#### cosmicsports

##### Colt

I 'm using the elo ratings from clubelo.com currently.

When I say "currently" I mean before the virus, which let's hope will go away soon and we are going to see football resuming.

I have constructed a probability scale using those.

From this forum thread:

I borrow something:

LIVERPOOL - WATFORD ............................... 81.7% - 11.2% - 7.1%

BURNLEY - NEWCASTLE .............................. 38.3% - 37.6% - 34.1%

CHELSEA - BOURNEMOUTH ...................... 67.2% - 17.7% - 15.1%

LEICESTER - NORWICH ................................ 73.8% - 14.9% - 11.3%

SHEFFIELD UTD - ASTON VILLA ............... 51.7% - 23.4% - 24.9%

SOUTHAMPTON - WEST HAM ................. 36.9% - 28.0% - 35.1%

MAN UTD - EVERTON .................................. 58.9% - 20.9% - 20.2%

WOLVES - TOTTENHAM .............................. 33.4% - 28.7% - 37.9%

ARSENAL - MAN CITY .................................. 26.2% - 29.7% - 44.1%

CRYSTAL PALACE - BRIGHTON ................. 59.0% - 20.9% - 20.1%

The first number is the probability of the home win, the second number is the probability of the draw and the third number is the probability of the away win.

Probability is important because it tells me if a certain result is a value bet (or looks like a value bet).

So in the last match (Palace v. Brighton) it advises me to buy the home win if the price offered is 1.69 or higher (1.69 = 1/0.59), to buy the draw if the price offered is 4.78 or higher and to buy the away win if the price is 4.98 or higher.

Strictly speaking I also use the elo values of the teams before the last match to make an average, as this improves things a little, but for the

sake of simplicity I don't do that now.

Now my studies show that this elo-probability formula of mine has a predictivity value of 38.5%.

The predictivity is a benchmark I 'm using and it is a quantity that derives when we compare the elo probabilities with the results.

38.5% is not bad. I don't know if it beats the bookies but it's not bad, for the English premier.

Let me compute the (partial) predictivity from just those ten matches:

The matches were held in December 2019 and the results were:

1 - 1 - 2 - X - 1 - 2 - X - 2 - 2 - X

So predictivity = (0.817 x 0.383 x 0.151 x 0.149 x 0.517 x 0.351 x 0.209 x 0.379 x 0.441 x 0.209 ) ^ (1/10) = 0.314

(it's on the low side - Chelsea losing to Bournemouth and Leicester drawing against Norwich made it so)

The thing is if those are true probabilities, then the selection system should work.

That is if I don't find a good price then reject the match (or declare it a "no bet"), if I do find a good price then make the bet.

If however I am a loser in the long run -say after 3-4 months of betting- what does it mean ?

It means they are not "true" probabilities !

But I did all this work very carefully -or you did it if I teach you how- so what went wrong ?

Let me tell you what went wrong.

Nothing went wrong but the bookies were using better probabilities !

In this game the "true probability" is the one that achieves the higher score, in the sense of the long multiplication I did previously.

So the situation is what it is and I can't report on new matches because as I said we are in this stoppage period.

But the starting point was the ratings themselves.

Those ratings are computed and recomputed every week as we know by means of another standard formula, which you can see in the clubelo.com site. It's a theory that was first proposed by a Russian mathematician, Dr Arpad Elo.

There are other ratings used here and there.

For the world cup of 2014 I remember FIFA were using some other ratings (but when I asked them how those compare to Elos they replied that "they don't make comparisons").

It's a fact the the ratings makers tend to avoid producing benchmarks - the Elo sites too don't give benchmarks.

But from all those verious rating systems which ones do you think are the best is my question to the forum (so hopefully we make the score go higher) ?

When I say "currently" I mean before the virus, which let's hope will go away soon and we are going to see football resuming.

I have constructed a probability scale using those.

From this forum thread:

### ELO VERSUS POWER RATINGS.

..... Ok here are this week's ELO Ratings:- ENGLISH PREMIER LEAGUE. Southampton T 1663 v Leicester C 1773 -110 2 Manchester C 2023 v Aston V 1638 .385 1 Brighton & H A 1635 v Everton 1731 -.096 2 Watford 1649 v Bournemouth 1699 -.050 X West Ham U 1729 v Sheffield U 1652 .077 X Burnley 1695 v...

www.theukbettingforum.co.uk

I borrow something:

Using those elo values my probability calculator says:..... Here are this week's Elo ratings fully updated:-

ENGLISH PREMIER LEAGUE.

