1) The 1st Bundesliga
a. Review of the Matches
Results of the 23rd Matchday
Borussia Mönchengladbach – Hamburger SV 1:1 (1:0)
FSV Mainz 05 – 1. FC Kaiserslautern 4:0 (3:0)
- FC Cologne – Bayer Leverkusen 0:2 (0:1)
FC Augsburg – Hertha BSC 3:0 (0:0)
VfL Wolfsburg – TSG Hoffenheim 1:2 (0:1)
VfB Stuttgart – SC Freiburg 4:1 (2:1)
Werder Bremen – 1. FC Nürnberg 0:1 (0:0)
FC Bayern Munich – FC Schalke 04 2:0 (1:0)
Borussia Dortmund – Hannover 96 3:1 (1:0)
A few observations:
1) Hans Meyer
After last week’s brief mention of the return of Otto Rehhagel and the long absence of Hans Meyer, described as the returnee’s “comrade-in-arms” in that he certainly doesn’t mince his words and regularly picks on journalists with his silly or inane questions, the same Meyer was invited on Monday to appear on Sport 1’s “Doppelpass” programme, which is quite highly regarded and included in the station’s own compulsory programme.
Hans Meyer’s observations are all just as highly regarded as those of Mr Rehhagel. Both have this keen power of observation and the intellect to ruthlessly expose shortcomings, as well as to acknowledge the small, permanent coincidences that can decide games here and there and, in that sense, to maintain objectivity, which, unfortunately, the questioners generally do not manage to do. Above all, these media representatives believe that they actually have sufficient expertise when they know the standings and the results, and as soon as they run out of steam argumentatively, they refer to those facts with such a repulsive but outwardly knowing smile in order to silence those who question the validity of the statement but remain objective.
Now this programme is so appreciated because it is hosted by someone who certainly shows the pleasing beginnings of following in the footsteps of those whose opinions and views are NOT exclusively oriented towards the above-mentioned so-called “facts”. The much praised and ever creeping into favour Thomas Helmer does an excellent job, in addition he has an absolutely credible manner and highly charming, pleasant charisma. The questions he asks are to the point and he plays marvellously with his invited guests, even sprinkled with a little humour here and there. At the same time, he does not get involved with the guests in more than a few sentences, even if you can hear that his opinion differs from that of the interviewee. In this way, one can bear it wonderfully, no, more than that, one can gain quite a few insights, since the claim to absoluteness is not made that one can answer all questions definitively. Thomas Helmer takes care of exactly that again and again by breaking off the discussions with a skilful transition, but usually leaving both, now and then even more, points of view as equally valid next to each other. Exemplary and elegant. In this way, no opinion is imposed on the viewer, but he is even explicitly allowed to form his own and to scurry off to bed with it later, reassured and not agitated or even highly agitated because of the misinterpretation or injustice that only he himself recognises.
Now, after this eulogy on Thomas Helmer, the transition to Hans Meyer? As usual, he shone with razor-sharp observations, most of which one has not yet made in this form, which then tends to give one that pleasant feeling that there are people after all – and those are also asked to speak AND are prepared to do so without hesitation — who understand something (more) about the subject matter.
What was worrying, however, was that he had to almost “keep his mouth shut” with the observation he had made himself (by the author) and regularly recorded, since he was addressing such a precarious topic, and now had to cover his mouth with his hand, if possible, in order not to spoil everything. Once again it was about a so-called “critical offside situation”, which in this scene, presumably, according to the common opinion, was interpreted “accidentally” against the attackers, when Hans Meyer opened his mouth: “I think the rule is applied too seldom.” came the counter-question: “Which rule do you mean?” “Well, the rule that in case of doubt it should be interpreted FOR the attacker. That is too little applied.”
A very restrained criticism of those who apply the rules and those who dispense them. Well, it was the highly praised Americans who “tinkered” with the rules for the World Cup in their own country in 1994. Their insight: in order to keep the game colourful and exciting, a few more goals are needed, that was the simple (and “simply” ingenious) idea. To this day, you will not understand why nobody in the world understands that the change in thinking is quite simple. People want more goals, everyone actually wants more goals, because then there is more fun, more dramatic game progressions, more exciting developments, more beautiful goals, more action in general, so this is the way to ensure more goals. Where could a problem lie? Has the fan at some point voted that he prefers dirty 1-0 wins where you poke one in front and otherwise keep it tight at the back?
According to the opinion that is widely held here, it would be more than enough just to be right in all the goal-scoring decisions, and there would be about one and a half more goals per game. But since it would be impossible to ever achieve this (a simple reason: even if you were allowed to work with freeze frames, you are far from being able to clear all situations beyond doubt), the clever Yanks have given the linesmen this tiny rule stretch. If you doubt, keep the flag down. God and the rules officials will forgive you. If you think about the above statement a little further, and therefore keep the flag down in critical situations, according to the rules, there would probably be about 2 more goals per game.
This statement cannot be verified, nor can the statement that the game would be more exciting and would attract more fans. But this change would be absolutely protected by the rules, one would simply have applied the rules. Whether the fans would now turn away for their part because it would give them a 4:2 or a 5:3 too often seems at least more than questionable. “Do you still remember the wonderful times when we slumbered gently and blissfully in the sunshine in front of us in the stands because there was never a goal anyway?”, or what fan reaction would one have to fear? “It used to be that when we were 1-0 up, we always won. Now it doesn’t mean anything. No one knows how the game will end if we’re leading. That’s annoying.” Well, this sports comrade has presumably forgotten that, just as conversely, they have conceded every game in which they were 1-0 down, and from then on, exposed to this score, he would also not have the slightest idea how the game would NUN end.
If one follows Hans Meyer’s words a few millimetres further, the question inevitably arises as to how it is interpreted? What does he mean by “it is too rarely used?” The fact is, of course, that it is never applied at all. In fact, the exact opposite is always applied. If there is even a hint of doubt as to whether a striker who is heading for the goal on his own might not have been offside, even though it was actually quite certain that he wasn’t, then raise the flag anyway. And if you are quite sure that he was NOT offside, then it is still a 50:50 decision. You can’t do anything wrong WITH the wave. It might be seen as a mistake, that can happen. But if it is, the second sentence immediately says: “But that was also really hard to see at that speed.”
“The rule is too rarely applied” is of course also valid as a sentence. Because: it is NEVER applied is also “only” clearly too rare. The fact that the opposite has taken hold is only a marginal problem.
The new rule, as it could be reformulated without changing even the tiniest detail of the whistle, would have to read as the interviewed spectator, who developed her passion for the German national team only very temporarily in 2006, at the World Cup here, expressed it (certainly WITHOUT any study of paragraphs, just like that, after watching a few games and pictures): “Offside is always when someone is free. One is inclined to add for her, “So whenever there is a “danger” of a goal being scored.” After all, it’s football and the pretty boxes with the nets so neatly knotted at either end of the pitch are there purely for decoration. The Yanks had already realised this in 1994 and to this day shake their heads at the fact that it seems against the spirit of the game to cause bulges in the net.
