There was no mathematics to show that Germany would trash Brazil. Brazil were the host and they were in good form before the Neymar injury. Nobody expected Germany to win by that margin. That's how football is. You can use all the stats and predict all you want but when the players go into the field anything can happen.
You can use stats to predict a match. How many goals they score, and how many they concede per match, but all those things won't determine your success, you still have to be lucky.
And yeah, there is luck in football. A team can go into the match and everything will go well for them.
PSG last season was lucky against Barcelona. They were losing and Barcelona had already taken the lead then all of a sudden Barcelona got a red car. No mathematics can predict that.
Topic: What is harder to predict, randomness or regularity? - page 3. (Read 912 times)
So what is harder to understand about sports in general, and football in particular – random events or non-random events?
Well, I guess whatever events take place in those matches are random as there's no fixation involved in those but sometimes match fixes do happen or a player who's the top player of Team might get paid a huge sum in order to not perform good but that doesn't happen all the time.Sometimes even skilled players aren't able to perform well and that's also a random event, and sometimes even the weak players of a team perform better then their top players and that's also random event. So I guess. most events are random and not pre-planned.
I wouldn't say it as a random event, it's the result of skill and one who is playing better in terms of everything will one day so you can't say it's random while the stats gives some insights about the stronger team. Let's say if you are comparing the stats between Team A and Team B and team B scored 4 against the A for all time which is a stat and you can't conclude anything but then you need to include the multiple factors like recent form and only the result from last 10 matches instead of all, playing venue and scores scored in the particular venue which gives better stats to conclude who has the edge than one stat.
Randomness and regularity work in sports, but it's at different times/events. That's why you see a certain prediction which you've deemed sure failing you while the unexpected would work for you. But most times, if the right information is collected and used correctly, regularity may prevail. In all, I don't like relating with the randomness, it's not worth it, and so will I not honour what any mathematician says about sports.
Sport is a live event whose outcome is never 100% certain by any calculation, and it all depends on many updated conditions in which mathematics can't give accurate results. And if one has the needed real-time information and not on mathematic templates, it's highly possible that regularity (as you call it) wins more even though some predictions will definitely fail.
Sport is a live event whose outcome is never 100% certain by any calculation, and it all depends on many updated conditions in which mathematics can't give accurate results. And if one has the needed real-time information and not on mathematic templates, it's highly possible that regularity (as you call it) wins more even though some predictions will definitely fail.
I believe those events which are "random" and go against the average behavior of the team A against Team B are way harder to predict. In the case of the infamous match of Brazil versus Germany, we all could agree there was no bettor on the planned who could have predicted Brazil would underperform in such desastrous way before Germany.
Those "random" events are the result of small actions and decisions which are taken by the players of both teams before and during the match which combine to create the perfect storm for something as unusual as we saw to happen. It could be some within the Brazilian selection were mentally under pressure and Germany did not, or perhaps someone in the Brazilian team did not get enough hours of sleep during the previous night, while all the German selection did. It is a collection of small events giving birth to a huge one and making a lot of people to watch it from beginning to end.
Those "random" events are the result of small actions and decisions which are taken by the players of both teams before and during the match which combine to create the perfect storm for something as unusual as we saw to happen. It could be some within the Brazilian selection were mentally under pressure and Germany did not, or perhaps someone in the Brazilian team did not get enough hours of sleep during the previous night, while all the German selection did. It is a collection of small events giving birth to a huge one and making a lot of people to watch it from beginning to end.
i wouldn't say the sports bets are random, there is luck involved, but each time a player kicks a ball he does it with intention and with a propose, he isn't kicking the ball just to random places. We have as a good example the world cup, i don't think Argentina won on a random way, some players and some teams are better than others, and those are the ones who have a better chance to win.
So, for me the sports aren't random at all. There is skill and intention involved.
Yeah you are quite right. Sports bet aren't really random in terms of the outcomes although it may sometimes seem unpredictable. Especially in the case of popular games like soccer. Infact it's the lack of that randomness that actually suggests how most casinos usually select their odds for different outcomes of the game. The fact is although sports vets can't be 100% accurately predicted, they can still be to an extent based on team stats and past statistics of the different teams in different games.So, for me the sports aren't random at all. There is skill and intention involved.
If you check the regular odds in casinos like home to win, draw , or away to win you will find out that the team that has a better statistics in that particular sport say soccer has the smallest odd on their wager (for choosing them to win) and this is simply because probability and normal logical reasoning suggests that they would likely win the game. On the other hand the other team that has a lower stats will have the odds for their wager relatively bigger depending on how poor their stats are.
When all of a sudden a team wins despite how well organized the other team is, then I think there is luck in it.
Gascoigne could be right but you always have to look at who is telling the story.
David Moyes and Ferguson will always tell the story like they are the hero of the story which they meant to make themselves player of the game and the win is not just random.
