1) The 1st Bundesliga
a. Review of the Matches
Results of the 26th Matchday
TSG Hoffenheim – VfB Stuttgart 1:2 (0:2)
Bayer Leverkusen – Borussia Mönchengladbach 1:2 (0:1)
Borussia Dortmund – Werder Bremen 1:0 (1:0)
FC Augsburg – FSV Mainz 05 2:1 (1:1)
Hamburger SV – SC Freiburg 1:3 (0:2)
- FC Nuremberg – VfL Wolfsburg 1:3 (1:2)
Hertha BSC – FC Bayern Munich 0:6 (0:3)
- FC Kaiserslautern – FC Schalke 04 1:4 (1:2)
Hannover 96 – 1. FC Köln 4:1 (1:1)
A few observations:
1) Hacks on Hertha
On the one hand, I apologise at this point for having mistakenly sent the earlier programme “DSF Doppelpass” here to be continued under this name on Sport 1. The programme, which takes place on Monday evenings, has been called “Die Liga Total Spieltaganalyse” for some time now, even if it has almost the same presentation with the same cast. On the other hand, today I have to take a more critical look at the otherwise mostly praised programme.
It is not the first time in recent times that a loser has been picked on who did not deserve it. A few weeks ago, for example, there was the Barcelona Gala, at which every football fan witnessed with open-mouthed amazement an unstoppable, absolutely exceptional artist, Lionel Messi, about whom the English press, so highly praised for its objectivity, wrote afterwards that it was no longer a question of whether Messi was the best player of all time, but whether he was not the best player of ALL time. Here Leverkusen had to play the role of extras, which they have to fill more or less well – and Leverkusen did it very well, as they made the effort to score a goal themselves until the end, which they even managed to do – a beautiful one at that – which even prompted coach Guardiola to congratulate his colleague with a handshake. There was nothing that could be done that night, and stopping this Messi would be like trying to stop the water coming in through a leak on an ocean liner with your bare hands. Even then, the demand made here was: please leave Leverkusen alone. Their performance is not relevant under these circumstances and cannot be judged at all – except as happened above. Here and today, we can only talk about Messi and his colleagues, here the finest football circus was on offer, which one admires and marvels at, here there was no embarrassment and no disgrace and nothing at all except admiration, taking off one’s hat, standing guard and applauding.
Incidentally, it was also pointed out in the same place – namely here – that the people who spoke of this disgrace and were supposedly so ashamed and so angry – Alfred Draxler in the commentary in the BILD the day after – were not believed at all. This was a put-on anger, a feigned being angry, an insincere shame. Nobody felt that, not even any Leverkusenian on the pitch, as the smiles on the faces of all those interviewed, including coach Dutt, proved.
Likewise, one should not judge the performance of Berlin’s Hertha at all on Saturday. These Bavarians were a number too big for Hertha. Only coach Rehhagel pronounced the right judgement (once again): they were unlucky that the very first action led to a goal. Curious that he also left the “critical situation” in the opponents’ penalty area shortly beforehand, when a foul was committed on a Berliner (as is brazenly claimed here), completely uncommented. Of course, they were ashamed (here, in fact) to talk about a penalty after a 0:6 score, which they could have possibly got, in order to suggest that the game could have ended “quite differently” (i.e. 1:6?). Nevertheless, anyone who has ever played (years of watching might be enough) knows that a goal, if you score it yourself and thus take the lead, can suddenly not only release your own strength, but can also send the crowd into a frenzy, which, thanks to the support that follows, really becomes a “real” twelfth man.
Bayern were simply too good. Whether a possible lead could have resulted in a completely different course of the game is idle and irrelevant. But please leave Hertha alone now. Bayern has NOT been able to force points, as for example in the last defeat in Leverkusen, when, according to coach Heynckes, they had the best first half of the whole season away from home – but could not convert any of the at least four or five great chances. At that time, they were talked into the crisis, which they simply blew away in the following games, when they converted their chances, and this in packages. But why should this now cause surprise? Everyone saw Bayern’s outstanding potential this season, and some spoke of the best Bayern of all time in the first half of the season. What has changed? This time they converted the first (and the second) chance, which, thanks to their undoubted class, they are naturally more likely to do than anyone else. And now the opponent is supposed to have been pathetically weak?
The game was decided after 0:2 at the latest, EVERY player on the pitch knows that. A miracle, well, yes, that could help. We might try this or that attack – if we get possession at all – and the (almost) inevitable happens: 0:3.
Messrs Helmer, Strunz and Kruse had nothing better to do for the first 20 minutes of the programme than to take a close look (in their opinion) at the disastrous performance of the Berliners. Above all, they had replayed scenes that took place AFTER the 0:3. What were they trying to achieve? Is it a blessing for them, the tormented ones who have always been short-changed in life, to finally have someone they can pick on without expecting any opposition? Don’t they realise that with every further recognised error, both the game of football (“very weak here, everyone’s just watching, they’re standing wrong, moved out at the wrong moment, left criminally unguarded, inattentive, everyone was asleep, catastrophic error here”; gloating in buckets) and the performance of the opponent are completely destroyed? And this: would the gentlemen have been satisfied if Hertha had won the game? Would they then, as a substitute, have replayed the comparable scenes and constantly praised the excellent covering work of the Berliners? No, that is the reliable answer. Under these circumstances, Bayern would have had to take all the criticism and gloating. Only then, instead of pouring out of buckets, it would have poured the complete contents over them from the aforementioned ocean liner….
I’m sorry, gentlemen, as the highlight of the day, since most of the broadcasting time was devoted to this match, this was very, very weak and in addition lowest drawer. Bayern was simply good and you, thanks to your vouched-for German supporters, should be glad that there are these Bavarians who can possibly even make a splash internationally – whereby the fantasising about the final, in which supposedly (against Barca, one speculates) everything would be possible, is already embarrassing again, but no less typical German arrogance.
