World Cup Betting

[Dewi Jones]

Come on then guys. Going on my own knowledge the bookies have given me a tanning in the first round of games. I had an idea a few seasons ago (based on a book that impressed me) that peoples combined knowledge might beat the bookies, and it made consistent small returns. I'd like to try it for the second load of games and try and make my money back.

All I do is collate your collective opinions, and compare them to the bookies prices. And put the money on the results where our opinion suggests the bookie has his odds wrong.

If the theory is correct then it's important that all your opinions are independent. So please give your opinion before reading other peoples opinion in this thread.

Just click reply to and then split 10 points between the three possible results win / draw / win based on how likely you think the result is to happen.

For example Cardiff vs Swansea 10 / 0 / 0 Ayatollah

Brazil v Mexico
Australia v Holland
Spain v Chile
Cameroon v Croatia
Colombia v Ivory Coast
Uruguay v England
Japan v Greece
Italy v Costa Rica
Switzerland v France
Honduras v Ecuador
Argentina v Iran
Germany v Ghana
Nigeria v Bosnia
USA vs Portugal
Belgium v Russia
South Korea v Algeria

I'll work them out vs the bookies odds tomorrow afternoon before the Brazil game and post the tips here at say 5pm. The more that reply the better the tips should be.

[Rob Thompson]

Brazil v Mexico - 6/2/2
Australia v Holland - 0/1/9
Spain v Chile - 5/1/4
Cameroon v Croatia - 4/2/4
Colombia v Ivory Coast - 4/2/4
Uruguay v England - 3/3/4
Japan v Greece - 5/4/1
Italy v Costa Rica - 6/3/1
Switzerland v France - 3/3/4
Honduras v Ecuador - 0/3/7
Argentina v Iran - 10/0/0
Germany v Ghana - 7/2/1
Nigeria v Bosnia - ?
USA vs Portugal - 0/2/8
Belgium v Russia - 5/2/3
South Korea v Algeria - ?

I've left blank the two results that I have absolutely no idea about.

[Dewi Jones]

Thanks Rob. I'm gonna give it until after the Iran Nigeria game and then I'm going to collate the results (I'm getting input from other places too). I want to give people who've contributed a chance to get on the tips if they want to, and I may not get a chance with work tomorrow. So if anybody else wants to put their opinion, please do so in the next couple of hours.

[Geoff Chandler]

I'm up £90 on a £5.00 roll up.

Brazil, France, Italy, Holland (that was the one I gambled on) and Argentina all to win.

Put a couple of quid on all the favourites in a roll up the next round.
Germany has already come in.

Serious fun will start in the quarter finals. One one bet going 1-0 across
the board perming 4 from 8. (may make Brazil a 2 or 3 niller.)

[Rob Thompson]

Having watched Iran vs Nigeria, I think i was rather too harsh on Iran in the odds I gave earlier. Probably 8/2/0 is more sensible.
For Nigeria vs Bosnia I would say 2/5/3. I still have no idea about SK vs Algeria.

[Ian Thompson]

Come on then guys. Going on my own knowledge the bookies have given me a tanning in the first round of games. I had an idea a few seasons ago (based on a book that impressed me) that peoples combined knowledge might beat the bookies, and it made consistent small returns. I'd like to try it for the second load of games and try and make my money back.

All I do is collate your collective opinions, and compare them to the bookies prices. And put the money on the results where our opinion suggests the bookie has his odds wrong.

If the theory is correct then it's important that all your opinions are independent. So please give your opinion before reading other peoples opinion in this thread.

I very much doubt the theory is correct. The bookie is unlikely to get his odds wrong. His aim is not to determine the actual odds of each outcome occurring; it is to set the odds in such a way that he wins regardless of the result, based on bets already taken and future bets he'd like to encourage/discourage. So you're not really trying to beat the bookie. You're trying to beat everyone who has already placed bets with the bookie. Why would the people on here be better informed than everyone else, seeing as it's not a chess event?

