1) The 1st Bundesliga
a. Review of the Matches
Results of Matchday 7
VfB Stuttgart – Hamburger SV 1:2 (1:0)
Borussia Mönchengladbach – 1. FC Nürnberg 1:0 (0:0)
FC Augsburg – Hannover 96 0:0
FSV Mainz 05 – Borussia Dortmund 1:2 (1:0)
FC Schalke 04 – SC Freiburg 4:2 (1:1)
VfL Wolfsburg – 1. FC Kaiserslautern 1:0 (0:0)
FC Bayern Munich – Bayer Leverkusen 3:0 (2:0)
- FC Cologne – TSG Hoffenheim 2:0 (1:0)
Werder Bremen – Hertha BSC 2:1 (1:1)
So however one may expect this section here from readers or whatever its correct title may be in the meantime, it is “abused” to one’s heart’s content to put forward one’s own concerns which come to mind. In this respect, the diversity is infinite, as is the need to communicate, which has one primary cause: how to preserve football, how to improve it, how to make it more enjoyable for even more spectators, how to keep the old fans happy and how to eliminate grievances and injustices. According to their own theory, there are overall contexts which, once recognised, fit into a logical structure and in a very simple way, with a kind of sweeping blow, implement all these demands, which are probably hardly controversial or even “approved” by general consensus. “More beautiful, better, bigger, more attractive, more exciting, fairer” should go through, right?
Only, of course, the assertion stands worldwide that a) everyone does this and everyone has their own solutions ready, of which they are equally so convinced, b) that enough people are already striving for this with official intent and have certainly known and discussed this and that for a long time, c) that it is just fine if there are some emotional moments every week (or by now almost every day), in which the fan can get excited and possibly vent, and that it is precisely the constant discussions that help to preserve it (as opposed to a completely perfect world in which everyone is happy and there is nothing left to get excited about because of all the justice) and d) that football is probably only so big because it is so great that everyone should actually watch it and it will remain the number one sport in the world here and always, no matter how shamefully it is mistreated.
But there are very serious doubts about d) in particular. People follow their team, sure, yes. There are also enough stadium-goers, equally true (and rather the opposite tendency than decreasing: it is increasing). People want to know the results, they want to see the standings, yes, they compare and follow this and that, sure, but always in comparison or at least in connection with their own team, for which they have declared themselves supporters. But: you can’t watch a game without your own involvement, as a completely neutral observer, so to speak. And this element is certainly not recognised in this way, especially in official circles. You HAVE to be a fan of one of the two teams (or place high bets; then you can) to be able to watch a match. However, these are the major concerns expressed at this point. What would be wrong with the game as such, the game of football, captivating people? There are two teams kicking off, red against blue or yellow against green, and one is sure that something spectacular will happen. There will be great actions, successful dribbles, perfect crosses, fair tackles, a flying save, a chopping trick here or a bicycle kick there. You will definitely have the feeling that it will be fair. You will see plenty of goal action and you will certainly see the ball land in the net with sufficient frequency, the ultimate release of happiness, the dream goal of this game, regardless of any other passions, and for my sake, almost inevitably, rejoice with the fans living out those feelings of happiness even more.
However, since one falls on many deaf ears, there is not much else to do but continue to write one’s fingertips to the bone and hope that one of them will be heard here or there.
Well, actually we should be talking about completely different things. Nevertheless, the thread taken up with this should simply be spun further. The Bundesliga also provided enough “talking points”, but Tuesday and Wednesday were Champions League days. And this also provided, in its own way, perhaps a little differently prepared material for discussion on the part of the author. Just one example: those who saw the summary (yes, sure, not so many…) would have been amazed to no end and should not have been able to close their mouths with the right focus. Namely: as often as on Tuesday evening the statement came out of the Sky channel that “here was a crystal clear penalty”, and each time it came out that it was NOT given, but in the next scene it was already back to “business as usual” (which is: smart-mouthing and bad-mouthing) to start up the hurdy-gurdy again and talk about a “deserved result”, yes, that must make the hairs on the back of the neck stand up on end for anyone with a little bit of sense – in order to question in the next moment WHY THESE ELFERS WERE ALL NOT GIVEN.
Surely only one answer can emerge. It would be ridiculous to claim that the referees “didn’t see” or “misjudged” all these actions, because, always remember, when the striker does NOTHING (which also happened x times, not only that evening) but ONLY wins the ball, but the defender, realising that he cannot do anything with other measures, drops theatrically, THEN he has ALWAYS SEEN EVERYTHING and blows the whistle, because he even saw an action that did not take place and still finds it worthy of punishment. In the penalty area, where it is a matter of deciding whether to give a penalty or not, he WILL see nothing and punish nothing.
The reason for this has of course been explained here for a long time, but is repeated from time to time: a goal changes the score, and such a change must be expected to a great extent when a penalty is awarded. A change in the odds is always perceived as a serious break. Especially since, given the small number of goals in the game, it is very often tantamount to a decision. So: you give the penalty, you have decided the game. If you decide against it, you leave the result open (in very many cases). So it’s a psychologically much greater inhibition to vote FOR the penalty. So a NON-GIVEN one preserves the chances that existed before. A GIVEN one changes them dramatically. So you want to be absolutely sure in all circumstances that the decision is justified.
There is the one flaw in the reasoning: one NOT given with the opportunity shift NOT triggered, but which would have gone to the team is not objectively a minor injustice. It is just that it is felt a little less so (understandable: It is always a little more difficult to accept change because something unexpected is coming; it is a natural conservative action that has been good for humanity and nature in general). Still, one can quietly move on as a human being: the deferral of opportunities withheld but justified is no less an injustice.
There were about 8 such scenes, in 8 games. It was simply unbelievable. What good is it for a losing team to be judged at the end: “Should have given…?”
That’s also how Bayern Munich got the win, after Boateng fouled his opponent twice in the penalty area in a completely unambiguous manner. The one foul, if it had taken place on the halfway line, would normally even have resulted in a straight red card, that’s how nasty the tackle was. Since it took place in the penalty area, the referee logically decided to play on and not even to give a yellow card, which would not have been possible. However, the opinion that Bayern was “lucky” is not shared here. There is no penalty here, there is no penalty there. The defenders can play in the penalty area – lately, by the way, even with their arms, which make them bounce around like handball goalkeepers, and whenever a ball goes against them they say, “from that distance, he can’t get his arm away, you can’t…”, but nobody asks the question why he keeps his arm there in the first place? The answer would be simple: because he has nothing to fear, but at the same time the chance to fend off the ball; a “win-win situation”, so to speak – almost doing what they want. Holding, pulling, tugging, straddling in case of emergency, the goalkeeper runs attackers over, jumps into game pigeonholes, and if he doesn’t catch the ball, he applies for “goalkeeper protection”, which is granted to him everywhere in the 16. So: it had nothing to do with luck at Bayern. It has something to do with the rules, which stink or scream to high heaven at every turn or whatever it’s called.
No, it is truly always a blessing when there is Champions League and you can enjoy the single match or conference option as an exclusive Sky subscriber. Because: you finally have the chance to listen to a NON-GERMAN commentary. This option is now being used extensively by the authors. On Tuesday evening, the choice fell on the match between Napoli and Villarreal. One gets goose bumps, almost inevitably, when this atmosphere in the stadium is transported into the living room, especially as the narrator contributes decisively to this with his pleasant, tense tone of voice. Here you can feel expertise paired with anticipation, but also respect (there is none here) for the opponent, here there is a willingness to entertain and inform the viewer and not to lecture him and explain football to him, especially not with nonsensical generalisations, here the game is described and even if you don’t understand a word, everyone is advised to do it once: it is a pure blessing, because you simply notice that the man goes along with it and enjoys it. It’s infectious, no matter which words you understand or don’t understand.