2) HSV is relegated?
On Sunday evenings Sky always runs the talk show “Sky 90”. Here, too, a lot of experts are invited in turn to give their opinion on the latest topics. One topic was of course the possible relegation of the Bundesliga dinosaur, the last remaining founding member, HSV. A telephone call was made to a Hamburg journalist who has been following HSV at every turn for more than 30 years. He had conveyed the greatest concern for “his” HSV, but at the same time noted that they were playing really rubbish together and that all the former HSVers he had spoken to had said the same thing: this year HSV will be relegated.
Now, on the one hand, it is understandable that people who feel emotionally connected to the club express pessimism. This is a way of preventing even greater disappointment in the event of a failed attempt to stay in the league. Apart from that, people naturally look back in their minds to the many successful years in which they were able to lift trophies, celebrate championships or fight unforgettable European Cup battles, and compare the current situation with that, so that they possibly lose sight of the sometimes even more threatening situation of the competition while indulging in reminiscences, and only have an eye for their own worries. So far, so comprehensible, perhaps understandable. Incidentally, one may even assume that there is suddenly a greater wave of sympathy for this last dinosaur in the entire nation, because they somehow belong to it and a Bundesliga WITHOUT HSV sounds and tastes bland and dreary, one can’t quite imagine it without HSV – and doesn’t even like it.
Only that this journalist, presumably as proof of the coming relegation, now brings in all the interviewees who would have expressed equal scepticism? What does he want to prove? Does he even wish that his prophecy would come true, that he wouldn’t lose face, that he would go down in the meantime?
No, as has been mentioned many times – and with more and more probative force: the only reasonable answer to the question of whether HSV will be relegated is a number in the form of a probability. My own impression is that HSV has sufficient quality, possibly even slightly higher than some of the competitors. However, this in no way provides the counter-statement to the Hamburg journalist (he writes for the Abendblatt) and all the HSV idols interviewed from the past, no, it only leads to the statement: the figure below, which the reader is welcome to look up, is as well calculated as it could be. The fact that this or that part of the percentages (one FOR relegation, one AGAINST relegation, complementing each other 100%) is realised is, in Fortuna’s own opinion, attributable to a whim. Whether and to what extent those responsible can influence the development of the chances at the moment, possibly influence them positively, is still an open question. They will try, but if it were to happen, it would have no further significance than this: the calculations are (slightly) inaccurate, perhaps wrong. Because: actually, all possible influence measures – which, mind you, each of the competitors has in equal measure – should already have been taken into account. The perhaps slightly higher potential of HSV (as can be read below in the playing strength) includes, if possible, the size of the name HSV; for example, compared to Augsburg or Freiburg.
3) “At Barca we would all have stood on our chairs”.
There was a very curious quote in the Sky summary “All games – All goals” on Saturday afternoon, directly after the games. When Dortmund’s wonderful, perfectly played goal for 1:0 against Werder was played – incidentally, it was shown in a graphic in the BILD the next day, probably because it was so beautiful that it seemed worthwhile for once to make this goal vivid for the reader – the announcer slipped out this curious sentence: “With Barca, we would all have stood on our chairs.
Now one can investigate what he might have meant by that. Surely quite unintentionally the small logical problem: if we had stood on the chairs at Barca, then, since it was “only” Dortmund, we would actually have to jump from the chair directly to the ceiling to top it off. Or does he want to claim that we at Barca, unjustifiably, would be stood on chairs, perhaps even the whole world, and such a goal, which is actually even more beautiful, would remain closed to the world because it was only scored by Dortmund, it actually deserved a higher recognition?
No, this is probably all nonsensical. He wants to draw attention to the beauty and presumably remind us – even if partly unconsciously – that we were able to see a series of such beautiful goals a few weeks ago. But what he is hinting at at the same time, “between the lines” so to speak, is this, which has already been mentioned above: he actually stood in the chair at all Barca goals – even if only symbolically – was thrilled, could not hold on to himself for the joy of the beauty of football and forgot his own Germanness for these two hours. This is the real truth, and even more a joyful one. At moments like that evening, everyone who was lucky enough to be there gives thanks and doesn’t care about their origins or their previously cherished hopes and dreams. Messi is the football god, an idol that you simply adore and could never wish him anything bad. Here, the whole world became a Messi fan (at the latest), one way or another.
But it’s nice that such words — even if one may assume, for the most part unintentionally — burst out after a few weeks. It has often been observed that after a really lucky victory of a team (this impertinence of objectivity is something you personally presume, yes, I, the author), it is first claimed, in all summaries and the print media, that it was ultimately a deserved victory, usually with the completely silly tenor behind it that now it is the goals that count and that according to THIS SINGLE CONDITIONAL count now THIS team was ahead. Of course, one can just as well do without such a description, since one has got so far behind with the counting oneself. Nevertheless, that’s what it says: “Deserved victory”.
A few weeks or months later, however, one hears from the same spokespersons that “back then, in November, they only came to a very lucky victory”. This suggests that either they have listened attentively to the coaches’ voices and are simply adopting their really profound judgement, bit by bit, or that there might be a little more football sense than they initially dare to express. This would be a little like the emperor’s new clothes. Everyone thinks they have to see something, recognise something, because everyone else does, too, and they don’t dare make their own perception known. How good it would be to tell the truth right away without the fear of being called a “layman” if you dare to say that the losing team was actually the better team in this game.
As I said, “with hindsight”, it does seem to work, both in terms of this memorable evening – as it will most certainly soon be called – of Barca against Leverkusen, and in terms of the fortunate or less fortunate circumstances of a victory.
4) Leverkusen wanted to avoid the 0:1.
