2018/19 relegation odds

Claret&Green · Post by **Claret&Green** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:12 am

Only Fulham, Huddersfield, Cardiff, Watford and Brighton are shorter odds than us to go down next season according to WHill
. They must think Europe is gonna take its toll on us.

MACCA · Post by **MACCA** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 6:51 am

Just the way i like it.

Nobody needs to be getting ideas or raising ecpectations that we are a solid mid table outfit.

Keep the underdog tag, and over achieve/surpass people's expectations is always the way to go about it.

piston broke · Post by **piston broke** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 8:23 am

Sounds about right. Possibly throw Bournemouth and a Benitez less Newcastle in there.
Southampton will chuck money away to improve and West Ham have made a great appointment, sadly.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 8:39 am

Claret&Green wrote:Only Fulham, Huddersfield, Cardiff, Watford and Brighton are shorter odds than us to go down next season according to WHill
. They must think Europe is gonna take its toll on us.

They have Wolves to stay up over us?

MACCA · Post by **MACCA** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 8:44 am

ClaretMoffitt wrote:They have Wolves to stay up over us?

Wolves were very short odds for a top half finish! ( Possibly same as our survival odds )
Quite a few bigging them up to be a real hit, I hope the classless manager is out by December, and no doubt Allerdyce called into action.

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 8:57 am

Wolves have money to burn, they are likely to finish higher than us.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:01 am

MACCA wrote:Just the way i like it.

Nobody needs to be getting ideas or raising ecpectations that we are a solid mid table outfit.

Keep the underdog tag, and over achieve/surpass people's expectations is always the way to go about it.

Great idea. I'll tell Mourinho and Klopp.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:03 am

Tall Paul wrote:Wolves have money to burn, they are likely to finish higher than us.

Lots of team have 'burned money' trying to make it in the PL and mostly it doesn't seem to work. Don't worry about the bookies guys, we will finish top half again easily, unless someone poaches Dyche.

MACCA · Post by **MACCA** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:03 am

houseboy wrote:Great idea. I'll tell Mourinho and Klopp.

Mention it was you that started the No Net Never chant too, and I doubt they'll even turn up with a team

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:18 am

houseboy wrote:Lots of team have 'burned money' trying to make it in the PL and mostly it doesn't seem to work. Don't worry about the bookies guys, we will finish top half again easily, unless someone poaches Dyche.

As I said last time we had this conversation, if you know better than the bookies you must be a very rich man.

It's been proven that the best indicator for where a team will finish in the league is the relative wages budget. Wolves will pay higher wages than we do so they'll rightly be favourites to finish higher.

Bigvince · Post by **Bigvince** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:25 am

This news really disappoints me! This club is going backwards!
We’re usually the favourites

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:04 am

Tall Paul wrote:As I said last time we had this conversation, if you know better than the bookies you must be a very rich man.

It's been proven that the best indicator for where a team will finish in the league is the relative wages budget. Wolves will pay higher wages than we do so they'll rightly be favourites to finish higher.

I'm not sayi9ng I know better, I'm just ignoring them, just like I ignored them last season and the season before. Tell me, who was right?

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:05 am

MACCA wrote:Mention it was you that started the No Net Never chant too, and I doubt they'll even turn up with a team

They'd be quaking in their boots mate.

Lord Beamish · Post by **Lord Beamish** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:10 am

As a non-gambler, the Bookies odds really don’t mean all that much to me.

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:11 am

houseboy wrote:I'm not sayi9ng I know better, I'm just ignoring them, just like I ignored them last season and the season before. Tell me, who was right?

You are saying you know better. Why would you ignore them if there's big money to be made?

Just because something happened/didn't happen, doesn't mean the predicted odds of it happening weren't right. If I flipped a coin and it was heads, it doesn't mean it was wrong to predict it would've been tails 50% of the time.

JohnMac · Post by **JohnMac** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:36 am

It's not the population angle makes us a minnow, it's the operating budget and whilst we continue to impose a sensible control measure on player salaries, we will be looked upon as relegation candidates.

One day someone will twig that an additional £20k per week does not improve your skill level and ability.

jojomk1 · Post by **jojomk1** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:58 am

Last season the Premier League outside the top 6 was poor - if Brighton Huddersfield and Newcastle were able to stay up it shows how bad the other teams were.
Expect some of the "so called" mid table sides such as WHU and Southampton will be spending a good amount this summer to ensure the same doesn't happen again
Our transfer and wage spends will again be one of the lowest in the league
Anything above 18th will be another good season

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:00 am

Tall Paul wrote:You are saying you know better. Why would you ignore them if there's big money to be made?

