kaiser – as Otto once said? “Franz Beckenbauer calls him Schwanzl – Kaiser before the game, Franzl afterwards.” – stressed that it was not Bayern’s 25 goals that impressed him, but the 1 on the other side. Why does he emphasise this? After all, isn’t the aim of the game to score goals, if possible one more than the opponent? It just shows this: Goals are somehow undesirable, even from the highest, even imperial, level. Is a fan supposed to be excited just because his team doesn’t concede any goals? No, that’s not it, that can’t be what gets you out of your seats, can it? Why is this always emphasised? Is there no responsibility for the spectators, for the fans? Are they always there anyway, is it assumed, no matter how boring the games get? “We didn’t concede anything. We are satisfied with that.” “Yes, but you didn’t manage anything going forward?” “Nope, not important. We kept a zero. 0-0, we can live with that.” The spectators too?
Otherwise, it’s a well-ordered picture. The top favourite is pulling away, Gladbach has played such an outstanding season so far that 2nd place doesn’t really amount to a miracle, behind them Dortmund is already lining up to possibly still be able to intervene, but they would certainly be satisfied with 2nd place.
At the very back, everything moved closer together, due to three victories of the three teams placed at the very back – all achieved away from home and all in all, an attentive reader, in persona Dr. Matthias Kribben, drew attention to this circumstance, calculating that something like this should only happen once every 75 years — so that the tension relates to other questions than the one discussed in a moment, but it has increased there.
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 likewise calculated goal expectations (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
FC Bayern Munich 4401 88.02% 1.14
Borussia Dortmund 432 8.64% 11.57
Bayer Leverkusen 44 0.88% 113.64
VfB Stuttgart 39 0.78% 128.21
Werder Bremen 26 0.52% 192.31
Borussia Mönchengladbach 18 0.36% 277.78
FC Schalke 04 16 0.32% 312.50
Hannover 96 11 0.22% 454.55
TSG Hoffenheim 6 0.12% 833.33
VfL Wolfsburg 4 0.08% 1250.00
Hertha BSC 2 0.04% 2500.00
1.FC Cologne 1 0.02% 5000.00
1.FC Kaiserslautern 0 0.00%
Hamburger SV 0 0.00%
1.FC Nuremberg 0 0.00%
FSV Mainz 05 0 0.00%
SC Freiburg 0 0.00%
FC Augsburg 0 0.00%
88% is no guarantee (Marius Müller Westernhagen: “Nobody gives you a guarantee, no dear God, not even him, unfortunately.”), but it reflects quite well what one currently feels about this question. The verdict is: “Not exciting.” Or: “Boring.”
Change in chances compared to the previous week due to the results of the 9th matchday
Team Win/loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/loss percentage
FC Bayern Munich 227 4.54%
VfB Stuttgart 18 0.36%
VfL Wolfsburg 2 0.04%
1.FC Cologne 1 0.02%
1.FC Kaiserslautern 0 0.00%
FC Augsburg 0 0.00%
Hamburger SV 0 0.00%
SC Freiburg 0 0.00%
1.FC Nuremberg -2 -0.04%
FSV Mainz 05 -3 -0.06%
Hertha BSC -7 -0.14%
Borussia Mönchengladbach -14 -0.28%
Borussia Dortmund -16 -0.32%
TSG Hoffenheim -23 -0.46%
Hannover 96 -27 -0.54%
Bayer Leverkusen -43 -0.86%
Werder Bremen -49 -0.98%
FC Schalke 04 -64 -1.28%
Not really exciting despite the movement and not worth saying very many words about. Why does Dortmund lose? Well, the somewhat more complex connection: their still defensibly good chances are recruited from the fact that Bayern give up something now and then, their own victories remain a prerequisite. If Bayern don’t give anything away, they forfeit chances. Other clubs, on the other hand, first have to create chances for themselves, which they can only do by winning. So it is not paradoxical that Stuttgart wins and Dortmund loses.
d. The title chances in the development
The small “slump” has been ironed out again. Bayern’s chances greater than ever before. “They’re closing in” they say in England.