It’s unbelievable what you hear again and again over the course of a weekend. This sentence is an example of the many shortcomings of those who constantly want to accuse others of shortcomings without having a shred of sense. Gladbach took the lead in Leverkusen after 7 minutes. And the announcer proclaims this wisdom: “It happened exactly what Leverkusen wanted to avoid at all costs: an early goal against.”
In itself, there is no need to say anything at all about such nonsense. The man disqualifies himself, but he is not even responsible for it. He just doesn’t know and can’t do any better, yet someone put a microphone in his hand and said, “Do you know anything about football?” “No, I don’t know anything about it.” “Hmm, never mind. Can you talk fast, whatever the content?” “Yes, at school I once won a competition to see who could verbally spout the maximum nonsense the fastest.” “That’s good, then you’re our man.”
But it is still fun to dissect this sentence a little. You can approach it in different ways. As an example? The alternative tactic would look like this, which the coach gives his players shortly beforehand in the dressing room: “So, make sure you fall behind as early as possible, then hold on to that deficit for a while, then in the 65th or so you concede the second, so we lull the opponent into a sense of security, and suddenly we strike: 84th and 87th and get away with a lucky draw.”
Or in this way: he asked the coach before the game what tactics his team wanted to use today. In doing so, he learned that the coach had no real plan, because he said that his only thought was to score one more goal than the opponent. Now the questioner woke up and reacted like this: “Oh, so they wouldn’t care if they conceded a goal?” At this, a light goes on for the coach. He realises that it would not be good at all, and not even necessary, to concede a goal. He says, “No, you’re right. It’s not a good idea to concede a goal. Especially because we don’t know yet whether we’ll end up with one more than the opponent.”
The only sensible thing that could be worked out from the thought regarding the timing of (such) conceded goals, he has failed to grasp. That would be: if we have to concede a goal before we have scored any ourselves, then the following applies almost irrevocably: the earlier, the better. Because: the more time you have to correct it. A 0:1 would then be most unfavourable (as, by the way, the Fürth team witnessed on Tuesday night) if it happened with the last shot of the game. It is (and was on that day) the sealing of the defeat, which would not be the case at any other time.
Leverkusen also made excellent use of the time and, after the equaliser in the 77th minute, even had enough time to turn the game around completely. “it wasn’t to be”, as the English say, it wasn’t to be, because on the day (as reported below) a committed Borussia, the neighbour from Gladbach, kept the upper hand.
5) “Important”, the 2:1 for Gladbach.
But, as usual, he missed few chances to spread nonsense – whereby: are there any possible limitations at all? Seems not, no – and once again made dazzling use of those shortly before the end. Because: when Borussia actually scored the 2-1 winner, it escaped him, possibly in the realisation that it would be even more stupid to now, analogous to the sentence after 7 minutes, to shine with the statement: “Leverkusen almost wanted to avoid that even more. A WHOLE LATE goal conceded, and one that puts the score at a loss at that,” and he completely swung around by calling that goal “important”. “Hello?” one would like to shout at him, “yes, still going?”.
What was this supposed to be, what was it supposed to represent? Was he pressing for Gladbach all the time without giving it away? He should have a) announced that in good time and b) perhaps the broadcaster would have preferred to use a neutral commentator. Otherwise, provided he was impartial and above all neutral-objective, one would have to ask back, especially the Leverkuseners: “If it was important for Gladbach, what was it FOR US?”
The problem has long been recognised and has also been described several times: the speakers speak a jargon, if one wants to put it mildly (it would be correct to say that they regularly conjure up a sentence in a little “reporter’s sayings” booklet made especially for them, which could just as well be spouted without looking at the pictures). In this jargon, there is no distinction between games in which they are supposed to be neutral and those in which they are allowed to be, or, in some cases, even explicitly supposed to be, biased. So if Germany (once again) scores the decisive (penalty) goal against England in a semi-final, then one may, from a German mouth, already concede the remark “that was important”. If Bayern once again bowled out Real Madrid with a goal in the Bernabeu, 5 minutes before the end, which secured them a place in the next round, then it would also be fair for a German to call it “important”. Such a thing has no place in a game between Leverkusen and Gladbach, it is completely out of place. It’s just that jargon is spoken. The word “important” appears in this jargon, so it is unpacked, whether appropriate or inappropriate, the finger just landed on the saying when it was stuck into the little book.
But the question somehow continues: what was it for Leverkusen if it was “important” for Gladbach? But not “unimportant”?
6) “Once again too many chances missed”.
Interesting, too, what one learned during the summary of the Dortmund vs. Werder match. It was just great and (not for the first time) huge fun to watch these Dortmunders. Well, I guess you have to put up with the fact that there, at the broadcaster, there is no one who enjoys this kind of, as it is so often and just as ugly called lately, “event”. That’s just the way it is. The viewer, the one who is tormented and put off the whole time by the commentary, has to create this for himself (what other reason could one have as a viewer to tune in than that one has fun doing it? “Information duty” it will be for the very few).
In any case, you saw great chance after great chance (partly from Großkreutz, of course), and every now and then an attacker throwing himself to the ground, sometimes desperately, because he also saw this ball rush past the goal if the keeper or a defender’s leg didn’t clear it before the line. It was the complete antithesis of the Bayern game and, clearly, Dortmund will be delighted that even the one goal was enough to win. Anyone who knows anything about it can only say “highly deserved victory, too close this time, but at least it turned out to be a victory for which there are also the far more counting three points.” Instead, they were told that “Dortmund once again missed too many chances”. The focus, as always, is on the negative. After all, what is the point of wasting chances, allegedly in a large-scale, planned, arrogant wastefulness, if at the end of the day the three points and, a little later, perhaps the championship title beckon?