Hans Meyer really went out on a limb with his statement. Will he be able to draw attention in the right direction in this way? Doubts are justified, one way or another. Especially since there is no need for psychological causal research anyway. Why does the flag always go up? Even if repeated for the umpteenth time: the fear is to cause a goal by a mistake. A goal prevented by a mistake doesn’t make waves, but a goal prevented by a mistake does. After all, what did Dr. Markus Merk say after he gave a goal at Werder against Dortmund that was demonstrably incorrect? “That was my worst mistake in the last 10 years.” All 175 goals that were disallowed, all penalties that were not given, and which were subsequently certified as “clear penalties” cannot, even in total, outweigh this one mistake. Consequence: always disallow a penalty “just to be on the safe side”. No one crows about it, it’s forgotten a second later. But woe betide you if you concede a goal even once that was not in accordance with the rules. You’re in for a lifetime of misery.
This injustice stinks to high heaven. But it does exist, and it is being supported more and more, talked up, the referees and assistants increasingly absolved of blame, the incorrect disallowance attributed to the increasing speed, and even the clearest fouls or manhandles in the penalty area increasingly declared “unintentional” or “insufficient for a penalty kick” or “not clear enough”, thus giving the referees all kinds of justification reasons with which they can vote against the goals again and again. But woe betide any striker who takes a deep breath in the opponent’s penalty area, just trying to defend himself against the constant tugging of the jersey, the pulling, the holding, and simply pay back in kind. This, let us be assured, is recognised by the whistle man as a “striker’s foul” from 70 metres away and with his naked but at the same time closed eyes.
2) The public broadcasters
On Wednesday this week, the public broadcasters once again had their foot in the door by being given exclusive rights to international matches. Germany had to deal with France, the otherwise extremely flayed ears with the somewhat less flaying Bela Rethy, who is currently probably ahead of all the resident reporters. Of course, his tone is bearable, now and then almost positive, even crossing over here and there into “excited” or even “euphoric”. For every Sky viewer, this is already a pure blessing compared to the exclusively boring, but in a sneering, condescending tone, always and under all circumstances maintaining the sobriety of the nonsense spreaders at the private provider.
On the other hand, one realises that this task is by far the easiest of all. Partisanship is not only unambiguous and clearly established before the game, no, it probably even runs in the speaker’s blood, since he has certainly been an ardent supporter of the German team since early childhood, as befits a right-wing (or even left-wing, and this politically as well as geographically…) German, and can look forward to every major tournament so immeasurably, since, thanks to the Pope in his pocket, one can always thumb one’s nose at almost all other nations despite no discernible superiority – except that in the sector of the allocation of luck. This is something you get, almost regardless of year, with your mother’s milk, so to speak. Germany are world champions and European champions and will always remain so, no matter how badly they play.
In view of this partisanship, which is therefore almost inevitably coupled with emotionality, commentating on a match between Cologne and Dortmund or Leverkusen against Hanover, where one would actually have to be neutral, is a baby’s job in comparison. Moreover, it should be clear that, apart from a few troublemakers, the entire audience is equipped with the same feelings. Germany is playing – Germany is sitting in front of the TV – Germany is rooting for its footballers. Even in circles that otherwise don’t even tune in to the Sportschau. So it couldn’t be simpler, except perhaps that as an announcer you might get a little more exasperated, given the fact that with such a high audience rating you can both embarrass yourself more easily and quickly make a few enemies.
So Bela Rethy manages this task quite skilfully, simple as it may be. Of course, there is the usual smart-alecky talk when an attack doesn’t go his way, with hot tips on where the next player would have been standing free and who the attacker had overlooked and what the right pass would have been or at what moment the finish should have been made. This “small art” can also concern attacks by the opponent, in which case it would be more likely to hear that one’s own defence was attentive. Logically, the commentary is based on the score and not on the quality of the performance, but basically these little things can almost be ignored (if you didn’t know exactly how much better it would be if you just looked at England) and it remains benevolent.
Mind you, the Germans have really shown outstanding quality since the 2010 World Cup. Basically, it’s a bit surprising in that sense that the players and coaches can still do so well internationally despite the absolute naivety and cluelessness of the media, because that’s clearly a stumbling block, but it is: Germany is (currently) world-class football-wise and doesn’t have to hide behind any nation (even if one could argue that Spain showed them the limits, which happened only marginally, if at all). The game on Wednesday was also great, by the way. Such a multitude of lightning combinations, determined to a large extent by a top player like Mesut Özil, provide moments of surprise again and again, and the deficit was undeserved, despite the truly outstanding resistance of the French. It’s just that people don’t seem to recognise such “injustices”, especially in this country, because that would also mean having to morally give back almost all the titles they’ve won. “Yes, back then, in the semi-final against France, we had a hell of a scare.” “In the penalty shoot-out against England, too, because it was a coin toss.” “In Mexico against Mexico in 1986 it was the same.” “Against England in England, when Gascoigne was alone in front of the empty goal in sudden death it was a bit more of a shower.” and so on and so forth. All these victories, if luck were acknowledged, would forfeit their significance, cast doubt on the invincibility of the Germans and the legitimacy of any current score at all. So, of course, the logical consequence is: the 0:1 was deserved, because every result is deserved.
The Germans put so much pressure on until the break and had an accumulation of promising actions rare at this level that it was a wee bit more undeserved until the break. Well, the story is quickly told, the game was lost and the BILD newspaper rips the Germans to shreds as “too green for the title” (it automatically means “the title”, of course, while other, more modest nations, acknowledging, that every victory requires a bit of luck and that, above all, you can’t rely on it but that, on the contrary, it can turn into bad luck, especially when you meet the black beast from good old Germany, would already be satisfied with getting through the preliminary round, knowing just as well that there is a high performance density in Europe, especially at the top). Well, it’s all a matter of habit. When you put on the jersey as a German, you have taken on the obligation to give the nation a celebration, those who switch on the TV have the right to feelings of happiness, and denying them is unconditionally blamed on the failures on the pitch. That’s the way it is. Unfortunately, denial happens far too rarely, in this writer’s opinion, even if the kickers down there are entitled to a great deal of sympathy for this completely misplaced expectation. It would do the Germans a lot of good to set the record straight, and a little more modesty would be even better.
So far, everything was “business as usual”, apart from the minimal fact that this (loser) business happens all too rarely. But when the other nations were introduced with their performances, all the frustration burst out of the battered souls, as it seemed. Now they could really go to town against all the other countries, how miserably they had failed (yes, if Germany is NOT involved, then, you may like to convince yourself, BOTH performers regularly fail), how limp their performances were, how miserable they had defended and how little one had to fear them, most of all, how boring the games had been.
If one were to see and hear only this summary, one would, as a first-time viewer, definitely not look a second time. One would rather rub one’s eyes in wonderment as to why they hadn’t filmed the grass growing or a half-filled bin that didn’t even fall over, because all of this would still have been guaranteed to offer more spectacle than these appallingly weak games by the competition.
One really has to assume that a self-esteem enhancement programme is being carried out here, in which those who have been so badly short-changed can finally polish themselves up. It is guaranteed that there is not a single German on the pitch who could have been offended with this badmouthing, who could perhaps even defend himself, and presumably there is hardly anyone on the pitch who would ever get to hear this and if so would not understand it. Here, a playground has been found on which all kinds of nasty gloating can be spilled, on which supposed missteps or stumbles can be attributed to one’s heart’s content without the person concerned being able to defend himself.
If, on top of that, this is secreted by a woman, it becomes even more unpleasant, more penetrating, more annoying, more incomprehensible. How is that possible? In general, the commentary has already been called misguided enough times (in these texts here). The speaker already knows the outcome of the play and the individual scene. There is so much unpleasant oracular, which on the one hand robs the viewer of pleasure and suspense, but on the other hand opens the door to smart-alecky talk.
Just one example: the lady – probably Sabine Töpperwin – was assigned to the Portugal-Poland match. When the world-class man (even if Messi won the election, he is probably number 2 in the world) Christiano Ronaldo kicked a free kick, one could already sense from her highly unpleasant, slightly implied increase in tension, which, however, already clearly decreased again during the execution, that it would come to nothing. When the ball really did miss the goal quite clearly, she said, “He can do better than that.” It’s so disgusting, so impertinent, so unbearable, no, the only thing that can be said for her protection is this: even with this segregation, no one has been in front of the boob tube for a long time. Germany is finished, the feelings of happiness have been unlawfully denied, the culprits have been identified, now it’s time to go to bed with the feeling of having someone to be angry at, because in the morning you read the Bild and see confirmed what you already knew. That’s not how it works, Jogi. But to occupy yourself with football or other nations on such an evening? No, that’s out of the question. Maybe you’d still be watching their bickering at the last beer party, and laughing heartily if the Germans had won. But after a defeat? No, that doesn’t happen. In this respect, Ms. Töpperwin, rest assured: you really did have the playing field (almost) to yourself. Hurray for (and for) your self-esteem!
By the way, why is it even more unpleasant coming from a woman? It’s because women are generally more conciliatory, that they would rather protect a supposed failure, that they would calm down their husband who is so upset about one of “his” failures with the words “I like him” or “oh, poor guy” or even “he didn’t do that on purpose” or something like that. If she takes the same line as a man, it is simply unbelievable, she is emulating the male role models, thinks she can catch up with them instead of looking for her own niche, in which she could very well settle down, in a niche in which there is still the search for an ideal football world. Why not? Why doesn’t anyone stand up for themselves, at least someone who could be expected to do so by nature? No, Mrs Töpperwin, that was the lowest drawer. And by the way, this question: when you chose this scene for a summary. Was it specially chosen so that you could get a particularly good picture of the losers in the other countries? Should one, as a bedtime snack, once again be able to laugh heartily about such a failure? Was it one of the very few scenes worth showing? What, in your opinion, makes football so exciting and beautiful that one should tune in?
3) ccc
b. The standings
Sp S U N Pkt T GT Diff1 Borussia Dortmund 23 16 4 3 52 50 – 15 +35
2 FC Bayern Munich 23 15 3 5 48 51 – 14 +37
3 Borussia Mönchengladbach 23 14 5 4 47 37 – 14 +23
4 FC Schalke 04 23 14 2 7 44 50 – 30 +20
5 Bayer Leverkusen 23 10 7 6 37 34 – 29 +5
6 Werder Bremen 23 10 6 7 36 37 – 37 +0
7 Hannover 96 23 8 10 5 34 28 – 30 -2
8 VfB Stuttgart 23 8 5 10 29 37 – 33 +4
9 TSG Hoffenheim 23 7 8 29 26 – 27 -1
10 1.FC Nürnberg 23 8 4 11 28 22 – 32 -10
11 FSV Mainz 05 23 6 9 8 27 34 – 36 -2
12 Hamburger SV 23 6 9 8 27 28 – 38 -10
13 VfL Wolfsburg 23 8 3 12 27 28 – 44 -16
14 1.FC Köln 23 7 3 13 24 30 – 45 -15
15 FC Augsburg 23 4 9 10 21 23 – 37 -14
16 Hertha BSC 23 4 8 11 20 25 – 40 -15
17 1.FC Kaiserslautern 23 3 9 11 18 16 – 32 -16
18 SC Freiburg 23 4 6 13 18 28 – 51 -23
584 584 0
Total number of games 207
Goals ø 2.82
The table picture is fascinating, especially at the back (while at the top it’s more of a long time coming). Augsburg leave the relegation places! The author remembers a conversation with another market participant before the start of the season, when the ranking of the teams was being discussed. The opinion was expressed that Augsburg clearly belonged in last place. Well, even if one didn’t really disagree with that (except, as one always does, namely in the sense that everything is a game of probabilities, and even Augsburg will keep the class with a certain chance), one had this much to counter: “Sure, yes, they may be the weakest. But I wouldn’t be surprised if, for example, after 14 matchdays they were standing quite normally in the table, in the lower midfield or something, in any case outside the relegation places.” It wasn’t the 14th matchday, but now it’s the 23rd. Even if the balance is still under a point per game: this season the whole table is a bit more stretched than usual, with 1 to 3 having over 2 points per game, and 4 only just less. These ensure that it is also stretched a little further at the bottom to lower point totals (because: the ones in front had to help themselves somewhere).
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 probabilities1 Borussia Dortmund 3615 72.30% 1.38
2 FC Bayern Munich 1205 24.10% 4.15
3 Borussia Mönchengladbach 134 2.68% 37.31
4 FC Schalke 04 46 0.92% 108.70
5000 100.00%
Dortmund with over 70%. Whether the market could now confirm this? Probably not. The discrepancy will probably remain. Although one may recall that at one point in the Hinrunde there was a recommendation to bet pro Bayern. That was after matchday 14, when Bayern had lost twice in a row, once of them to Dortmund, once to Mainz, and Dortmund had moved past them in the table for the first time, with 29 points compared to Bayern’s 28. At that point, the computer had probably factored in the still gigantic goal difference a little more, while the market reacted a little more to the short-lived lack of success.