e. Comparison of title chances with the betting exchange betfair
Back Lay Probability (Back)
FC Bayern Munich 1.18 1.19 84.75%
Borussia Dortmund 10.5 13.5 9.52%
Bayer Leverkusen 70 75 1.43%
VfL Wolfsburg 320 380 0.31%
Hanover 96 170 350 0.59%
Werder Bremen 130 160 0.77%
FC Schalke 04 75 90 1.33%
Hamburger SV 600 0.17%
VfB Stuttgart 120 400 0.83%
FSV Mainz 05 1000 0.10%
Borussia Mönchengladbach 130 180 0.77%
TSG Hoffenheim 200 580 0.50%
1.FC Nuremberg 800 0.13%
1.FC Cologne 490 1000 0.20%
SC Freiburg 1000 0.10%
Hertha BSC 700 1000 0.14%
1.FC Kaiserslautern 1000 0.10%
FC Augsburg 1000 0.10%
The computer still gives the advice: bet Bayern on Deutscher Meister. Sure, it’s not exactly a “make a post office out of a stamp” bet, but the advantage is still an advantage. The only difference is that the capital would have to be tied up and could probably be invested more cheaply on the bond market instead. The following small problem: the “advantage” is imaginary and not verifiable.
The changes in betfair’s opportunity assessments
FC Bayern Munich 4.75%
Borussia Dortmund 0.83
Bayer Leverkusen -2.28%
VfL Wolfsburg -0.10%
Hannover 96 -0.52%
Werder Bremen -1.40%
FC Schalke 04 -2.00%
Hamburger SV -0.03%
VfB Stuttgart -0.28%
FSV Mainz 05 -0.02%
Borussia Mönchengladbach -0.66%
TSG Hoffenheim -0.68%
1.FC Nuremberg -0.04%
1.FC Cologne 0.00%
SC Freiburg -0.03%
Hertha BSC -0.06%
1.FC Kaiserslautern 0.00%
FC Augsburg 0.00%
(The order according to the original estimations of the ranking)
Of course, the betting market cannot possibly follow the complex computer logic – which even takes into account the amount of the victories, whereby it is precisely the manner of Bayern’s victories that commands so much respect and thus the 4:0 is not unjustifiably included so favourably. Dortmund is also gaining in chances, from this point of view.
f. Direct Champions League qualification via 2nd place
The probability distribution for 2nd place after matchday 9
Team Number of 2nd places in 5000 simulations 2nd places in percentage
Borussia Dortmund 2447 48.94%
Bayer Leverkusen 513 10.26%
FC Bayern Munich 457 9.14%
Werder Bremen 348 6.96%
VfB Stuttgart 303 6.06%
FC Schalke 04 261 5.22%
Borussia Mönchengladbach 249 4.98%
Hannover 96 132 2.64%
TSG Hoffenheim 114 2.28%
VfL Wolfsburg 79 1.58%
Hertha BSC 57 1.14%
1.FC Cologne 17 0.34%
1.FC Nuremberg 10 0.20%
FSV Mainz 05 7 0.14%
Hamburger SV 3 0.06%
SC Freiburg 2 0.04%
1.FC Kaiserslautern 1 0.02%
FC Augsburg 0 0.00%
Dortmund are way ahead, which is of course not surprising. Bayern fall behind because they are so far ahead…
The changes compared to the previous week:
Team win/loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/loss percentage
Borussia Dortmund 682 13.64%
VfB Stuttgart 107 2.14%
VfL Wolfsburg 31 0.62%
1.FC Cologne 9 0.18%
1.FC Kaiserslautern 1 0.02%
Hamburger SV 1 0.02%
FC Augsburg 0 0.00%
SC Freiburg -2 -0.04%
Borussia Mönchengladbach -6 -0.12%
FSV Mainz 05 -10 -0.20%
1.FC Nuremberg -14 -0.28%
Hertha BSC -28 -0.56%
Bayer Leverkusen -42 -0.84%
TSG Hoffenheim -102 -2.04%
FC Bayern Munich -108 -2.16%
Werder Bremen -144 -2.88%
Hannover 96 -164 -3.28%
FC Schalke 04 -211 -4.22%
Dortmund also at the top of the winners’ rankings, of course. Especially since the competition (Leverkusen) lost points and the other competitor (Bayern) is moving away towards the top spot.