By the way, it was very nice that Napoli actually scored the first goal: 0 – after a perfect cross, in which Villarreal’s offside trap didn’t work (and the linesman – yes, yes, the assistant – suppressed the reflex to raise the flag) and Hamsik stood alone in front of the goalkeeper really very free, but took the ball out of the air in full flight and carefully placed it into the far corner, with the necessary spin and touching the post, i.e. highest precision and perfection, the speaker immediately in stacchato and without the here indispensable (but equally unbearable) error analysis already carried out during the action destroyed, made impossible joy, simply willingly acting out his own emotions shouting out his “Hamsik, Hamsik, Hamsik, Hamsik” in a swelling tone of voice and thus accompanying his run into the fan curve, to then shout a “uno a zero per Napoli” after him. Hamsik then pretended not to hear in front of the crowd in the stadium bursting with cheers, holding his ears to add to the spectacle. An unbelievably beautiful scene that once again teaches you why football was actually chosen as a game, even in early childhood. That’s what you want to see and the goosebumps don’t stop even now, as I write, returning again and again, because everything just fit.
The amazing thing, however, in the Sky summary, exactly on that evening (but fortunately not an isolated case there lately): when “all games, all goals” was on and the pictures of this game had run through and the babbler (Kai Dittman or whoever it was, one like the other) to this scene only the completely silly, missed, lecturing, tension and joy killing: “Villarreal played for offside, but if they do, they should do it collectively”, the presenter said afterwards: “Listen to how the Italian reporter went off at that goal. ” And exactly what was described above was run through completely.
Back in the studio he just said succinctly (still amazing; Patrick Wasserziehr): “Great.” Well, one does wonder a bit: if it is recognised that it was entertaining and insofar worthy of replay, plus deserving of the comment “great”, why on earth does one not understand (and perhaps not even notice) that in this country there is NEVER such joy in a commentary, no matter how important or beautiful the goal was? Do we even have to assume that the scene with the Italian commentary is only played to mock the man? “He’s still really happy and hasn’t even noticed the catastrophic mistakes that made the goal possible in the first place?” Or even just in the sense: “A real professional doesn’t rejoice, no, he doesn’t have to rejoice. He has already seen it all, earlier in his life, and scored such a simple volley goal, even back then, in the sandbox, x times himself and later showed his mates how to do it. A true professional already knows everything, he analyses and sees and notices everything. Unlike this dumb and naive Italian.”
Incidentally, the same thing happened in the Manchester United vs FC Basel game when Basel actually turned 0-2 into a 3-2 lead after the break, and it didn’t even look like luck as they had squandered quite a few chances beforehand that had them pulling their hair out. The goal to make it 2:2 was played with the Swiss commentary (after the summary of the game that ended 3:3), which in a gushing voice – this joy, of course, undisguised and not like here, where even if it happens that the voice gushes, one seems to be directly ashamed of it, as one seems to express one’s amateurishness with it somehow – called out the 2nd goal by Alex Frei: 2 by Alex Frei – a pure blessing to hear something like that and you look forward, also completely unconcealed, to the next Champions League match day, in which you still leave yourself completely open as to which channel you will end up on. Perhaps a Russian or Ukrainian game with commentary? It’s guaranteed to be a joy.
Now we have to say a few words about the Bundesliga, of course, as the reader will have guessed, it’s about comments, perhaps also assessments on the part of the commentators. But first, just this: HSV won the game in Stuttgart. They could easily have conceded 0:2 at a stage when their game didn’t look a bit better than in the games before. Cacau hit the post, from close range, and perhaps made the little miracle possible. Here out: why does it seem that often luck suddenly returns after a change of coach? Is it just imagination? It’s just that one remembers many examples without wanting to or being able to name them concretely. After all, luck would always remain luck and could never be deserved, even if the “luck of the brave” exists as a standing expression, pronounced in the search for explanations for luck?
About the Bayern vs. Leverkusen game: all the experts agreed that FC Bayern had never been so strong, no one could at least remember (and one likes to confirm this sentiment here from one’s own view coupled with memory). What’s the point of even bothering with the opponent and his performance after you’ve come to this conclusion? You should just leave him alone, not go into it. Bayern was overpowering, everyone had to recognise that, whether enviously or unenviously. There was nothing they could do about the ball security, the passing security, the outstanding individual players, the tactics, the moments of genius, the self-confidence they radiated and, in the necessary moments, also the strength in tackling and the willingness to fight. That’s what we want to see and we should be grateful, especially in the places commenting on this, that we now have a serious contender in the Champions League who can hopefully represent the German colours in a worthy manner, perhaps even capable of a fairly big or the very big throw? So what do people want from Leverkusen?
Well, despite all the enthusiasm for Bayern, Leverkusen was just NOT left alone. Robin Dutt was interviewed and he was happy to answer. His conclusion was not only absolutely sober, but also perfect and totally appropriate: “Those Bavarians were too strong, they didn’t stand a chance. I’m glad that the team didn’t let itself get slaughtered and that it was able to keep up quite well for a longer period of time, but the 0:3 at the end hurt a bit. After the 0:1 after 4 minutes, the game was practically over, but I’m not dissatisfied.”
Now this apt and well-considered comment, which actually expresses everything, is being picked apart? “I beg your pardon?” goes the female (and thus even more disturbing) voice after it has been sent out. So she didn’t really understand? What should he have said that she would have understood? “We were evenly matched and unlucky.” Would she be satisfied then? “We were catastrophically weak. An average performance was enough for Bayern to destroy us 3-0. Thanks to the opponent that they didn’t score 7 or 8. Oh, and one more thing: I’m to blame for this and take (not “take off”) my hat, that’s it for me in Leverkusen. Do you have a pistol handy?” Would that be acceptable?
No, it’s so incredibly stupid what’s happening there, and it went on for hours. On “Doppelpass” on DSF (oh yes, Sport 1) the same thing was recited again and again. How weak Leverkusen were. Yes, don’t you realise that by making them so horribly weak, you are at the same time completely destroying the opponent’s performance? Why has everyone forgotten Sepp Herberger, who was so fond of quoting, and who only ever spoke new truths? “You play as well as your opponent allows you to.” It’s just true. Bayern was good. Point. No, not a point. Bayern was very good, Bayern was outstanding, Now but point.
By the way, just by the way: the kicker comes up with a chance ratio of 4:1. No matter what a correct or better count looked like: that doesn’t look like this dominance. Surely one understands Dutt even better then? They were ok, the opponent was clearly better, he also said it with respect, and he doesn’t want to compete with them at the moment. What do the commentators expect? That every year NOT the title favourite, the best team is in front? Only to then constantly harp on their “crisis”?
It’s a bit reminiscent of Otto Rehhagel, who made Greece the European champions, which was described as a “miracle”, and four years later, when asked about the weakness and failure of his team after they were eliminated in the preliminary round, went off the deep end: “You said yourself four years ago that it was a miracle. But now we are supposed to repeat it?” What do you expect? Always only nonsense, often squared and even more often to the power of three.
b. The standings
Sp S U N Pkt T GT Diff
1 FC Bayern Munich 7 6 0 1 18 21 – 1 +20
2 Werder Bremen 7 5 1 16 14 – 7 +7
3 Borussia Mönchengladbach 7 5 1 1 16 9 – 3 +6
4 TSG Hoffenheim 7 4 0 3 12 – 7 +5
5 FC Schalke 04 7 4 0 3 12 15 – 12 +3
6 Hannover 96 7 3 3 1 12 8 – 8 +0
7 VfB Stuttgart 7 3 1 3 10 10 – 6 +4
8 Borussia Dortmund 7 3 1 3 10 9 – 7 +2
9 1.FC Nürnberg 7 3 1 3 10 6 – 7 -1
10 1.FC Köln 7 3 1 3 10 13 – 15 -2
11 Bayer Leverkusen 7 3 1 3 10 7 – 10 -3
12 Hertha BSC 7 2 3 2 9 9 – 9 +0
13 VfL Wolfsburg 7 3 0 4 9 8 – 12 -4
14 FSV Mainz 05 7 2 1 4 7 9 – 15 -6
15 1.FC Kaiserslautern 7 1 2 4 5 – 10 -5
16 FC Augsburg 7 0 4 3 4 6 – 12 -6
17 SC Freiburg 7 1 1 5 4 12 – 22 -10
18 Hamburger SV 7 1 1 5 4 8 – 18 -10
181 181 0
Total number of games 63
Goals ø 2.87
Well, you start to get your bearings pretty well. The big sensations of last season – which at this stage included Borussia Dortmund – are not to be found this time. It is striking that Berlin Hertha are really excellently in the mix and did not quite get their just reward for the really great performance with the almost tragic defeat in Bremen, when they were almost closer to the winning goal with 9 men than the Bremen team and were denied at least one clear penalty (nothing to do with bad luck, man how already…. it doesn’t exist, ex doesn’t exist, not here and not there either).