What would you imagine Bayern would say to that? “Basically, it’s pure luck that we still have a small chance of winning the title, since Dortmund has so often and so negligently squandered a series of chances”? Is that supposed to be imagined? Or, in addition: what would the standings actually look like if Dortmund did NOT constantly squander these masses of great chances? No, it’s unbelievable.
b. The table situation
- Die Tabellensituation
|2||FC Bayern München||26||17||3||6||54||64||–||17||+47|
|4||FC Schalke 04||26||16||2||8||50||58||–||34||+24|
|11||FSV Mainz 05||26||7||9||10||30||38||–||41||-3|
If you take a close look (again), early statements have been confirmed: there are only two teams with more than two points per game left, and they play for the championship. There are only three teams left with less than one point per game, these are on the relegation places, Freiburg with the narrowest possible less on the relegation place.
Augsburg’s stellar career has also been somewhat heralded, at least they were already attested league fitness in times when they were in last place. Of course, Lautern and Hertha have also shown this in enough games, which still doesn’t change the fact that some will have to bite the dust. The answers to the question “who will be relegated?” can be read below, as usual with the only correct answer (but one that says so little, unless you get used to the fact that the world is not black and white but merely takes place in different shades of grey) in the amount of the calculated probability. Of course, if you like, you can raise doubts about the teams’ assessments (which you can also read about below) and, if you have them, you would have to approach them with the teams’ alternative classifications and determine changed chances in this way. Once you have taken this step, you can very well go to the betting market and compare these values with the odds offered there in order to try your luck in this way – or simply to back up your own opinion monetarily. In this respect, there should be no need for further oracles. This is left to the so-called “experts”. As one learned in the “Liga Total Matchday Analysis” on Monday evening, Axel Kruse was suddenly quite sure that HSV or Hertha will get it, maybe even both. The opinion expressed with regard to this statement is quite clear: Ensigns set according to the wind. Both teams lost. Primitive in principle. Wait a week, other results, then question again. Apart from that: would he have better answers than those in the form of probabilities? One gets relegated. So 100% for one event? Nonsensical something like that. What enlightenment does that bring at all?
In the same vein, of course, there is the answer to …
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.
|Mannschaft||Anzahl Deutscher Meister in 5000 Simulationen||Meisterschaften in Prozent||Faire Quoten als Kehrwert der Wahrscheinlichkeiten|
|FC Bayern München||1147||22.94%||4.36|
|FC Schalke 04||27||0.54%||185.19|
Surely one already suspects when looking at these (quite clearly) diverging figures that the market will see it somewhat differently after the latest results. But please bear in mind that the computer does take into account the level of the results. The reason that the market will now see it differently is much more likely to be found in the fact that Bayern have (almost) been seen as the better team all season (there are good reasons for this, too, which can now again be seen in the goal difference) and that there is currently confirmation of this. Of course, Bayern’s “mir san mir” plays a huge role. They still have to go to Dortmund, as the market knows, and that’s where the championship will be decided. If Bayern put everything into it, they think, they can do it.
Change in chances compared to the previous week due to the results of matchday 26
|Mannschaft||Gewinn/Verlust absolut gegenüber vorherigem Spieltag||Gewinn/Verlust in Prozent|
|1||FC Bayern München||18||0.36%|
|3||FC Schalke 04||2||0.04%|
At least we get a little confirmation here that the amount of the victories plays a role and is included by the computer. Because: the tasks of the two teams at the weekend were hardly different in difficulty. Hertha away one, Werder at home the other, that fits (the odds also last week and shown below in the review, the computer even gave Dortmund a small advantage). So if both teams have managed their task, the approach of the finish line should naturally promise an increase in chances for the team in front. But it is exactly the other way round: Bayern gained in percentage.
Even Gladbach in the plus, which is of course due to the fact that they had only a small chance to win, but took it. This logically improves their chances determined in the simulation (which is carried out as close to reality as possible) compared to the situation before (even if the same should apply: the finish line has moved closer and the team in first place has won). After all, it’s only nuances of the shift, nevertheless understandable (especially since Dortmund’s 1:0, despite a great performance, naturally doesn’t have such a positive effect on their playing strength).
Even Schalke’s gain can be explained in this way: a high victory from a minor favourite position results in a positive development. Amazing, amazing, all together that one would have to say, interpreting the numbers: Dortmund is the loser of the matchday.
d. The title chances in development
But, recognisably, Bayern are bucking up.
e. Comparison of title chances with the betting exchange betfair
|FC Bayern München||2.7||2.74||37.04%|
|FC Schalke 04||100||130||1.00%|
As announced, a much smaller difference between the two teams. Nevertheless, the market also recognises: it is not a completely open race. There is a favourite.
The changes in betfair’s odds estimates
|FC Bayern München||3.25%|
|FC Schalke 04||-0.18%|
Dortmund also with losses on the market, even much higher. The high wins obviously make even more of an impression on the bettors than on the computer….
The development at betfair in the graph
The same picture in the trend, with weaker expressions.
f. The direct Champions League qualification over 2nd and 3rd place
The probability distribution for 2nd and 3rd place after the 26th matchday
|Mannschaft||Anzahl 2. Plätze in 5000 Simulationen||Anzahl 3. Plätze in 5000 Simulationen||Summe der Plätze 2 und 3||2. Plätze in Prozent|
|FC Bayern München||3285||464||3749||74.98%|
|FC Schalke 04||295||2143||2438||48.76%|
Since there are now two direct qualifying places, it should finally be stated that way from this week on. At least a few more teams will be involved, even if their chances are rather slim (starting with Leverkusen). Will there be any more excitement? Gladbach and Schalke are almost on a par to make it directly.
