History is of no use when betting on football

[insomniac]

Can’t believe anyone seriously takes history into account when betting on football. e.g Team x haven’t won at such-and-such a ground in so many years..
History is of limited use in Horse Racing (mainly the draw), but in football it’s of no use whatsoever.
Does anyone disagree?

[Himself]

If a team has a history of consistently good or bad results against certain other teams, it is definitely worth taking notice of.

In Scotland for example, newly promoted Gretna have become the whipping boys for the other SPL teams, except Dundee Utd for some inexplicable reason. Gretna have won only two SPL matches – both against
Dundee Utd – home and away.

I have noticed over the years that there are some teams, no matter how well their current form may be at the time, seem to struggle against their so called "bogey team."

Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning

[MikkyMo73]

It’s an excellent point Insomniac as I agree that history means very little when betting on football.

However, like Himself has said, it’s worth noting significant previous results when one teams keeps beating another. But generally I take very little notice of history between the two teams and back a team based on recent form (no more than 6 games) and squad status (injuries & suspensions).

Mike

[Peter Poston’s Ghost]

It’s of less use than in previous years.

In the past there was a far lower turnover of players and managers and some useful patterns emerged.
How could one possibly compare say Man. City of this season with the same team of just 2 years ago? They are not remotely the same.

I find that more can be gained from the number of late goals scored or conceded by certain teams and their disciplinary record in games where they are likely losers.

[Author]

Posts