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 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 Total
1 FC Augsburg 59.10% 4.65% 63.75%
2 SC Freiburg 37.78% 4.95% 42.73%
3 1.FC Kaiserslautern 30.80% 4.88% 35.68%
4 Hamburger SV 23.96% 4.56% 28.52%
5 FSV Mainz 05 16.90% 3.79% 20.69%
6 1.FC Nuremberg 11.00% 2.89% 13.89%
7 1.FC Köln 8.76% 2.55% 11.31%
8 Hertha BSC 3.92% 1.37% 5.29%
9 VfL Wolfsburg 3.02% 1.27% 4.29%
10 TSG Hoffenheim 1.22% 0.69% 1.91%
11 Hanover 96 1.16% 0.53% 1.69%
12 FC Schalke 04 0.66% 0.29% 0.95%
13 Borussia Mönchengladbach 0.56% 0.35% 0.91%
14 Werder Bremen 0.56% 0.23% 0.79%
15 VfB Stuttgart 0.42% 0.19% 0.61%
16 Bayer Leverkusen 0.18% 0.14% 0.32%
17 FC Bayern Munich 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
18 Borussia Dortmund 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
200.00% 33.33% 233.33%
Augsburg remain in front, Freiburg and Lautern fully in, but certainly it’s a bit flatter, the distribution, than before, as you can surely read in the next statistic.
The change in chances due to the results of matchday 9 in relation to relegation
Team Change in chances
1 1.FC Kaiserslautern 12.17%
2 FC Augsburg 6.74%
3 Hamburger SV 6.71%
4 1.FC Cologne 4.76%
5 VfL Wolfsburg 1.81%
6 VfB Stuttgart 0.54%
7 Borussia Dortmund 0.02%
8 Borussia Mönchengladbach 0.01%
9 FC Bayern Munich 0.00%
10 Bayer Leverkusen -0.12%
11 Werder Bremen -0.53%
12 FC Schalke 04 -0.69%
13 Hannover 96 -0.72%
14 TSG Hoffenheim -0.73%
15 Hertha BSC -2.88%
16 1.FC Nuremberg -4.85%
17 FSV Mainz 05 -9.43%
18 SC Freiburg -12.79%
Winner number 1: Lautern. Augsburg follows in second place. Augsburg’s problem was that they were already so far ahead (i.e. in so much danger). As a result, they have to fight their way back – if they succeed. A start has been made. In terms of suspense, one wishes them well, also because one probably always has a certain inclination towards outsiders. Identification is easier.
HSV, too, of course, among the winners, only with a slightly lower percentage, presumably not because they beat a rival (which of course should have a positive effect) but because they had the weakest opponent of the three away winners.
h. The relegation issue in development
Yes, yes, you can see that the curves are moving towards each other. Tension is being created.
i. The point expectations and the deviations
Explanation: for each game, 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 12.19 17 4.81 4.81
2 FC Bayern Munich 19.39 22 2.61 2.61
3 1.FC Köln 10.50 13 2.50 2.50
4 VfB Stuttgart 13.56 16 2.44 2.44
5 Werder Bremen 13.90 16 2.10 2.10
6 TSG Hoffenheim 10.97 13 2.03 2.03
7 Hertha BSC 10.25 12 1.75 1.75
8 Hannover 96 13.62 15 1.38 1.38
9 FC Schalke 04 14.14 15 0.86 0.86
10 Bayer Leverkusen 13.75 14 0.25 0.25
11 1.FC Nürnberg 11.01 11 -0.01 0.01
12 VfL Wolfsburg 12.75 12 -0.75 0.75
13 Borussia Dortmund 17.34 16 -1.34 1.34
14 1.FC Kaiserslautern 9.41 8 -1.41 1.41
15 FC Augsburg 8.80 7 -1.80 1.80
16 SC Freiburg 10.02 7 -3.02 3.02
17 Hamburger SV 10.15 7 -3.15 3.15
18 FSV Mainz 05 12.58 8 -4.58 4.58
ø Deviation 2.04
Gladbach remains clearly in front despite the unfortunate two points given away shortly before the end (how silly too, compared to the old and fairer two-point rule: “the lost point” used to be called). Behind them is Bavaria, but as you can see, the deviation is moderate everywhere: a plus of 2.6 points is enough for the Bavarians to take this place. Of course, this small deviation is noticeable in the average. Theoretically, one would have to say that the computer has assessed everything quite well. On the other hand: there can also be too much order.