Just because something happened/didn't happen, doesn't mean the predicted odds of it happening weren't right. If I flipped a coin and it was heads, it doesn't mean it was wrong to predict it would've been tails 50% of the time.

I ignore them because I don't gamble. You're really struggling here aren't you? First off you are saying that bookies work things out in a precise way then you compare that to a completely random instance like tossing a coin. Guessing the way a coin is going to fall is pure luck and cannot in any way be predicted by anyone other than it will be heads or tails. You are saying that predicting the odds on a sporting event is more precise but yet for two seasons in a row I have disagreed with the bookies and.....well, tell me again who got it right?

Barnesy · Post by **Barnesy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:02 am

I wonder if this is the first time in the Prem we haven’t been one of the three favourites for relegation?

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:02 am

JohnMac wrote:One day someone will twig that an additional £20k per week does not improve your skill level and ability.

You've got it back to front. Market forces dictate that better skill and ability commands a higher wage.

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:06 am

Tall Paul wrote:You are saying you know better. Why would you ignore them if there's big money to be made?

Just because something happened/didn't happen, doesn't mean the predicted odds of it happening weren't right. If I flipped a coin and it was heads, it doesn't mean it was wrong to predict it would've been tails 50% of the time.

Toss that coin ten times..... Betcha it's not 50/50

edison · Post by **edison** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:07 am

Claret&Green wrote:Only Fulham, Huddersfield, Cardiff, Watford and Brighton are shorter odds than us to go down next season according to WHill
. They must think Europe is gonna take its toll on us.

If only Fulham, Huddersfield, Cardiff, Watford and Brighton finished below us, I'd be happy.

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:19 am

edison wrote:If only Fulham, Huddersfield, Cardiff, Watford and Brighton finished below us, I'd be happy.

You forgot west ham

JohnMac · Post by **JohnMac** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:39 am

Tall Paul wrote:You've got it back to front. Market forces dictate that better skill and ability commands a higher wage.

Is that applicable in football though?

Look at those young players at Chelsea and Man City with potential but haven't played a game in the Premier League or even the Championship. Some of those are earning more than established players with vast Championship/Premier League experience.

They tend to disappear from the game having taken hundreds of thousands of pounds out of it for doing nothing other than train a few times a week.

It wouldn't happen in many other walks of life, high end clubs are just money pits.

Edited to say I agree when we are talking about high end players!

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:40 am

houseboy wrote:I ignore them because I don't gamble. You're really struggling here aren't you? First off you are saying that bookies work things out in a precise way then you compare that to a completely random instance like tossing a coin. Guessing the way a coin is going to fall is pure luck and cannot in any way be predicted by anyone other than it will be heads or tails. You are saying that predicting the odds on a sporting event is more precise but yet for two seasons in a row I have disagreed with the bookies and.....well, tell me again who got it right?

I'm not struggling at all, you're the one who seems to be struggling to understand probabilities.

I didn't say that bookies work things out precisely, they assess the probability of something happening then add a little juice to arrive at their odds. Historically, over large samples, they have been proven to be very accurate predictors of sporting events, certainly better than the bloke on the street.

It looks like the bookies think we have around a 20% chance of being relegated. Seems reasonable to me. What do you think are our chances of being relegated? Zero?

The probability of a coin toss can be calculated precisely because there are two, equally likely, outcomes.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:50 am

Tall Paul wrote:I'm not struggling at all, you're the one who seems to be struggling to understand probabilities.

I didn't say that bookies work things out precisely, they assess the probability of something happening then add a little juice to arrive at their odds. Historically, over large samples, they have been proven to be very accurate predictors of sporting events, certainly better than the bloke on the street.

It looks like the bookies think we have around a 20% chance of being relegated. Seems reasonable to me. What do you think are our chances of being relegated? Zero?

The probability of a coin toss can be calculated precisely because there are two, equally likely, outcomes.

If you toss a coin 9 times and it falls on tails every time what are the odds of a heads on the tenth.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:52 am

If we can pick up a good number of points against the teams outside the top 6 we'll be comfortably mid-table at worst,usually one of the established teams struggles unexpectedly,Leicester might be that team next season if the exodus led by Mahrez continues.

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:57 am

JohnMac wrote:Is that applicable in football though?

Look at those young players at Chelsea and Man City with potential but haven't played a game in the Premier League or even the Championship. Some of those are earning more than established players with vast Championship/Premier League experience.

