In Part 1 we looked at whether a strategy of backing the favourite and laying prior to the semi-final would have been successful. Let’s continue this by looking at the tournaments since 1986.
Mexico 1986. Winners: Argentina. Following the experience of the European teams at high altitude in 1970, it was expected that they would struggle to adapt to the conditions. However France were rated very highly, with a team containing many highly rated played including Platini, Tigana and Giresse. But overall, it’s probably fair to say that Brazil were marginal favourites followed by Argentina. Adopting Brazil as favourites would not have been successful as you would not have been able to trade out in time thanks to a defeat on penalties to France in the Quarter Finals. This was the tournament that belonged to Maradona and his ‘hand of God’. Result of Strategy: YOU LOSE!
Italy 1990. Winners: West Germany. It is not beyond reason to say that Italy were the favourites. They had the pedigree, they had home advantage and their team had a number of players capable of turning any match in their favour, not least Gianluca Vialli and Roberto Baggio. As usual, there were a number of other teams also given realistic chances of winning, including the eventual winners. Although Italy lost rather unluckily to Argentina, this was at the semi-final stage and strict application of the strategy would have given you a profit. Result of Strategy: YOU WIN! More on World Cup Strategy: A Lesson From History, Part 2
Written by on May 12th, 2010. 1 Comment.
The FA Cup is just so unpredictable, isn’t it? Just look at already relegated Pompey’s win against Spurs as evidence. Who would have believed that poor old Pompey would have stood any chance against a Spurs team competing for a Champion’s League place? Or at least this is what the media hype would have you believe!
But was it really such an astounding result? Let’s look at the evidence: Spurs had historically failed to live up to expectation when suddenly touted as favourites. And Portsmouth record in getting this far showed that perhaps it was no fluke. They had already put out 2 Premiership teams and even their opening games against Coventry and Southampton could not be considered as free tickets through to the later rounds.
We could look at other factors such as having no pressure and team spirit, all of which points to the fact that it was not really as big an upset as the hype would have you believe.
And of course this is being wise after the event, but part of trying to be a successful football trader is taking all these factors into account, and that’s why my latest review of Soccer Mystic shows why this software is worthwhile. It allows you to test different probabilities of an event happening and so arms you with more information on which to make your trades.
Written by on May 5th, 2010. Comment.
As promised, after a little delay, here is a closer look at Soccer Mystic in action.
Let’s look at how you would use it whilst trading an unders market: not always the best market to choose, but lets suppose in this case the game is looking very boring with few chances, so you think its worth it. Taking as an example Espanyol v. Atletico Madrid, its 2-0 to Espanyol with about 75 minutes played. Entering the main screen you see a conventional picture as below:
So far so normal, but where Soccer mystic really wins is its charting tools.
You enter this screen via the price predictor, and the screen shot shows what happens to the probability predictor after 2 the second goal has been scored at 48 and 65 minutes. As you would expect, the probability og under, shown by the green line, drops, but perhaps not as much as you would expect. This shows that it can be worth trading quickly, though the profit line (blue) shows that this will not be profitable until the end, and it is also of course a dangerous trade as 1 more goal and you lose.
This is how the chart predictor works: it allows you to assess the probability and therefore the chances of particular trades and also what happens with particular scenarios.
Written by on May 3rd, 2010. 1 Comment.





Latest Discussion