The foreign 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 do not know their business well)
Liga 1 ø Deviation Change from previous week
Germany, 1. BL 2.04 -0.55
Italy 2.23 0.13
Spain 2.51 0.21
France 3.34 0.31
England 2.75 0.21
Germany, 2.BL 4.42 0.39
The effect of the three winners in the last places: the average deviation decreased by a sensational 0.55 points! In the other countries, however, the disarray increased, which is anything but unexpected. As already noted here, it must increase with the number of games, but by no means linearly (still the mathematical problem, clearing this up, is not quite solved, at least not by the author, but would anyone else have it?). Germany 1, regardless of the number of matches, definitely has the largest order at the moment. That is recognisable (and also somehow noticeable).
j. Goal expectations and their deviations
Explanation: Almost the same applies to goals as to points. The expected goals scored and the expected goals conceded are compared with reality. Too few goals scored count negatively just as too many goals conceded count negatively, the reverse counts positively in each case. Here, the sum of the deviations must be 0, because all expected and not scored goals were not conceded somewhere. However, the goal average may show a deviation.
Team Name Goal expectation Goals scored Goals conceded expected Goals conceded Total deviation
1 FC Bayern Munich 19.88 25 8.29 1 12.41
2 VfB Stuttgart 14.62 14 12.90 6 6.28
3 Borussia Mönchengladbach 12.66 11 13.62 6 5.96
4 TSG Hoffenheim 11.68 12 13.86 9 5.19
5 Hertha BSC 11.22 12 15.04 13 2.82
6 Werder Bremen 14.67 16 12.31 12 1.65
7 Borussia Dortmund 15.06 15 7.74 7 0.68
8 FC Schalke 04 13.48 18 10.81 15 0.33
9 1.FC Köln 12.05 15 15.26 18 0.20
10 1.FC Nuremberg 10.67 10 12.78 12 0.11
11 1.FC Kaiserslautern 10.24 7 14.94 13 -1.31
12 Hannover 96 13.40 11 11.55 12 -2.85
13 Bayer Leverkusen 13.98 12 11.98 13 -3.00
14 FC Augsburg 8.36 7 13.56 16 -3.80
15 VfL Wolfsburg 12.40 11 11.92 16 -5.48
16 SC Freiburg 10.88 14 15.04 24 -5.85
17 Hamburger SV 11.62 11 15.58 21 -6.04
18 FSV Mainz 05 12.32 12.01 19 -7.31
229.17 233 229.17 233 0.00
Goals ø expected: Goals ø scored: ø Deviation 3.96 2.83 2.88
Bayern not only maintain the lead here, they actually extend it. In absolute terms, too, it is a completely different runaway winner at the front than the one at the other end (12.41 vs. 7.31 goals difference). Mainz in last place? Yes, it makes sense. The computer had them just above average before the season, after all. Well, the performances weren’t as bad as the results, anyway. HSV, Freiburg and Wolfsburg ahead of them? That makes sense too. Augsburg even better in proportion, as the computer clearly expected the least from them.
Place Country League 1 ø Goal difference Change from previous week
1 Germany, 1.BL 3.96 -0.38
2 Italy 1 2.30 -0.68
3 Spain 1 2.86 -0.23
4 England 1 3.93 0.06
5 France 1 3.49 0.52
6 Germany, 2.BL 6.22 -0.11
Germany 1 in this category also with a change towards more order. Only Italy is still far ahead here. The 2nd division has also “improved”, but is still far ahead. Theoretically a lot of excitement there, only perhaps the participation is lower?
k. The playing strength ranking
Note: 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.