Cologne, who were already the first victim of the media with coach Solbakken, have fortunately (a very personal view, admittedly) worked their way up. What else would be the surprises? Leverkusen not quite up there, but they also had Bayern last time and this fate will befall 10 more teams in the first half of the season and all 17 teams once in the second half, and Wolfsburg once again not being able to meet the expectations – which were also octrued to them here by the author and his computer, whereby one should always add a “so far”. Of course, one is always prepared for a few deviations, which can occasionally result from good games in a row and not scoring points or, vice versa, from not so good games with the maximum yield nevertheless achieved. However, this season it affects almost no team, at least not in a series.
If you like, the biggest surprise is the extremely favourable ranking of Gladbach’s Borussia, who were very lucky to catch a Bayern team cold in their opening match, which was perhaps not yet at its best – and possibly to lay the foundation for a really successful season with just such a result. On the other hand, it should be mentioned with pleasure that a) it has been mentioned repeatedly at this point that there is a different class to be found there, especially in the exceptional player Marco Reus, but b) Gladbach have played a fantastic series there since Lucien Favre took office, which already represented an above-average performance in the second half of last season, insofar as 16th place in the table was somewhat deceptive.
c. The title question
Explanation: these figures are the result of a computer simulation, which is based on the current playing strengths of the teams given below. The games are simulated individually on the basis of goal expectations (also given in the text below) and the final table is used to determine the winner.
Team Number of German champions in 5000 simulations Championships in percent Fair odds as reciprocal of probabilities
FC Bayern Munich 4353 87.06% 1.15
Borussia Dortmund 248 4.96% 20.16
Werder Bremen 152 3.04% 32.89
FC Schalke 04 56 1.12% 89.29
Borussia Mönchengladbach 51 1.02% 98.04
Bayer Leverkusen 46 0.92% 108.70
TSG Hoffenheim 26 0.52% 192.31
VfB Stuttgart 22 0.44% 227.27
Hannover 96 22 0.44% 227.27
VfL Wolfsburg 10 0.20% 500.00
1.FC Cologne 5 0.10% 1000.00
Hertha BSC 4 0.08% 1250.00
1.FC Nuremberg 2 0.04% 2500.00
FSV Mainz 05 2 0.04% 2500.00
Hamburger SV 1 0.02% 5000.00
1.FC Kaiserslautern 0 0.00%
SC Freiburg 0 0.00%
FC Augsburg 0 0.00%
Either you wait for better times in the sense of suspense or you accept that it will be a one-way street – and concentrate on other decisions. In any case, the Bavarians are fun and in this respect they offer a good opportunity to simply enjoy football without lurking for slip-ups.
Change in chances compared to the previous week due to the results of Matchday 7
Team Win/Loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/Loss percentage
FC Bayern Munich 251 5.02%
Werder Bremen 25 0.50%
FC Schalke 04 16 0.32%
VfL Wolfsburg 5 0.10%
1.FC Cologne 1 0.02%
Hamburger SV 1 0.02%
1.FC Kaiserslautern 0 0.00%
FC Augsburg 0 0.00%
SC Freiburg 0 0.00%
FSV Mainz 05 -3 -0.06%
Hertha BSC -4 -0.08%
1.FC Nuremberg -5 -0.10%
Borussia Mönchengladbach -19 -0.38%
Hannover 96 -29 -0.58%
VfB Stuttgart -40 -0.80%
TSG Hoffenheim -51 -1.02%
Borussia Dortmund -70 -1.40%
Bayer Leverkusen -78 -1.56%
Dormund is also losing chances. The reason: their previously still halfway intact chances mainly derive from possible slips by Bayern. If they also “get out of the way” of other competitors, then there is nothing to be gained. One should always bear in mind that the computer adjusts the playing strengths with each result and that Bayern’s was clearly more favourable than Dortmund’s in this sense (as can be read below). Werder had hardly any chances anyway and have to work for these phantoms first, hence the gain.
d. The title chances in the development
Everything rushes against 0 and a line against 1. In a way a classic: the favourite dominates.
e. Comparison of title chances with the betting exchange betfair
Back Lay Probability (Back)
FC Bayern Munich 1.25 1.27 80.00%
Borussia Dortmund 13 15.5 7.69%
Bayer Leverkusen 36 40 2.78%
VfL Wolfsburg 200 350 0.50%
Hannover 96 170 350 0.59%
Werder Bremen 32 40 3.13%
FC Schalke 04 38 44 2.63%
Hamburger SV 400 1000 0.25%
VfB Stuttgart 140 190 0.71%
FSV Mainz 05 800 0.13%
Borussia Mönchengladbach 50 70 2.00%
TSG Hoffenheim 80 300 1.25%
1.FC Nuremberg 500 1000 0.20%
1.FC Cologne 230 990 0.43%
SC Freiburg 660 0.15%
Hertha BSC 290 0.34%
1.FC Kaiserslautern 550 0.18%
FC Augsburg 660 0.15%
Now it remains the other way round: the computer advises a Bayern bet. It could very well be the “last exit”, the last exit. Now or never.
The changes in the odds estimates at betfair
FC Bayern Munich 3.08%
Borussia Dortmund -1.83
Bayer Leverkusen -1.22%
VfL Wolfsburg 0.10%
Hannover 96 -0.18%
Werder Bremen 0.49%
FC Schalke 04 0.13%
Hamburger SV 0.14%
VfB Stuttgart -0.71%
FSV Mainz 05 0.03%
Borussia Mönchengladbach 0.46%
TSG Hoffenheim -0.29%
1.FC Nuremberg 0.00%
1.FC Cologne 0.02%
SC Freiburg -0.01%
Hertha BSC 0.06%
1.FC Kaiserslautern 0.07%
FC Augsburg -0.01%
(Again the order according to the original rankings)
The gain is also smaller. So this week’s bet would be even better. On the other hand – readily admitted – it never sounds tempting to play for very small odds. You’re kind of shooting at sparrows with a cannon. To win something worthwhile, you have to risk a lot. On the other hand, advantage remains advantage.
f. Direct Champions League qualification via 2nd place
The probability distribution for 2nd place after matchday 7
Team Number of 2nd places in 5000 simulations 2nd places in per cent
Borussia Dortmund 1520 30.40%
Werder Bremen 768 15.36%
Borussia Mönchengladbach 475 9.50%
Bayer Leverkusen 466 9.32%
FC Bayern Munich 451 9.02%
FC Schalke 04 436 8.72%
TSG Hoffenheim 256 5.12%
Hannover 96 226 4.52%
VfB Stuttgart 157 3.14%
VfL Wolfsburg 96 1.92%
Hertha BSC 55 1.10%
1.FC Nuremberg 30 0.60%
1.FC Cologne 28 0.56%
FSV Mainz 05 24 0.48%
Hamburger SV 8 0.16%
SC Freiburg 3 0.06%
1.FC Kaiserslautern 1 0.02%
FC Augsburg 0 0.00%
No further interpretation required. If the clear favourite for 2nd place wins, it is of course clearly in front. Werder with it, also Gladbach with chances, as one gladly and benevolently registers.
