Hindsight is a glorious thing - why evaluating games played can help you with your long term betting
The games over, you know the result and you didn't have any money staked on the game, so it would seem a pretty stupid question to ask yourself 'What should I have bet on?' because you could argue there will be a really obvious answer now that you know the result.
What would be the point in doing that?
With the combination of hindsight and knowledge of the outcome of an event you can imagine it will naturally lead you to the obvious especially in the case of say a large expected home win, but what if the result actually wasn't that obvious? Or maybe it was but you missed what was staring you in the face prior to kick off? This of course isn't about your Manchester City's playing at home to a Luton Town per se.
Did you just miss a really great chance to make some money and if so can we change our thinking to help us win some money the next time this type of opportunity appears?
I keep talking about perceptions of certain teams we all have and how dangerous that can be especially when money is involved. So why don't we go back to an example from the guide Part 2; Portugal vs Slovenia and we'll use it as a training exercise for spotting patterns and key indicators prior to kick off that might have led us to have placed a winning bet on the outcome.
Even before looking at the data and writing it down to follow here for anyone reading, I know this is going to be a good example because I saw the result, remembered what I'd written prior to kick off and went oh shit you're a fucking idiot - that was an obvious bet. OK it might have been a punt but it did seem pretty obvious after the horse had bolted that it should have been worth backing to some degree. I had free bet builders to be used so it's not like it would have cost me anything either. To me the obvious bet builder now would have been the draw at under 2.5 or two singles taking the draw and taking the under 2.5 - nevermind it will teach me for waffling on so much about how much of a con prop bets are.
For anyone genuinely new to football betting, tournament football in the knockout rounds works slightly differently and if you don't know the final result of this example game, Portugal went on to beat Slovenia in a penalty shoot out 3-0. However prior to kick off if you'd have bet Portugal to win (which off the top of my head I think was 2/ 5 so 1.40 on the decimal) you'd have lost. How so you may rightly be asking if they won the game? Well, unlike the first round where the teams play in a mini league and a drawn game results in a point for each team, once the knockout stages start there has to be a winner. If the game is level at the end of 90 minutes (i.e. the two teams are drawing) the game goes into extra time. If you'd bet Portugal to win then that bet is settled and at that point it would have lost. A new market opens up for the next half an hour of football that will follow. I've no idea what price Portugal were when they kicked off in extra time but it doesn't matter, what matters is if you'd bet Portugal to win again come the full time whistle, after 30 minutes of additional time you'd have lost again. Say what? You told me Portugal won on penalties. Now you're telling me I've lost twice in a game they won. Bear in mind this part is written for people who really don't understand the complexities of tournament football. You can skip this bit if you haven't already for those who do understand. Anyway, so yes post Ronaldo penalty miss, or was it saved? Either / or I haven't seen it, the second market has now closed again and you'd have only been paid if you'd bet the draw. So now a third market opens. Only now if you'd bet Portugal at that final stage of the game to win where they'd scored their first three penalties and Costa saved all three from Slovenia would you have had a winning bet.
Now the expression goes: the smart money is on… and you'd fill in the blanks.
This is where perceived reputations can be such an awful thing in football when it comes to betting and why actually knowing nothing can be such an added bonus that you never knew you had. If you didn't know who Ronaldo was, or Bruno Fernandes, or what the expectations of Portugal are as potential tournament winners, or anything at all about Slovenia, how if asked, would you have made your mind up about what the result might have been? Say someone gave you some really basic data and that someone not only gave you basic data, but displayed it in a deliberate order to make something appear that little bit more obvious. Knowing nothing about football you're explained the basics and asked what you think the result might be and whether there'd be over or under 2.5 goals. You're merely given the Slovenia results from the group and you're not given any data about Portugal at that point or even told who the next opponent is.
Those results to recap;
V Denmark a 1-1 draw. 2 goals scored
V Serbia a 1-1 draw. 2 goals scored
V England a 0-0 draw. 0 goals scored
Can anyone see any patterns emerging here especially now we know after 90 minutes in the Portugal game it finished 0-0.
Anyone, anyone at all? Please don't make me have to draw you a picture in crayons with the answer.
