Spil ansvarligt | 18+ | udeluk dig selv: rofus.nu | Spillemyndighedens hjælpelinje: stopspillet.dk (ring på 7022 2825)
*Links med en stjerne efter sig er reklamelinks.
In this article, we review the results for August in our two subscriptions, Live Betting + and The Sports Bettor. You can read this article in Danish by clicking here.
Let’s start with the obvious: August was a very poor month for Live Betting +.
There is no point trying to sugarcoat it.
The results from our live bets simply have not been good enough. When you follow our bets month after month as a customer, it is therefore completely fair to ask what has gone wrong – and, not least, what we are doing about it.
We have asked ourselves both of those questions as well.
That is why we have spent the past few days digging thoroughly into the numbers. We have not only looked at the overall result, but analysed the development across punters, bet types, units, markets, leagues and different periods. At the same time, we have held meetings and discussed what we ourselves are seeing in the markets we work with.
That has given us some interesting answers.
We are not starting from scratch. It is important for us to emphasise that we do not see the August result as proof that our Live strategy fundamentally does not work. Quite the opposite.
When we look back through the historical statistics, we can see that the Live group has demonstrated over a long period of time that it is capable of generating a positive return. There have naturally been poor months and difficult periods along the way – but the long-term track record tells us that there is something worth building on.
That does not mean we can simply expect the results to turn around automatically. It means we have a data foundation that allows us to identify where we believe adjustments need to be made.
We have not chosen the easy explanation. After reviewing the results, we could simply have said: ‘August was extremely poor, but that is betting.’ That would have been the easy answer.
We do not accept that.
We know that variance is part of betting. But when the numbers show clear changes in specific areas of our picks, we believe it is our responsibility to investigate them properly rather than simply hiding behind the idea that we must just have been unlucky.
So that is what we have done.
The conclusion is not that we are now going to completely turn the Live concept upside down. But we are going to be more selective. There will be a greater focus on the bets where the data and the experts’ assessments align best, and where we can see that we have historically generated a profit.
One of the things our analysis has particularly confirmed is that the downturn has not affected all experts, markets and bet types equally. There are areas where the results continue to look strong – and areas where the development has clearly been worse.
That means we will place greater emphasis going forward on the quality of each individual bet rather than simply the quantity of bets.
That may mean fewer bets during certain periods.
It may also mean that some types of bets are left out when our overall assessment is not strong enough. This is not a promise that we will suddenly only publish winners. That is obviously not how betting works. But it is a promise that we will actively use the knowledge we have gained from the data and meetings of recent months when selecting future bets.
And we will follow the development closely. Perhaps most importantly, we do not see this as a one-off exercise. We will continue to monitor the areas we have identified month by month and compare them with the historical development.
If a change proves to work, we should be able to see it in the numbers. If it does not, we have to be willing to change it again.
The goal is not to react to one poor period. The goal is to get Live Betting + back to the level that our historical results show the group is capable of delivering.
August was a serious reminder that we cannot take that for granted. And we do not.
We take the numbers seriously. We have analysed them thoroughly and used AI as an additional tool in that analysis. And we head into September with a more selective strategy and a clear objective of getting the group back on track.
Number of bets: 37
Result: -36.64 units
Return percentage: 38.16
We came back down to earth after an outstanding July that produced a profit of 34 units and a return percentage of 127, but fortunately the month was nowhere near as poor as it was in the live markets, and we finish August with a loss of seven units.
Most of the ‘big’ bets actually landed. We won four units on Austin not to lose against Club America, which was the biggest bet of the month, 3.5 units on Club Leon not to lose against Inter Miami, Benfica -3.5 corners against AGF for 3.5 units, and another 3.5 units on under 2.5 goals in Thisted against FA 2000. Among the bets with the largest stakes, the ‘only’ one we missed was Ajax to win to nil against Shelbourne for 3.5 units.
We had also identified that Hannover would effectively have a home advantage against Hemelingen in the DFB Pokal – even though the match was not played in Hannover. The fact that Hannover had several thousand supporters behind them in Bremen ended up playing an important role in the 9-1 victory, and this is exactly the kind of information that parts of the market may overlook, so it is worth continuing to look for those edges. As expected, FCN also proved to be the better team on the artificial surface against Brøndby.
The loss has to be found elsewhere, and one example is Hearts to compete on corners at home against Benfica. In terms of how the match played out, that was perhaps our worst bet of the month. Benfica won the corner count 11-0, so there is not much else to say other than that we were simply on the wrong side there. Omonia against Sint-Truiden, where we backed the first-half under, is another example. There were three first-half goals, and although two of them came from penalties, backing a low-scoring first half does not look like the right side based on how the game developed. Brøndby’s defence also collapsed in the second half against Sønderjyske, where we had backed a home win to nil.
Sign up for The Sports Bettor*
Number of bets: 49
Turnover: 144.5
Result: -7.06 units
Return percentage: 95.11
