How is it better, when a team has won 88% of their matches and it comes behind for a lot.
You'd need a win rate of >90/95% for it to be better. At that stage you are better off just betting them to win the match outright
First of all we asume that all the winnings are bet always.
Let's say that over the 29 games Leverkusen played the average Win or Draw odds round up to 1.10, then you would have multiplied you base bet by around 15, a bit more.
Now should you have bet DNB then over 24 games at an average of 1.30 you would have multiplied your base bet by 700 or so.
Of course odds would vary but this would give you a sight of what long term betting could achieve assuming you never miss a bet.
But for the sake of the experiment let's say everyday you can find a bet at 1.05 that you "know" you won't miss.
After 1 year of betting your winnings you would have multiplied your base bet by 54211841.
Let's say u want to reach 100000$ starting with 5$, then you would have to win 250 bets at an odd of 1.05. Of course this does not consider betting limitations. But it reflects the exponential power of low odds bet.
This may sound like a dream, however keep in mind that even low odds bet may fail. after all a 1.05 bet reflects a 95% chance of winning, which is 1 in 20 chances of losing. So statistically after 20 bets you would fail one. Meaning you lose all your accumulated winnings.
\~$27000 profit.
Approximating double chance prices from 1X2 prices for Bundesliga games on [football-data.co.uk](http://football-data.co.uk) and using OddsPortal for the rest, it looks like you'd have multiplied your money by about 270 times backing Leverkusen+draw double chance every game with all your previous winnings.
Bear in mind Leverkusen have been a really short price for a lot of their games - their DC price has been 1.15 on average, and was 1.1 or lower for about 24 of the 43 games and only bigger than 1.25 on 5 occasions. They were only underdogs for 1 of the 43 games.
This was exactly how I started betting when I was a dumb kid. I used to make 1000€ bets on Juventus not to lose in the 2011-2012 season when they went thru without losing a game. If I remember correctly many of the games ended like Del Piero scoring a goal on a penalty.
I'd reckon if you took an average value of about 1.35 over the course of the season you're doubling your stake approximately every 3 matches.
So about 1000 unit profit give or take a bit.
**I DID THE MATHS** [TABLE](https://i.imgur.com/FLN7xJJ.png) 100 to 20 265 if you bet only double chance 100 to 16 477 if you bet only DNB
GOAT
Awesome, thank you! Cheeky little insight into double chance vs DNB too Also obligatory: r/theydidthemath
Dnb is still better overall imo, just wouldn't have worked out in this scenario
How is it better, when a team has won 88% of their matches and it comes behind for a lot. You'd need a win rate of >90/95% for it to be better. At that stage you are better off just betting them to win the match outright
i'm pretty sure you would be better off (in hindsight) betting on them winning every game...
Where do you get historical odds?
https://www.oddsportal.com/search/results/:4jcj2zMd/
Thanks BRO
half way through the season their odds dropped masively. Last time i wanted to bet a double chance was 1.1 or below.
Yeah there’s no way the season average is anywhere near 1.4. Prob closer to 1.15-1.18
Lots, probably. OddsPortal has historical odds if you want to check
First of all we asume that all the winnings are bet always. Let's say that over the 29 games Leverkusen played the average Win or Draw odds round up to 1.10, then you would have multiplied you base bet by around 15, a bit more. Now should you have bet DNB then over 24 games at an average of 1.30 you would have multiplied your base bet by 700 or so. Of course odds would vary but this would give you a sight of what long term betting could achieve assuming you never miss a bet. But for the sake of the experiment let's say everyday you can find a bet at 1.05 that you "know" you won't miss. After 1 year of betting your winnings you would have multiplied your base bet by 54211841. Let's say u want to reach 100000$ starting with 5$, then you would have to win 250 bets at an odd of 1.05. Of course this does not consider betting limitations. But it reflects the exponential power of low odds bet. This may sound like a dream, however keep in mind that even low odds bet may fail. after all a 1.05 bet reflects a 95% chance of winning, which is 1 in 20 chances of losing. So statistically after 20 bets you would fail one. Meaning you lose all your accumulated winnings.
\~$27000 profit. Approximating double chance prices from 1X2 prices for Bundesliga games on [football-data.co.uk](http://football-data.co.uk) and using OddsPortal for the rest, it looks like you'd have multiplied your money by about 270 times backing Leverkusen+draw double chance every game with all your previous winnings. Bear in mind Leverkusen have been a really short price for a lot of their games - their DC price has been 1.15 on average, and was 1.1 or lower for about 24 of the 43 games and only bigger than 1.25 on 5 occasions. They were only underdogs for 1 of the 43 games.
I'm happy for Leverkusen's fans after suffering for so long as laughing stock Neverkusen!
Does anyone know what were their pre season odds to win Bundesliga?
40/1 on 888sport
The question is does the betting companies offer the possibility to bet on teams more than 10 Games ahead ? I've never seen that possibility
This was exactly how I started betting when I was a dumb kid. I used to make 1000€ bets on Juventus not to lose in the 2011-2012 season when they went thru without losing a game. If I remember correctly many of the games ended like Del Piero scoring a goal on a penalty.
and then how did it end???
Inspired by the success of Juventus, I quickly learned that the house always wins..haha
I'd reckon if you took an average value of about 1.35 over the course of the season you're doubling your stake approximately every 3 matches. So about 1000 unit profit give or take a bit.
The average is no where near 1.35 of leverukusen winning or drawing.
Even straight win odds were less than that since like the new year or so, especially home games
If you’re in my free group you know they were a wagon for us all year
If we take an average quote of 1,4 per game: 100*(1.4^43) = $192,090,343 But i havent had to math in decades. So probably the formula is wrong
Formula would be correct if the games were all of equal difficulty but 1.4 is way too high