Charon84

I unfortunately missed the line change on Brighton from +0.25 to +0.50...otherwise would have taken that one even though the 'advantage' wasn't >0.5 but 0.49. Line Brentford changed to +0.75 now.

I have been back to the drawing board this summer and made up a new betting model (this time based on linear regression). It's supposed to point out good dogs with a handicap. Hope this one is more promising then last one 😁 (though I already loved the process). The model predicts a Brentford +1 @1.98 as a good bet this round. So that one I take. No other bets.

I think it's really hard to compare those two teams based on recent stats because they are misleading. Opponents Milan were far better than opponents Torino. That said; I still think value is with Torino but it's a pass for me. I only have Sassuolo Win @3.80 and Monza Win @3.60 this week.

After some testing of my model this will be the first match I'll actually put in money. Arbitrage bet Fulham Win @3.55 and Draw @3.95 = actually a Fulham +0.5AH @1.87 (1 unit).

@StefanBB wrong topic ?

After the Tottenham match yesterday my model also points out Fulham. Odds @3.55 for a win and @3.95 for a draw mean Fulham 1X @1.87 after arbitrage. I'll take them gladly. Odds will drop coming days.

Last week my model preformed well (paper chase) with +2.13u. For this week it points out Chelsea and Brentford. Going to look at situational angles, but I guess Brentford will remain solely.

My model gives Fulham good edge so I take Fulham win (0.5u) @4.10 and Draw (0.5u) @3.60.

Really....two own goals by Leicester and same player...that is not helping at all lol

Same as with Leeds yesterday...model says Leicester +1 is big value @2.90 (1 unit) and Leicester @10 (0.25 units). Actually my model rates Leicester as the better team here. No value in other friday match.

I'm paper chasing my new excel model for the Leeds - City game...everything points to massive value Leeds here so (paper bet) Leeds +1 @3.10 (1 unit) and Leeds @9.50 (0.25 unit). Edit: model is based on pythagorean theorem with additional stats and subjective analysis (injuries, weather, circumstances etc.).

Well...that was incredible bad football from Netherlands...equador deserved a win here.

After odds Netherlands dropped they are back and still rising...am I missing something or is it the over excitement for performance equador?

Already bet Netherlands -0.5 @1.83: Betting public is too happy about performance Ecuador and too disappointed in performance Netherlands but you can't compare those matches at all (it's a WC opening game with lot of tension and stress impacting game performance, Qatar is way below Senegal). Expect the Netherlands to grow into the WC with Van Gaal as top-coach fine-tuning the team. Van Gaal is strategical above Alfaro. Expect gready and important Memphis to play (instead of totally ineffective Jansen) and also Timber to play (instead of shaky De Ligt) with (in my opinion) better offensive skills. Don't let 2 goals Ecuador (against Qatar) fool you because Ecuador has trouble scoring goals. Before Qatar match they only scored 7 in 11 matches and never more than 1 per game (last 3 matches no goals) where I only count 3 'strong teams' and a lot of weak teams. The Dutch? 29 in 11 matches and only 2 matches with 1 goal (rest 2+) where I count 3 'strong teams' and a whole bunch of teams who are equal or slightly better than Ecuador. Maybe Valencia is out for Ecuador.

I know I'm talking 'afterwards', but Noppert is the best decision Van Gaal made so far. He's the best goalie at the moment even if he's inexperienced. I had Netherlands -0.75 @1.95 btw so I'm happy with the result! Though a 0-1 or 0-0/1-1 was a more realistic result based on performance.

I've bought the book @Valiant Thor you mentioned. I think this suits well. Thanks for the tip!

Thanks for input @Valiant Thor I don't expect my model to be better than bookmakers model. Certainly not. I also don't expect it to be the holy grail. I'm only trying to create a model that could improve my already positive betting results by integrating it.

Going to order the book. Read same type of book for betting on horses while ago...good stuff. I'm doing fine at sportsbetting for last 10 years, but everything that improves it I'm prepared to do. Additionally; I like messing around with data and Excel.

How to calculate the number of goals I expect? Home strength (Home attack rating * Away defense rating * Home goals average)+ Away strength (Away attack rating * Home defense rating * Away goals average)? That results in the following (first number my calculations, second spread middle). Many are way off (these calculations are based on data this season only). 4,432366 3.2 3,927636 2.75 1,659885 2.6 2,659768 2.4 2,291417 2.3 1,654608 2.2 2,830698 3.25 3,655371 2.6 3,537423 3.05 2,748091 2.85

@harry_rag Thanks. 1. I thought I was using recent data with just two seasons (lol). What is the name of the book you refer too? 2. I certainly will create a system with an edge added. Just to be accounting for some variance. 3a. Why do you think spread prices are more accurate? Didn't know about spread prices before so I read some information about it, but still don't understand how this wil blend in the mix? 3b. So with fixed odds you mean something like this; Leicester (see example above) Bet365 odds 1,57 and True Odds 1,37 means 1,47 odds? How does that help out? When it's 'value' in the first place, it will also be 'value' after using this method (but less). 3c. Where do you get good xG data? Understat? FootyStats? Something else? I'm very grateful for helping me on my way!

@harry_ragHave done some trying with Excel. Just the 'normal' calculations and Poisson distribution based on goals Home and Away (data is this season and last two). Over/Under 2.5 are odds from Bet365 and TOO/TOU2.5 are true odds based on output Excel. 1.How do you identify a potential good betting spot (solely based on this output) when you also have to account for the overround? Difference between the Bet365 and True Odds pair is around 5% juice. 2. Do I understand it correctly that "shots on target" can also contribute to the "Home Attacking"-ratings (and thus contributes to the Poisson distribution)? Let say Arsenal has average 5 shots on target per match and league average is 4 then Shots on Target-rating is 1.25. If I say this contributes 20% to Home Attack-rating can I take 20% of this value (0.25) plus 80% of Goal-rating 1.10 (output Excel) (0.88) for a total Home Attack-rating of 1.13? I wonder because Poisson goal distribution would then be partly based on shots on targets and actual goals instead of actual goals only. Over 2.5 Under 2.5 TOO2.5 TOU2.5 2 Leicester Leeds 1,57 2,37 1,37 4,63 3 Aston Villa Southampton 1,72 2,10 1,57 2,87 4 Burnley Chelsea 1,90 1,90 2,23 1,84 5 Newcastle Brighton 2,20 1,66 2,46 1,69 6 Norwich Brentford 2,20 1,66 2,07 1,96 7 Wolves Crystal Palace 2,30 1,61 2,69 1,60 8 Liverpool West Ham 1,44 2,75 1,78 2,41 9 Watford Arsenal 1,90 1,90 1,92 2,15 10 Man City Man United 1,57 2,37 1,86 2,23 11 Tottenham Everton 1,80 2,00 1,96 2,10

Don't onderstand the critical part "mashing" (lol). I'm not a Excel wonder or statician.

Or do you get two distributions? My wish is to get one rating (based on several stats) to compare.

And when a stat is added; is there a way to give value to these stats? I.e. goals x 1 and shots on target x 0,8?

I can make a rating Poission distribution with Excel based on goals for and against. But how do you add another stat (like shots on target, possesion) in these ratings? Can someone help out?