The changes compared to the previous week:
Team win/loss absolute compared to previous matchday Win/loss percentage
Borussia Dortmund 292 11.70%
Werder Bremen 145 3.50%
FC Schalke 04 127 2.04%
Borussia Mönchengladbach 75 1.04%
1.FC Cologne 13 0.00%
Hamburger SV 5 0.00%
FC Augsburg 0 0.00%
SC Freiburg 0 0.02%
VfL Wolfsburg -4 0.48%
1.FC Kaiserslautern -5 0.00%
FSV Mainz 05 -6 0.30%
1.FC Nuremberg -24 0.14%
Hertha BSC -29 0.40%
Hannover 96 -40 0.50%
Bayer Leverkusen -98 7.90%
VfB Stuttgart -112 0.72%
FC Bayern Munich -138 70.36%
TSG Hoffenheim -201 0.90%
Dortmund as a big winner. Clearly and even more so because BOTH rivals part with good chunks of their chances due to Bayern’s 3-0 against Leverkusen. Bayern towards the title and Leverkusen as they lack the points. An “ideal result” if Dortmund were to settle for that spot – and would most certainly take that deal at this stage. “We 2nd, Bayern 1st, deal.”
g. The relegation question
The distribution of relegation percentages
Note: There would also be a detailed breakdown across the individual places. Here, places 17 and 18 count as fully relegated (i.e. in total as 1, for relegated in each case, otherwise the term is “direct relegation), and a further third of relegated teams are added through the relegation, whereby the first division team is generally rated as 2/3 to 1/3 favourite compared to the second division team. This makes the total number of relegated teams equal to 233.33%. In individual cases, of course, it would be different in reality. So if, for example, Frankfurt were to finish 3rd in League 2 and Augsburg 16th in League 1, one could perhaps speak of a balanced pairing.
Team Direct relegation (17th or 18th place) Relegation by relegation Total
1 FC Augsburg 59.48% 4.50% 63.98%
2 SC Freiburg 35.22% 5.40% 40.62%
3 1.FC Kaiserslautern 34.80% 5.11% 39.91%
4 Hamburger SV 27.18% 4.55% 31.73%
5 FSV Mainz 05 10.82% 2.69% 13.51%
6 1.FC Köln 9.32% 2.63% 11.95%
7 1.FC Nürnberg 7.96% 2.39% 10.35%
8 Hertha BSC 5.40% 1.83% 7.23%
9 VfL Wolfsburg 3.38% 1.21% 4.59%
10 VfB Stuttgart 2.28% 0.85% 3.13%
11 Hanover 96 1.44% 0.63% 2.07%
12 TSG Hoffenheim 1.08% 0.55% 1.63%
13 FC Schalke 04 0.58% 0.30% 0.88%
14 Bayer Leverkusen 0.46% 0.35% 0.81%
15 Borussia Mönchengladbach 0.42% 0.23% 0.65%
16 Werder Bremen 0.14% 0.09% 0.23%
17 Borussia Dortmund 0.04% 0.02% 0.06%
18 FC Bayern Munich 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
200.00% 33.33% 233.33%
The movement will be quite inevitable in this decision. Especially since there are just more than 2 relegated teams. Freiburg is mixing right at the front, Lautern is fully in, whereas the computer at HSV – not only thanks to the victory but more thanks to the “imputed” playing strength, the much quoted “higher potential” – is already making some deductions. But there is a big gap of these 4 to the 5th rank, the Mainzers.
The change in chances due to the results of matchday 7 with regard to relegation
Team Change in chances
1 Hamburger SV 12.85%
2 1.FC Cologne 7.92%
3 VfL Wolfsburg 0.78%
4 Borussia Mönchengladbach 0.59%
5 FC Schalke 04 0.22%
6 Werder Bremen 0.20%
7 Borussia Dortmund 0.03%
8 FC Bayern Munich 0.00%
9 Hannover 96 -0.31%
10 Bayer Leverkusen -0.35%
11 TSG Hoffenheim -0.81%
12 FC Augsburg -1.47%
13 VfB Stuttgart -1.54%
14 Hertha BSC -1.63%
15 FSV Mainz 05 -2.53%
16 1.FC Nuremberg -2.76%
17 SC Freiburg -4.67%
18 1.FC Kaiserslautern -6.50%
The winner completely clear and unambiguous, HSV, with an away win at a strong opponent. The losers are the losers of their games, first and foremost Lautern and Freiburg, whereby Freiburg did not look as bad as the result suggests. They had an even chance ratio of 7:7, according to Kicker, but the summary seen also confirmed that there were chances on both sides, some of the greatest calibre. Augsburg were not really helped by the draw, as you can see, but this is not only due to the faultiness of the three-point rule. They also need to win games at some point to prove league fitness – also in terms of developing chances.
h. The relegation question in development
At least it is recognisable: something is moving. Whether one can conclude from this view alone that there will be excitement is a matter for the individual to judge. Pretty much guaranteed, however: it will continue to move, also in a jagged way, which means at least so much that the question remains open.
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 victory * 3 points + probability of draw * 1 point. The deviations given below compare the points actually achieved with those expected by the computer.
In total, the deviation does not have to be 0 for all teams, as the number of expected draws does not have to be congruent with those that have occurred (nor can it even be), but an imbalance is forced by the three-point rule. Too many points scored means that there were too few draws.
Team Name Points scored Deviation Deviation absolute
1 Borussia Mönchengladbach 9.34 16 6.66 6.66
2 Werder Bremen 11.44 16 4.56 4.56
3 FC Bayern Munich 14.93 18 3.07 3.07
4 TSG Hoffenheim 9.05 12 2.95 2.95
5 1.FC Köln 8.08 10 1.92 1.92
6 1.FC Nürnberg 8.49 10 1.51 1.51
7 FC Schalke 04 10.53 12 1.47 1.47
8 Hannover 96 10.70 12 1.30 1.30
9 Hertha BSC 8.16 9 0.84 0.84
10 VfB Stuttgart 10.45 10 -0.45 0.45
11 Bayer Leverkusen 10.57 10 -0.57 0.57
12 VfL Wolfsburg 10.02 9 -1.02 1.02
13 FSV Mainz 05 9.44 7 -2.44 2.44
14 1.FC Kaiserslautern 7.47 5 -2.47 2.47
15 SC Freiburg 7.12 4 -3.12 3.12
16 Borussia Dortmund 13.42 10 -3.42 3.42
17 FC Augsburg 7.55 4 -3.55 3.55
18 Hamburger SV 7.71 4 -3.71 3.71
ø Deviation 2.50
Although Werder and Gladbach have 16 points each, the higher expectations of the runners-up mean that Gladbach are entitled to first place. Bayern, however, are working their way up. Hoffenheim lost and is still in 4th place, but behind them is FC Köln, who were almost relegated, if you believed the media reports… All in all, however, you can see from this ranking that there have been no big sensations so far. So it confirms the intuitive thesis (and not prepared for this moment here): biggest surprise are Gladbach, both positive and negative, which you can see in the absolute numbers.
The foreign comparison for the average point deviation.
Note: the theory is that the German Bundesliga is the most exciting among Europe’s top leagues. This finding is rather intuitively derived, but so far “accepted” both in this country and abroad. Of course, the higher goal average is an indication of this, as well as the(perceived) lower predictability when it comes to the title, relegation, but also other issues. Balance is a criterion and possibly the main reason for this.
The measure used here for the deviation in average points expectation provides measurable information about this, but it was probably a “problem” specific to the 2010/2011 inaugural season (the fan thanked) that the Bundesliga produced a particularly large number of surprises. This was reflected in the figures. Now the phenomenon can be observed further. Is the Bundesliga also exciting in this respect? More exciting than elsewhere?(At the same time, a large deviation in this category could simply mean that computers or feeders do not know their business well)
Liga 1 ø Deviation Change from previous week
Germany, 1. BL 2.50 -0.05
Italy 1.81 0.12
Spain 2.21 0.19
France 3.08 0.83
England 2.16 0.40
Germany, 2.BL 4.03 0.07
The Bundesliga is even slightly down in terms of this measure of surprises. Otherwise, there is still a lack of comparability, but the value of 2.5 is certainly not a top value, not even when other leagues come to this matchday (Italy, Spain).
j. Goal expectations and their deviations
Explanation: Almost the same applies to goals as to points. The expected goals scored and the expected goals conceded are compared with reality. Too few goals scored count negatively just as too many goals conceded count negatively, the reverse counts positively in each case. Here, the sum of the deviations must be 0, because all expected and not scored goals were not conceded somewhere. However, the goal average may show a deviation.