Sometimes knowing a lot can be more of a hindrance than knowing nothing at all. Also as seasoned punters or gamblers we've a perceived bias towards any data we'll read for Portugal because they start the game as favourites to win and we all know - it's Portugal right. Portugal against Slovenia and well you know Slovenia erm…are…erm. What was I saying about Portugal again?
Psychological programming means we naturally favour the perceived stronger team over the weakened team. Consistency of results from the opposition in the tournament to date is oddly discounted. They're like the annoying fly flicked away with the back of your hand without even looking. Portugal have won the Euros you cry, they've a star studded team. Slovenia, well they're just erm, Slovenia.
We've in this example deliberately withheld certain data. We're in effect going - this is what the left hand has been doing. Do you think the left hand will continue to behave in the same manner or do something different? A class of primary school children would all shout the same back at you. So we've already been potentially outsmarted by someone who knows nothing about football and a group of primary school kids.
Someone randomly asked for an opinion who wasn't a football fan wouldn't necessarily think to ask who they were playing against. In my hypothetical example they're going on the most basic set of data available. For now it's just them and the Slovenians and three results that have already happened, all of which provided evidence of two outcomes which were the same in each of the three games. I might as well ask based on those three games that went draw, draw, draw do you think the next game will be a draw? And with games shown here that finished under 2.5 goals, under 2.5 goals and under 2.5 goals do you think the best game will be - yes you've guessed it folks, under 2.5 goals. Am I getting my crayons out yet?
Most adults will have heard of Ronaldo. He's got something like 633 million followers on Instagram and sure there's 8.2 billion people give or take in the world but that doesn't mean there's 7.6 billion who've not heard of him. There's just 633 million who like him enough to follow him on social media or are at an age where they can follow him. Give 2 billion kids a child version of IG and that number would at least double. You'd imagine the average person who doesn't have an interest in football if asked who he qas could at least tell you he's the Portuguese guy who scores lots of goals. That might be enough to sway them into saying Portugal will win if they were revealed as the opposition and they are also told that this is who Ronaldo plays for. Because who knows anything about Slovenian football other than Slovenians and who knows any Slovenians other than other Slovenians? How many people even know where Slovenia is? I know that Tadej Pogačar is Slovenian but he's not a footballer. I'd guess Slovenia is probably one of the countries that used to be part of the old Soviet block but I'd not stake my life on it (note after checking I'd have been dead turns out it's slap bang under Austria). Oh and I know Sporar because he played briefly for Sporting so I know two Slovenian Sports people. I think Roglic is also Slovenian so let's go wild with three. I don't actually know anyone from Slovenia though and to the best of my knowledge have never met a Slovenian. I'm sure you're all uber lovely people.
If any of you are going well I know something about football, then even if you'd not call yourself an expert, be honest if this wasn't the Euros and someone said who'll win in a game between Portugal and Slovenia, the large majority will just plump for Portugal. If asked if the game could be a draw you'd get a maybe, an I don't know or a straight no, or a possibly and a shrug of the shoulders. You're getting non commitment, something most women around the world experience from men. The ones who get full commitment normally have to take a restraining order out. Men reading this - do better please.
I digress.
If you watched a lot of Premier League football you'd know that Bruno Fernandes is a key part of Manchester United as an attacking force. But I know off the top of my head that he went on a huge run of games without a single shot on target last season because I can visualise the hand written numbers in my data book. See the question and answers blog for the relevance of that. I also know Kilman who just signed for West Ham is a really great player to have in respects of passes made without having to check. Anyways that's why they call me a smart arse and I'm showing off and it has no relevance. The point is the perception of Bruno is he takes a lot of shots. I'm a Sporting fan. Boy did he take a lot of shots for us. I've seen every game he played in a Sporting shirt so I know what he's like and how he can affect the outcome of a game when on song. However I also know Ronaldo throws an imbalance into the national team. He's taking the shots you'd expect Bruno to take if you were watching him at United. What happens at club level doesn't always manifest itself at international level especially if you have the egotistical Ronaldo spear heading your forward line. Even without watching Slovenia I can see they must have a good solid defence based on the results of the first three group games. I know Portugal have an attacking line up which will mean Slovenia will play predominantly on the back foot. This is all without looking at any data.