Change in chances compared to the previous week due to the results of match day 23
Team Win/loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/loss percentage1 Borussia Dortmund 194 3.88%
2 FC Bayern Munich 151 3.02%
17 FC Schalke 04 -100 -2.00%
18 Borussia Mönchengladbach -245 -4.90%
0 0.00%
The winners more than clear, the losers the same.
d. The title chances in the development
So both top teams with a positive development, which would now mean in expertese: they settle it among themselves. Sure, it’s what one might now dare to predict with the greatest certainty. But “safe” is only a 1.0, and that is by no means to be given. The other two still have a computer-calculated 3.5%, a chance that is still well above hitting a plein in the roulette wheel.
e. Comparison of title chances with the betting exchange betfair
Back Lay Probability (Back)FC Bayern Munich 2.68 2.74 37.31%
Borussia Dortmund 1.77 1.8 56.50%
FC Schalke 04 70 85 1.43%
Borussia Mönchengladbach 21 23 4.76%
101.40%
Even if Dortmund is now ahead, it’s still not to the same extent as the computer. Of course, in the world of betting, you see the duel coming up and you might think to yourself, “If Bayern need a win in Dortmund and want it badly, concentrating all their efforts, they can do it.” Well, again the question: do you have a chance to influence the objectively calculated probabilities with your own efforts? If this were the case and the calculator already knew this, then he could take this influencing phenomenon into account and thus again “hit the truth” (of the distribution of chances, and it is precisely here that the term “probability” is appropriate; it only seems true)…! All this has long been in the realm of philosophy, although the questions have occupied man for ages and he continues to search for answers: to what extent can statements be made about future events, each including the areas 1 and 0? What can be predicted with certainty, what can be ruled out? Because: not even the statement: “The game will … end”, i.e. it will end somehow, 1, X or 2, is certain. For that to happen, the whistle has to be blown, time has to pass, the earth has to rotate, the sun has to give us its protective gravitational pull, which then has to be in balance with the centrifugal force triggered by the earth’s speed of flight, and the whistle has to be blown, for which there would be much more trivial reasons for this not to happen (at least not at the scheduled time, because it could be stopped and restarted; would it then be “over”? Yes, in one way, namely with an abort, but this is not represented in the value range 1 – X – 2. ).
The changes in betfair’s odds estimates
Change(Back)FC Bayern Munich 3.53%
Borussia Dortmund 2.15%
FC Schalke 04 -1.70%
Borussia Monchengladbach -4.76%
-0.78%
Gains for both winners, losses for the non-winners. That’s the way it has to be.
(The order according to the original rankings estimates).
The development at betfair in the graph
The market also recognises the two-way increase in the odds.
Incidentally, the fact that the curves seem to go partly into negative territory is due to the fact that it is difficult to always calculate the market opinion, the betting offers in addition, exactly to 100%. Thus, “the rest” sometimes had a negative expectation, because the 100% had already been reached for the teams indicated.
f. The direct Champions League qualification via 2nd place
The probability distribution for 2nd place after the 23rd matchday
Team Number of 2nd places in 5000 simulations 2nd places in percent1 FC Bayern Munich 2752 55.04%
2 Borussia Dortmund 1098 21.96%
3 Borussia Mönchengladbach 775 15.50%
4 FC Schalke 04 369 7.38%
5 Bayer Leverkusen 4 0.08%
6 Werder Bremen 1 0.02%
7 Hannover 96 1 0.02%
5000 100.00%
Bayern is holding on to the first place, which Dortmund had held for such a long time. The results have stabilised it at the bottom.
The changes compared to the previous week:
Team Win/Loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/Loss percentage1 FC Bayern Munich 604 12.08%
2 Borussia Dortmund 28 0.56%
13 TSG Hoffenheim -1 -0.02%
14 Werder Bremen -1 -0.02%
15 Bayer Leverkusen -2 -0.04%
16 Hannover 96 -2 -0.04%
17 Borussia Mönchengladbach -313 -6.26%
18 FC Schalke 04 -313 -6.26%
0 0.00%
Bayern’s win clear: they make 2nd place safe(er). Gladbach and Schalke, of course, the victims of this, though it may come as a surprise that they give away exactly the same amount, given that Schalke lost to their rivals, while Gladbach drew against a neutral team (and didn’t even lose).
Well, two phenomena are responsible for this: 1) Schalke had the clearly more difficult opponent, and in an away game at that. 2) Schalke had less to give away, as their chances were small anyway.
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 another third of relegated teams are added due to 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 Total1 SC Freiburg 60.90% 5.69% 66.59%
2 1.FC Kaiserslautern 57.26% 6.27% 63.53%
3 FC Augsburg 37.96% 7.74% 45.70%
4 Hertha BSC 29.50% 6.85% 36.35%
5 1.FC Köln 11.96% 4.35% 16.31%
6 VfL Wolfsburg 0.96% 0.97% 1.93%
7 1.FC Nuremberg 0.72% 0.57% 1.29%
8 Hamburger SV 0.42% 0.33% 0.75%
9 FSV Mainz 05 0.22% 0.33% 0.55%
10 TSG Hoffenheim 0.06% 0.13% 0.19%
11 VfB Stuttgart 0.04% 0.09% 0.13%
200.00% 33.33% 233.33%
Augsburg only in 3rd place, Freiburg and Lautern clearly ahead. Hertha and Cologne are also doing very well, while the rest of the teams have done pretty well. I wonder if any of them will still take action?
The change in chances due to the results of the 23rd matchday in relation to relegation
Team Change of Chances1 FC Augsburg 25.57%
2 1.FC Nürnberg 4.69%
3 FSV Mainz 05 2.53%
4 TSG Hoffenheim 1.06%
5 Hamburger SV 0.84%
6 VfB Stuttgart 0.48%
14 VfL Wolfsburg -0.65%
15 1.FC Cologne -3.47%
16 SC Freiburg -6.63%
17 Hertha BSC -11.00%
18 1.FC Kaiserslautern -13.43%
0.00%
There has probably never been such a high winner before. Of course, these values can develop somewhat more rapidly towards the end of the season when the final decision is made (consider the case where a team needs – and manages – a two-goal win in its last match at a rival. Then it would be perhaps 15% on class preservation beforehand, but afterwards it would be an even 100%. Gain: 85%; possible only on the final matchday). Nevertheless, it is simply sensational. Of course, it is due to their own victory, which was also clear – and thus had an effect on both playing strengths in the sense of improving Augsburg’s chances. At the same time, however, the most important competition did not score. So Lautern AND Freiburg lost at the same time, which boosts the chances enormously.
h. The relegation question in development
The “slump” of the Augsburg curve is graphically nicely visible. Once again the phenomenon (as recently with the championship view) that the already very large chances (close to 80%, the Augsburgs) do not simply materialise like that after all. Whether this is an exception (because when they were at 80%, surely all of football expert Germany was convinced: a relegation is as good as certain) or whether this happens again and again (which would naturally raise doubts about the level of the calculated chances), further match years will have to show.
Please bear in mind that 80% is roughly in the order of magnitude of an expected Bayern home win against Freiburg. And there you would have the feeling: they will win that, won’t they?
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 absolute1 Borussia Mönchengladbach 32.86 47 14.14 14.14
2 FC Schalke 04 36.26 44 7.74 7.74
3 Borussia Dortmund 46.15 52 5.85 5.85
4 Hannover 96 31.49 34 2.51 2.51
5 1.FC Nürnberg 26.41 28 1.59 1.59
6 Werder Bremen 34.87 36 1.13 1.13
7 Bayer Leverkusen 36.97 37 0.03 0.03
8 Hamburger SV 27.46 27 -0.46 0.46
9 TSG Hoffenheim 30.06 29 -1.06 1.06
10 FC Augsburg 22.25 21 -1.25 1.25
11 1.FC Köln 25.98 24 -1.98 1.98
12 FC Bayern Munich 50.80 48 -2.80 2.80
13 FSV Mainz 05 29.87 27 -2.87 2.87
14 VfB Stuttgart 32.88 29 -3.88 3.88
15 VfL Wolfsburg 31.23 27 -4.23 4.23
16 1.FC Kaiserslautern 24.61 18 -6.61 6.61
17 SC Freiburg 24.70 18 -6.70 6.70
18 Hertha BSC 28.57 20 -8.57 8.57
-7.41 73.41
ø Deviation 4.08Hertha meanwhile on 18, i.e. the team that missed its expectations by the furthest. Surely one thinks here and there and Mario Basler’s assessment (in the BILD newspaper) from last summer, when he pretty much put Hertha in 18th place. Did he perhaps have the slightly better assessment after all?
Sure, the deviations are quite moderate everywhere, but the fact that Nuremberg is now already in 5th place? Bayern are missing 2.8 points, yes, you get the idea. A win instead of a defeat and everything would be in order, even if they were only in 2nd place in real terms.
The international comparison for the average point difference
Note: the theory is that the German Bundesliga is the most exciting of Europe’s top leagues. This finding is rather intuitively derived, but so far “accepted” both in this country and abroad. Of course, the higher goal average is an indication of this, as well as the(perceived) lower predictability when it comes to the title, relegation, but also other issues. Balance is a criterion and possibly the main reason for this.
The measure used here for the deviation in average points expectation provides measurable information about this, but it was probably a “problem” specific to the 2010/2011 inaugural season (the fan thanked) that the Bundesliga produced a particularly large number of surprises. This was reflected in the figures. Now the phenomenon can be observed further. Is the Bundesliga also exciting in this respect? More exciting than elsewhere?(At the same time, a large deviation in this category could simply mean that computers or feeders are bad at their trade)
Rank Country League 1 ø Point deviation Change from previous week Number of games
1 Germany, 2.BL 6.24 0.09 206
2 England 1 4.51 -0.12 259
3 France 1 4.42 -0.03 249
4 Germany, 1.BL 4.08 -0.27 207
5 Italy 1 3.57 0.48 246
6 Spain 1 3.22 -0.12 240
As already mentioned several times, things are reasonably orderly in Germany 1 this season after all. Gladbach is the one gigantic outlier. But also abroad there are no exaggerated sensations (at least not many).
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 deviation1 Borussia Mönchengladbach 31.48 37 30.25 14 21.77
2 Borussia Dortmund 40.84 50 18.93 15 13.09
3 FC Schalke 04 35.81 50 28.77 30 12.96
4 FC Bayern Munich 51.61 51 19.72 14 5.12
5 VfB Stuttgart 36.00 37 34.26 33 2.26
6 TSG Hoffenheim 29.75 26 32.51 27 1.77
7 FSV Mainz 05 31.42 34 34.48 36 1.06
8 FC Augsburg 21.25 23 35.06 37 -0.18
9 1.FC Nürnberg 26.49 22 34.96 32 -1.53
10 Hannover 96 31.02 28 31.25 30 -1.76
11 Bayer Leverkusen 37.02 34 29.28 29 -2.74
12 Hamburger SV 29.76 28 36.95 38 -2.81
13 1.FC Köln 30.95 30 41.69 45 -4.25
14 Werder Bremen 37.83 37 33.27 37 -4.55
15 1.FC Kaiserslautern 24.99 16 36.02 32 -4.97
16 Hertha BSC 29.61 25 34.92 40 -9.69
17 SC Freiburg 27.91 28 39.57 51 -11.33
18 VfL Wolfsburg 32.33 28 34.14 44 -14.20
586.06 584 586.06 584 0.00
Goals ø expected: Goals ø scored: ø Deviation 6.45
2.83 2.82 Dortmund has conquered 2nd place! Ahead of their neighbour from the Revier, of all places. Well, the 15 fewer goals conceded (with the same goals scored) cannot be made up for by the deficit in playing strength (in the expectation). And the series has been “uncanny” for some time now.
Wolfsburg is even pulling away at the bottom! Well, in this table you can already experience surprises in some positions: Stuttgart on 5? Cologne ahead of Werder? Augsburg in 8th place, almost without a deficit? Hannover in the red here? Well, the goal balances are in any case not quite 1 to 1 with the point yields.
Overall, as you can see, two goals are “missing”. Well, a justifiable discrepancy, one might feel.
The international comparison for the average goal deviation
(Note: crazy results do not necessarily have to be reflected in the tendency. So a 5:3 or even a 7:0 may cause large deviations here, in terms of goals, but not at all in terms of points, since, for example, the favourite would have won in each case. So there is an alternative method of comparing with other countries: are there the most “surprises” in the Bundesliga in this respect too)?
Rank Country League 1 ø Goal difference Change from previous week Number of games
1 Germany, 2.BL 9.52 0.50 206
2 Germany, 1.BL 6.45 0.46 207
3 England 1 6.23 -0.54 259
4 Italy 1 5.05 0.61 246
5 Spain 1 4.95 -0.07 240
6 France 1 4.42 0.70 249
The German leagues (further) ahead. In a sense q.e.d., see the note text.
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.
Team For Against Quotient For/Counter Change in Quotient Shift1 Borussia Dortmund 1.99 0.75 2.66 -0.03 +0
2 FC Bayern Munich 2.02 0.83 2.44 +0.09 +0
3 FC Schalke 04 1.77 1.19 1.49 -0.02 +0
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 1.52 1.04 1.46 -0.04 +0
5 Bayer Leverkusen 1.61 1.27 1.27 +0.05 +0
6 Werder Bremen 1.56 1.54 1.01 -0.04 +0
7 Hannover 96 1.35 1.34 1.01 -0.02 +0
8 FSV Mainz 05 1.46 1.46 1.00 +0.07 +1
9 VfB Stuttgart 1.59 1.62 0.98 +0.04 -1
10 TSG Hoffenheim 1.23 1.33 0.93 +0.04 +0
11 Hamburger SV 1.27 1.47 0.87 +0.02 +0
12 VfL Wolfsburg 1.28 1.62 0.79 -0.03 +0
13 1.FC Nürnberg 1.08 1.39 0.77 +0.04 +1
14 Hertha BSC 1.18 1.68 0.70 -0.05 -1
15 1.FC Köln 1.27 1.81 0.70 -0.02 +0
16 FC Augsburg 1.01 1.56 0.65 +0.05 +2
17 SC Freiburg 1.17 1.87 0.63 -0.03 -1
18 1.FC Kaiserslautern 0.91 1.51 0.60 -0.05 -1
25.29 25.28
Goals ø expected
2.81 Fact: Augsburg leave the last place that was theirs for so long, partly, in the first half of the season, by quite a clear margin. Of course, it was the clear victory that helped them get there, but even before that, their performances were hardly worse than those of other contenders for quite some time.