The favorite team always has the odds of winning. By luck the other team wins, then something must have happened in the middle of the game.
In my opinion, random events are impossible to predict.
Moreover, it is impossible to build a winning strategy on them. The probability of winning when betting on a random event is 50 percent, and in reality it is less due to the commissions of the casino, bookmaker, miner, etc.
Regular (non-random) events are a completely different matter... Regular (non-random) events allow (in theory, and sometimes in practice) to create a winning betting strategy.
What is needed to create a winning betting strategy based on non-random events?
You need insider information about a given event or a correct guess about the internal mechanisms of this event. Often, this is enough to start winning and making a profit.
Moreover, it is impossible to build a winning strategy on them. The probability of winning when betting on a random event is 50 percent, and in reality it is less due to the commissions of the casino, bookmaker, miner, etc.
Regular (non-random) events are a completely different matter... Regular (non-random) events allow (in theory, and sometimes in practice) to create a winning betting strategy.
What is needed to create a winning betting strategy based on non-random events?
You need insider information about a given event or a correct guess about the internal mechanisms of this event. Often, this is enough to start winning and making a profit.
Randomness has always been harder to predict, though Football may seem non random there are various factors at play that decides winners and losers.
People score own goals not of conscious decision it just happens and the player that caused it didn't plan it
It just happened.
So no matter how it may seem non random
Football like many things in life have some element of randomness.
True. When it comes to sports betting, randomness is the nature of the game, but regularity is not assured, so the game is unpredictable. Because you can't tell what will happen to each team member, even if you bet on a team with greater field capacity and team quality, you are still not certain. Anything can happen - their key player could get hurt or something like that.People score own goals not of conscious decision it just happens and the player that caused it didn't plan it
It just happened.
So no matter how it may seem non random
Football like many things in life have some element of randomness.
So you are betting on a game with hope, and if you are lucky, you win. But you just put out your bet there randomly with random scores and predictions. But while you follow regularity, studying patterns and trends, patterns and trends don't always repeat themselves when it comes to sports.
Team A can play a certain way in a match today and play another way in the match they have tomorrow. So you can't say, "Because they won the game with this pattern or they lost with this pattern, this is what works and this is what doesn't work." So you can't be certain of any.
But I think randomness is a bit harder because regularity - you might notice one thing in a key player that will reoccur for the individual, which doesn't assure you a win in their coming game, but you just got an insight into something. Randomness - you are not sure of anything.
So what is harder to understand about sports in general, and football in particular – random events or non-random events?
My understanding and experience of betting on sports, especially football, is that the most difficult thing that I faced and felt was a goal that was not predicted, where the goal could have happened accidentally, meaning that it was an own goal that made it a little difficult for me to predict.Goals like that often happen, especially during corner kicks where when the ball is directed outside it actually goes into the goal by the host himself. I have experienced something like that several times in gambling, when I placed a bet of 2-1, it turned out to be 2-2 in the last minute with an own goal, as long as I was betting that was the most difficult thing for me.
Both are hard but then if it's about being harder then randomness is obviously the harder thing to predict. While with regularity, you have the pattern and study to make to see how the regularities are being done. While the randomness of a game or a player based on the situation that they're facing during the live game, that's something that you'll never expect to happen and see for which twists are becoming common. You'd see that most games are spontaneous and they are harder to predict.
I was struggling with the OP's question and this makes sense to me at least.
Its harder to predict randomness purely because of the nature of it, its random,
anything can happen.
Could we argue that betting against the favourite is betting on a random event
occuring we us winning our bet? while betting with the favourite is predicting
regilarity?
Watching the championship in my country, it is easier for me to say that the victory of the team that is at the top of the table, which will play with a weak team, will be considered a pattern. Talking about the outcome of the game but not about the score will most likely be correct, as it will not look surprising. But if we talk about the opposite, then of course it will be quite strange if a weak team wins the championship. Chance, and it is unlikely that these victories will be natural.
i wouldn't say the sports bets are random, there is luck involved, but each time a player kicks a ball he does it with intention and with a propose, he isn't kicking the ball just to random places. We have as a good example the world cup, i don't think Argentina won on a random way, some players and some teams are better than others, and those are the ones who have a better chance to win.
So, for me the sports aren't random at all. There is skill and intention involved.
If you say this then we can assumed that the match is a fixed game, because already when a player kicked ball as you said their intention is projected and channeled to specific point but when they ball didn't go that direction which the viewers expected it to go directly then they are assuming it's a mistakes meanwhile it's an intentional acts. This led to a conclusion that most of the matches are directly fixed match, but still there are 50% chances of luck attached to it, and they are also random/nonrandom in it.So, for me the sports aren't random at all. There is skill and intention involved.
No, that's not the definition of a fixed game, fixed game is when players colluding with each other as who is going to win the match, simply as that. As compare in a games wherein each players are playing skills vs skills and it's hard to see who is going to win until the last buzzer.