Liverpool 2046 v Watford 1623 423 1

Burnley 1679 v Newcastle U 1716 -37 X

Chelsea 1871 v Bournemouth 1678 193 1

Leicester C 1839 v Norwich C 1590 243 1

Sheffield U 1668 v Aston V 1631 35 X

Southampton T 1640 v West Ham U 1685 -45 X

Manchester U 1803 v Everton 1699 104 1

Wolverhampton W 1751 v Tottenham H 1839 -88 2

Arsenal 1809 v Manchester C 2000 -191 2

Crystal P 1743 v Brighton & H A 1647 96 1

The contest between Elo and Paul Steel Ratings was surprisingly won by the former 7/10 to 5/10 but there was some strange results around again.

Ark Royal's selections also beat Paul Steele ratings scoring 6/10 so well done there also.

LIVERPOOL - WATFORD ............................... 81.7% - 11.2% - 7.1%

BURNLEY - NEWCASTLE .............................. 38.3% - 37.6% - 34.1%

CHELSEA - BOURNEMOUTH ...................... 67.2% - 17.7% - 15.1%

LEICESTER - NORWICH ................................ 73.8% - 14.9% - 11.3%

SHEFFIELD UTD - ASTON VILLA ............... 51.7% - 23.4% - 24.9%

SOUTHAMPTON - WEST HAM ................. 36.9% - 28.0% - 35.1%

MAN UTD - EVERTON .................................. 58.9% - 20.9% - 20.2%

WOLVES - TOTTENHAM .............................. 33.4% - 28.7% - 37.9%

ARSENAL - MAN CITY .................................. 26.2% - 29.7% - 44.1%

CRYSTAL PALACE - BRIGHTON ................. 59.0% - 20.9% - 20.1%

The first number is the probability of the home win, the second number is the probability of the draw and the third number is the probability of the away win.

Probability is important because it tells me if a certain result is a value bet (or looks like a value bet).

So in the last match (Palace v. Brighton) it advises me to buy the home win if the price offered is 1.69 or higher (1.69 = 1/0.59), to buy the draw if the price offered is 4.78 or higher and to buy the away win if the price is 4.98 or higher.

Strictly speaking I also use the elo values of the teams before the last match to make an average, as this improves things a little, but for the

sake of simplicity I don't do that now.

Now my studies show that this elo-probability formula of mine has a predictivity value of 38.5%.

The predictivity is a benchmark I 'm using and it is a quantity that derives when we compare the elo probabilities with the results.

38.5% is not bad. I don't know if it beats the bookies but it's not bad, for the English premier.

Let me compute the (partial) predictivity from just those ten matches:

The matches were held in December 2019 and the results were:

1 - 1 - 2 - X - 1 - 2 - X - 2 - 2 - X

So predictivity = (0.817 x 0.383 x 0.151 x 0.149 x 0.517 x 0.351 x 0.209 x 0.379 x 0.441 x 0.209 ) ^ (1/10) = 0.314

(it's on the low side - Chelsea losing to Bournemouth and Leicester drawing against Norwich made it so)

The thing is if those are true probabilities, then the selection system should work.

That is if I don't find a good price then reject the match (or declare it a "no bet"), if I do find a good price then make the bet.

If however I am a loser in the long run -say after 3-4 months of betting- what does it mean ?

It means they are not "true" probabilities !

But I did all this work very carefully -or you did it if I teach you how- so what went wrong ?

Let me tell you what went wrong.

Nothing went wrong but the bookies were using better probabilities !

In this game the "true probability" is the one that achieves the higher score, in the sense of the long multiplication I did previously.

So the situation is what it is and I can't report on new matches because as I said we are in this stoppage period.

But the starting point was the ratings themselves.

Those ratings are computed and recomputed every week as we know by means of another standard formula, which you can see in the clubelo.com site. It's a theory that was first proposed by a Russian mathematician, Dr Arpad Elo.

There are other ratings used here and there.

For the world cup of 2014 I remember FIFA were using some other ratings (but when I asked them how those compare to Elos they replied that "they don't make comparisons").

It's a fact the the ratings makers tend to avoid producing benchmarks - the Elo sites too don't give benchmarks.

But from all those verious rating systems which ones do you think are the best is my question to the forum (so hopefully we make the score go higher) ?

Last edited: