betting on st kilda football

[soho]

we all know st kilda flood, only the term 'flood' was killed by the afl in 2k7 and now any journalist who uses the term is shunned by the afl, and so now days we refer to st kilda football as 'getting numbers behind the ball' or 'compression footy'... but lets face it, they flood, and they're good at it...

so far this season they've only had 887 points scored against the, the lowest in the comp, the next nearest being the bulldogs at 996, some 12.28% more... last season they finished with 1411 points against, again the lowest with the next closest being the pies at 1778, some 26% more...

given these figures, would it be viable to bet on st kilda's opponents being the lowest scoring team each round? lets look...

in the 2009 regular season, st kilda held their opponents to being the lowest scoring team of the round on 7 occasions. the teams were:

sydney
freantle
collingwood
melbourne
north melbourne
richmond
hawks

7/22 = .31 strike rate, or 31% winners

so far in the 2010 season, st kilda have held their opponents to being the lowest scoring team of the round on 5 occasions (including 1 equal lowest). the teams were:

bulldogs
collingwood (equal lowest scoring for the round with adelaide)
north
richmond
geelong

5/13 = .38 strike rate, or 38% winners



if you're gambling with a 30% strike rate, you need average odds of $3+ to be turning a profit. now i cant go back and find historical data for what price the teams in 2009 were paying, but id say with collingwood, hawks and sydney, the average odds would have been around $5+, with the weekly favorite for lowest score usually being around the $3.50 mark (as melbourne are this week coming up against the saints)... this year collingwood, geelong and the bulldogs would have all pushed the average price well above $6 id think. it seems the saints really try to lock down games against the other big sides...



so, would it be worth a punt each week on the team st kilda are playing to be the lowest scoring? or have st kilda pulled their quota for the year, and should only have a few more 'lowest scoring' games in them?

time will tell...

be for now, all we know is st kilda football = shit, low-scoring defensive football...

 

[GoodesStuff]

we all know st kilda flood, only the term 'flood' was killed by the afl in 2k7 and now any journalist who uses the term is shunned by the afl, and so now days we refer to st kilda football as 'getting numbers behind the ball' or 'compression footy'... but lets face it, they flood, and they're good at it...

so far this season they've only had 887 points scored against the, the lowest in the comp, the next nearest being the bulldogs at 996, some 12.28% more... last season they finished with 1411 points against, again the lowest with the next closest being the pies at 1778, some 26% more...

given these figures, would it be viable to bet on st kilda's opponents being the lowest scoring team each round? lets look...

in the 2009 regular season, st kilda held their opponents to being the lowest scoring team of the round on 7 occasions. the teams were:

sydney
freantle
collingwood
melbourne
north melbourne
richmond
hawks

7/22 = .31 strike rate, or 31% winners

so far in the 2010 season, st kilda have held their opponents to being the lowest scoring team of the round on 5 occasions (including 1 equal lowest). the teams were:

bulldogs
collingwood (equal lowest scoring for the round with adelaide)
north
richmond
geelong

5/13 = .38 strike rate, or 38% winners



if you're gambling with a 30% strike rate, you need average odds of $3+ to be turning a profit. now i cant go back and find historical data for what price the teams in 2009 were paying, but id say with collingwood, hawks and sydney, the average odds would have been around $5+, with the weekly favorite for lowest score usually being around the $3.50 mark (as melbourne are this week coming up against the saints)... this year collingwood, geelong and the bulldogs would have all pushed the average price well above $6 id think. it seems the saints really try to lock down games against the other big sides...



so, would it be worth a punt each week on the team st kilda are playing to be the lowest scoring? or have st kilda pulled their quota for the year, and should only have a few more 'lowest scoring' games in them?

time will tell...

be for now, all we know is st kilda football = shit, low-scoring defensive football...

Nice research

I think there is some value to be had when looking at what you have come up with. I for one would just sit back and see what happens for the rest of the year, and see if I would do this sort of thing as a 'system bet' next year instead of doing it half way through the year...

Up to you though

 

[jayjones1]

we all know st kilda flood, only the term 'flood' was killed by the afl in 2k7 and now any journalist who uses the term is shunned by the afl, and so now days we refer to st kilda football as 'getting numbers behind the ball' or 'compression footy'... but lets face it, they flood, and they're good at it...

so far this season they've only had 887 points scored against the, the lowest in the comp, the next nearest being the bulldogs at 996, some 12.28% more... last season they finished with 1411 points against, again the lowest with the next closest being the pies at 1778, some 26% more...

given these figures, would it be viable to bet on st kilda's opponents being the lowest scoring team each round? lets look...

in the 2009 regular season, st kilda held their opponents to being the lowest scoring team of the round on 7 occasions. the teams were:

sydney
freantle
collingwood
melbourne
north melbourne
richmond
hawks

7/22 = .31 strike rate, or 31% winners

so far in the 2010 season, st kilda have held their opponents to being the lowest scoring team of the round on 5 occasions (including 1 equal lowest). the teams were:

bulldogs
collingwood (equal lowest scoring for the round with adelaide)
north
richmond
geelong

5/13 = .38 strike rate, or 38% winners



if you're gambling with a 30% strike rate, you need average odds of $3+ to be turning a profit. now i cant go back and find historical data for what price the teams in 2009 were paying, but id say with collingwood, hawks and sydney, the average odds would have been around $5+, with the weekly favorite for lowest score usually being around the $3.50 mark (as melbourne are this week coming up against the saints)... this year collingwood, geelong and the bulldogs would have all pushed the average price well above $6 id think. it seems the saints really try to lock down games against the other big sides...



so, would it be worth a punt each week on the team st kilda are playing to be the lowest scoring? or have st kilda pulled their quota for the year, and should only have a few more 'lowest scoring' games in them?

time will tell...

be for now, all we know is st kilda football = shit, low-scoring defensive football...

well done but its not shit football its hard, pressure football

 

[asanque]

Good spot.

