"The Good Day" LTD system

[Richard Latimer]

@richard-latimer said in "The Good Day" LTD system:

DC Utd v Sporting Kansas City (kicks off shortly)
Monterrey v Necaxa

2 wins

[Martin]

@denis-caunce I get that, your logic is different to OP in that way. what really matters though is does it work, has it made money and is there a significant backlog of statistical data in favour of it? that's what is being worked towards and essentially the real key here for me.

[A Former User]

@richard-latimer I confess that I don't understand how or whether these ratings work in this system. I can't see the logic but that just maybe me.

[Richard Latimer]

DC Utd v Sporting Kansas City (kicks off shortly)
Monterrey v Necaxa

[Richard Latimer]

Mine were on sheet today but sorry I couldn't post them up. Way way way too hungover!!
in any case, som,e high odds for the draw but neverthless a very good day only soured slightly by Konyaspor v Trabzonspor.

[Richard Latimer]

@richard-latimer said in "The Good Day" LTD system:

@denis-caunce said in "The Good Day" LTD system:

@richard-latimer I actually though that on defence, the higher (i.e. more positive) the rating the more miserly (i.e. the better the defence). The description below is from the BTC ratings page. It seems to tally with other descriptions of massey ratings that I fund on the web

Massey ratings are another measure of team performance. A team's offensive rating basically measures their ability to score goals against their opposition, so the higher the better. It can be interpreted as the number of goals a team would be expected to score against an average defense. A team's defensive rating measures their ability to prevent an average opponent from scoring. Generally the defense ratings will be negative figures but again, the higher the figure, the better their defense has proven to be based on historical results. These can be used to predict the outcome of the match and whether it will be a high or low scoring match.

I stand corrected. In which case I'm trying to understand why it works. Why logically this would mean a draw becomes less likely.

I suppose it goes along with the whole basis which is finding evenly matched teams in every way possible.

[Richard Latimer]

@denis-caunce said in "The Good Day" LTD system:

@richard-latimer I actually though that on defence, the higher (i.e. more positive) the rating the more miserly (i.e. the better the defence). The description below is from the BTC ratings page. It seems to tally with other descriptions of massey ratings that I fund on the web

Massey ratings are another measure of team performance. A team's offensive rating basically measures their ability to score goals against their opposition, so the higher the better. It can be interpreted as the number of goals a team would be expected to score against an average defense. A team's defensive rating measures their ability to prevent an average opponent from scoring. Generally the defense ratings will be negative figures but again, the higher the figure, the better their defense has proven to be based on historical results. These can be used to predict the outcome of the match and whether it will be a high or low scoring match.

I stand corrected. In which case I'm trying to understand why it works. Why logically this would mean a draw becomes less likely.

[A Former User]

@richard-latimer I actually though that on defence, the higher (i.e. more positive) the rating the more miserly (i.e. the better the defence). The description below is from the BTC ratings page. It seems to tally with other descriptions of massey ratings that I fund on the web

Massey ratings are another measure of team performance. A team's offensive rating basically measures their ability to score goals against their opposition, so the higher the better. It can be interpreted as the number of goals a team would be expected to score against an average defense. A team's defensive rating measures their ability to prevent an average opponent from scoring. Generally the defense ratings will be negative figures but again, the higher the figure, the better their defense has proven to be based on historical results. These can be used to predict the outcome of the match and whether it will be a high or low scoring match.

[Richard Latimer]

@richard-latimer said in "The Good Day" LTD system:

This is what I have for Saturday:

11/05/2019 09:00 South Korea K League 1 Normal Incheon v Pohang 12 8 4 1437 1533 -96 0.913 -0.758 0.884 -0.403 0.51 0.126 2.89 -6 23 24 63 48 -23 0 0 0 0 0
11/05/2019 12:30 Sweden Allsvenskan Normal Ostersunds v Hacken 6 3 3 1633 1685 -52 1.146 -0.438 1.373 -0.074 1.072 0.935 2.75 8 21 30 35 44 21 20 -6 3 52 3
11/05/2019 14:00 Italy Serie B Normal Lecce v Spezia 2 6 -4 1547 1491 56 1.206 -0.642 0.868 -0.642 0.564 0.226 3.41 25 28 12 91 30 40 9 18 7 53 7
11/05/2019 14:00 Italy Serie B Normal Brescia v Benevento 1 4 -3 1551 1482 69 1.204 -0.481 1.029 -0.613 0.591 0.548 3.18 13 29 14 49 54 23 34 11 15 57 12
11/05/2019 16:30 Switzerland Challenge League Normal Schaffhausen v Aarau 9 3 6 1412 1511 -99 0.66 -0.9 1.203 -0.625 0.035 0.303 3.42 -11 13 25 40 56 1 0 0 0 0 0
11/05/2019 19:00 France Ligue 1 Normal Nimes v Monaco 8 17 -9 1545 1603 -58 1.167 -0.592 0.719 -0.516 0.651 0.127 2.91 29 25 19 24 34 46 19 -4 -1 52 15
11/05/2019 20:30 Chile Primera B Normal La Serena v S. Wanderers 5 1 4 1458 1513 -55 0.751 -0.777 0.989 -0.496 0.255 0.212 2.98 13 21 24 59 45 8 0 0 0 0 0

[Richard Latimer]

This is what I have for Saturday:

[Richard Latimer]

@richard-latimer said in "The Good Day" LTD system:

Tomorrow starts at 09:30am in Russia then nothing until the evening:

Orenburg v Ural
St. Liege v Gent

For mine it was a case of late goals today. 2 for and 1 against. Orenburg scored in injury time to make it 2-1 but then conceded again in the 6th minute of injury time.

Gent looked to be heading for a draw 2-2 until an injury time winnner for them.

[Richard Latimer]

@denis-caunce said in "The Good Day" LTD system:

@lee-woodman Thanks Lee, that is what I was doing originally before I started to double guess myself. Doh.

It makes an interesting calculation though. Since the more negative the defence rating the worse the defence and so the higher number of goals they would expect to concede, we are testing whether the strength of the attack is higher than the weakness of the defence? So basically we are finding games where the quality of the attacks & defences are mirror images of each other. It feels very clever but can't really get my head around what it means in reality My brain hurts.

Attack 0 Defence -2 (Poor attack, really bad defence) - excluded
Attack 1 Defence -0.9 (ok attack, ok defence) - included
Attack 2 Defence -1.9 (really good attack, really bad defence) - included
Attack 0.1 Defence -0.05 (really bad attack, really good defence) - included
Attack 0.1 Defence 0.2 (ok attack, really good defence) - Excluded

I think the way the ratings work (and please feel free to tell me if this is bollox haha) is the bigger the plus on offence the more potent they are, the bigger the negative number on defence the more miserly they are to the extent that a plus number on defence actually signifies a really crappy leaky back line rather than the opposite.

Hence you're not looking for mirror images so much as games where offence will over-rule defence on both sides.

[A Former User]

@lee-woodman I just have these for today...

10/05/2019 01:00 Mexico Primera Division Playoff Necaxa v Monterrey
10/05/2019 01:00 El Salvador Primera Division Playoff Santa Tecla v Metapan
10/05/2019 09:30 Russia Premier League Normal Orenburg v Ural
10/05/2019 13:30 Singapore Premier League Normal Home Utd v Tampines
10/05/2019 14:00 Israel Leumit League Normal Hapoel Kfar-Saba v Beitar Tel Aviv
10/05/2019 19:00 Switzerland Challenge League Normal Servette Geneve FC v Lausanne
10/05/2019 19:30 Belgium Jupiler League Normal St. Liege v Gent
10/05/2019 19:45 France Ligue 1 Normal St Etienne v Montpellier

Are you sure that all of yours are correct? e.g. GFC Ajaccio game has goal expectancy of 2.07.

I know we've had a thing where ratings appear different at different times, but I checked last night and this morning and both times I only got the ones listed above.

[Richard Latimer]

@denis-caunce said in "The Good Day" LTD system:

@lee-woodman Thanks Lee, that is what I was doing originally before I started to double guess myself. Doh.

It makes an interesting calculation though. Since the more negative the defence rating the worse the defence and so the higher number of goals they would expect to concede, we are testing whether the strength of the attack is higher than the weakness of the defence? So basically we are finding games where the quality of the attacks & defences are mirror images of each other. It feels very clever but can't really get my head around what it means in reality My brain hurts.

Attack 0 Defence -2 (Poor attack, really bad defence) - excluded
Attack 1 Defence -0.9 (ok attack, ok defence) - included
Attack 2 Defence -1.9 (really good attack, really bad defence) - included
Attack 0.1 Defence -0.05 (really bad attack, really good defence) - included
Attack 0.1 Defence 0.2 (ok attack, really good defence) - Excluded

Goal expectancy should take care of whether a team is really bad and b team a little worse as far as I can see. As long as A team offence beats b team defence and vice versa it's a go.

So A team 1 beats b team -0.9. Essentially turn b team defence into an absolute number in terms of thinking. Negative becomes positive. This is why I said the excel formula takes care of things as when you minus the minus it's still just a minus.

[Richard Latimer]

@lee-woodman said in "The Good Day" LTD system:

@denis-caunce I dont fully understand the ratings system myself, how its calculated etc, but as Chris is away i'll answer the question for this system

So basically he has taken the 'minus' symbol from the defence figure, as though it then becomes a positive figure, and then produced the calculation. So using your figures in the system, 0.5 offence would be LESS than the 0.6 defence figure and would thus be ruled out, as -0.6 would be represented as 0.6 and is therefore obviously greater than 0.5

Also to clarify, Home offence has to be greater than away defence and away offence has to be greater than home defence. Plus obviously ELO diff>100 and goal exp > 2.5 to give the 4 criteria

Hope that answers your question but if not just give me a shout and ill try to help clear it up

The way I do it is with formula that minuses defence from attack in excel. If that leaves me with a positive it qualifies under that criteria.

[A Former User]

@lee-woodman Thanks Lee, that is what I was doing originally before I started to double guess myself. Doh.

It makes an interesting calculation though. Since the more negative the defence rating the worse the defence and so the higher number of goals they would expect to concede, we are testing whether the strength of the attack is higher than the weakness of the defence? So basically we are finding games where the quality of the attacks & defences are mirror images of each other. It feels very clever but can't really get my head around what it means in reality My brain hurts.

Attack 0 Defence -2 (Poor attack, really bad defence) - excluded
Attack 1 Defence -0.9 (ok attack, ok defence) - included
Attack 2 Defence -1.9 (really good attack, really bad defence) - included
Attack 0.1 Defence -0.05 (really bad attack, really good defence) - included
Attack 0.1 Defence 0.2 (ok attack, really good defence) - Excluded

[A Former User]

@denis-caunce I dont fully understand the ratings system myself, how its calculated etc, but as Chris is away i'll answer the question for this system

So basically he has taken the 'minus' symbol from the defence figure, as though it then becomes a positive figure, and then produced the calculation. So using your figures in the system, 0.5 offence would be LESS than the 0.6 defence figure and would thus be ruled out, as -0.6 would be represented as 0.6 and is therefore obviously greater than 0.5

Also to clarify, Home offence has to be greater than away defence and away offence has to be greater than home defence. Plus obviously ELO diff>100 and goal exp > 2.5 to give the 4 criteria

Hope that answers your question but if not just give me a shout and ill try to help clear it up

[A Former User]

@chris-watts I think I may have misunderstood the offence/defence ratings. Hoping you can explain.

When we say that 'positive number (offence) to be larger than the negative number (defence)' are we looking at the relative or absolute numbers? E.g is 0.5 greater than -0.6? In relative terms it of course is but if we test 0.5>abs(-0.6) it isn't.

I have assumed that we are testing absolute rather than relative since virtually all offence ratings are greater than defence ratings in relative terms.

[Ryan]

@lee-woodman Let's hope so my friend!

[A Former User]

@ryan-carruthers I hope we're saying that in 12 hours time!