The exchange of places between Mainz and Stuttgart, both of whom had magnificent victories, is curious. This shows once again that everything in the world is relative, especially adjectives. “Grandiose” “more grandiose”? Well, at least Mainz didn’t concede any, with the same number of goals scored. The quality of the opponents, on the other hand, hardly played a role, as you can see. It was the 17 and 18 that became them…
At the front, Bayern is “creeping up” a bit again.
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.
2010/2011 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 match1 1st Bundesliga 9 2 0 1 3 0.333
2 France 9 3 2 1 6 0.667
3 2nd Bundesliga 13 6 4 0 10 0.769
4 Italy 9 3 1 1 5 0.556
5 Spain 10 8 1 4 13 1,300
6 England 12 4 1 1 6 0.500
Total balance 62 26 9 8 43 0.694
The 1st division with a pretty miserable performance in the category. Only HSV managed to equalise in Gladbach, Wolfsburg did likewise against Hoffenheim, only to come away empty-handed in the end.
In Spain there was a lot going on. But you wouldn’t know it from the results. They were all close games, but they always ended with an equaliser.
Trend changes in the major leagues in the 2011/2012 season
Country Matches Equalisation Home Leading Goal Away Leading Goal Total per match1 1st Bundesliga 207 104 35 164 0.792
2 2nd Bundesliga 206 100 38 25 163 0.791
3 France 249 125 36 31 192 0.771
4 England 259 119 32 43 194 0.749
5 Spain 240 109 44 28 181 0.754
6 Italy 246 95 34 23 152 0.618
Total balance 1407 652 219 175 1046 0.743
League 1 and 2 now almost exactly tied. An exciting head-to-head race. Which league has more surprises to offer in terms of trend changes? Of course, the other leagues are not out of the race yet.
m. The mathematical review of the results of the 23rd matchday
Note: here, the deviation of the expected goals with the goals scored is calculated for each match. To determine the total deviation, the values are added up in absolute terms (not visible here, this column). So: if one team deviates positively by 0.35 goals, the other negatively by -0.62, then the absolute total deviation is 0.35 + 0.62 = 0.97 goals. To determine the average deviation, all these values are added up and divided by the number of pairings – usually 9.
Goal expectation
Home Away Total DeviationGladbach HSV 1.87 0.85 2.72 1 1 -0.87 0.15
Mainz Kaiserslautern 1.56 0.93 2.49 4 0 2.44 -0.93
FC Cologne Leverkusen 1.28 1.72 3.00 0 2 -1.28 0.28
Augsburg Hertha 1.27 1.22 2.49 3 0 1.73 -1.22
Wolfsburg Hoffenheim 1.49 1.09 2.58 1 2 -0.49 0.91
Stuttgart Freiburg 2.30 1.28 3.58 4 1 1.70 -0.28
Werder Nürnberg 1.91 0.94 2.86 0 1 -1.91 0.06
FC Bayern Schalke 04 2.01 0.86 2.87 2 0 -0.01 -0.86
Dortmund Hannover 1.96 0.62 2.58 3 1 1.04 0.38
15.65 9.52 25.16 18 8 2.35 -1.52
Expected goal total Expected goal average Scored goal average
25.16 2.80 2.89 ø expected goal difference 1.84 ø goal difference 1.84
Stuttgart was expected to be particularly high-scoring against Freiburg. This was confirmed. It is still striking that the average expected goal deviation was hit exactly, which in this respect speaks for a very healthy distribution of goals. Just as much chaos was to be expected. Predictable moments of surprise, if you like. “How many surprises will there be this weekend?” “Well, about three and a half.” And so it came to pass.
n. The determination
Note: The commitment 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
Gladbach HSV 61.18% 22.32% 16.50% 45.13%
Mainz Kaiserslautern 51.73% 25.84% 22.43% 38.47%
FC Cologne Leverkusen 28.32% 24.09% 47.59% 36.47%
Augsburg Hertha 37.33% 27.72% 34.96% 33.83%
Wolfsburg Hoffenheim 46.10% 26.36% 27.54% 35.78%
Stuttgart Freiburg 60.08% 19.63% 20.29% 44.06%
Werder Nuremberg 59.83% 22.16% 18.01% 43.95%
FC Bayern Schalke 04 64.12% 20.82% 15.05% 47.72%
Dortmund Hanover 69.06% 20.16% 10.78% 52.92%
4.78 2.09 2.13 3.78
average expected fixing: 42.04%Always as a reminder, the expected values from the previous week’s text. So what has reality brought?
The determination arrived Pairing 1 X 2 Tendency
Gladbach HSV 61.18% 22.32% 16.50% 0 22.32%
Mainz Kaiserslautern 51.73% 25.84% 22.43% 1 51.73%
FC Cologne Leverkusen 28.32% 24.09% 47.59% 2 47.59%
Augsburg Hertha 37.33% 27.72% 34.96% 1 37.33%
Wolfsburg Hoffenheim 46.10% 26.36% 27.54% 2 27.54%
Stuttgart Freiburg 60.08% 19.63% 20.29% 1 60.08%
Werder Nuremberg 59.83% 22.16% 18.01% 2 18.01%
FC Bayern Schalke 04 64.12% 20.82% 15.05% 1 64.12%
Dortmund Hannover 69.06% 20.16% 10.78% 1 69.06%
5 1 3 3.98
average determination arrived: 44.20%Three of the four over 60% favourites have won. Only one draw and two away wins are not enough to bring the score down to the expected one. So, all in all, it remained (if only slightly) a matchday of favourites.