The changes compared to the previous week:
This point must be dropped for this week.
g. The relegation question
The distribution of the percentages for relegation
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 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.
|Mannschaft||Direkter Abstieg (Platz 17 oder 18)||Abstieg per Relegation||Insgesamt|
|9||FSV Mainz 05||0.38%||0.47%||0.85%|
Lautern with more than 80% already. Can they turn it around? In any case, the BILD is working diligently on the headline: “Kurz sacked.” If the people in charge were aware of the figure calculated here, would this initiate a positive development? That seems more than doubtful. The BILD doesn’t care about anything anyway, as long as there’s a headline. And they know neither how to write nor how to tell about football matches. And yet there would be, if one would only look properly…
The change in chances due to the results of the 26th matchday in relation to relegation
|13||FSV Mainz 05||-0.29%|
Whether there are higher swings to be expected towards the end due to individual results or whether they are just a perfect fit for Freiburg here? After all, BOTH (now) behind them have lost, at the same time they created another contender by also winning away from home. So there is nothing more positive. Hertha as maximum loser, which is of course due to the amount of the defeat, but also due to the Freiburg victory. Cologne lost almost all the percentage they had gained from the win against Hertha. Their performance was really excellent and they should have won in Hannover rather than lost (of course, a draw would not be a bad option either). But that’s the way it is: football is (becoming) a results sport. This is the responsibility of the media, which can do nothing but report results, comment on them and – declare them “deserved”, no matter how unfairly they come about. But anyone who says that a 1:4 (as I, the author, do here) is an undeserved result is automatically considered at least a dreamer, but even more so a layman. Who would want to claim this for themselves? ICH!!!!
Lautern too, of course, with further losses, but at the other end, just as logically, Augsburg with huge gains.
h. The relegation question in development
Now you can really see how dramatic the development is at Hertha. The curve creeps up very slowly and then suddenly surges forward. Augsburg’s development is the opposite. For a long time clearly ahead, now with an exhilarating (pleasing, from their point of view) downturn.
i. The point expectations and the deviations
Explanation: for each match, the computer has calculated the chances for 1, X and 2. On the basis of these, a point expectation is mathematically calculated for each team per game according to the formula probability of 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||Punkterwartung||Punkte erzielt||Abweichung||Abweichung absolut|
|2||FC Schalke 04||42.01||50||7.99||7.99|
|13||FC Bayern München||57.04||54||-3.04||3.04|
|14||FSV Mainz 05||33.59||30||-3.59||3.59|
Enough has been said about the number 1, but the performance in Leverkusen was really outstanding. This doesn’t mean the (short) phase before the 1:0 nor the long one from the 25th minute onwards, as they really played to keep the result, but the one after the equaliser. What they had to offer after that was fantastic. I had chosen this game as a live game, and I was really excited. Suddenly they went forward courageously, thus also offering Leverkusen chances, but in fewer numbers, and had about four excellent chances, really forced, one may say, the last of which was taken. Just great and Favre’s joy understandable, with his run to the corner flag, into the group of cheering players, an understandable outburst of emotion. They deserved it and had the necessary luck, even if one may say here. that they somehow forced it (if only one really had influence on the allocation of luck…. but, though, would that really be nice?).
Hertha are 18th in this table, even already some way behind Kaiserslautern. HSV is also lining up pretty far behind by now. But at least at this point one could read that HSV would be the hardest team to judge.
The international comparison for the average point difference
Note: the theory is that the German Bundesliga is the most exciting among Europe’s top leagues. This finding is rather intuitively derived, but so far “accepted” both in this country and abroad. Of course, the higher goal average is an indication of this, as well as the(perceived) lower predictability when it comes to the title, relegation, but also other issues. Balance is a criterion and possibly the main reason for this.
The measure used here for the deviation in average points expectation provides measurable information about this, but it was probably a “problem” specific to the 2010/2011 inaugural season (the fan thanked) that the Bundesliga produced a particularly large number of surprises. This was reflected in the figures. Now the phenomenon can be observed further. Is the Bundesliga also exciting in this respect? More exciting than elsewhere?(At the same time, a large deviation in this category could simply mean that computers or feeders are bad at their trade)
|Platz||Land Liga 1||ø Punktabweichung||Änderung gegenüber Vorwoche||Anzahl Spiele|
Here the 1st division is at the bottom of the table. There are just not the really big deviations this season, i.e. not the outstanding sensations (except Gladbach). At least the 2nd division keeps the German flags flying high in the sense of “surprise league”.
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||Torerwartung||Tore erzielt||Gegentore erwartet||Gegentore kassiert||Summe der Abweichung|
|2||FC Schalke 04||41.16||58||31.67||34||14.51|
|3||FC Bayern München||57.43||64||22.28||17||11.85|
|7||FSV Mainz 05||35.02||38||38.93||41||0.91|
|Tore ø erwartet:||Tore ø erzielt:||ø Abweichung||7.51|
1 and 2 identical with the points deviation table, behind meanwhile also Hertha, only Lautern keeps up much better with the still decent goal ratio. Wolfsburg, thanks to the still very bad ratio, keeps a place at the very back, whereas they are on 9 in the real table. HSV here also with a very poor record.