Goal expectations Team For Against Quotient For/Counter Change of Quotient Shift
1 FC Bayern Munich 2.22 0.78 2.85 +0.21 +0
2 Borussia Dortmund 1.70 0.84 2.03 +0.12 +0
3 Bayer Leverkusen 1.64 1.30 1.26 -0.00 +0
4 FC Schalke 04 1.46 1.30 1.12 -0.06 +0
5 Werder Bremen 1.61 1.45 1.11 -0.04 +0
6 VfB Stuttgart 1.56 1.41 1.11 +0.04 +0
7 TSG Hoffenheim 1.37 1.34 1.02 -0.05 +0
8 Borussia Mönchengladbach 1.32 1.32 1.00 -0.01 +1
9 Hannover 96 1.38 1.00 -0.05 -1
10 VfL Wolfsburg 1.39 1.41 0.98 +0.01 +1
11 Hertha BSC 1.36 1.46 0.93 -0.05 -1
12 FSV Mainz 05 1.38 1.64 0.84 -0.04 +0
13 1.FC Nürnberg 1.20 1.47 0.81 +0.00 +0
14 1.FC Köln 1.42 1.78 0.80 +0.03 +0
15 Hamburger SV 1.27 1.67 0.76 +0.02 +0
16 SC Freiburg 1.27 1.81 0.70 -0.02 +0
17 1.FC Kaiserslautern 1.10 1.59 0.69 +0.04 +0
18 FC Augsburg 0.90 1.57 0.58 +0.02 +0
Goals ø expected 2.84
Bayern with clear gain, Hertha not losing so much. The effect not explained again. Otherwise moderate changes and shifts. The results somehow “normal”.
l. The frequency of tendency changes
Note: a “change in 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 trend is similar.
Country Matches Equalisation HF AF Total per match
1st Bundesliga 306 158 60 49 267 0.873
England 380 198 66 46 310 0.816
2nd Bundesliga 306 145 56 41 242 0.791
Italy 380 169 58 48 275 0.724
France 380 175 49 40 264 0.695
Spain 380 146 48 46 240 0.632
Country Matches Equalisation Home Leading Goals Away Leading Goals Total per match
Country Matches Equalisation Home Leading Goals Away Leading Goals Total per Match
1 1st Bundesliga 81 40 17 12 69 0.852
2 France 100 57 12 12 81 0.810
3 Italy 60 25 7 10 42 0.700
4 2nd Bundesliga 99 42 15 12 69 0.697
5 Spain 70 25 10 4 39 0.557
6 England 79 25 7 5 37 0.468
Total balance 489 214 68 55 337 0.689
The 1st division is ahead, just like last season. So: even if (too) many normal results: the occurrence of the same happens in surprising ways.
At the weekend there were these changes of tendency:
Gladbach turned against Leverkusen, but still conceded the 2:2. 3 TW.
Wolfsburg took the 1:1 from Nürnberg, but won 2:1. 2 TW.
The same procedure at Schalke against Lautern and Freiburg against HSV: lead – equaliser – lead again – final whistle. So another 4 TW.
So a total of 9 changes of tendency at the weekend. Something is happening in the Bundesliga.
In the 2nd league this came out:
Duisburg turned around at home against Ingolstadt, 3:1 after 0:1. 2 TW.
Dresden equalised in the last second against Aachen. 1 TW.
Düsseldorf turned the game around at St. Pauli, 3:1 after 0:1. 2 TW.
All in all, only 5 changes of tendency in League 2.
England remains far behind in that respect, even if there were 9 tendency changes in 10 games on the WE.
m. The mathematical review of matchday 9 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.
Home Away Total Deviation
Werder Dortmund 1.18 1.42 2.61 0 2 -1.18 0.58
FC Bayern Hertha 2.52 0.71 3.23 4 0 1.48 -0.71
Gladbach Leverkusen 1.35 1.30 2.65 2 2 0.65 0.70
Stuttgart Hoffenheim 1.66 1.30 2.96 2 0 0.34 -1.30
Mainz Augsburg 1.80 0.94 2.75 0 1 -1.80 0.06
Wolfsburg Nürnberg 1.55 0.96 2.51 2 1 0.45 0.04
Schalke 04 Kaiserslautern 1.89 0.79 2.68 1 2 -0.89 1.21
Freiburg HSV 1.70 1.24 2.93 1 2 -0.70 0.76
FC Köln Hannover 1.46 1.53 2.98 2 0 0.54 -1.53
15.11 10.18 25.29 14 10 -1.11 -0.18
Expected goal total Expected goal average Goal average achieved 25.29 2.81 2.67
ø expected goal difference 1.88 ø goal difference 1.66
Slightly too few goals, with 24 instead of 25.29 expected. The average goal deviation also supports the observed trend: the results were normal, a little too normal.
n. The determination
Note: The determination is calculated for each match as the sum of the squares of the individual probabilities. This measures how much one can commit to a favourite in a certain pairing. The higher the favourite position, the higher the sum of the squares, but also the more “certain” the occurrence of the (favourite) event. The mathematical question in itself is even more how far one can commit, since one cannot really determine this value. Events are predicted whose probabilities are unknown. Nevertheless, one can check the quality of the estimates made here in the long term by comparing expected/occurred. This is done week by week, but of course also overall.
