In-Play Odds Analysis Method in Soccer Betting

Sona59

Fluctuations in odds have always been a perplexing issue for both beginners and experienced bettors. Some people like to pay attention to them, while others disdain it, thinking that odds changes are meaningless. I don't agree with this perspective. Let's examine it through the following example.

Opening Odds: In the calculation of opening odds, according to the understanding of operators, it should be something like this:

\[ \text{Result calculated through opening formula} = A \times \text{Experience result of the bookmaker's brain trust} = B \times \text{Anticipated perception of bettors for this match} = C \]

So, the final opening odds should be: \[ \text{Opening odds} = A \times a + B \times b + C \times c \]

Where \(a\), \(b\), and \(c\) are three coefficients. I've given them the name "Opening System Coefficients." \(a + b + c = 100%\). Different bookmakers have different coefficient systems, which are unknown and unpredictable for many bettors.

Let's explain the formula above. For a match, if a bookmaker (mostly referring to European odds, as they are the guiding odds and are the first to be released) opens odds for a certain play (let's call it Project A), the first thing is to calculate its probability. Assume that the calculated probability by the opening bookmaker is 40%, the brain trust's experienced probability is 45%, and the bookmaker's anticipated perception by bettors is 70%.

Then, the final probability would be: \[ \text{Final Probability} = 40\% \times a + 45\% \times b + 70\% \times c \]

From the above, we can see that the opening bookmaker's formula (or its opening calculation theory) affects the first of the three factors in the opening. Many people often overlook the role of the bookmaker's brain trust experience (B) and the bookmaker's anticipated perception by bettors (C). I remember reading a classic article on the forum that discussed a theory similar to the above, but it only mentioned C without B.

In the three factors A, B, and C:
- A remains almost unchanged after the opening because the formula and theory only process the data, and the same data cannot yield different results in a short time.
- B may make slight adjustments; perhaps pre-match news and changes will make the brain trust and operators change their views on a match.
- C is the most likely factor to change because bettors' views on a match are difficult to statistically analyze using data and theory. The bookmaker's perception is often an estimated result.

The above explanation is my understanding of the opening. After the opening odds are released, it actually has a feedback effect on C. Bettors will make certain adjustments based on the opening odds set by the bookmaker, and changes in the match in the day or two before the match are also involved. So, when formally accepting bets, the opening odds often make some adjustments.

Introducing the system coefficient of a, b, and c in the above example, assuming \(a = 40%\), \(b = 20%\), \(c = 40%\), the probability obtained is \(53%\).

Suppose a change occurs between the opening and acceptance, making the bookmaker's brain trust feel that the probability should be adjusted to 40%, while the public thinks it should rise to 80%.

Then, the adjusted probability is: \[ \text{Adjusted Probability} = 40\% \times a + 40\% \times b + 80\% \times c = 56% \]

This situation occurs where the bookmaker does not favor the outcome, but the odds are increased in terms of probability. Using this formula, you can explore the changes in the values of coefficients b and c to explain most of the changes between the opening and acceptance odds. I won't demonstrate each one here. The so-called "hot favorites must die" is not necessarily all true. Using this formula, the explanation is that if a match is a hot favorite, the odds change should be consistent with the enthusiasm of the public. If the odds change by the bookmaker is less than the enthusiasm of the public, resulting in a significant difference between the two, then the "hot favorites must die" phenomenon occurs.

Kapil334

The method of analysis is also something you shouldn't miss learning.

Shri333

Having too much information can lead to confusion in the mind.

Jafar224

Having too much information can lead to confusion in the mind.