Further note: No comparable model has yet been discovered in mathematics. Not even by a mathematician who had set himself the task of proving to the author that there was guaranteed to be nothing new.
o. League statistics
Note: such a statistic is regularly produced by computer. It is generally used for quality control of the individual figures, Each figure has its meaning and is explained in more detail. The goal average is not repeated here. The home advantage is calculated by dividing the goals scored by the home team by half of the total goals. In this way, you can see how many goals the home teams score more than they should 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 Heimvortarrived 207 95 55 57 351 233 1,202
expected 207 96.08 47.58 63.33 332.9 253 1.136
abs Deviation 0 -1.08 7.42 -6.33 18.10 -20.00 0.07
rel. Deviation 0 -1.14% 13.49% -11.11% 5.16% -8.58% 5.46%
Determination expected Determination received
40.53% 40.68%
ø Goal deviation ø Goal deviation expected
1.85 1.87 The trend continues in the direction of an increasing home advantage, which develops so consistently that at some point one could believe in a systematic error. Whereas, as you can see, the number of home wins was not even fully achieved. However, the away victories were even more missed, and in terms of goals the tendency is even clearer. This means that home teams often win high and clear, while away teams usually win narrowly. And such things could also be coincidence.
In the determination, the swing is now again minimally per higher possible favourites, but the deviation is so small that one would not have to worry.
The goal deviation is consistently very good anyway, so one might rather wonder how this fits with what was said above about this permanent small home-away error. In any case, if you have many comparative variables that all provide a slightly different statement, but these statements do not point constantly in one direction (namely indicating an error), then you can be quite reassured in the aggregate. It is therefore probably a matter of purely random fluctuations that can be corrected at any time. Since the parameters are self-adjusting, a reaction that goes beyond this would certainly be out of place.
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
Gladbach HSV 1.80 3.85 5.00
Mainz Kaiserslautern 1.79 3.65 5.20
FC Cologne Leverkusen 3.90 3.50 2.10
Augsburg Hertha 2.68 3.35 2.86
Wolfsburg Hoffenheim 2.25 3.55 3.45
Stuttgart Freiburg 1.76 3.90 4.90
Werder Nuremberg 1.83 3.80 4.80
FC Bayern Schalke 04 1.45 5.00 8.50
Dortmund Hannover 1.33 5.20 9.40
Goals scored 2.19
Goals scored 1
Money Evaluation -3.24
As the author and publisher of the nonsense bets had little time for football this weekend, the assessment has to be comparatively tight. One can hardly judge the bet on Gladbach (and does not dare to call it good). But at least Gladbach took the lead, after which the bet was definitely good. Today, with the outstanding betting offers and a completely transparent, networked world, and therefore in the age of live betting, you can easily realise your profit during the game after such a leading goal, if you don’t like something about the bet. The live rate on Gladbach winning after a leading goal should already be below 1.30, and you would then have to pay this with a “lay” bet. That way you secure your profit. Nevertheless, from a feeling point of view it was not a good bet. HSV has long been called “the surprise team”, the team that is hardest to judge.
Lautern’s defeat was so depressingly clear that you wouldn’t dream of calling the bet “good”. Of course, we have seen often enough that Mainz can play very well – and have shown this often enough recently. It’s just that this game was a derby and Lautern also had enough unrewarded good performances to lead. Well, this one was nothing, in contrast to quite a few other outsider picks in the last few weeks, which unfortunately were also not won.
The only bright spot was Stuttgart’s win, which by its size leaves little doubt about the quality of the bet.
The author was now able to watch the Werder vs. Nuremberg match almost completely again. Here there is a tendency to describe the bet as justifiable despite the loss. Werder were by no means bad and had sufficient own goal actions, including a few penalty-claims, a couple of penalty claims, as one would have to translate it, very clumsily. Even if one goal wasn’t enough to turn the game around, the reaction of the team, fans and opponents would have to be experienced live after the equalising goal, and furthermore, of course, there was the possibility of taking the lead for a longer period of time, after which it could easily be a no-brainer. In any case, the bet was ok.
And we wouldn’t want to talk down the bet on Schalke under any circumstances. They went out with a broad chest, as commentator Marcel Reif also correctly recognised with an unusual chance goal, and they almost had the clear dominance in the opening phase. This – as was also well analysed in the Sport 1 Doppelpass – almost led to the arrogance of the complete advancement of the central defence, which was thus perfectly countered in the opponents’ stadium at 1:0 for Bayern. A flap of the butterfly’s wings in the other direction – and Schalke “could have snatched it”, could have grabbed it.
Recommended betting statistics for 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
20 6 2 2.32 -0.32 +0.63
21 8 2 3.02 -1.02 -3.73
22 8 4 2.85 +1.15 +2.19
23 5 1 2.19 -1.19 -3.24
Easy come, easy go, but not even that fits. More like a steady two steps forward and three steps back.
Total statistics
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
124 44 +19.05 15.36% 45.78 -1.78
132 46 +15.32 11.61% 48.80 -2.80
140 50 +17.51 12.51% 51.65 -1.65
145 51 +14.27 9.84% 53.84 -2.84
For the first time, the winning percentage is below 10%. Whereby the 14.27 units won are still quite handsome and it will not be easy to give them away fully by the end of the season.
q. The preview of the 24th 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) 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 TotalLeverkusen FC Bayern 1.14 1.61 2.75
Hannover Augsburg 1.81 0.82 2.63
Freiburg Schalke 04 1.11 1.78 2.90
HSV Stuttgart 1.68 1.50 3.17
Kaiserslautern Wolfsburg 1.25 1.17 2.42
Hertha Werder 1.48 1.55 3.04
Dortmund Mainz 2.32 0.69 3.01
Nuremberg Gladbach 0.92 1.27 2.20
Hoffenheim FC Cologne 1.80 1.05 2.86
13.52 11.45 24.97
Expected goal total Expected goal average
24.97 2.77 Flood of goals in Hamburg (expected), but this can very well be supported, also in Berlin it should be more than 3 goals (how will Rehhagel line up and adjust? No hot tip therefore), likewise in Dortmund, but this does not necessarily collide with the market.
Few goals especially in Nuremberg, which is kind of good to imagine, whereas Gladbach could now react roughly like a poker player with an “all in”: put everything on one card (well, in poker it’s usually five, in a pre-flop all-in) and either the sensation succeeds and they continue to reach for the stars with a win – or they probably have to settle for CL qualification, which, however, is far above all season goals ever set. Accordingly: this is not such a hot tip either.
Note: The determination is calculated as the sum of the squares of the individual probabilities. This measures how much one can commit to a favourite in a certain pairing. The higher a favourite position is, the higher the sum of the squares, but also the more “certain” the occurrence of the event. The mathematical question in itself is even more how far one can commit, since one cannot really determine this value. Events are predicted whose probabilities are unknown. Nevertheless, one can check the quality in the long term by comparing expected/occurred events.
The determination expected Pairing 1 X 2
Leverkusen FC Bayern 27.00% 25.05% 47.96% 36.56%
Hannover Augsburg 60.56% 22.80% 16.63% 44.64%
Freiburg Schalke 04 23.61% 23.55% 52.84% 39.04%
HSV Stuttgart 42.00% 23.75% 34.25% 35.01%
Kaiserslautern Wolfsburg 38.08% 27.88% 34.03% 33.86%
Hertha Werder 36.26% 24.48% 39.25% 34.55%
Dortmund Mainz 73.81% 16.75% 9.44% 58.18%
Nuremberg Gladbach 26.87% 28.88% 44.25% 35.14%
Hoffenheim FC Cologne 54.79% 23.31% 21.90% 40.25%
3.83 2.16 3.01 3.57
average expected fixing: 39.69%After last week’s claim that the expected commitment could possibly increase in the second half of the season as the games become more predictable (the potentials are more clearly marked out, the top teams have unleashed their true capabilities, so to speak, and are calling them off week by week, so the idea behind it), here is a smaller expected commitment right away. Bayern in Leverkusen, relatively no easy task (well, the newspapers also report that Ribery has blasted Bayern out of the crisis), and also Dortmund against Mainz not even over 60%, also the other pairings fit in the sense of a smaller possible determination, they are, in Toto player jargon, open games or also three-way.
The fair odds
Note: the fair odds are simply 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
Leverkusen FC Bayern 3.70 3.99 2.09
Hannover Augsburg 1.65 4.39 6.01
Freiburg Schalke 04 4.23 4.25 1.89
HSV Stuttgart 2.38 4.21 2.92
Kaiserslautern Wolfsburg 2.63 3.59 2.94
Hertha Werder 2.76 4.08 2.55
Dortmund Mainz 1.35 5.97 10.59
Nuremberg Gladbach 3.72 3.46 2.26
Hoffenheim FC Cologne 1.83 4.29 4.57
Comparison with the betting exchange betfair
(The betting recommendations)
Pairing 1 X 2 % Average
Leverkusen FC Bayern 4.90 3.90 1.84 100.40%
Hannover Augsburg 1.79 3.80 5.40 100.70%
Freiburg Schalke 04 4.10 3.80 1.97 101.47%
HSV Stuttgart 2.10 3.70 3.80 100.96%
Kaiserslautern Wolfsburg 2.36 3.45 3.30 101.66%
Hertha Werder 2.60 3.60 2.86 101.20%
Dortmund Mainz 1.32 5.90 12.50 100.71%
Nuremberg Gladbach 3.10 3.45 2.56 100.31%
Hoffenheim FC Cologne 1.68 4.00 5.80 101.77%
Goal expectation 3.24
A short comment on the betting recommendations:
It is clear that one lacks the power of persuasion for a lot of things after such a messed up weekend. Nevertheless, ALL GAMES are shown this time – and are also suggested.
Leverkusen against Bayern is certainly not something you can particularly like. Leverkusen have not shown any special games all season (except maybe in the Champions League, even against Barcelona in half 2). The position in the table reflects this quite well. The expectations are actually somewhat higher, but of course they will not despair in the face of a somewhat weaker season (especially since the Champions League was both a burden, but at the same time a source of money). Nevertheless, not everything is back on track for Bayern with just one game. They have the difficult second leg coming up next Wednesday, the championship is a bit out of reach for now (even if not written off for a long time). So the focus could be a bit more on the Champions League, while Bayer might already have resigned themselves to elimination and are looking for the straw to even qualify for the CL this season, or at least for the Euro League. So probably quite a good bet, with 2 out of 10, at least.
Augsburg have left the relegation places. Chapeau, but at least it was mentioned here a few weeks ago that they play on a par with the teams around them. Nevertheless, Hannover are actually convincing week after week. They are where they belong. Their performance in Dortmund was also great, as they came close to equalising for a while, which is a huge sign of quality anyway. The market doesn’t quite seem to appreciate that. So: 5/10.
Schalke at Freiburg can please much less (and is, after all, only minimally shown). Still: Schalke are desperate to stay up. They started well in Munich, even managed to equalise once with a huge chance after 0:1, and even if Bayern were good, they weren’t bad at all. Freiburg, on the other hand, clearly lost the game in Stuttgart, the Baden-Württemberg derby, and now have their backs to the wall. The home game against Bayern was encouraging and they showed their class. However, it is possible that the pressure of having to win and the somewhat lower-class opponent is already fuelling expectations and thus paralysing the legs. Schalke have the class, but still only 3/10.
Stuttgart’s win in Hamburg is of course difficult as a bet. HSV is the team that is hardest to classify and their point win in Gladbach again cost (virtual) money, at the same time testifying to this problem. Where do they really belong? On top of that, though, Stuttgart are just as difficult to assess. Now and then clear, convincing victories, now and then clear defeats. The potential seems to be there, but here too only 2/10.
Wolfsburg created some pressure of their own again with the recent home defeat (certainly not deliberately). But, it should be remembered that the home win before that against Freiburg was also more than shaky. How high is their potential? Hard to determine, of course, due to the numerous personnel changes. Nevertheless, they are playing against an opponent who has it much dirtier. Lautern simply don’t score goals. The 0:4 was such a bitter setback that even the coach came under fire. This is evidence of anything but calmness. In this respect: two real problem children against each other, the course is indicated, therefore 3/10.
Werder at Hertha could actually only be a good bet. The 0:1 against Nürnberg is a misleading result. They were the better team, that was quite clear. The chances were there, but they didn’t take them. On the other hand, it’s hard to imagine Hertha losing another game with new coach Rehhagel. Somehow it’s their turn to win a point or even a victory. The advantage is also not that big (fair yes 2.55, offered 2.88). Well, so maybe also a 3/10.
Mainz have delivered a series of great games. Most recently the 4:0, but also before that a team that, as at the beginning of the previous season, can really inspire. You don’t really want to bet against Dortmund, but if it’s recommended and there’s a really tasty reward, why not? Especially since the 3:1 (which only came in the final second) against Hannover showed that they can definitely wobble sometimes. So if the opponents play just as fearlessly, which you can trust Mainz to do, given the now reasonably reassuring situation in the standings, why not? One has convinced oneself: 2/10.
Well, to speak of an end to Gladbach’s super series only because of a 1:1 is, like Hans Meyer (in Sport 1 Doppelpass), nonsensical. Something can always happen, could have happened to Bayern and Dortmund at the weekend, and a 1:1 is not a defeat – despite the penalty for the draw due to the stolen half point. No, Gladbach is all there. If there are any doubts about the bet, they relate to Nürnberg. They have also had a string of good games, and even if their win in Bremen could be called lucky, it was still an excellent performance. No, this bet doesn’t taste quite right either. Also 3/10.
Still few those on Cologne. Cologne are overrated by the computer, so the market says (and the impression can somehow be confirmed right now). Podolski is missing and if just in the first game without him the victory against (10-man) Kaiserslautern succeeded, in Lautern, this perhaps provided the eyewash that he is not necessarily missing. Hoffenheim have now got results back with Babbel, they had always been thought to have the potential (despite bloodletting), no, that’s a 1/10.
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 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