The determination expected
Pairing 1 X 2 Determination
Werder Dortmund 31.78% 25.11% 43.12% 34.99%
FC Bayern Hertha 76.93% 14.71% 8.36% 62.04%
Gladbach Leverkusen 38.72% 24.92% 36.36% 34.42%
Stuttgart Hoffenheim 46.46% 23.15% 30.39% 36.18%
Mainz Augsburg 58.07% 22.35% 19.59% 42.55%
Wolfsburg Nuremberg 51.65% 24.81% 23.54% 38.37%
Schalke 04 Kaiserslautern 63.72% 21.16% 15.11% 47.37%
Freiburg HSV 48.69% 23.06% 28.25% 37.00%
FC Köln Hannover 36.81% 23.28% 39.91% 34.90%
4.53 2.03 2.45 3.68
average expected fixing: 40.87%
To repeat only above the expected figures given in last week’s text.
The determination arrived
Pairing 1 X 2 Tendency
Werder Dortmund 31.78% 25.11% 43.12% 2 43.12%
FC Bayern Hertha 76.93% 14.71% 8.36% 1 76.93%
Gladbach Leverkusen 38.72% 24.92% 36.36% 0 24.92%
Stuttgart Hoffenheim 46.46% 23.15% 30.39% 1 46.46%
Mainz Augsburg 58.07% 22.35% 19.59% 2 19.59%
Wolfsburg Nuremberg 51.65% 24.81% 23.54% 1 51.65%
Schalke 04 Kaiserslautern 63.72% 21.16% 15.11% 2 15.11%
Freiburg HSV 48.69% 23.06% 28.25% 2 28.25%
FC Köln Hanover 36.81% 23.28% 39.91% 1 36.81%
5 2 2 3.43
average determination received: 38.09%
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.
It is logical that the results cannot achieve the expected determination due to the three surprising away victories. They were suitable for balancing the average point deviation, since of course these three winners had previously been below their expectation and balanced out a little with the victories, also otherwise they were very normal football results, with 2:1 goals in each case, and in this respect not for large deviations in the goal expectations in the statistics before, but for the average arrived at determination it was a little damaging. In this respect, the determination arrived at is below the expected one.
o. Overall league statistics
Note: such a statistic is regularly produced by the computer. It is generally used for quality control of the individual figures. Each figure has its meaning and is explained in more detail. The goal average is not repeated here. The home advantage is calculated by dividing the goals scored by the home team by half of the total goals. In this way, you can see how many more goals the home teams score than they would score without home advantage. 1,116 is 11.6% more for the home team, 11.6% less for the away team.
Note: For arithmetic foxes, here is a brief explanation of the calculation method for the expected goal deviation: The computer gives each result from 0:0 to 20:20 a probability (it is actually sufficient up to 10:10, as the rest has no significant probability). There would be a goal deviation for each result. So if you multiply the probability of, for example, a 3:4 by the deviation that would then occur (in the case of the match Mainz – Gladbach, with goal expectations of 1.77:1.25, this would be 3 – 1.77 = 1.23 for Mainz plus 4 – 1.25 = 2.75 for Gladbach, i.e. a total of 3.98 goal deviation) and carry out this procedure for each match result, you get the expected average goal deviation.
1st Football Bundesliga 2011/2012 Statistics of the actual results
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals conceded Home advantage
81 39 14 28 136 97 1.167
Statistics of expected results
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals Conceded Home advantage
81 37.77 18.65 24.57 130.5 98.61 1.139
Statistics of absolute deviations
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals Conceded Home advantage
0 1.23 -4.65 3.43 5.5 -1.61 0.02819
Statistics of the percentage deviations
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals Conceded Home advantage
0 3.15% -33.21% 12.25% 4.04% -1.66% 2.41%
Determination expected Determination arrived 39.90% 40.51% ø Goal difference ø Goal difference expected 1.97 1.87
Nevertheless, the determination arrived over the whole season still remains above the expectation, i.e. there were still a little too many favourite victories. The other deviations remain within bounds. Only the draws remain quite clearly below expectation, to the delight of the fans, one may assume.
p. Review of the betting recommendations
But this question is always more explosive: which bets should/must have been made according to the computer? Where would he have messed with the betting market? And: if he messes with it, with the great mass intelligence, does he have good reasons for it? Could one possibly win, can one even prove long-term advantages? Up to now, such “dry swim” exercises have been made for oneself, if at all. Now, at least, it is documented.