They tend to disappear from the game having taken hundreds of thousands of pounds out of it for doing nothing other than train a few times a week.

It wouldn't happen in many other walks of life, high end clubs are just money pits.

Edited to say I agree when we are talking about high end players!

I see what you're saying about the young players at big clubs, but it's not really relevant to the point. They are paid more because of their potential and because those clubs see them as better investments than paying an experienced player to sit on the bench or in the reserves.

You could make the argument that by paying these youngsters they're taking budget away from the first team squad, but the point stands that clubs who can pay their first team squad higher wages have a better chance of success than those who don't because they can attract better players.

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:58 am

houseboy wrote:If you toss a coin 9 times and it falls on tails every time what are the odds of a heads on the tenth.

You didn't answer my question to you, what do you think our chances of being relegated are?

I'll still answer yours though:

50%

What do you think it is?

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:25 pm

50% - so we agree on that. If you toss a coin a million times the chances are ALWAYS 50/50, but you were talking about the odds on football where the chances of an outcome are variable not constant, would you not agree, so you're analogy of football odds to coin tossing is not quite the same is it?
No, I don't think our chances of relegation are zero but then that is also true of United or City.
As for not answering a question let me try this one again - who got it right the last two seasons, me or the bookies?

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:51 pm

houseboy wrote:50% - so we agree on that. If you toss a coin a million times the chances are ALWAYS 50/50, but you were talking about the odds on football where the chances of an outcome are variable not constant, would you not agree, so you're analogy of football odds to coin tossing is not quite the same is it?

I don't think I do agree. What do you mean by the chances are variable?

I agree that the chance of relegation will vary over time due to other events such as changes in personnel over the summer and then the the results of matches as they happen. The relegation odds will be adjusted as these events happen.

No, I don't think our chances of relegation are zero but then that is also true of United or City.

So what do you think they are, as a percentage?

As for not answering a question let me try this one again - who got it right the last two seasons, me or the bookies?

Your question is impossible to answer, as illustrated by the coin toss analogy.

happyclaret17 · Post by **happyclaret17** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:51 pm

The bookies make money by betting to over rounds..they take a million and pay out 900 or 950 grand..they don't make money by getting everything right....if they did then everyone would back favourites and would all be rich.
cherry picking bets regarding Burnley has been highly lucrative over the years......yes us burnley fans have made money from over generous odds but the bookies overall have won....just imagine how many accumulator bets were tripped up by us at Stamford Bridge last August.

deanothedino · Post by **deanothedino** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:58 pm

Tall Paul wrote:You didn't answer my question to you, what do you think our chances of being relegated are?

I'll still answer yours though:

50%

What do you think it is?

But the chance (before you flipped the first) of getting heads ten times in a row is 0.001%

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:59 pm

happyclaret17 wrote:The bookies make money by betting to over rounds..they take a million and pay out 900 or 950 grand..they don't make money by getting everything right....if they did then everyone would back favourites and would all be rich.

They do need to get the odds in the right ballpark though. They make their money by offering slightly shorter odds than the chances of the event happening. The market makes sure that the odds reflect probablitles as accurately as possible because if one bookie is offering wildly different odds, the market picks up on it and forces them to adjust.

Obviously it's not an exact science because nobody can predict the future accurately, but bookies tend to do it more accurately than blokes on messageboards, particularly those who might have inherent bias.

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:03 pm

deanothedino wrote:But the chance (before you flipped the first) of getting heads ten times in a row is 0.001%

Nice edit

happyclaret17 · Post by **happyclaret17** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:05 pm

bookies odds regarding football are flawed....odds for matches that go on coupons are done days in advance....injuries and other factors can mean the punter gains the advantage providing the punter is selective.
The betfair market reflects the chances far more accurately.

happyclaret17 · Post by **happyclaret17** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:06 pm

deanothedino wrote:But the chance (before you flipped the first) of getting heads ten times in a row is 0.001%

....
was wondering where you got that 5% from

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:20 pm

happyclaret17 wrote:bookies odds regarding football are flawed....odds for matches that go on coupons are done days in advance....injuries and other factors can mean the punter gains the advantage providing the punter is selective.
The betfair market reflects the chances far more accurately.

Yes, I can agree with that, but in this day and age with internet bookmakers, their odds are kept much more up to date.

Besides that, we're talking about the current odds for relegation.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:22 pm

Tall Paul wrote:I don't think I do agree. What do you mean by the chances are variable?