The international comparison for the average goal difference
(Note: crazy results do not necessarily have to be reflected in the tendency. So a 5:3 or even a 7:0 may cause large deviations here, in terms of goals, but not at all in terms of points, since, for example, the favourite would have won in each case. So there is an alternative method of comparing with other countries: are there the most “surprises” in the Bundesliga in this respect too)?
|Platz||Land Liga 1||ø Torabweichung||Änderung gegenüber Vorwoche||Anzahl Spiele|
The 1st division has achieved a clear plus value at the weekend (almost one goal more in deviation), which is easy to understand: high results everywhere, with many more goals than expected, plus the other surprise results (Freiburg’s victory, for example). In France, already in last place, a further regression.
k. The playing strength ranking
Note: The playing strength is measured in goals expected against the average team (which does not exist in practice). There is offensive strength, which is measured in expected goals scored, and defensive strength, which is measured in expected goals conceded. The quotient of these two values is the measure of playing strength. The more expected goals scored, the higher the value; the fewer expected goals conceded, the higher the value.
|Team||Für||Gegen||Quotient Für/Gegen||Veränderung des Quotiente||Verschiebung|
|2||FC Bayern München||2.22||0.85||2.61||+0.19||+0|
|3||FC Schalke 04||1.85||1.22||1.52||+0.06||+0|
|8||FSV Mainz 05||1.47||1.48||0.99||-0.03||+0|
|Tore ø erwartet|
Sensational that HSV make up one place with a 1:3! The reason is the defeat of Nuremberg, which was by the same amount, but perhaps Nuremberg was expected to score quite a bit more? So should we assume that Nuremberg’s 1:3 against Wolfsburg was the worse result than HSV’s 1:3 at home against Freiburg? Of course, it is almost impossible to feel that way, but the computer has its own logic. And if you follow it, then it makes sense?! The main thing is that the HSV result is being commented on everywhere, since they are now, as it is said, in the middle of the relegation battle, while Nuremberg and Wolfsburg were already considered to be out of the fight at the back.
Bayern in front now close to Dortmund again. Well, a 7:1 and a 6:0 (the 7:0 against Basel is not included here; there is an extra calculation for the European Cup) help enormously, of course. Only: if you look back two weeks, there was a doomsday mood after the 0:2 in Leverkusen. Even if everyone (humans) intuitively forgets and suppresses this: the computer does not. Would it be fairer, more logical, if Bayern were on 1? The 20 games without defeat compared to a season with many ups and downs (the last of which was just a fortnight ago) now, destroyed by admittedly three outstanding results? Well, of course, this is all philosophy. It would not be demonstrable who is better. You can only dabble in the market and, one way or another, count money afterwards. If it’s more, then you’ve somehow got it right. If not, you have to console yourself in some other way.
Hertha slips down to 17. Somehow wise, the computer. Cologne, too, now in a relegation place, so to speak. Well, the performance didn’t justify it, if anything the result did. However, even that was not enough. It is mainly the victories of the rivals that make up for it. So Freiburg moves up to 14 and Augsburg, get this, now to 15, outside the relegation places. You can’t prove it, but intuitively it fits quite well.
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.
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.
|Land||Spiele||Ausgleich||Heim Führungstreffer||Auswärts Führungstreffer||Summe||pro Spiel|
The German 1st league with several exciting, because turned, games. Gladbach wins, after 1:0 and an intermediate equaliser. Augsburg turned the game around, 2:1 after 0:1. Wolfsburg also turned the game around completely in Nuremberg, 3:1 after 0:1, Schalke continued to improve, even 4:1 after 0:1. Cologne equalised, came close to scoring the opening goal several times – and lost 1:4. In League 2, too, things were pretty high this time – to the delight of the spectators, to the regret of some coaches. In France also above average, the rest with less action. All in all, the entire match day was average, although this time it was the German leagues that had to do it.
Trend changes in the major leagues in the 2011/2012 season
|Land||Spiele||Ausgleich||Heim Führungstreffer||Auswärts Führungstreffer||Summe||pro Spiel|
At least they have maintained or even expanded their leading positions as a result.
m. The mathematical review of the results of the 26th 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.
|Erwartete Torsumme||Erwarteter Toreschnitt||Erzielter Toreschnitt|
|ø erwartete Torabweichung||1.85||ø Torabweichung||2.26|
34 goals, with an expected (just under) 25. Well, at least this yield ensured that a) it was fun to watch and b) that the goal average now (as can be seen below) fits exactly as far as the ratio arrived/expected is concerned. No tendencies discussed here recently to leave any doubt about being too slow or too quick to react. It all works out quite well and the ball is, as Max Merkel took over from his role model Sepp Herberger, round (His book title: “Das Runde ist der Ball”; worth reading).
It may also be noted that spring is breaking out, which on the one hand can ensure better playing conditions (in the Bundesliga a subordinate problem, even if in Berlin it was played on anything but “grass”; 6 goals there, of all things), and on the other hand also, towards the end of the season, for a few games in which it is a little less about points but simply played for the joy of football. However, this “problem” has also become a much smaller one. Because a) there is a certain “price” for every place in the table, the higher the more, and b) there is still something at stake everywhere (at least this season). No one to rest on their laurels for a long time yet.
Many goals were expected in Dortmund, of all places, where only one was scored. However, looking at the pictures only provides this answer: there could have been far more.
Conversely, there were supposed to be few in Augsburg (which could not be fully argued at this point a week ago), and there were three, which is not an “under” in any case. Further, there were also supposed to be rather few goals at Lautern and Nürnberg, and this did not occur either. The only good one in this respect was the Hannover v Cologne game, where there were supposed to be many and five actually fell.
n. The Determination
Note: The fixing is calculated for each game as the sum of the squares of the individual probabilities. This measures how much one can commit to a favourite in a certain pairing. The higher the favourite position, the higher the sum of the squares, but also the more “certain” the occurrence of the (favourite) event. The mathematical question in itself is even more how far one can commit, since one cannot really determine this value. Events are predicted whose probabilities are unknown. Nevertheless, one can check the quality of the estimates made here in the long term by comparing expected/occurred. This is done week by week, but of course also overall.
|Die Festlegung erwartet|
|durchschnittlich erwartete Festlegung:||40.36%|
Always as a reminder, the expected values from the previous week’s text. What has reality brought now?
|Die Festlegung eingetroffen|
|durchschnittlich eingetroffene Festlegung:||44.17%|
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.
