Wager Mage
Photo: Leeloo Thefirst
For the BTTS probability, it is the adjustment to the probability of the 1-1 outcome that is of interest. The trick is basically to subtract the probability of the 1-1 outcome for the underlying independent model without the Dixon-Coles adjustment, and then add back the Dixon-Coles adjusted 1-1 probability.
Cashing out early in sports betting Early cash-out betting is an increasingly popular option at sportsbooks. Bettors have the option of taking some...
Read More »
You can deduct your losses…to an extent You're allowed to deduct losses only up to the amount of the gambling income you claimed. So if you won...
Read More »R – opisthokonta.net, and kindly contributed to Want to share your content on R-bloggers? [This article was first published on, and kindly contributed to R-bloggers ]. (You can report issue about the content on this page here Want to share your content on R-bloggers? click here if you have a blog, or here if you don't. I recently read an interesting paper that was published last year, by Igor Barbosada Costa, Leandro Balby Marinho and Carlos Eduardo Santos Pires: Forecasting football results and exploiting betting markets: The case of “both teams to score. In the paper they try out different approaches for predicting the probability of both teams to score at least one goal (“both teams to score”, or BTTS for short). A really cool thing about the paper is that they actually used my goalmodel R package. This is the first time I have seen my package used in a paper, so im really excited bout that! In addition to using goalmodel, they also tried a few other machine learning approaches, where insted of trying to model the number of goals by using the Poisson distribution, they train the machine learning models directly on the both-teams-to-score outcome. They found that both approaches had similar performance. I have to say that I personally prefer to model the scorelines directly using Poisson-like models, rather than trying to fit a classifier to the outcome you want to predict, whether it is over/under, win/draw/lose, or both-teams-to-score. Although I can’t say I have any particularly rational arguments in favour of the goal models, I like the fact that you can use the goal model to compute the probabilities of any outcome you want from the same model, without having to fit separate models for every outcome you are interested in. But then again, goalmodels are of course limited by the particlar model you choose (Poisson, Dixon-Coles etc), which could give less precice predictions on some of these secondary outcomes. Okay, so how can you compute the probability of both teams to score using the Poisson based models from goalmodel? Here’s what the paper says: This is a straightforward approach where they have the matrix with the probabilities of all possible scorelines, and then just add together the probabilities that correspond to the outcome of at least one team to score no goals. And since this is the exact opposite outcome (the complement) of both teams to score, you take one minus this probability to get the BTTS probability. I assume thay have used the predict_goals() function to get the matrix in question from a fitted goal model. In theory, the Poisson model allows to an infinite amount of goals, but in practice it is sufficient to just compute the matrix up to 10 or 15 goals. Heres a small self-contained example of how the matrix with the score line probabilities is computed by the predict_goals() function, and how you can compute the BTTS probability from that.
Eddie Robbins III BetOnline Type of business Privately held company Key people Eddie Robbins III, CEO, Marcus Shrestha, COO, Industry Gambling...
Read More »
Not all riders use a running martingale, but for those who can benefit from a little extra control over their horse, they are quite handy. They can...
Read More »# Expected goals by the the two oppsing teams. expg1 <- 1.1 expg2 <- 1.9 # The upper limit of how many goals to compute probabilities for. maxgoal <- 15 # The "S" matrix, which can also be computed by predict_goals(). # Assuming the independent Poisson model. probmat <- dpois(0:maxgoal, expg1) %*% t(dpois(0:maxgoal, expg1)) # Compute the BTTS probability using the formula from the paper. prob_btts <- 1 - (sum(probmat[2:nrow(probmat),1]) + sum(probmat[1,2:ncol(probmat)]) + probmat[1,1])
There are no simple hacks, slots tips or tricks to winning on slot machines. If you want better odds to win on slots, you need to: Choose the slots...
Read More »
Generally speaking, it is always best to play the maximum bet when you play slots, whether it's online or in real world casinos. Wins normally pay...
Read More »# Dixon-Coles adjustment parameter. rho <- 0.13 # 1-1 probability for the independent Poisson model. p11 <- dpois(1, lambda = expg1) * dpois(1, lambda = expg2) # Add DC adjusted 1-1 probability, subtract unadjusted 1-1 probability. dc_correction <- (p11 * (1-rho)) - p11 # Apply the corrections prob_btts_dc <- prob_btts_2 + dc_correction If you run this, you will see that the BTTS probability decreases to 55.4% when rho = 0.13. I have added two functions for computing BTTS probabilities in the new version 0.6 of the goalmodel package, so be sure to check that out. The predict_btts() function works just like the other predict_* functions in the package, where you give the function a fitted goalmodel, together with the fixtures you want to predict, and it gives you the BTTS probability. The other function is pbtts(), which works independently of a fitted goalmodel. Instead you just give it the expected goals, and other paramters like the Dixon-Coles rho parameter, directly.
World Snooker Champion Mark Williams is also extremely proficient with a set of darts but believes a 147 is much harder, having gone close to a...
Read More »
The bottom line, IF you are going to play a parlay, play a 3 or 5 outcome parlay. For those new and lucky enough to have never been enticed by the...
Read More »
PDC World rankings Rank Player 1 Gerwyn Price 2 Peter Wright 3 Michael van Gerwen 4 Michael Smith 6 more rows
Read More »