Team Name Goal expectation Goals scored Goals conceded expected Goals conceded Total deviation
1 FC Bayern Munich 15.47 21 6.63 1 11.16
2 Borussia Mönchengladbach 9.90 9 11.01 3 7.10
3 TSG Hoffenheim 9.43 12 10.32 7 5.89
4 Werder Bremen 12.16 14 9.39 7 4.24
5 VfB Stuttgart 11.43 10 10.23 6 2.80
6 Hertha BSC 8.63 9 11.11 9 2.48
7 FC Schalke 04 10.12 15 8.71 12 1.59
8 1.FC Nuremberg 8.27 6 10.06 7 0.79
9 1.FC Köln 9.19 13 11.85 15 0.66
10 1.FC Kaiserslautern 8.08 5 11.52 10 -1.56
11 Hannover 96 10.38 8 8.77 8 -1.61
12 FC Augsburg 6.90 6 9.74 12 -3.16
13 Borussia Dortmund 11.62 9 6.03 7 -3.59
14 Bayer Leverkusen 10.90 7 9.53 10 -4.37
15 VfL Wolfsburg 9.75 8 9.19 12 -4.56
16 SC Freiburg 7.95 12 12.32 22 -5.62
17 FSV Mainz 05 9.34 9 9.62 15 -5.72
18 Hamburger SV 8.99 8 12.48 18 -6.51
178.51 181 178.51 181 0.00
Goals ø expected: Goals ø scored: ø Deviation 4.08 2.83 2.87
Bayern stay ahead, sure enough, with a 3-0 win and now 20-1 goals. Gladbach behind and then already Hoffenheim, which is a bit surprising, considering the recent defeat. The figures only become negative after Kaiserslautern. HSV is fighting its way back, but the deviations are quite moderate, at least in comparison with the previous season.
Rank Country League 1 ø Goal difference Change from previous week
1 Germany, 1.BL 4.08 -0.12
2 Italy 1 2.59 0.97
3 Spain 1 3.10 0.24
4 England 1 3.02 -0.02
5 France 1 3.04 0.82
6 Germany, 2.BL 5.92 0.37
As can be seen confirmed: a slight regression due to “normal” results.
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.
Goal expectations Team For Against Quotient For/Counter Change of Quotient Shift
1 FC Bayern Munich 2.22 0.85 2.61 +0.12 +0
2 Borussia Dortmund 1.62 0.90 1.81 +0.02 +0
3 Bayer Leverkusen 1.58 1.28 1.23 -0.06 +0
4 Werder Bremen 1.63 1.38 1.18 +0.01 +0
5 FC Schalke 04 1.47 1.27 1.15 +0.02 +0
6 TSG Hoffenheim 1.45 1.39 1.04 -0.05 +0
7 Borussia Mönchengladbach 1.35 1.30 1.03 +0.01 +2
8 VfB Stuttgart 1.54 1.51 1.03 -0.05 -1
9 Hannover 96 1.38 1.34 1.02 -0.01 -1
10 VfL Wolfsburg 1.38 1.37 1.00 +0.01 +0
11 Hertha BSC 1.35 1.46 0.92 -0.00 +0
12 FSV Mainz 05 1.38 1.59 0.87 -0.01 +0
13 1.FC Nürnberg 1.14 1.39 0.82 -0.02 +0
14 1.FC Köln 1.45 1.79 0.81 +0.03 +0
15 Hamburger SV 1.26 1.67 0.75 +0.03 +0
16 SC Freiburg 1.30 1.83 0.71 -0.01 +0
17 1.FC Kaiserslautern 1.11 1.60 0.69 -0.01 +0
18 FC Augsburg 0.92 1.57 0.59 -0.01 +0
Goals ø expected 2.833
Bayern’s lead gigantic, the gain too. Well, it has long since been registered throughout Europe (and perhaps the world, too, if a share is taken): this team can be right at the top. Of course, everyone says: you can’t get close to Barca, and I don’t think anyone can at the moment, but behind them it’s reasonably open. Real Madrid, too, have conceded goals in every game in the league so far, and even against Ajax on Tuesday, as great as the attack always looks, they allowed a number of brilliant chances, which only Iker Casillas – years ago the author once jokingly referred to him as “the Real Madrid defence,” because when Vincente del Bosque once gave an interview on how he wanted to strengthen and stabilise the defence, and in general how he wanted to defend, he answered “We do not defend. – and did so brilliantly. So: as little as one’s own German heart beats in one’s chest, one is still curious about Bayern’s development, especially as it is always about objectivity and that is just this: they are on a par with Europe’s top (in contrast to many years before), and this is NOT regurgitated what the media pretends.
l. The frequency of trend changes
Note: a “change of tendency” is considered to be a goal which equalises a lead or gives 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: with 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.
The following changes in tendency took place at the weekend:
The trend changes in the 1st Bundesliga:
HSV still behind in Stuttgart at the break, manages the turnaround in the 2nd half. 2 TW.
Dortmund also turn around an away game, the one in Mainz, with the same sequence. Another 2 TW.
Schalke also turn the game around at home against Freiburg: from 0:1 to 4:1, later 4:2.
Also 2 TW.
Werder Bremen achieve the same feat: after 4 minutes they are behind and in the last second, “with the last kick of the game”, as the Englishman likes to put it, the not really deserved winning goal to 2-1. Again 2 TW.
So there were 8 in total, again giving the 1st league the (internationally questionable) reputation of being the most exciting league.
In the 2. league it looked like this:
St. Pauli takes the lead against Aue. then trailed 1:3, reduced to 2:3, final whistle. 2 TW.
Braunschweig equalises FSV Frankfurt’s lead. 1:1, 1 TW.
Karlsruhe equalise in Rostock. 1 TW.
Duisburg equalises in Bochum, but loses in the end with 1:2. 2 TW.
Dresden take the lead against Eintracht Frankfurt, but lose 1:4 in the end. Again 2 TW.
All in all, there were 8 changes of tendency in League 2 as well, which is clearly above average, i.e. both German leagues with exciting match progressions from this point of view. The question of the measure of class pronounced in this way remains open, but the German teams have looked quite good internationally so far (despite some lack of results).
In England this result:
Stoke equalises at home against ManU and QPR manages the draw against Aston Villa in the last minute.
All in all, 2 changes of tendency, which again underlines that nothing (exciting) is happening in England at the moment.
To save the day: a total of 4 times they managed to reduce a lead, which in a way also provided some excitement: Wolves came to within 1:2 at Liverpool, that’s how it stayed, Blackburn Rovers also came to within 1:2 at Newcastle, but lost 1:3. Also Wigan came to within 1:2 at home against Tottenham, just like Sunderland at Norwich, where 2:1 remained the final result in each case. On the other hand, if results football is preached everywhere and this bracket tactic brings success, then it can be seen with the highest perfection in England, which is exactly what is reflected in international results. Even if the Spanish are almost more than just a competitor.
Nevertheless, this very observation would be cause for rethinking, in the highest circles responsible for the continuation of the game. As a spectator, you are supposed to be eagerly awaiting the outcome of a match, but as soon as the score is 1-0, you know the winner? No, that would certainly be the death of football in the long run. Nevertheless, we are moving closer to this model. You hear coaches say often enough that “it must not happen to let a lead slip away”, apart from the legendary, but nevertheless football-destroying slogans such as “the zero must stand”, as much as this motto is in fact tactically tweaked.
Also for the change of tendency every week the foreign comparison:
A look back at the last season should keep the “averages” in mind and serve for comparison purposes. League 1 was far ahead, but the English Premier League had still slipped in between League 1 and League 2.
Do the values converge with the previous values over the course of a season or is everything subject to the famous chaos principle? Sometimes this way, sometimes that and nothing that fundamentally distinguishes the leagues?
Country Matches Compensation HF AF Total per match
1st Bundesliga 306 158 60 49 267 0.873
England 380 198 66 46 310 0.816
2nd Bundesliga 306 145 56 41 242 0.791
Italy 380 169 58 48 275 0.724
France 380 175 49 40 264 0.695
Spain 380 146 48 46 240 0.632
First, in brief, a review of the trend changes internationally:
In France at the weekend, this result:
Lorient equalise in the last second at champions Lille. 1 TW.
Nice also equalised in the 90th, at home against Dijon. 1 TW, just as Valenciennes achieved this feat against one of the title candidates, Olympique Marseille, who are not getting going in the league. 1 TW.
Spectacular match between newcomer Evian TGFC and SM Caen: Caen leads, later trailing 1:2, finally wins 4:2. 4 TW there.
Auxerre is trailing 0:1 at home against Sochaux at the break, turns the game around to win 4:1. 2 TW.
Another 2 TW by the obligatory ones in the 1-1 draws between Brest and Ajaccio and Rennes and St Etienne,
This gives us a total of 11 changes of tendency in 10 games in this league.
In Italy this result:
Inter lead 1:0 at Bologna, concede the equaliser, win 3:1. 2 TW.
Chievo turn the game around at home against FC Genoa, 2:1 after 0:1. 2 TW.
Juve equalises in Catania, end 1:1, one TW.
So in total only 5 changes of tendency in this league this week, dropping back to normal.
In Spain there were these games:
Villarreal equalise in Bilbao, end 1-1, 1 TW.
Real Madrid concede 0:1 at home against Rayo Vallecano, turn the game around to 3:1, get the (not counting) 2:3, later win 6:2. 2 TW only, but a spectacular game, of course, which is almost a tradition in Madrid.
Mallorca are behind against Real Sociedad, but still win 2:1. 2 TW.
Granada equalise Osasuna’s lead at home. End 1:1, 1 TW.
In total, there are 6 changes of tendency in the league.
This provides the following momentary ranking:
Country Matches Equalisation Home Leading Goal Away Leading Goal Total per match
1 France 80 47 11 10 68 0.850
2 1st Bundesliga 63 31 14 8 53 0.841
3 Italy 30 13 4 5 22 0.733
4 2nd Bundesliga 81 34 13 9 56 0.691
5 Spain 40 15 7 2 24 0.600
6 England 59 17 5 3 25 0.424
Overall balance 353 157 54 37 248 0.703
France take the lead, which seems a little strange given the other lack of goals in this league. But there has been spectacle there this season, not just on this matchday (hopefully to the delight of the fans), and this is reflected in the table. Will they be able to maintain their place ahead of Germany? Will anyone else interfere? Like so much else, we shall see.
Nevertheless, a promise was made a week ago to publish a long-term statistic of all these leagues. That promise is fulfilled here:
Country/League Matches Equalisation Home Leading Goals Away Leading Goals Total per Match
1 1st Bundesliga 1530 761 259 221 1241 0.811
2 2nd Bundesliga 1530 734 274 170 1178 0.770
3 Italy 1 1900 909 315 237 1461 0.769
4 England 1 1900 867 319 206 1392 0.733
5 Spain 1 1900 825 305 229 1359 0.715
6 France 1 1900 787 252 187 1226 0.645
Total balance 10660 4883 1724 1250 7857 0.737
Well, actually it turns out that BOTH German leagues are at the top. However, one can also see that the differences are quite narrow, and this, one readily admits, comes as something of a surprise. Because: the higher goal average alone almost inevitably leads to a higher occurrence of changes in tendency (as once explained, there may be an upper limit, a “saturation limit”, so to speak, with regard to this phenomenon in connection with an increasing goal average), so that one must expect a lead, but intuitively it is rather too narrow.
Here are the statistics for the goal average in all these leagues since 2007:
League Goal average
Germany, 1st division 2,845
Germany, 2nd division 2,726
Spain, Primera Division 2.703
England, Premier League 2,576
Italy, Serie A 2,564
France, Ligue 1 2,306
So: Germany is also ahead here, with both leagues, but just as close as in the tendency change statistics. In this respect, one would have to say: apart from the fact that Germany plays more offensively, there are no tactical deficiencies whatsoever that could lead to even more “ups and downs” – i.e. changing leads, etc. – in Germany. — can be observed. France has the red lantern in both statistics, which of course is no proof of a lack of quality per se. At most, it is possible that the spectators will become (even more) bored.
Alternatively, of course, this approach is always considered possible, necessary or beneficial: here in Germany, one would first have to realise how football actually works, especially as far as reporters are concerned. It is rare to watch a game – if you include the organ grinders with microphones – that is not marked by the reporters as lacking in entertainment or (going hand in hand) having considerable quality deficiencies. If one had understood that this is not at all due to this individual game, but to the sport of football, then one could – like an Italian commentator, for example – not limit oneself to the few moments of goal celebrations – which, by the way, are also criticised in Germany with the error analysis carried out during the action – but bring the individual actions, even if they do not directly lead to the goal, closer to the viewer in their beauty and quality.
Translated: goal actions, especially successful ones with a bulging net, are so rare (and there is neither a decreasing nor an increasing trend to be observed) that one is actually forced to focus on other things in terms of entertainment value. An Englishman is quite capable of stating a “good tackling”, if it takes place, which would be illuminated here exclusively from the other perspective: “There he goes again.” or “Too stubborn” or “he has to separate himself from the ball faster.” A successful action can also be a successful tackle, provided it is executed with mastery, precision and fairness. A very nice, captured English comment went like this: “If Tackling is an art, then surely he is a master of the art.”
Translated, (redundantly), “If tackling is an art, then surely he is a master of the art.” It almost gives you goosebumps just writing it.
m. The mathematical review of matchday 6 results.
Note: here the deviation of expected goals with scored goals is calculated for each match. To determine the total deviation, the values are added up in absolute terms (not visible here, this column). So: if one team deviates positively by 0.35 goals, the other negatively by -0.62, then the absolute total deviation is 0.35 + 0.62 = 0.97 goals. To determine the average deviation, all these values are added up and divided by the number of pairings – usually 9.
Home Away Total Deviation
Stuttgart HSV 2.19 1.05 3.24 1 2 -1.19 0.95
Gladbach Nürnberg 1.56 0.97 2.53 1 0 -0.56 -0.97
Augsburg Hannover 1.06 1.45 2.51 0 0 -1.06 -1.45
Mainz Dortmund 0.97 1.54 2.51 1 2 0.03 0.46
Schalke 04 Freiburg 2.05 0.94 2.99 4 2 1.95 1.06
Wolfsburg Kaiserslautern 1.74 0.94 2.67 1 0 -0.74 -0.94
FC Bayern Leverkusen 2.20 0.89 3.09 3 0 0.80 -0.89
FC Cologne Hoffenheim 1.50 1.70 3.20 2 0 0.50 -1.70
Werder Hertha 1.94 1.18 3.12 2 1 0.06 -0.18
15.20 10.67 25.88 15 7 -0.20 -3.67
Expected Goal Total Expected Goal Average Scored Goal Average 25.88 2.88 2.44
ø expected goal difference 1.86 ø goal difference 1.72
This time a matchday with too few goals, which shows that these are simply random fluctuations and in no way a trend can be identified, and, as demonstrated above and most recently, such a trend could not be identified for several years.
The too low average goal deviation (compared to the expected one) means translated that the results were somewhat “too normal”. No special outliers except perhaps the Schalke-Freiburg game, in which the only absolute deviation was over 3 goals. Werder vs Hertha, on the other hand, would be an example of “too normal”. Almost no deviation at all on either side.
n. The determination
Note: The fixing is calculated for each match as the sum of the squares of the individual probabilities. This measures how much one can commit to a favourite in a certain pairing. The higher the favourite position, the higher the sum of the squares, but also the more “certain” the occurrence of the (favourite) event. The mathematical question in itself is even more how far one can commit, since one cannot really determine this value. Events are predicted whose probabilities are unknown. Nevertheless, one can check the quality of the estimates made here in the long term by comparing expected/occurred. This is done week by week, but of course also overall.
The determination expected
Pairing 1 X 2
Stuttgart HSV 63.58% 19.27% 17.15% 47.08%
Gladbach Nürnberg 51.45% 24.80% 23.75% 38.26%
Augsburg Hannover 27.77% 25.59% 46.65% 36.02%
Mainz Dortmund 23.99% 24.98% 51.02% 38.03%
Schalke 04 Freiburg 63.35% 20.13% 16.52% 46.92%
Wolfsburg Kaiserslautern 56.57% 23.10% 20.32% 41.47%
FC Bayern Leverkusen 67.30% 18.64% 14.06% 50.74%
FC Cologne Hoffenheim 34.33% 22.59% 43.09% 35.45%
Werder Hertha 55.31% 21.52% 23.17% 40.59%
4.44 2.01 2.56 3.75
average expected determination: 41.62%
To repeat only above the expected figures given in last week’s text.
The determination arrived
Pairing 1 X 2 Tendency arrived
Stuttgart HSV 63.58% 19.27% 17.15% 2 17.15%
Gladbach Nürnberg 51.45% 24.80% 23.75% 1 51.45%
Augsburg Hannover 27.77% 25.59% 46.65% 0 25.59%
Mainz Dortmund 23.99% 24.98% 51.02% 2 51.02%
Schalke 04 Freiburg 63.35% 20.13% 16.52% 1 63.35%
Wolfsburg Kaiserslautern 56.57% 23.10% 20.32% 1 56.57%
FC Bayern Leverkusen 67.30% 18.64% 14.06% 1 67.30%
FC Cologne Hoffenheim 34.33% 22.59% 43.09% 1 34.33%
Werder Hertha 55.31% 21.52% 23.17% 1 55.31%
6 1 2 4.22
average determination received: 46.90%
Further note: No comparable model has yet been discovered in mathematics. Not even by a mathematician who had set himself the task of proving to the author that there was guaranteed to be nothing new.
As of this week, hopefully, this statistic has been made a little more vivid, as both the tendency is shown (1, 0 or 2 for home win, draw or away win) and the column arrived at is highlighted. In addition, the totals of the tendencies for this matchday are given, which makes these values comparable with the expected ones.
There were 6 home wins, and except for Cologne, all were favourites, some of them clear ones, which yes expressed the favouritism-heavy nature of the whole matchday in the expected figure of 41.62%. Since there was also only one draw (and draws are currently always, often clear, away events, so these were absent) and Dortmund won as away favourites, the expected figure was exceeded with 46.90%.
But you can see, for example, that even the very late goals scored by Dortmund and Werder, if they had not been scored, would have easily changed the statistics in the other direction. This is just a comment on how difficult it is to get something tangible. The numbers presented already represent a pretty good attempt to be able to predict anything at all, how much you can commit, because every outcome is exposed to a sufficient amount of randomness – not only that of the late goals.
o. Overall league statistics
Note: such a statistic is regularly produced by computer. It is generally used for quality control of the individual figures, Each figure has its meaning and is explained in more detail. The goal average is not repeated here. The home advantage is calculated by dividing the goals scored by the home team by half of the total goals. In this way, you can see how many more goals the home teams score than they would score without home advantage. 1,116 is 11.6% more for the home team, 11.6% less for the away team.
Note: For arithmetic foxes, here is a brief explanation of the calculation method for the expected goal deviation: The computer gives each result from 0:0 to 20:20 a probability (it is actually sufficient up to 10:10, as the rest has no significant probability). There would be a goal deviation for each result. So if you multiply the probability of, for example, a 3:4 by the deviation that would then occur (in the case of the match Mainz – Gladbach, with goal expectations of 1.77:1.25, this would be 3 – 1.77 = 1.23 for Mainz plus 4 – 1.25 = 2.75 for Gladbach, i.e. a total of 3.98 goal deviation) and carry out this procedure for each match result, you get the expected average goal deviation.
1st Football Bundesliga 2011/2012 Statistics of the actual results
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals conceded Home advantage
63 30 11 22 104 77 1.149
Statistics of expected results
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals Conceded Home advantage
63 29.43 14.56 19 101.9 76.55 1.142
Statistics of absolute deviations
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals Conceded Home advantage
0 0.57 -3.56 3 2.1 0.45 0.00711
Statistics of percentage deviations
Matches Home wins Draws Away wins Goals Conceded Home advantage
0 1.90% -32.36% 13.64% 2.02% 0.58% 0.62%
Determination expected Determination arrived 39.88% 40.51% ø Goal difference ø Goal difference expected 1.99 1.87
Well, the home wins have almost exactly equalised due to the six scored on the WE, whereas the draws continue to diverge. Well, as already discussed above, there were two games where the draw was lost in the last second, so that we have to assume that this was a coincidence.
On the other hand, there is a tendency for both teams to go all the way for the winning goal when the game is tied, which, if you are open to interpretation, can mean that the three-point rule (declared bad and unsuitable here) has been internalised, both by coaches and by the players themselves, who have come to the conclusion that the risk of losing a point (which you would have had if the game had gone to a draw) is well worth it, since you stand to gain two points if you force the winning goal.
On the other hand, programmers can rest assured that the parameter that controls the frequency of draws is adjusted weekly and automatically. It is currently 1.05, whereas in the past or in other leagues there were values of 0.66. The meaning is as follows. The meaning is as follows: with identical goal expectations in a match, this value expresses the drawing tendency of the teams (actually those in the entire league), provided that a match is drawn. Translated, it means that in the past the ball was passed back and forth in a 1-1 draw and the chance of scoring the winning goal was reduced from 1.00 (100%) to 0.66 (66%), so to speak. In this context, 100% does not mean that the goal will certainly be scored, but merely that it remains just as likely as usual that another goal will be scored. So nowadays, in the case of a draw, the propensity for another goal rises and does not fall, which is tantamount to internalising the (nonsensical) rule.
However, this only really applies to Germany, Should we now assume that German football is actually more modern than football internationally? Hard to imagine, but this season there are already a few clues (those already since the 2010 World Cup, when “unsre Jungs” really caused a furore after all).
p. Review of the betting recommendations
But this question is always more explosive: which bets should/must have been made according to the computer? Where would he have messed with the betting market? And: if he messes with it, with the great mass intelligence, does he have good reasons for 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.
Pairing 1 X 2
Stuttgart HSV 1.62 4.20 6.00
Gladbach Nuremberg 2.14 3.60 3.75
Augsburg Hannover 3.10 3.55 2.42
Mainz Dortmund 3.95 3.70 2.06
Schalke 04 Freiburg 1.41 5.20 9.20
Wolfsburg Kaiserslautern 1.90 3.80 4.50
FC Bayern Leverkusen 1.36 5.60 10.50
FC Cologne Hoffenheim 3.10 3.60 2.44
Werder Hertha 1.90 3.85 4.40
Goal expectation 3.55
So the analysis like this: the Stuttgart bet had been declared not really sympathetic, as they had also noticed the upward trend at HSV. On the other hand, 2:0 was easily possible with the great chance with a goal against the post by Cacau, and this intermediate result would by no means have been undeserved at that time.
Gladbach worked out the victory very systematically. The bet was very good, as they missed another series of great chances (Kicker: 8:1).
Hannover was clearly the better team and also missed some good chances (Kicker: 4:6, so Hannover in front). The bet was good, especially since a 2.42 only has to occur at far less than 50% for it to pay off.
Dortmund only won in the last second, but they were in control throughout and you can only call the victory lucky because of the timing.
In any case, Freiburg was also justified. Not only did they take the lead, but they also had good chances all the time. Even if Schalke had the better attack (and therefore needed fewer chances): with a chance ratio of 7:7 you can only have had a good bet. It’s worth mentioning that you couldn’t be sure that Schalke would be able to cope with the departure of coach Rangnick (one hopes that it was widely enough discussed elsewhere).
Wolfsburg was not a good bet, not in terms of how the game went. The whole first half (which you watched live) Kaiserslautern were rather the better team, closer to taking the lead, and then there was the sending off against Wolfsburg. Even if they were good in the 2nd half and even won: not a good bet.
The thrown away (virtual) money on Leverkusen should not be mentioned further. Just this tip to yourself: don’t mess with Bayern!
The Werder bet was, curiously enough, not so bad up to a certain point and completely contradicted all the assessments we had heard: Hertha made it 1:0 after 4 minutes and such a goal is never really forced. It simply happens because there is a chance and the ball is in. It does “count” for the statistics, and you can perhaps enjoy (or alternatively be annoyed by) a successful action, but for the quality of the bet it has no significance. This is about the performance of the team(s). After that Werder had the really very good phase where it smelled overwhelmingly like 1:1. That’s when they were good and anyone who says otherwise has no idea. Reporters orientate themselves exclusively on the score anyway and said that they were good after the 1:1. However, this of all things is not true: they got worse and worse, until in the 2nd half they totally lost control of the game. Hertha had more of the game and, logically, you include this more in the quality of the bet. However, the decisive break came – and one would have preferred to see the game continue at 11 against 11, for real assessment – through the sending-offs. Werder really thought it would go away by itself and Hertha fought back fantastically, deserved the winning goal more than Werder and, for reasons of justice, you really would have begrudged them it live. The two denied penalties did the rest to make the game really miserable. The late winning goal is only favourable in the statistics. It was neither deserved nor wanted at that moment.
But: you really want to see the game again in its entirety, without these two events: there is no early lead for Hertha and there are no sending-offs. Because: in large phases of the 11 against 11, Werder did look quite good. So, looking at it that way, one would repeat it after all, even though the images seen do not confirm a good bet overall at all. It was bad, it was just a curious course of play.
Betting recommendation Statistics of the individual match days
Matchday No. Number of bets Number of hits expected hit deviation win/loss
1 7 5 2.84 +2.16 +7.96
2 7 3 2.77 +0.23 +1.75
3 2 0 1.00 -1.00 -2.00
4 3 1 1.14 -0.14 -0.28
5 6 2 2.54 -0.54 -2.33
6 8 3 2.29 +0.71 +8.10
7 8 4 3.55 +0.45 +0.00
The result accordingly: exactly par. There is no need to comment further, only this, that one exceeds the hit expectation but still only goes out pari is due to the fact that this time only the small odds were hit (which, by the way, is always more probable).
Statistics in total
Total number of bets Total number of hits Total balance G/V in% Total expected hits Total hit deviation
7 5 +7.96 113.71% 2.84 +2.16
14 8 +9.71 69.36% 5.61 +2.39
16 8 +7.71 48.19% 6.61 +1.39
19 9 +7.43 39.11% 7.74 +1.26
25 11 +5.10 20.40% 10.28 +0.72
33 14 +13.20 40.00% 12.57 +1.43
41 18 +13.20 32.20% 16.12 +1.88
Overall, it remains a decent plus and that makes one happy.
q. Preview of the 8th matchday
Note: The computer calculates the goal expectations (and the individually maintained home advantage not shown here) according to a specially developed – of course explainable and highly logical – algorithm. These in turn are offset against the probabilities of occurrence, in the past by simulation, today long since by a function derived from the simulation results). These goal expectancy values have also long since proved to be competitive in goal number betting on the betting market.
Goal expectation Home Away Total
Kaiserslautern Stuttgart 1.37 1.52 2.89
Leverkusen Wolfsburg 1.78 1.10 2.87
Dortmund Augsburg 2.02 0.52 2.54
Nuremberg Mainz 1.45 1.17 2.62
Hoffenheim FC Bayern 0.95 1.89 2.84
Freiburg Gladbach 1.31 1.40 2.72
Hertha FC Cologne 1.88 1.40 3.29
Hannover Werder 1.50 1.32 2.82
HSV Schalke 04 1.32 1.47 2.79
13.57 11.81 25.37
Expected goal total Expected goal average 25.37 2.82
Hertha vs Cologne as the highest scoring game? Can’t really feel that way, but if the stupid box means? Otherwise, a bit fewer goals expected than last time, but there were fewer before. So a small adjustment, made by the computer on its own initiative (but according to the rules).
Note: The determination is calculated as the sum of the squares of the individual probabilities. This measures how much one can commit to a favourite in a certain pairing. The higher a favourite position is, the higher the sum of the squares, but also the more “certain” the occurrence of the event. The mathematical question in itself is even more how far one can commit, since one cannot really determine this value. Events are predicted whose probabilities are unknown. Nevertheless, one can check the quality in the long term by comparing expected/occurred events.
The determination expected
Pairing 1 X 2
Kaiserslautern Stuttgart 34.71% 23.66% 41.63% 34.98%
Leverkusen Wolfsburg 53.75% 22.64% 23.61% 39.59%
Dortmund Augsburg 73.01% 18.45% 8.53% 57.44%
Nuremberg Mainz 44.01% 25.01% 30.97% 35.22%
Hoffenheim FC Bayern 18.72% 21.58% 59.70% 43.80%
Freiburg Gladbach 35.56% 24.55% 39.89% 34.58%
Hertha FC Cologne 49.21% 21.75% 29.05% 37.38%
Hannover Werder 41.93% 23.97% 34.10% 34.95%
HSV Schalke 04 34.29% 24.15% 41.57% 34.86%
3.85 2.06 3.09 3.53
Average expected commitment: 39.20%
The expected commitment again at under 40%, which is slightly below average. There are probably slightly more even pairings than normal.
The fair odds
Note: the fair odds are just the inverse of the probabilities. However, this is how the games are offered on the betting market or traded on the betting exchanges (“betfair”). You can gladly compare what the computer guesses. The deviations will not be enormous, but theoretically every bet is a good bet (from the computer’s point of view) if the odds paid on the market are above the fair odds. “Good” is the bet insofar as it promises long-term profit. If you consistently make bets in this way, you should make a profit in the long run. Of course, there are no guarantees for this either.
Pairing 1 X 2
Kaiserslautern Stuttgart 2.88 4.23 2.40
Leverkusen Wolfsburg 1.86 4.42 4.23
Dortmund Augsburg 1.37 5.42 11.72
Nuremberg Mainz 2.27 4.00 3.23
Hoffenheim FC Bayern 5.34 4.63 1.68
Freiburg Gladbach 2.81 4.07 2.51
Hertha FC Cologne 2.03 4.60 3.44
Hannover Werder 2.39 4.17 2.93
HSV Schalke 04 2.92 4.14 2.41
Comparison with the betting exchange betfair
(The betting recommendations)
Pairing 1 X 2
Kaiserslautern Stuttgart 3.35 3.55 2.32
Leverkusen Wolfsburg 1.76 3.95 5.20
Dortmund Augsburg 1.27 6.40 13.50
Nuremberg Mainz 2.18 3.60 3.45
Hoffenheim FC Bayern 6.60 4.70 1.56
Freiburg Gladbach 3.20 3.50 2.42
Hertha FC Cologne 1.99 3.70 4.00
Hannover Werder 2.84 3.60 2.70
HSV Schalke 04 2.78 3.75 2.56
Goal expectation 1.28
No really good bets this time, more just technical play. Lautern wasn’t that bad lately and why shouldn’t a win be possible? Wolfsburg aren’t great either and their supporters are wavering, but Leverkusen aren’t playing that great either – even if you exclude the game against Bayern. Before that, there was a 1:4 against Cologne.
Augsburg are supposed to get their first win in Dortmund? Another unit in the rubbish.
Hoffenheim defeats Bayern? Well, after all, both top favourites play in the Champions League during the week. But still: not a good tip, how could it be? “Don’t mess with Bayern.” Just as a side note: if none did, the odds at betfair would be close to infinity….
Hannover vs Werder is also a purely technical bet.
In case you wonder why Freiburg wasn’t chosen as a bet: think of it as making the statement that “this team is so good, you all don’t know it” with every pre-placed bet on Gladbach, and thus competing in the betting market. Now the market has tilted. He sort of sees that Gladbach really is that good. Only in a way he’s claiming a bit more: “Gladbach is so good, YOU don’t even know how good.” And now you don’t want to mess with that. “Ok, yes, you’re right, they’re even better, I can see that.”
And now: have fun (and gladly wished at this point: good luck).
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 league third place team has against the first league third last.
c. Point expectations and discrepancies
d. Evaluation of the 5th second division matchday
e. Preview of the 7th Second League Matchday