See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262395354

Using Bookmaker Odds to Predict the Final

Result of Football Matches

Conference Paper · September 2012

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-37343-5_20

CITATIONS READS

2 4,349

2 authors, including:

Jacek Grekow
Bialystok University of Technology
17 PUBLICATIONS 35 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Jacek Grekow
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 24 October 2016
Using bookmaker odds to predict the final result
of football matches

Karol Odachowski, Jacek Grekow

Faculty of Computer Science, Bialystok University of Technology,

Wiejska 45A, Bialystok 15-351, Poland
[email protected], [email protected]

Abstract. There are many online bookmakers that allow betting money
in virtually every field of sports, from football to chess. The vast majority
of online bookmakers operate based on standard principles and estab-
lish the odds for sporting events. These odds constantly change due to
bets placed by gamblers. The amount of changes is associated with the
amount of money bet on a given odd. The purpose of this paper was to
investigate the possibility of predicting how upcoming football matches
will end based on changes in bookmaker odds. A number of different clas-
sifiers that predict the final result of a football match were developed.
The results obtained confirm that the knowledge of a group of people
about football matches gathered in the form of bookmaker odds can be
successfully used for predicting the final result.

Keywords: bookmaker odds, feature extraction, classification, forecast-

ing, sports betting.

1 Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the possibility of predicting how
upcoming sporting events will end based on changes in bookmaker odds. Football
was the sport chosen for observation of changes in bookmaker odds. It should be
assumed that if a gambler risks his own money, he has reasons to place such a
bet. The greater the amount of gambled funds, the greater the change of the odds
and greater possibility that the bet was based on factual knowledge about the
competing teams, the status of the players, games played, etc. Predictions of the
result can be based on such types of information. If the research should provide
promising results, one might be tempted to build a decision-making system that
could allow predicting final results based on observation of fluctuations of odds.

2 Previous Works
There are several papers that have dealt with similar problems of analysis and
prediction of sporting event results. They are based on various types of data
such as expert knowledge, results of previous matches, rankings of teams or
bookmaker odds.
2 Karol Odachowski, Jacek Grekow

A group of papers directly referring to this paper are those addressing the
problem of using data mining techniques to predict the final result of a sports
match. An analysis of data of National Basketball Association (NBA) seasons
was used to develop the expert system, which predicts the winner in a sport
game [1]. The analyzed data contained detailed statistics of each game played
during a season. The best accuracy (67%) was achieved by a classifier built using
a multinomial logistic regression model with a ridge estimator. Miljkovic et al.
[2] presents a system that uses data mining techniques in order to predict the
outcomes of basketball games in the NBA league. To predict the game result
the Naive Bayes method is used. Besides the actual result, the system calculates
the spread for each game by using multivariate linear regression. Each game was
described with attributes composed of the standard basketball statistics (field
goals made, field goals attempted, 3 pointers, free throws, rebounds, blocked
shots, fouls, etc), and information about league standings (number of wins and
losses, home and away wins, current streak etc). The system correctly predicted
the winners of about 67% of the matches. McCabe and Trevathan [3] used Arti-
ficial Neural Networks to predict games. They used attributes that indicate the
quality of a particular team and achived 54.6% correct predictions for the En-
glish Football Premier League and 67.5% for Super Rugby. Smith et al. [4] used
the Bayesian classifier to predict Cy Young Award winners in American base-
ball. The model was crated based on player statistics data collected for baseball
seasons from 1967 to 2006. The accuracy of the Bayesian classifier was more
than 80% correct.

3 Classic Football Bets of 1-X-2 Type

This work focuses on classic football bets of 1-X-2 type. For example, the result
is a win of the first team, second team or a draw. Because of the three possible
endings for the match, a three-way 1-X-2 bet, where ”1” is an odd for the home
team, ”X” a draw, ”2” odds for the away team, is used in football betting. The
home team is the one that plays at home, while the visiting team is the away
team. The classic bets are regarded as winning if the selected result is correct.
For example, a football match: Tottenham Hotspur vs. Chelsea:
– Bet on Tottenham Hotspur (type 1) will be settled as a win if Tottenham
Hotspur wins. If Chelsea wins or there is a tie, the bets will be settled as a
loss. It would be the same with a bet on Chelsea (type 2).
– A bet on a draw (type X) will be settled as a winning bet only in the event
of the match ending in a tie.