I've actually been using portions of this theory all year and having reasonable success with it

 

[crow10]

have had a crack at the team playing saint kilda at various points throughout the year as lowest score. for a while there i was doing it weekly. without looking at any statistics, i'd suggest that they seem to play a much tighter game against the big opponents (e.g. geelong last week, bulldogs + collingwood earlier in the year) than against the lesser ones. though that may seem obvious.

 

[duncs]

I reckon this may be one of the weeks where this theory is not so solid - hard to see West Coast getting many on the board against Collingwood away from Subiaco.

 

[asanque]

Not a good week for lowest score bets.

Lots of possibles:

WCE v Pies
Rich v Syd
Dees v St Kilda
North v Geelong

even

Essendon v Crows

Dogs v Hawks will be high scoring
Lions v Blues - generally pretty free flowing
Freo v Port - I'd imagine the same

 

[soho]

I reckon this may be one of the weeks where this theory is not so solid - hard to see West Coast getting many on the board against Collingwood away from Subiaco.

if you start 'picking and choosing' which games to bet on, you'd potentially miss the high value bets, such as last weeks against the cats...

you either bet on every game, or you dont bet... you've got to accept the losers in order not to miss any winners...

 

[KardiniaPark]

if you start 'picking and choosing' which games to bet on, you'd potentially miss the high value bets, such as last weeks against the cats...

you either bet on every game, or you dont bet... you've got to accept the losers in order not to miss any winners...

Yeah and the pies can leak a few goals when the game is over, the eagles would only need to kick 8-9 goals for the night to score more than most teams that play st kilda. I actually looked at this bet last week saints v cats and i nearly put it on...Cats were paying $17

 

[soho]

Yeah and the pies can leak a few goals when the game is over, the eagles would only need to kick 8-9 goals for the night to score more than most teams that play st kilda. I actually looked at this bet last week saints v cats and i nearly put it on...Cats were paying $17

$17?! holly shit, thats a whole lot more than i would have expected...

going by that, this system would have returned ~$10 per win, given that the collingwood and bulldogs games would have also returned good odds (north and richmond being low odd games, probs ~$4)...

so saying you'd put $50 on each game this year, you'd be around $2,100 up by now...

 

[KardiniaPark]

Yeah well you if you started round 1, you would be a long long way ahead by now. Didnt work out this week did it?. I might just have a nibble when they play top 4 sides from now on, thats where the value is. Pretty sure they kept collingwood to the lowest score as well, 40 odd?. That would have been $10+ as well. At least you could put up with the snorefest that is stklilda football if it was bringing in a big profit! .

 

[Jammer]

Good research Soho,,,,,, I'd advice you looking at at Total match points in St.Kilda games...... As when they are up against a decent team they don't score much either...
I love taking the unders with Centrebet and am 6 from 8 this season five of those Saints matches.

Saints in form v a top 6 team nearly always = under 156.5
The bet of the year was when they played the Cats outdoors in the wet and the total match points was approx 162.5........ winning bet with about 50pts to spare

 

[soho]

good point jammer...

might do a bit of backtesting to see how many games were lowest overall scores for the round...

 

[BarryG]

I missed a few factors when i took StKilda v Melbourne under 156.5 last weekend.

 

[GoodesStuff]

I think it helps if you just sit back and observe in the pre season. I know Adelaide struggled in the NAB cup, failing to kick more than 10 goals in a game. This then translated into the season proper for the first month. This is helpful for under game totals, lowest score for the rounds etc. IIRC St.Kilda didnt set the world on fire either in regards to kicking scores in the pre season. I think another thing to watch with game totals is when the top teams play. Time and time again the line is way too high, because the top teams SMASH bottom 8 teams, leading to a high match total. But when the top teams beat it is more about defence, and their goal scoring potential usually cancels each other out.

 

[Jammer]

Saints v Pies at the mcg followed by saints v hawks would be the two i'd be looking at.......
If there is any weather about for the pies game I'll be hitting the under hard on that one

 

[soho]

st kilda total match points this year:

165 melb
116 geel
152 freo
156 rich
199 adel
147 wc
174 ess (loss)
197 carl (loss)
95 dogs
98 port (loss)
201 freo
110 coll
182 north
184 syd

u 156.5 would have returned 7/14 winners, 50%
but its pretty clear that against the big teams, st kilda play lock down football...
possibly because they are scared of losing if it becomes a game of skills rather than flooding...

 

[Papa Juggs]

You need to be aware that the number of players infront of the footy for the Saints is based on the strength of the opposition.

This is why Geelong/Bulldogs kicked 6 goals on us and Melbourne got 9.

It doesn't make the Dees a 3 goal better team than the Cats. It just means we flood less.

 

[soho]

pretty sure everyone is well aware of the ugly football the saints play...

 

[DT_35]

pretty sure everyone is well aware of the ugly football the saints play...

Not many teams can beat us...especially Collingwood

 

[soho]

grats, you beats collingwood...

too bad flooding has never won you a grand final...

 

[soho]

looks like brisbane may be lowest of the round...

 

[asanque]

No value on Brisbane.

I went for North this week.

 

[vesra]

Put money on Collingwood to score the lowest this week. They are terrible against the Saints.

Chip around the boundary line is the easiest style for the Saints to play against, Collingwood have no faith in their footskills. Swan and co will get a bunch of useless possesions and go no where with it.

 

[GoodesStuff]

Put money on Collingwood to score the lowest this week. They are terrible against the Saints.

Thats what Im thinking

Would like to get at least $6.00+ though

Depending on the line, I also plan to take the under, although I think the bookies will set it too low this week, and provide little value...