I agree that the chance of relegation will vary over time due to other events such as changes in personnel over the summer and then the the results of matches as they happen. The relegation odds will be adjusted as these events happen.

So what do you think they are, as a percentage?

Your question is impossible to answer, as illustrated by the coin toss analogy.

Come on Paul. You surely understand, you seem like a clued up guy (kinda why I like having a bit of a tussle with you). They are variable because on any given season circumstances will change for any or every club. Burnley's chances of survival will depend on who they sign, who they lose, refereeing decisions, and even who other clubs sign or lose. It can even be affected by the weather on a day of an important match against a near rival. The variables are almost innumerable.
The toss of a coin is not affected by anything unless it is interfered with so the chances will ALWAYS be 50/50.
Your statement about my question being impossible to answer is odd because we are talking in past tense here - after the event. A historical event has no variable so the question 'who got it right over the last two years' is very answerable. In fact it is a very simple question regarding who predicted things more correctly.

Spike · Post by **Spike** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:26 pm

we wont go down . simples

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:27 pm

houseboy wrote:Come on Paul. You surely understand, you seem like a clued up guy (kinda why I like having a bit of a tussle with you). They are variable because on any given season circumstances will change for any or every club. Burnley's chances of survival will depend on who they sign, who they lose, refereeing decisions, and even who other clubs sign or lose. It can even be affected by the weather on a day of an important match against a near rival. The variables are almost innumerable.

Pretty sure that's what I said in my second paragraph. The chance at any particulalr point in time (such as right now) isn't variable though.

What do think the chances, as of right now, of Burnley being relegated next season are?

Your statement about my question being impossible to answer is odd because we are talking in past tense here - after the event. A historical event has no variable so the question 'who got it right over the last two years' is very answerable. In fact it is a very simple question regarding who predicted things more correctly.

But the bookies assigned a probability to Burnley being relegated (and that probablilty was that they were more likely not be relegated), you still haven't. Anyone can predict things after they've happened.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:35 pm

tim_noone wrote:Toss that coin ten times..... Betcha it's not 50/50

Actually every time you toss it its is 50/50, it's not a variable.

happyclaret17 · Post by **happyclaret17** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:40 pm

bearing in mind that the teams coming from championship have not done too bad recently then our position where they have us now would be about right in my view.....if the european ties take their toll or god forbid we lose dyche at some stage then it could be a tough season....for once the bookies seem to be pitching our price about right.

deanothedino · Post by **deanothedino** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:32 pm

Tall Paul wrote:Nice edit

Posted and then I was like "wait a second, I've not done that right"

JohnMac · Post by **JohnMac** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 3:36 pm

Tall Paul wrote:I see what you're saying about the young players at big clubs, but it's not really relevant to the point. They are paid more because of their potential and because those clubs see them as better investments than paying an experienced player to sit on the bench or in the reserves.

You could make the argument that by paying these youngsters they're taking budget away from the first team squad, but the point stands that clubs who can pay their first team squad higher wages have a better chance of success than those who don't because they can attract better players.

I absolutely get what your saying and maybe I could have explained it better. My point is there are far too many average players on salaries befitting a player of better standing. The clubs with benefactors skew the market by paying over the odds and the Bookies have to use it as the benchmark.

We as Burnley fans know full well a wage bill is not reflective of a clubs standing though.

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 3:52 pm

houseboy wrote:Actually every time you toss it its is 50/50, it's not a variable.

Its certainly not 50/50.

Height, Speed, Rotations play a key role in the coin flip.

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:06 pm

Dyched wrote:Its certainly not 50/50.

Height, Speed, Rotations play a key role in the coin flip.

Would you offer me better than evens on a coin flip?

happyclaret17 · Post by **happyclaret17** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:20 pm

Just done the maths on the 10 coin tosses to land on heads.....its 1023/1....in other words....200/1 with ladbrokes

.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:34 pm

Dyched wrote:Its certainly not 50/50.

Height, Speed, Rotations play a key role in the coin flip.

But statistically there can only ever be one of two results (if you discount the highly unlikely event of it landing on it's edge). Wind, rain, hurricane, thunderstorm, etc. don't make a blind bit of difference to the statistical chances involved and even if you throw a hundred successive heads it doesn't make any difference to the odds on the 101st throw, it's still 50/50. I learned this years ago at college learning stats as part of another course. I thought the odds of throwing an opposite increased with the number of times a successive opposite had been thrown but it simply isn't the case. Taken individually each throw has a 50/50 chance. It can be no other way.