How the format of a competition can alter the odds of success

How the format of a competition can alter the odds of success

By Mark Taylor May 27, 2014

Tweet

This World Cup group betting article analyses how the competition format can alter the odds of a nations success. With each nation playing just three games on neutral ground in the group stage, the World Cup gives the weaker nations a greater chance of causing an upset, compared to the longer home/away format of the Champions League.

The two main aims of a prolonged sporting tournament is to try to ensure that the ultimate winners are considered to be worthy of their triumph, whilst also maintaining a degree of unpredictability to proceedings to satisfy the interests of the spectating public.

These two ingredients are largely the product of the difference in talent levels between the competitors and the length of the individual contests within the tournaments as a whole and this interplay is present in every sport.

Snooker often uses a seeded draw and a reasonable number of frames to decide the outcome of early round matches. The near guarantee of facing a weaker opponents gives an advantage to the higher seed, but the shorter duration of the contest compared to subsequent rounds allows the weaker player some chance of causing an upset.

Tennis’ most prestigious men’s tournaments, deserved rewards for the elite, are played over the best of five sets, rather than three. The longer haul gives more opportunity for the best players to see their superior talent shine through, potentially overwhelming the randomness of chance that can be a factor in deciding individual points within the match.

Soccer is no different. At the start of the 2013/14 season, the yet to be crowned Premiership champions, Manchester City were virtually certain to finish above newly promoted and eventually relegated Cardiff City over a 38 game season. But over a single 90 minute match, the latter, could and did defeat the former.

This spills over into a straight knockout competition such as the FA Cup. A reduced number of matches, combined with a random draw, will still see the likely competition winners ranked in a familiar order, but the chances assigned to the best will reflect the increased uncertainty.

Comparison between World Cup & Champions League group format

The flagship European club competition, the UEFA Champions League, combines aspects of a league and a knockout format and a casual glance at the eventual winners indicates that the competition invariably allows for the cream of European football to progress deep into the tournament.

Teams are seeded in the group phase and over the last decade 71 of the 80 sides drawn from the highest seeded pot have progressed out of the initial group stage and 8 out of the last 10 winners also originated from the premier pot.

So the Champions League format that currently combines home and away group matches, comprising 4 teams, followed by two legged, home and away knockout ties and ultimately a single match with provision for extra time, appears to assist the best in surviving a potentially fatal slip up.

The World Cup partly mimics the UEFA Champions League format. It currently contains both a group and a knockout stage, but the timeframe of the contests is shorter. Most notably in the initial group stages, where each side plays just three matches and a single aberration, similar to the high point of Cardiff’s relegation season, can often mean elimination.

Data for a tournament played every four years is sparse and it is easy to weave a convincing narrative around prominent, but limited individual outcomes to support a particular line of reasoning.

France, as defending champions in 2002 failed to score a goal in Group A and departed the tournament behind the two qualifiers, Denmark and Senegal as well as third placed Uruguay. France again propped up Group A in 2010, as did Italy in Group F.

Numerous, less fancied sides have crept into the second qualifying spot at the expense of more fancied rivals.  Australia, Ghana and Ecuador in 2006 and South Korea, Japan and Slovakia in 2010 have each progressed out of the World Cup groups.

So anecdotally and from evidence from other sports, we might expect group outcomes at the World Cup to be less favourable to the better quality sides than we have come to expect from our experience of observing the results from the similar, but elongated format used in the Champions League.

How the format of a competition can alter the odds of success

It is often helpful to attempt to quantify the suspected differences that can be attributed to altered formats and one way to do this is to simulate an actual World Cup group both under the conditions of the tournament and then under a format consistent with that used in Europe’s UCL.

In 2014, Group B is comprised of the two finalists from 2010, Spain and the Netherlands, a side from the home continent, Chile and big outsiders, Australia.  Although it would be a logistical nightmare in reality, it is easy to construct match prices whereby each team play a six match, home and away sequence against their group rivals, as per the Champions League and simulate the outcome of this 10,000 times.

We can then compare the frequency of the finishing positions for each side under UCL format to a simulation of the shorter, three match programme that will be played out in June in Brazil.

Finishing position % when playing each opponent, home & away (UCL Format)

Position

Spain

Netherlands

Chile

Australia

1st

62.9

24.6

12.3

0.2

2nd

25.9

41.9

30.3

1.9

3rd

10.5

29.8

48.6

11.1

4th

0.8

3.7

8.8

86.8

The table above charts how frequently each side finished in each position in the 10,000 simulations of a UEFA Champions League format.
Spain was considered the best team in the group, as befitting a team at the top of the current FIFA rankings. The Dutch are then slightly favoured over Chile, although FIFA rankings suggested the narrow ordering should perhaps be reversed. Australia is indisputably the outsiders of the four.
As expected the talent we’ve bestowed upon each team is reflected in their most likely finishing position over 10,000 iterations. Spain is most likely to top the group and Australia is most likely to finish last, while the Netherlands and Chile vie for the second qualifying spot.
If we now repeat the simulation, but instead reduce the number of matches to three per side, as well as allowing for neutral venue matches we can see the effect of format on likely outcome.

Finishing position % under a World Cup group format

Position

Spain

Netherlands

Chile

Australia

1st

56.1

26.9

15.8

1.2

2nd

28.3

37.4

29.3

5.0

3rd

13.1

28.2

41.2

17.5

4th

2.6

7.4

13.7

76.3

Reducing the length of the overall contest to a half of the UCL length hasn’t altered the most likely finishing position for the teams, but the likelihoods has changed and is most noticeable in the chances of the best and worst teams in the group.
The likelihood of Spain winning the group has fallen from nearly 63% when a side plays 6 games to just over 56% and while Australia might expect to taste overall victory on average, once every 500 attempts under a UCL format, this improves to around once every 80 tries in a World Cup scenario.
Australia’s chances of emulating the team of 2006 by reaching the round of 16 more than doubles in the underdog friendly World Cup group stages compared to the UCL format.
The most talented are still most likely group winners, but their advantage is eroded by the pared down format and the need to complete the tournament in a month of intense competition. The chances that a fancied team might finish fourth in a group, as France have done twice in the last three finals, shouldn’t be dismissed or underestimated.
The World Cup is designed, partly through necessity to produce some “shocks”, but also allow enough quality to progress to the knockout stage through group seeding.

Click here to see the latest World Cup group stage odds.

Mark Taylor is a freelance soccer and NFL writer who, along with producing expert content for Pinnacle Sports, also runs his own soccer analytics blog, the Power of Goals.

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.