Pairing 1 X 2
Werder Dortmund 3.05 3.65 2.44
FC Bayern Hertha 1.21 7.20 16.50
Gladbach Leverkusen 2.82 3.40 2.76
Stuttgart Hoffenheim 2.12 3.65 3.85
Mainz Augsburg 1.72 3.90 5.60
Wolfsburg Nuremberg 2.16 3.65 3.65
Schalke 04 Kaiserslautern 1.49 4.60 8.00
Freiburg HSV 2.68 3.60 2.74
FC Köln Hannover 2.46 3.70 2.64
Goal expectation 2.36
Money score 5.60
As long as the balance is positive, there is of course never any cause for complaint. The Lauter victory ensures that, for which sufficient publicity was given here. It was a good bet, especially if you followed the performance from the start. Nevertheless, you still need some luck to make it work, of course. Lautern was strong, the price offered was above the fair price, in this respect a favourable ratio of payout to probability of occurrence, and the “luck” merely refers to the fact that for each bet you need the difference in luck from the previously calculated chance (in this case the reported 15.11% on Lautern winning) to the 100% needed to get in, i.e. 100% – 15.11% = 84.89%. Lautern, however, achieved a significantly higher chance in the match, but of course that was not foreseeable (they had a good day, one would have to call it).
On the other hand, it is not luck when you make such good bets many times and end up with a plus. In any case, a good way has been taken to prove it.
Hertha was probably not a good bet, although that is not so easy to judge with a 16.5.
Gladbach, on the other hand, was an excellent bet and was as good as won. That was rather unfortunate.
The bet on Hoffenheim would also be repeated at any time. The 5:4 chances in their favour, but also the viewed pictures say that everything was ok with it.
Wolfsburg won the game, but the bet was rather bad. They could by no means dominate the game as one would expect them to do at such a rate. This win was lucky.
For that, they actually should have won the Freiburg bet. It was excellent, you just couldn’t understand the betting market assessment – and that one also corrected the assessment towards the game.
All in all, it was a very good weekend, but you can’t win enough when the bets are so favourable. The bad days, one has to fear, will still come and then these missed units could be missed.
Betting recommendation 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
The losses were always moderate, the gains now and then huge. Plenty of cause for satisfaction, of course.
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
31.4% profit is far too much, there is no question about that. But every now and then you can just sit back and enjoy the good balance sheets. But you can see that with only 2.24 hits above expectation, you are not that far ahead. This indicates that the odds were too high. So: high odds were hit a lot, smaller ones a little too little.
q. The preview of the 10th matchday
Note: The computer uses a specially developed – of course explainable and highly logical – algorithm to calculate the goal expectations (and the individually maintained home advantage not shown here) to these goal expectations. These in turn are offset against the probabilities of occurrence, in the past by simulation, today long since by a function derived from the simulation results). These goal expectancy values have also long since proved to be competitive in goal number betting on the betting market.
Goal expectation Home Away Total
Augsburg Werder 1.04 1.56 2.60
Kaiserslautern Freiburg 1.68 1.30 2.98
Nuremberg Stuttgart 1.37 1.44 2.81
Hoffenheim Gladbach 1.38 1.06 2.45
Dortmund FC Cologne 2.49 0.80 3.28
Hertha Mainz 1.73 1.24 2.97
HSV Wolfsburg 1.50 1.43 2.93
Leverkusen Schalke 04 1.67 1.17 2.84
Hannover FC Bayern 0.88 1.81 2.69
13.74 11.82 25.56
Expected goal total Expected goal average 25.56 2.84
There should be many goals in Dortmund with over 3, few in Hoffenheim and Augsburg. In total it is pretty normal with 2.84 expected goals per game.
Note: The determination is calculated as the sum of the squares of the individual probabilities. This measures how much you 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, one can check the quality in the long term by comparing expected/occurred events.