4 Input Data
The input data describing the changes in bookmakers odds was obtained from the
PinnacleSports [5] website, which makes public any information about sporting
events in a clear form of an XML document. The XML file can be found at
 Using bookmaker odds to predict the final result of football matches 3

http://www.xml.pinnaclesports.com/pinnacleFeed.asp. This is a static file,

updated every 10 minutes. The process of importing data from an XML file
consisted in tracking its contents for the last 10 hours preceding the football
game and recording data on the changing odds. Additionally, the input data
had to be supplemented with the final result of the matches. Due to the fact
that Pinnacle Sports does not provide such data, we imported it from another
source: Betfair.com [6]. We collected the input data for a period of six months,
from a total of 2615 matches.

4.1 Feature Extraction

Every game, which is an independent instance included in the input data of

the decision-making system, was described by a set of features. They reflected
significant changes in bookmaker odds, which may affect the final result of the
match.
We analyzed the overall level of changes in bookmaker odds of football games,
which could determine the path of further research. For this purpose sample
graphs showing the odds over time were analyzed. A period of 10 hours of sam-
pling before the match was taken into consideration, because in this period the
greatest fluctuations of the odds occurred. The time interval between successive
samples was 10 minutes.

Fig. 1. Sample chart of odds changes (home, away, draw) in 1-X-2 type bets
4 Karol Odachowski, Jacek Grekow

Fig. 2. Odd changes for the Racing Genk vs. Loceren (2:1) match

We observed that the closer to the start of the match, the more changes
in the odds occurred. Figure 1 illustrates such a situation. This is a chart of
values of the odds for the home team, the visiting team, and a draw over time
(Y axis) during the last 10 hours (X axis) before the Tottenham Hotspur vs.
Chelsea match, which was held on 12th December 2010 and ended with a 1-1
draw. Figure 2 presents another example of changes in bookmaker odds for the
Racing Genk vs. Loceren (2:1) match, which was held on 3th April 2011.
We decided that it would be justified to divide the sampling period into
several smaller ones, because the irregularity of the distribution of the changes
may indicate that the entire sampling period does not have the same effect on the
final result. For each period we generated the same set of features. Additionally,
the entire sampling period was also taken into account. This allowed us to extract
general information about the match. Figure 3 shows a schematic diagram of such
a division.

Fig. 3. Division of the sampling period

We examined three data sets:

 Using bookmaker odds to predict the final result of football matches 5

1. Set of odds for a home team win;

2. Set of odds for a away team win;
3. Set of odds for a draw.
Regardless of the data set, we investigated four sampling periods:
– the entire 10-hour sampling period prior to the match;
– 1st sampling period correlating to the first 3 hours and 20 minutes;
– 2nd sampling period beginning on the 21st minute of the third hour and also
lasting 3 hours and 20 minutes;
– 3rd sampling period correlating to the last 3 hours and 20 minutes before
the start of the match.
For each set of data in each sampling period we generated a set of 24 stan-
dard features, which include: the minimum value; the minimum value given as a
percentage; the maximum value; the maximum value given as a percentage; the
value of the arithmetic mean; arithmetic mean given as a percentage; the number
of odds with different values; standard deviation; initial value; initial value given
as a percentage; final value; final value given as a percentage; the difference in
the initial and final value; the difference in the initial and final values given as a
percentage; angle between the horizontal line and a line drawn from the initial
to the maximum value; angle between the horizontal line and a line drawn from
the initial to the minimum value; minimum value of the derivative; maximum
value of the derivative; arithmetic mean of the derivative; standard deviation of
the derivative; initial value of the derivative; final value of the derivative; the
difference between the initial and the final values of the derivative; the number
of different values of the derivatives.
Additionally, a single sampling period contained eight general features that
apply to all three data sets simultaneously: minimum limit of money; maximum
limit of money; arithmetic mean of the limit of money; nominal feature which
based on the arithmetic mean value of the odds determines the favored team;
nominal feature determining the favored team at the beginning of the sampling
period; nominal feature determining the favored team at the end of the sampling
period; nominal feature determining the team that recorded the biggest odds
drop between the beginning and the end of the sampling period; nominal feature
determining the team that recorded the biggest odds drop between successive
sampling periods.
The number of features determined for a single sampling period is equal to
80. This is the sum of the general features (8) and the product of the number
of features included in the set of standard features (24) with the amount of data
sets (3). We get a total of 320 features from the four sampling periods.

4.2 Data in ARFF Format

To use the collected input data about the matches in the decision-making pro-
cess, the values of all the features describing a particular match were determined
and later recorded in the ARFF file format. The last declared attribute (feature)
6 Karol Odachowski, Jacek Grekow

in this file is the decision class, which is the result of the match and adopts the
nominal values from the set: Win-home, Win-away, Win-draw. It defines the
final outcome of the match. For the input data prepared in such a manner, clas-
sifiers were developed allowing to predict the final result. To analyze the data
and the development of classifiers, a data mining task software WEKA [7] was
used. Cross-Validation Folds 10 (CV-10) were used to evaluate the classifiers.

5 Experiment Results

We constructed three variants of classifiers in order to thoroughly test the data

on football matches.

5.1 Standard Data Set Classification

To make the data collected from the PinnacleSports and Betfair sites useful
for data mining purposes, they had to go through pre-treatment in the form of
transformation and cleaning of the collected information. The overall objective
was to minimize so-called GIGO (garbage in - garbage out) - the reduction of
”garbage” that enters the model so that the model could minimize the number of
incorrect results [8]. For this purpose, the study included only those events that
had odds in the full 10-hour sampling period and had not been postponed. An
equal number of matches for each decision-making class was included in order to
offset the number of instances from each class [9]. Thus a total of 1116 sample
football games were selected, including: 372 matches that ended with a win for
the home team; 372 matches that ended with a win for the away team; 372
matches that ended with a draw.
Six classification algorithms were selected: BayesNet, SMO, LWL, Ensemble-
Selection, DecisionTable and SimpleCart [7]. For attribute selection the following
attribute evaluators and search methods were used: CfsSubsetEval with Best-
First, CfsSubsetEval with LinearForwardSelection and PrincipalComponents with
Ranker. The highest accuracy rate of 46.51% was achieved by the DecisionTable
algorithm. The confusion matrix for the created model is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Confusion matrix of classifier for a win for the home team, the away team or
a draw

a b c ← classified as
260 65 47 a = Win-home
154 154 64 b = Win-away
173 94 105 c = Win-draw

Matches that ended with a win for home team (Win-home class) are classified
very well in comparison with the two other classes. Most of the matches which
ended with a win for the away team were classified slightly worse. In this case
 Using bookmaker odds to predict the final result of football matches 7

a big mistake occurred due to a mistaken classification as a win for the home
team. The worst is the classification of matches that ended in a draw, which are
mostly classified incorrectly as a win for the home or the away team. This is
because a draw is a middle class between the two results.

5.2 Binary Classification

For better detection of the match result, we decided to build binary classifiers [10]
for each type of match result: win for the home team (Win-home), win for the
away team (Win-away), and a draw (Win-draw). The binary classifier focuses
on one problem and it can perform a better classification than a classifier that
has to identify three classes.

Binary Classifier for a Win for the Home Team. When developing a
classifier for the home team win, just as before (section 4.1), we used 1116 sample
football matches. Matches which ended with a win for the home team remained
unchanged, but the matches that ended with a win for the visiting team and
a draw were combined to form a new class. Then, we randomly discarded 372
matches to make the number of the instances in each class equal. Below is the
size of the two classes: 372 matches that ended with a win for the home team
(Win-home class); 372 matches that ended with a win for the away team or a
draw (Win-no-home class).
Six classification algorithms were selected: BayesNet, SMO, LWL, Bagging,
DecisionTable, and LadTree. For attribute selection the following attribute eval-
uators and search methods were used: CfsSubsetEval with BestFirst, Consis-
tencySubsetEval with GreedyStepwise, WrapperSubsetEval (classifier: Bagging)
with BestFirst. The highest accuracy rate of 70.56% was noted by the Bagging
algorithm, which obtained this result after feature selection (WrapperSubsetEval
with BestFirst) and after discretization of attributes. The confusion matrix for
the created model is presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Confusion matrix of binary classifier for a win for the home team

a b ← classified as
229 143 a = Win-home
76 296 b = Win-no-home

Binary Classifier for a Win for the Away Team. The accuracy of predict-
ing a win for the away team proved to be a bit more difficult than predicting
a win for the home team. The classifiers achieved worse results, but as in pre-
vious studies, a positive influence of feature selection and data discretization
was observed. The highest accuracy rate of 65.46% was noted by the Bayesian
NaiveBayes algorithm. The confusion matrix for the created model is presented
in Table 3.
8 Karol Odachowski, Jacek Grekow

Table 3. Confusion matrix of binary classifier for a win for the away team

a b ← classified as
244 128 a = Win-no-away
129 243 b = Win-away

Binary Classifier for a Draw. Same as with the evaluation of classifiers of

the standard data set (section 4.1), draws proved to be very difficult to predict.
In many cases, the classifiers could not perform a correct classification, which
resulted in obtaining accuracies which were not satisfactory. It can be concluded
that the values of features describing matches that ended in a draw are very
similar to those relating to the win of the home and away teams. The Ensemble-
Selection classifier proved to be the most accurate which after feature selection
(without discretization) achieved an accuracy of 56.99%. The confusion matrix
for the created model is presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Confusion matrix of binary classifier for a draw

a b ← classified as
196 176 a = Win-no-draw
144 228 b = Win-draw

5.3 Classification of Data Without Draws

Due to the fact that predicting a draw is difficult, we decided to perform addi-
tional tests on data that do not contain instances of matches ending in a draw.
This allowed creating a classifier that could enable predicting a win for the home
or the away team. This information can be used to place Asian handicap bets,
where in the case of a draw the betting amount is returned.
Matches that ended in a draw were discarded from the 1116 football matches
sample set. Matches that ended with a win for the home or the away team were
left unchanged. Below is the size of the two classes: 372 matches that ended with
a win for the home team (Win-home class); 372 matches that ended with a win
for the away team (Win-away class).
Six classification algorithms were selected: BayesNet, VotedPerception, Ibk,
Bagging, DecisionTable, and LADTree. For attribute selection the following at-
tribute evaluators and search methods were used: CfsSubsetEval with BestFirst,
ConsistencySubsetEval with BestFirst, WrapperSubsetEval (classifier: Naive-
Bayes) with BestFirst.
Removal of matches that ended in a draw from the sample data set proved to
be very beneficial. Classifiers predicting a win for a home or away team obtained
the highest accuracy taking all the conducted studies into account. The classifier
that proved to be the most accurate was an algorithm based on the Bayesian
 Using bookmaker odds to predict the final result of football matches 9

network: BayesNet, which after feature selection conducted after discretization

achieved an accurancy of 70.30%. The confusion matrix for the created model
is presented in Table 5. The best BayesNet algorithm correctly classified more
than 80% of Win-home and 60% of Win-away class matches.

Table 5. Confusion matrix of classifier for win for the home or the away team

a b ← classified as
298 74 a = Win-home
147 225 b = Win-away

5.4 Summary of Classification of 1-X-2 Type Bets

The evaluation performed on the classifiers built for 1-X-2 type bets showed
that a draw is the most difficult to predict. This study confirms the reality of
football, because the draw class determines the intermediate odd between a win
for the home and the away team. Tests showed that features describing a draw
contain many similarities to those relating to a win for the home or the away
team. Matrices of classification errors in the study of the standard data set show
that most matches which ended in a draw are incorrectly classified as a win for
the home team. This is due to the fact that in most cases, the home team is the
favorite (has the lowest odd).
In the case of binary classifiers, the accuracy of predicting a win for the home
team and the away team is promising. The classifier of a win for the home team
achieved an accuracy of 70.56%. Once again the classifier of a draw had the
worst results. The best independent classifier was the classifier of a win for the
home or away team; the accuracy did not deteriorate with matches which ended
in a hardly recognizable draw. The achieved accuracy of this classifier is very
satisfying. This classifier can be used for Asian handicap bets, where in the case
of a draw the betting amount is returned.
In most cases, feature selection resulted in increasing the accuracy of clas-
sification. We observed that the features were selected from all the sampling
intervals. A selection frequently used features concerning the minimum and max-
imum values, angles to these values, derivatives, the differences between the first
and last samples in the interval, and the largest drops in the value of odds be-
tween adjacent samples. This indicates that these features were most important.
Discretization in most cases also had a very positive influence on the results of
classification. Below are the best classification algorithms that have been selected
to predict the final results of new football matches. A summary of accuracy of
the developed classifiers is presented in Table 6.
10 Karol Odachowski, Jacek Grekow

Table 6. Classifying algorithms selected for predicting 1-X-2 type bets

Type of classifier Algorithm Accuracy

Standard data set DecisionTable 46.51%
Win for home team Bagging 70.56%
Win for away team NaiveBayes 65.46%
Draw EnsembleSelection 56.99%
Win for home and away team BayesNet 70.30%

6 Conclusions
The results obtained, an effectiveness of 70%, are quite satisfactory and prove the
existence of a relationship between changes in the bookmaker odds values and
the outcome of the football match. These results confirm that the knowledge of a
group of people about football matches gathered in the form of bookmaker odds
can be successfully used for predicting the final result. Based on our research
results, one could build a decision-making system that could allow predicting
final results based on observation of fluctuations of odds. In further work on
the system, new features describing changes of the odds should be investigated,
which would probably contribute to improving the accuracy of the system.

Acknowledgments. This paper is supported by the S/WI/5/08.

References
1. Zdravevski, E., Kulakov, A.: System for Prediction of the Winner in a Sports Game.
ICT Innovations 2009, Part 2, pp. 55–63 (2010)
2. Miljkovic, D., Gajic, L., Kovacevic, A., Konjovic, Z.: The use of data mining for
basketball matches outcomes prediction. 8th International Symposium on Intelligent
Systems and Informatics, pp. 309-312 (2010)
3. McCabe, A., Trevathan, J.: Artificial Intelligence in Sports Prediction. Proceedings
of the Fifth International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations,
IEEE Computer Society, pp. 1194-1197 (2008)
4. Smith, L., Lipscomb, B., Simkins, A.: Data Mining in Sports: Predicting Cy Young
Award Winners. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, vol. 22, issue 4, Con-
sortium for Computing Sciences in Colleges, pp. 115-121 (2007)
5. Pinnacle Sports, http://www.pinnaclesports.com
6. Betfair, http://www.betfair.com
7. Hall, M., Frank, E., Holmes, G., Pfahringer, B., Reutemann, P., Witten, I.H.: The
WEKA Data Mining Software: An Update. SIGKDD Explorations, Volume 11, Issue
1 (2009)
8. Larose, D.T.: Discovering Knowledge in Data: An Introduction to Data Mining.
Wiley Interscience, pp. 28 (2005)
9. Hand, D., Mannila, H., Smyth, P.: Principles of Data Mining. MIT Press (2001)
10. Witten, I.H., Frank, E.: Data Mining: Practical machine learning tools and tech-
niques. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, USA (2005)