And if we talk about fixed match, as far as I know this is only happening in small league, but let's say in a World cup, it's very hard to do that as there are a lot of eyes on your team and why would someone fixed a world cup match? Doesn't make sense. As for the question by the OP, for me it's the regularity that is harder to predict that randomness itself.
If you say this then we can assumed that the match is a fixed game, because already when a player kicked ball as you said their intention is projected and channeled to specific point but when they ball didn't go that direction which the viewers expected it to go directly then they are assuming it's a mistakes meanwhile it's an intentional acts. This led to a conclusion that most of the matches are directly fixed match, but still there are 50% chances of luck attached to it, and they are also random/nonrandom in it.
That's not how to interpret fixed games, it's not fixed because they're all want to win, it's a fixed game if there's a player or the whole team want to lose. All great players did make mistake, you can't really sure that their performance will always be consistent and score goals.Just like a team that have a good statistic and shots a lot, but defeated by a team with low possession and only shots few.
sport events are not random at all.
Sure they are not. Many factors which effect outcome in sport events are anticipatorily predetermined thus making events biased (which is good for us, i.e for those who are inclined to bet on them) while should the sport events be random their outcomes would be from the even-odd class.
i wouldn't say the sports bets are random, there is luck involved, but each time a player kicks a ball he does it with intention and with a propose, he isn't kicking the ball just to random places. We have as a good example the world cup, i don't think Argentina won on a random way, some players and some teams are better than others, and those are the ones who have a better chance to win.
So, for me the sports aren't random at all. There is skill and intention involved.
If you say this then we can assumed that the match is a fixed game, because already when a player kicked ball as you said their intention is projected and channeled to specific point but when they ball didn't go that direction which the viewers expected it to go directly then they are assuming it's a mistakes meanwhile it's an intentional acts. This led to a conclusion that most of the matches are directly fixed match, but still there are 50% chances of luck attached to it, and they are also random/nonrandom in it. So, for me the sports aren't random at all. There is skill and intention involved.
What do you think is harder to predict, randomness or regularity? When I write about randomness, I mean data that statistics take into account, but which cannot always be explained.
So what is harder to understand about sports in general, and football in particular – random events or non-random events?
So what is harder to understand about sports in general, and football in particular – random events or non-random events?
Having gone through this what I think is, in the aspect of football and whereas sports it involves regularity cause it's been done on let's say a daily basis and another thing is when players play the ball they are being intentional about scoring a goal which is a priority but then relating this to gambling and saying which is hard to predict I think randomness is abit hard to predict cause something that's static it's hard to predict but when it's otherwise you can make better predictions on how it's gonna be.
Well, that's what I'm talking about. You can't predict events with constantly changing data. It really doesn't seem like a possible process. That's why I consider betting more of a random event than seeing a pattern in all of this. It's not a case where you can apply some kind of repeating moments. Does anyone want to see something different in this? Please. No one has the right to judge a person for his particular choice, if it does not harm others.
For every choice someone makes, one cannot judge them, the important thing is that it does not harm other people and does not go outside the rules. The process in every game always changes quickly, no one can predict it accurately, let alone trying to prevent the same thing from happening again, which is very impossible here. Random choices are more likely than regular ones which are always considered the right moment, in this case the situation always changes without any bets, this is a process that cannot be predicted on a regular basis.
1.The short answer is only one: they are both hard to predict.
2.There's no point making a comparison between pure randomness and what you are calling 'non-random events'. Actually, I think that comparing them is wrong, because they are working together. There is always a certain percentage of randomness and luck in football, but the percentage is different, because there are other factors, that influence that particular randomness(team lineups, tactics, preparation for the certain match, weather, referees, players getting injured throughout the game, etc.). I'm not a genius mathematician, so I can't make complex calculations and I can't try to predict a football game by using math formulas. Maybe we should find a good mathematician and ask him about this topic.
2.There's no point making a comparison between pure randomness and what you are calling 'non-random events'. Actually, I think that comparing them is wrong, because they are working together. There is always a certain percentage of randomness and luck in football, but the percentage is different, because there are other factors, that influence that particular randomness(team lineups, tactics, preparation for the certain match, weather, referees, players getting injured throughout the game, etc.). I'm not a genius mathematician, so I can't make complex calculations and I can't try to predict a football game by using math formulas. Maybe we should find a good mathematician and ask him about this topic.
Randomness has always been harder to predict, though Football may seem non random there are various factors at play that decides winners and losers.
People score own goals not of conscious decision it just happens and the player that caused it didn't plan it
It just happened.
So no matter how it may seem non random
Football like many things in life have some element of randomness.
People score own goals not of conscious decision it just happens and the player that caused it didn't plan it
It just happened.
So no matter how it may seem non random
Football like many things in life have some element of randomness.
Jump to: