A value bet is not a bet that is likely to win. It is a bet where the probability of winning is higher than the price implies. Those are different things, and confusing them is the single most expensive misunderstanding in betting.
A selection at decimal odds of 4.00 implies roughly a twenty-five per cent chance. If our model puts the outcome at thirty-five per cent, the bet is positive even though it will lose most of the time. A short favourite priced tighter than its true probability is negative even though it will win most of the time.
For each fixture we compare our model probability against the probability implied by the bookmaker price, and surface the fixtures where our number is materially higher. The page shows the market price, the fair price implied by our probability, and the size of the gap between them.
Bookmaker margin is part of the calculation. The three prices in a 1X2 market always imply more than one hundred per cent between them, and a comparison that ignores that overstates every edge.
Expect this page to be uncomfortable. Positive-expectation selections at longer prices lose more often than they win, and a run of misses is a normal feature of the approach rather than a sign it has stopped working.
The edge on any single selection is small. What makes the approach coherent is consistency across many selections, which means flat staking and a long horizon. Increasing the stake after a loss converts a small edge into a large risk.
A value bet is not a tip with extra confidence attached. If anything, the strongest value selections tend to be the ones that feel least comfortable to back.
We do not publish returns for this page, for the same reason we do not publish them anywhere else. The prices we published are on the page and they do not change after the fact.
Positive-expectation selections at longer prices lose more often than they win. That is not a flaw in the approach; it is the approach. A 35% shot at a price implying 25% is a good bet that will miss roughly two times in three, and a run of misses is a normal feature rather than a signal that something has broken.
This is the opposite of how most prediction sites are used, and it is why value selections rarely feel comfortable to back. The selections that feel safest — short favourites at tight prices — are frequently the ones the market has already over-corrected.
If you want the higher strike rate instead, the individual market pages listed on the markets overview carry the same predictions organised by what the fixture is rather than by where the price is wrong.
For each fixture we compare our model probability against the probability implied by the bookmaker price, and surface the fixtures where our number is materially higher. The page shows the market price, the fair price implied by our probability, and the size of the gap.
Bookmaker margin is part of the calculation. The three prices in a 1X2 market always imply more than 100% between them, and a comparison that ignores that overstates every edge — sometimes enough to turn a negative bet into an apparently positive one.
The edge on any single selection is small, which means flat staking and a long horizon are not optional extras but the thing that makes the approach coherent. Increasing the stake after a loss converts a small edge into a large risk, and the accumulators page explains why combining value selections compounds the problem rather than solving it.
The methodology page sets out where our probabilities come from.