[Dewi Jones]

You're probably correct Ian. It is a mugs game, but there is not much interest in the the finals of major tournaments when you're Welsh unless you have a bet. Plus, Coral gave me £20 by offering me 2/1 on Brazil to wear yellow for opening an account on their website. I'm still spending that. Once it and my original £20 stake are gone I'm packing up . Though to answer your point about what the odds are based on - that doesnt matter. It's what the odds are that's important. The bookies motivation for setting them is irrelevant.

Here are the tips as of the opinions I've canvassed vs the opinion of the bookie. The important thing to note is that I'm not saying all these results are likely, I'm saying the bookies price is too generous compared with what we think will happen. So whilst our opinion is still that Spain will beat Chile, we think Chile are much more likely to win than their price suggests, and if our opinion of the odds is correct then if we were to make the bet 10 or 100 times that we would end up ahead. For that reason, I wouldn't include all of them in an accumulator.

For my accumulator I've only included results that we suggest are both likely to happen (more than 50%) and are undervalued by the bookie. The 3 in my accumulator are in bold below and only pay roughly 2/1

There isn't a tip for every game, as it's difficult to find value that beats the bookies profit margin, the bookie sets the odds equvalent to every result adding up to somewhere between 105% and 115% - thats his profit margin. So he's gotta be quite a way out for a price to look good.


Here are the returns for a £1 bet. As it's only an experiment I'm just putting a quid on them all.

Holland 2/9
Australia v Holland
Estimated Return:£1.22

Chile 4/1
Spain v Chile
Return:£5.00

Draw 9/4
Uruguay v England
Return:£3.25

Argentina 1/7
Argentina v Iran
Return:£1.14

South Korea 6/5
South Korea v Algeria
Estimated Return:£2.20

Draw 11/5
Belgium v Russia
Return:£3.20


The other results that showed better than bookie odds but only marginally were Brazil Mexico the draw, Colombia to beat Ivory Coast, Japan Greece the draw, Switzerland to beat France, Honduras Ecuador the draw and Portugal to beat the USA. The Portugal result was also 64% likelyhood in our opinion, so you could add that to your acca as well. But all these are by a much smaller margin and probably not worth the gamble.

Oh and the price most undervalued in our opinion is South Korea to beat Algeria,. So if you only have one bet, have that one.

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Dewi,

"...It is a mugs game."

Is it if you go overboard or try to chase your lasses.
I set a limit of £5.00 a week on gambling. No more.

If I win I usually pocket half and have fun with the rest.
Usually putting money on horses with chess names.
The Knights of Thunder recently romped home at 40-1.

If I lose I walk away. Never chase your losses.
The trick is too walk away.
How many times have you seen someone winning money on a puggie
and end up putting it all back again...you must learn to walk away.

And you have to bet properly.
No loyalty, no putting money on teams your support.
No putting money on results you want to happen.
Taking on the bookies is a serious business, no room for sentiment.

If you had used your £1.00 in a roll up on your above selections
then your winnings would have been £49.00.
You could have permed any 5 from 6 (cost £6.00) and showed a profit if one result fails.

One of my lines that is looking good ia 9 team roll-up.
Germany and USA have come in already. My £2.00 stake will return £236.60
and the rest are all odds on favourites (except Comubia to beat the Ivory coast
if that happens then I'm quids in.). The last game in the roll up is Italy v Costa Rica.
If the other 8 are up then I will put £20 on a draw just to cover my ass.
(so my winning will be £216.00 - I'm Ok with that for a £2.00 stake.
I'm not greedy. I want a piece of the pie, not all of it.)

But if it don't happen I'll shrug the old shoulders.

I won £27,777.71p in 1991 on correct scores.
Since then I've netted a couple of grand a few times.

"It is a mugs game."

[Mick Norris]

Hi Dewi,

"...It is a mugs game."