If I'm putting together a build a bet I'm going to look at the team news. Who's playing up front for Portugal and which defenders are going to be marking them? I'm going to guess that if Slovenia plays a back four, that each defender will have to make at least one tackle over 90 minutes. Let's look at the data, does it support that view? I'd go back and see how many bookings were there in the three group games because you'd guess again that someone in that Slovenian defence or midfield is going to take one for the team and get a yellow card and they'll do it on rotation.
So if I can surmise all that without watching a single second of Euro 24, that Ronaldo taking all the shots as per usual will mean those around him aren't worth adding in for total shots or shots on target., why then are so many free tipsters telling you to bet on; Portugal to win, Bruno over 2.5 shots and 1.5 on target and blah blah blah. I know why the bookmakers are offering prop bets that are heavily leaned towards Portugal because they've got all the data they know you're not checking and they don't think they'll win be having to pay out on them.
I didn't even know there were these types of tipsters pushing out next levels of shit day after day out until about a week ago and I'm flabbergasted. I saw one today talking about a double bet they'd tipped for Ronaldo top scorer at Euro 24 and Portugal to win at 50/1. I want to say off the top of my head that's a bet that carries a probability of winning of 1.96%. So yes flipping that around a probability of losing of 98.04%. I won't call them out but they have the name God in their X handle and have a VIP service which I'm assuming you have to pay for. You see the comments under the posts; 'Bro it's so easy to win money with you,' which is of course either him posting under his own account or one of his gamer mates. You've a screenshot of the actual Portugal bet showing a cash out option that a. Suggests the bet was placed but b. At a value that also suggests it was screenshot after their opening game and if they ever did place it they've long cashed it out. There are some incredibly gullible people in this world. It's why this blog exists. Wait that sounds really bad. It's why this blog exists as a warning. That's better. People will still believe I'm trying to do a long con because that's what tricksters and fraudsters do. No, I don't need your money, you keep it, just don't give it to the bookmakers based on what idiots like this guy will charge you a price for you to then bet something which is probably really fucking lame anyway pardon my French. Well it is Tour de France season. I can't see what he's tipping behind a paywall but I'd only give you 1.01 on the decimal that its something fucking stupid like Manchester City in a pre season friendly against Arbroath to win at 1.03 on the decimal. Hey everyone, that's ten straight winners. My youngest daughter at 3 and a half could have given you that tip for free. To any Arbroath fans reading these your club name jumped out at me from the list who played last Saturday on friendlies. Don't get excited, to the best of my knowledge you've not got a secret pre-season fixture forthcoming against the current Premier League Champions. Oh and to add a bookmaker would only take money on a draw or away win in that game.
Right rant over.
Let's do this seriously because the point is can we learn things and not just because we know the result. Because the result seems obvious to me now, but you might have bet Portugal and you might be sat there still pissed and thinking well it wasn't obvious to me smart arse and you didn't lose money on it so it's easy for you to say.
So let's throw some factors in even before we look at the data. What is the noise surrounding the game like before kick off? What are the media saying about each team? Well the Guardian football podcast was taking the view that Roberto Martinez was being too weak in not dropping an out of form Ronaldo who didn't score a single goal in the group games. How he's still being allowed to take free kicks despite scoring one in something like the last 60 odd attempts at this and past tournaments. How Portugal are continually putting crosses into the box for the one player that wants the ball crossed - 97 crosses from open play that's 21 more than the closest side. All the other players would rather have it played to feet.
I've genuinely not watched a single second of Euro 24 but I have the opinions of people I trust and I've used that to form my own educated opinion in turn. Yet there's that part of my brain going - yeah but it's Portugal v Slovenia and they'll scrape it in 90 even if it's a 1-0 win. I have Portuguese friends. No shit you follow a Portuguese football team you mjght be thinking, who knew hey? Point being I'll take a vested interest, but not enough to actually watch any of it. I turned on the radio at what I guessed was roughly the end of their opening game was just to find out the the score. 30 seconds of listening and they scored and there's my OCD brain going - I made that happen, how clever am I and then it was disallowed. Then they scored one that counted and my OCD brain was at it again - I really am magic and special, who knew! Post game I debrief, gather opinions from people I trust. Their opinion is no different from the so called experts, namely they've had the same problem for a few years and his name is Ronaldo. Everyone says it apart from the one person with whom it counts, the coach Roberto Martinez.