The determination expected
Pairing 1 X 2
Augsburg Werder 25.77% 24.42% 49.82% 37.42%
Kaiserslautern Freiburg 46.98% 22.90% 30.12% 36.39%
Nuremberg Stuttgart 36.50% 23.84% 39.66% 34.74%
Hoffenheim Gladbach 44.82% 25.86% 29.32% 35.37%
Dortmund FC Cologne 74.50% 15.53% 9.96% 58.91%
Hertha Mainz 49.28% 22.74% 27.98% 37.28%
HSV Wolfsburg 39.93% 23.31% 36.75% 34.89%
Leverkusen Schalke 04 49.54% 23.22% 27.25% 37.35%
Hannover FC Bayern 18.08% 22.15% 59.77% 43.90%
3.85 2.04 3.11 3.56
Average expected fixing:
The 39.58% expected commitment is pretty much in line with the season average (and even the long-term average). So a completely normal match day to expect.
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
Augsburg Werder 3.88 4.10 2.01
Kaiserslautern Freiburg 2.13 4.37 3.32
Nuremberg Stuttgart 2.74 4.20 2.52
Hoffenheim Gladbach 2.23 3.87 3.41
Dortmund FC Cologne 1.34 6.44 10.04
Hertha Mainz 2.03 4.40 3.57
HSV Wolfsburg 2.50 4.29 2.72
Leverkusen Schalke 04 2.02 4.31 3.67
Hannover FC Bayern 5.53 4.51 1.67
Comparison with the betting exchange betfair
(The betting recommendations)
Pairing 1 X 2 % average
Augsburg Werder 3.80 3.75 2.08 101.06%
Kaiserslautern Freiburg 2.02 3.65 3.90 102.54%
Nürnberg Stuttgart 2.66 3.50 2.86 101.13%
Hoffenheim Gladbach 2.00 3.65 4.00 102.40%
Dortmund FC Cologne 1.33 5.70 12.50 100.73%
Hertha Mainz 2.04 3.70 4.00 101.05%
HSV Wolfsburg 2.38 3.60 3.15 101.54%
Leverkusen Schalke 04 2.08 3.65 3.85 101.45%
Hannover FC Bayern 9.20 4.70 1.45 101.11%
Goal expectation 1.92
Once again, you should only bet on underdogs, but this does not mean that the betting market has caught wind of the (somewhat) greater favouritism and is now betting more heavily on favourites. No, but it is a fundamental tendency of the computer to assess the chances of (unloved) outsiders soberly-realistically-objectively and thus to advise such a bet more often.
In detail: Lautern convinced, Freiburg lost. The effect is understandable. The price on Lautern too low, that on Freiburg too high. After the performance seen, you definitely have to bet af Freiburg, even if a bet against a team that has brought you as much luck as Lautern is always difficult and actually unsympathetic. That’s how complicated gambler’s life is.
Stuttgart, of course, can be signed immediately. The team is good, plus it’s not such a long way from Stuttgart to Nuremberg, even if you can’t directly call it a derby. A good bet and actually not quite understandable that it will come to one, because after all, your own team won and the opponent lost.
The loyalty to Gladbach remains. Of course, they can be trusted to get something in Hoffenheim and the game is expected with some joy.
You also have to play Cologne. This is more of a derby, Dortmund had Champions League on Wednesday (with the bitter defeat known today, Thursday), and Cologne has Podolski. Even if you certainly shouldn’t go in with high hopes at a 12.5. The hope, however, is, and thus almost becomes a conviction, that there is a favourable ratio between the payout ratio and the probability of occurrence.
Mainz at Hertha can also be immediately signed off as a good bet at 4.0. Hertha have now suffered a setback – even if the players rather smiled about it in recognition of their superiority – and Mainz are in deficit, so they absolutely have to start scoring. The quality is in the team and in the away game it can even be temporarily easier, with no expectant but fearful fans (of renewed failure) behind them. A good bet, recommended with conviction.
Wolfsburg, of course, also remains loyal, especially after the victory on the WE. The turnaround can often be initiated by a painstakingly earned victory. Especially since HSV was rather lucky and the game already has a bit of a derby about it.
The unit on Hannover is money thrown away (fortunately only virtual).
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 league third place team has against the first league third last.
c. Point expectations and discrepancies
d. Evaluation of the 5th second division matchday
e. Preview of the 7th Second League Matchday