Is it if you go overboard or try to chase your lasses

I don't think you should chase losses, not so sure about lasses

[Alex Holowczak]

There was a very good article on FiveThirtyEight written by Nate Silver, who writes blogs on statistics in sport for ESPN. He's one of baseball's leading sabremetricians, and he is probably best known in the UK as the man who correctly predicted, using statistics, the winner in each of the 50 states in the US Presidential Election in 2012.

He has now reduced international football to statistics, and has created SPI, a "Soccer Performance Index".

Here is one relevant article: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its ... p-to-lose/

Basically, he believes Brazil's odds of winning the World Cup are lower than their statistical odds; and I extrapolate from that that this would be a "good" bet.

So actually:

I very much doubt the theory is correct. The bookie is unlikely to get his odds wrong. His aim is not to determine the actual odds of each outcome occurring; it is to set the odds in such a way that he wins regardless of the result, based on bets already taken and future bets he'd like to encourage/discourage. So you're not really trying to beat the bookie. You're trying to beat everyone who has already placed bets with the bookie.

Because you're trying to beat the people who bet, rather than the bookies, there are good bets available. In the case of who wins the World Cup, Brazil is the best bet. Argentina, Germany and Spain are bad bets by comparison. Italy is an awful bet. If you want to bet on an outsider, Chile is a good bet.

Similarly: http://fivethirtyeight.com/interactives/world-cup/

There are odds of each team making it out of the group, and in certain positions. He predicts England will be eliminated, but that we are marginal favourites against Uruguay and favourites against Costa Rica. In Group C, he makes Chile marginal favourites to beat Spain.

If you're going to gamble on match results, the thing to do is to bet on games where the chance of success statistically is better than the percentage chance with the odds. These are provided in the link above.

Some good bets, at a glance, seem to be:
(1) Brazil winning the World Cup
(2) Chile qualifying from Group C
(3) Costa Rica qualifying from Group D

Anyway, there is a choice. You can bet based on subjective opinions from people who are uninformed, or bet based on objective statistics produced by someone who is very well-informed, with a track record for success in this area. I know which choice I'd put my money on as being the one to go for!

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi ALex.

My £2.00 roll up went out the window when Brazil drew.

England got beat by the odd goal in three by two good teams who played
their best v England and clearly underestimated Costa Rica.

Twice England came from behind which shows some character to build on.
A cap on foreign players fielded in England and Scotland would do both countries the world of good.
(if/when Scotland gets Independence then of course English and Scottish players will be foreign. Even better!)

Nobody really expected England to do well. They were 28-1 to win the the thing
which is lowest odds I can ever recall for them in the World Cup.

Costa Rica win the group? Not yet.

They are through and England have a bit of pride to make up.
They will be wanting the win more than Costa Rica and now the pressure is off anything can happen.

Putting some money on England. (bet against them in the first two games and cleaned up.)

Uruguay v Italy will be some game ( it could possibly be a bloodbath in the style of
'The Battle of Santiago 1962'. That was Italy v Chile and even has it's own wiki page.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Santiago

If (a big if but worth a gamble, I'll throw £10.00 at it, I'm still using the bookies money)
if England beat Costa Rica then the winner of the Uruguay - Italy game may top the group
as it will come down to goal difference.

Italy lead Uruguay in goal difference so a draw in this match and Italy goes forward.

(possible double there England win and Italy - Uruguay draw.)

[Kevin Williamson]

Putting some money on England. (bet against them in the first two games and cleaned up.)

Yes Geoff, you were spotted celebrating your windfall in the São Paulo
crowd the other night.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... t-27939845

[IM Jack Rudd]

A cap on foreign players fielded in England and Scotland would do both countries the world of good.

It would also be illegal, but you probably knew that already.

[Rob Thompson]

Jack - I believe it's only illegal under EU law, so if Scotland's independence takes them out of the EU they may be able to impose it.

[IM Jack Rudd]

Jack - I believe it's only illegal under EU law, so if Scotland's independence takes them out of the EU they may be able to impose it.

True, but I don't see Scotland's leaving the EU if they become independent.