Then there's the obvious consideration that comes from having watched the precious games. Let's work on the law of probability; I can see these posts are mostly being read in the UK, England forms the largest part of the UK from which I'd assume that means those reading are English, are football fans as its a football betting based blog and therefore there's an increased probability they've watched the England games, one of which we've already ascertained was against England. If all that's true as an England fan were you left impressed by Slovenia and more importantly by their defence or were you pissed off by what I can gather was another poor England performance? Can you separate your emotions to form a rational judgement to have favoured Slovenia for a draw and a scoreline of under 2.5 goals? A judgement that may also have been based on watching Portugal lose 2-0 to Georgia. Can you stay rational and not let your heart rule your head? To be fair I can't always do it so I'm not expecting you to be able to do it. The season Lukaku went back to Inter I kept having to write notes in my diary to say stop betting in play on Inter. I've that inbuilt bias and expectation level same as everyone else when it comes to football.
This isn't about 'after timing' it's an abstract lesson into overcoming bias and whether a newfound hindsight bias could be of benefit if a similar level of game was to happen today, tomorrow, next week or whenever. Can we find value in a market before we make a bet? There's no sat nav system to help you locate value in the market.
Remember gambler's fallacy on the roulette wheel or the simple toss of a coin to determine heads or tails. If the ball lands on a red number it retains a 48% chance of a fifth red so don't listen to the voice in your head going well it's got to be black next, you can't get five reds in a row. Again four heads on the literal spin of a coin doesn't mean the next will be tails. It's still 50/50.
Slovenia aren't a coin or one of three colours on a roulette wheel. There is no fixed probability but the voice in the head probably isn't even thinking Slovenia have so far done this, therefore they're likely to do something different the fourth time. Here in this example where gambler's fallacy would actually you to have even posed the question to yourself but in reality it's like the old National Lottery advert with the giant finger pointing over someone's head going - it could be you. Here the finger before kick off is pointing at Portugal. All the bookmakers fingers are pointing to Portugal too, I'd seen the markets and offers. A magicians sleight of hand works because when the left is being watched it's the right where the real action is happening or vice versa.
So with basic data of Slovenia's opening group games all finishing in a draw and all under 2.5 we could choose to be the person who knows nothing about football.
What market do we want to bet on? Build a bet you say. OK can we find something that isn't a prop bet which we should avoid like a drunk asking for spare change whereby Bruno Fernandes X amount of shots and another 3 legs to win. Who's in the lineup in defence? Balkovec, Bijol, Drukusic and Karnicnik. Pose a hypothetical question; Are they likely to make a tackle in the game? Well, let's find out.
Data v England
Drukusic and Bijol each made 1 tackle. In fact seven players made a tackle. Four of those were midfielders. So we've two avenues now to explore. Did Balkovec and Karnicnik start? Balkovec didn't.
What happened against Serbia? Same back four as against England. Janza had a yellow card in both games so we now know why Balkovec played because Jamza is suspended. Otherwise we've a settled back four which equals a level of consistency that's served them well against the well fancied England team. Back to tackles won - 7 players with at least 1 tackle won. Bijol and Karnicnik with 1 a piece. Janza had 3 but we know he's suspended now. So what about the midfielders - 3 again. So the midfield could screen the defence providing another layer of protection before the ball gets into the final third. You begin to delve deeper into the midfielder tackles game by game. All the time you're looking for patterns in the data.
I'm not going to keep going over it line by line but you see where I'm going with it hopefully. Total cards, total tackles, I'm looking only at Slovenia because I'm expecting Portugal to play to type and I'm under the perception that Slovenia are the more consistent and balanced side of the two. My value radar is on. I might not find any value, or it might be above my perceived level of risk but I'm at least using an example of a game where I've gone shit why didn't I bet that and I'm training myself to look for that next big opportunity when it comes along.
Is it that they either don't come along that often or that these opportunities are there, we just don't bother to either look or have yet to understand where it is we should be looking? Maybe it's a coin toss?
The more we look closer, the more we can begin to learn and find that added value which can help with filling our coffers.