Overall, the expected determination was exceeded. Responsible for this, of course, were the victories of the high favourites Dortmund and Bayern, as well as Schalke and Hannover. Favourable in that sense also the low number (namely 0) of draws.
o. Overall league statistics
Note: Statistics of this kind are regularly compiled by computer. It is generally used for quality control of the individual figures. Each figure has its own meaning and is explained in more detail. The goal average is not repeated here. The home advantage is calculated by dividing the goals scored by the home team by half of the total goals. In this way, you can see how many more goals the home teams score than they would score without home advantage. 1.116 is 11.6% more for the home team, 11.6% less for the away team.
Note: For arithmetic foxes, here is a brief explanation of the calculation method for the expected goal deviation: The computer gives each result from 0:0 to 20:20 a probability (it is actually sufficient up to 10:10, as the rest no longer has any significant probability). There would be a goal deviation for each result. So if you multiply the probability of, for example, a 3:4 by the deviation that would then occur (in the case of the match Mainz – Gladbach, with goal expectations of 1.77:1.25, this would be 3 – 1.77 = 1.23 for Mainz plus 4 – 1.25 = 2.75 for Gladbach, i.e. a total deviation of 3.98 goals) and carry out this procedure for each match result, you get the expected average goal deviation.
|Die Statistik der Ergebnisse bisher|
|Festlegung erwartet||Festlegung eingetroffen|
|ø Torabweichung||ø Torabweichung erwartet|
The whole matchday did this statistic some good here. The home wins are now (again) almost exactly hit and the away wins have picked up mightily, with 6 arrived. With no draws, the statement here that there was no cause for concern was also confirmed. Of course, there are still a few (away) wins missing, as well as a few wickets that fell too much at home and too little away, but at least there was a small correction.
The expected commitment was also pretty much hit and the average goal expectation is off by as much as it always is (but thus giving no cause for concern). You can only hit there exactly in the long run if all the calculated goal expectations are exactly right. And this is an impossibility. So one is confirmed in the fact that one calculates well, since all deviations are normal and justifiable, but is by no means always right (and this would not even be theoretically possible). Whereby an error already exists if the actual goal expectation is perhaps 1.26 : 1.48, but the computer calculates 1.23 : 1.51. Who should know this and be able to prove it later, since even God would not and could not be free of statistical fluctuations? Otherwise he (the all-knowing) would simply have to write down as an expectation: “I expect Hannover against Cologne 4.00 to 1.00.” And that BEFORE the game. How would that be?
p. Review of the betting recommendations
But always more explosive is this question: which bets should/must have occurred according to the computer? Where would he have messed with the betting market? And: if he messes with it, with the great mass intelligence, does he have good reasons for doing so? Could one possibly win, can one even prove long-term advantages? Up to now, such “dry swim” exercises have been made for oneself, if at all. Now, at least, it is documented.
With such brilliant results, it is of course not only a pleasure but also quite easy to take a position on the bets. Stuttgart was in any case, as announced, a very good bet. Gladbach, too, can only be approved of. Everything went right, especially that the (almost) last attack in the 88th minute actually resulted in a goal. Dortmund, too, gives no cause for doubt. The large number of excellent goal-scoring chances allows no other judgement, even if the 1:0 naturally looks kind of shaky until the end (with such a small quota).
Freiburg in Hamburg can of course be declared excellent, not only because it happened. In any case, Freiburg has confirmed that they have developed excellently in terms of self-confidence, which seemed only logical based on the last results. The slight concerns about HSV were also confirmed, even if the result was of course anything but a one-way street, just look at HSV’s two missed giants. With odds of 5.0, however, it is not necessary that only the bet team plays. The other teams are allowed to score a few times without the bet going bad.
Hertha against Bayern was, of course, totally one-sided. As a spectator, right before the 1:0 for Bayern, I actually saw a clear foul in the penalty area against a Hertha player. Of course it wasn’t given (because: where will it be?). But the question is: if you didn’t see the lines, i.e. not the place of the action (during the foul) but only the naked action, I think 9 out of 10 referees would spontaneously decide on “foul”. Clearly, there was no chance at all after this sequence.
Of course, the bet on Schalke was also great. They put away the 0:1 and immediately and continuously worked forward. There was no sign of tiredness, nor of a subordinate classification of this competition. Football was played, Bundesliga football, with everything that goes with it, and at the highest level. An impressive game by Schalke and the defeat for Lautern on this day certainly had nothing to do with a lack of quality in the team, let alone a miscast in the coaching post. This opponent was too strong, the points would have to be taken elsewhere – even if, as repeatedly mentioned here, there will be two relegated teams in the end under all circumstances, regardless of the number of coaching dismissals (and new appointments) with the intention of preventing this.
In all honesty, however, one must rather regret the lost bet on Cologne. There has rarely been such a good bet, especially as the price of 6.20 was exorbitantly high. So you just have to note that Cologne was even the better party and deserved to win rather than Hannover, who are currently succeeding in everything, including avoiding conceding goals (because Standard also had their chances on Thursday). Of course, one can concede that they could have reacted after the possible (and long deserved) 1:2 for Cologne. But that doesn’t change anything: the bet was first class.
Recommended bets Statistics of the individual match days
|Spieltag Nr||Anzahl Wetten||Anzahl Treffer||erwartete Treffer||Trefferabweichung||Gewinn/Verlust|
The +8.43 have nevertheless done extremely well (despite the lost Cologne bet). They almost “ate up” all the negative values from the last five weeks. Of course, the positive mood and optimism then prevail.
Statistics in total
|Gesamtanzahl Wetten||Gesamtanzahl Treffer||Gesamtbilanz||G/V in%||Gesamt erwartete Treffer||GesamtTrefferabweichung|
The overall yield also very pleasing through last weekend. 12.41% gain is a very handsome figure. The number of units of +20.73 is also more than satisfactory, since you can only lose one per bet (with the current form of evaluation). This means that you still have 20 free bets, all of which you could lose without going into the red. That would be practically three complete match days without a hit (since not all matches are bet).
q. The preview of the 27th 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 competitive for goal number bets on the betting market.
|Erwartete Torsumme||Erwarteter Toreschnitt|
The overall goal average is lower again despite the high yield last weekend, which is of course due to the special pairings. This time it should be low-scoring Stuttgart, which can’t be felt that way, as well as Freiburg, which could be more fitting. Werder against Augsburg is also supposed to have a low yield with 2.48. Well, it’s hard to imagine that either. Especially at Werder? And Augsburg have been scoring lately, haven’t they? No, that doesn’t taste good.
Goal-laden Cologne are supposed to be, which you can imagine very well. They played really well up front, Podolski is back and they probably won’t hide (even if it’s possible that Dortmund squeezes them in behind, which is a huge difference to the tactical approach of playing defensively, unfortunately this is also completely unrecognised by the media. How are you supposed to attack if you don’t have the ball?), and Dortmund in particular, after the many missed chances, certainly have a ravenous appetite for goals.
Gladbach against Hoffenheim and Bayern against Hannover are also expected to score a lot of goals, although you can imagine it with Gladbach, of course, as they looked very strong offensively, and with Bayern anyway, but the market is more likely to collide with them in the opposite direction, as it naturally sees a lot of goals there too (about six or seven, I suppose). …), so that the computer should advise an “under”, in view of the high line in the game (the “line” indicates the roughly expected goals on or against which bets can be placed, whereby one can certainly also bet an “under” in the conventional way, then probably also at tasty odds).
r. The fixing
Note: The determination is calculated as the sum of the squares of the individual probabilities. This measures how much one can commit to a favourite in a certain pairing. The higher a favourite position is, the higher the sum of the squares, but also the more “certain” the occurrence of the event. The mathematical question in itself is even more how far one can commit, since one cannot really determine this value. Events are predicted whose probabilities are unknown. Nevertheless, the quality can be checked in the long term by comparing expected/occurred events.
|Die Festlegung erwartet|
|durchschnittlich erwartete Festlegung:||45.48%|
A very high expected commitment, thanks to Bayern and Dortmund, who, by the way, are currently increasing their chances due to positive match strength development. “Normal” quotients in playing strength in the Bundesliga are those of 2.0, for the top team, and this value is also pretty much the average of their quotient over the years (scored by conceded). This season, there are two teams that continue to stand out. Certainly also due to the fact that they are in competition, which used to be the case with Bayern now and then at least not, as they won championships on their own. But this could also be a development comparable to that in England, where the top teams are pretty much untouchable and regularly settle the championship and Champions League places among themselves (Man United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, with Man City now joining them and Tottenham also making claims).
However, it is to be feared that this is a consequence of the widening gap, as such huge rewards await the Champions League contenders, who can invest in both facilities and personnel, and so continue to catch up with the rest. This would, of course, be a less desirable consequence, even if in this country (and presumably elsewhere) one might argue “international competitiveness”.
The fair quotas
Note: the fair odds are merely 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.
Comparison with the betting exchange betfair
(The betting recommendations)
A short comment on the betting recommendations:
The bet on Wolfsburg is, of course, a must-win bet. There is no sign that any team has anything to give away at the moment. And, as much as you don’t appreciate Magath’s handling of money and players, after all Wolfsburg did get on track and earned 9th place. It’s a derby and HSV are under great pressure, the advantage on the other hand great, the odds mediocre, so a 4/10.
Gladbach, after this great performance, must of course be supported further. Even if Hoffenheim is gradually getting close to the relegation places and in this respect urgently needs points, it is still (even with only a small advantage) a 5/10.
Sure, it’s a bit difficult to play against Augsburg. But Werder weren’t that bad and still have every chance of reaching Europe. Some injured and suspended players will surely return, but even those who played in Dortmund didn’t disappoint at all. Augsburg is flying, there’s no question about that. But it is guaranteed that they will now be taken seriously. Small advantage, but not a likeable bet, so only 3/10.
Hannover have now shown so much optimism and also class in all their games that of course they have to be played. Even if they weren’t the better side for long stretches against Kln, they still scored 4 goals again. They will just go there and play as well as they can in Munich. The fact that Bayern are overpowering makes their starting position delightfully easy. Of course, sure, impossible to win. So 1/10.
The bet on Mainz is probably the best of the whole weekend. No chance Mainz will now spare an opponent (and the honourable Otto Rehhagel). They play their football, the fans will be there to support their team, all the home performances lately have been a feast for the eyes and there is nothing to give away anywhere at the moment. And what does Hertha have to counter that with other than a lot of worries and a desperate need to score? No, it’s too good, that bet. 9/10, only “saved” a unit out of decency.
Stuttgart’s win against Nuremberg is similarly good, seen as a bet. Stuttgart have scored goals without end, Nuremberg are not yet back in any major danger, Stuttgart have Europe in their sights and the discerning crowd will go in for this game with plenty of optimism and goodwill. If anything speaks against it, then only the very slight derby tendency. Accordingly, 8/10.
2) The 2nd Bundesliga
a. The standings
b. The chances of promotion
Note: the simulation of League 2 runs exactly like that of League 1. 5000 runs were also made. Third place logically gives a 1/3 chance of promotion, although it might still depend on the pairing. Since the top favourites are ahead here, it could well be 50% that the second division third place team has against the first division third last.
c. Point expectations and discrepancies
d. Evaluation of the 5th second division matchday
e. Preview of the 7th Second League Matchday