If you're not reading these blogs in order you can find more about pricing up matches and finding value here;
https://anegitsguidetofootballbetting.blogspot.com/2024/07/how-to-price-up-football-match.html
You'll find a pre game case study rammed pack full of statistics here as I take a look at an example where I question whether the bookmakers have got it wrong with the starting prices;
https://anegitsguidetofootballbetting.blogspot.com/2024/06/betting-case-study-1-gamba-osaka-v.html
Don't let a big win change your staking habits
Let's put to one side what your definition of a big win is for one minute and say whatever that number may be that it's what comes next that's important. For some punters they'll bank the money and walk away. That's the smart move. Gamblers however are likely to just gamble the winnings. I mean yes by the very diction definition we're all gambling. But there's a difference between taking a punt on an event, when you get that spidey sense tingling and you have a fiver on something and it comes in big. There are many people in the UK especially who might only have one bet a year and that's most likely to be on the Grand National. Or they might have a bet on their football team to win the league - think Leicester fans backing their side to win the Premier League at 5,000/1. You're not gambling on Leicester to win that bet. Or maybe you are but by my definition that suggests you're probably falling into someone who has a gambling problem. That bet is a punt, a longshot, a hail Mary. For gamblers the returns are everything and it's a continuous cycle with no exit point in sight. That cycle is not only continuous but often vicious as well especially when like anyone who bets regularly they go on losing streaks. No matter who you are if you're betting you're going to get them, it's just part of the course. But let's go back to that starting point and say you've had a decent sized win. You're betting regularly and suddenly you've a win that is substantially larger than your average return. Years ago and I do mean years ago I returned £110 on either a treble or a fourfold. It was that long ago I genuinely don't remember. What I do remember though is suddenly being flush with cash in my betting app the size of my bets changed. Say I was betting 50p or a £1, I went to betting £10 a bet. It was as if I'd convinced myself that suddenly I was an expert. I'm going to do it again and again but this time I'm going to be returning so much more. Couple of weeks later had all turned to sand money, by which I mean it all slipped through my fingers and just went back where it came from. I got no benefit from the win whatsoever. I didn't treat myself. Didn't even buy myself a congratulatory pint to say well done. I just handed it all back and at record speed. If you just called me a dick head I'd wholeheartedly agree. I can't argue with your logic.
A friend of mine told me a tale about another mutual friend of ours. I'm going to take it with a pinch of salt because I've not seen the guy for years and never had the chance to ask him but this is the story retold to me as best I can remember it.
Having never had a bet in his life being somewhat of an expert on tennis he for some reason decides he's going to have a bet on Wimbledon. It wins, he bets again, wins, and he goes on such a roll that supposedly he's up to a 6 figure sum. Proposes to his then girlfriend. They've got the deposit for a house. Life is going great. He doesn't stop though. Now he's got serious money to play with. He's not thinking about a deposit, he's thinking about buying a house outright. Unbeknown to his new wife to be he goes on the reverse streak to not only losing the lot, he tries to chase his losses back to the point he was. He does his bank account, their savings, he's maxing credit cards to the point where he's almost now the same figure in the red that he was a relative time before in the black. When she finds out she breaks it off, he ends up back with his parents and a fuck load of debt he now has to start to work off. So if you thought I was a dickhead for burning through £110 well that's pocket change compared to £100,000. As I say I don't know if those figures are true but I have no reason to doubt the story was true. I doubted the figures mentioned at the time because I've seen the single odds on players to win but I fucking hate tennis and I'm guessing it's like football in that you can bet games, sets, to win all sets to none and so on. Anyone who does watch tennis is going to think those terms aren't right. I know, I've just told you I fucking hate tennis. Focus on the moral of the tales. If you have an unexpected big win then bank it and enjoy it or if you keep it where it is - stay in your lane. If you went from driving a Fiat all your life you're not qualified to jump in a Ferrari overnight you're going to wrap it around a tree. You might give it all back if you don't take it out but at least do it over six months to a year. Don't up your bets suddenly thinking you're the shit, the Don Juan, the dogs bollocks, the best thing since sliced bread and so on. It's so easy to do so trust someone that's been there. When it comes to mistakes, making them and learning is one of the very greatest tools you can have in life. Forgetting you've taken a box of ice creams out of the freezer and coming back an hour later in the middle of summer to find they've all melted to shit is a bummer. But shit happens. They made a best selling car bumper sticker all about it. Guess what it said on it?
When it comes to mistakes with money - let someone else make that mistake for you. Practise your sympathy face, don't gloat because karma is a bitch and then don't go out and repeat it for yourself.
No comments:
Post a Comment