How to use statistics and match history for predictions

Article volumetric text

Statistics is a language of probabilities. She does not "guess" the future, but helps to assess the chances better than intuition. The history of matches is an important part of the data, but it is easy to interpret it incorrectly: small samples, the "magic of personal meetings," the calendar effect and the shape of the teams distort the picture. Below is a practical guide to how to collect, clean and apply statistics in such a way as to obtain reasonable coefficients and find value.

1) What data is really useful

Basic command metrics

Results: wins/draws/losses, goal/point difference.

"Quality of moments": xG/xGA in football, Shot Quality/Expected Goals for/against in hockey, Offensive/Defensive Rating in basketball.

Tempo/style: possession, pace of attacks, transitional phases, pressure, 3PA/pace (NBA).

Standard provisions, corners, penalties (football): often an underestimated source of scoring chances.

Individual factors

Roster: injuries, suspensions, rotation, minutes limit, return of leaders.

Synergy and roles: who creates moments, who converts, who draws protection.

Context

Home/away, flights, calendar density (back-to-back in NBA, 3 games in 7 days in football).

Weather/surface/altitude (wind and rain reduce tempo and accuracy).

Referees/referees (whistle style affects fouls and penalties).

Motivation/tournament position (but beware of "narrative" without numbers).

2) History of face-to-face meetings: when it matters and when it is a trap

Useful if:

Styles "do not coincide": team A falls apart against high pressure, and opponent B is one of the leaders in PPDA.
Stable coaches and the core of the squad, tactics changed little, matches were recent (≤ 12-18 months).
There are repeatable patterns (for example, a high volume of standards for an opponent systematically creates xG against a specific defense).

Traps:

Ancient matches and other coaches/lineups = trash.
Small samples: 2-4 games are noise.
"Derby psychology" without metric confirmation.

Practice: if head-to-head contradicts fresh data (form, xG trends, compositions) - trust fresh, process metrics, not old results.

3) How to weigh long-standing and fresh data

Sliding window: Take the last 10-15 matches as a form base.

Decreasing weights: recent games - more weight (for example, 1. 0 → 0. 9 → 0. 8…).

Ajast opponent: adjust statistics on the strength of opponents (games against the top 5 and against outsiders cannot be averaged "as is").

4) Power ratings (Elo/benchmarks)

The idea: Each team is given a rating; after the match, it rises/falls, taking into account the surprise of the result and the importance of the match.

Pros: versatility, few parameters, gives a good baseline.

How to apply:

1. Build/use the finished Elo.

2. Adjust for the home factor (often ≈ + 0 in football. 20–0. 30 goals in models; in basketball - a separate offset in points).

3. Translate the rating difference → the probability of winning through the logistics function.

4. Check with the market: where your probability> implicit is the potential value.

5) Simple probabilistic model: an example for football (Poisson)

Task: assess the chances of accurate scores and outcomes.

Steps:

1. Rate the teams' expected goals (\lambda _ A) and (\lambda _ B) (e.g. from xG adjusted for defensive/offensive strength and home factor).

2. Assume the independence of head distributions (simplification, but working to start).

3. Probability of a team scoring (k) goals:

(P(K=k) = e^{-\lambda}\frac{\lambda^k}{k!}).
4. Collapse the distributions to obtain the probabilities of "P1/X/P2," totals, and exact counts.

Mini-example (simplified):

Let (\lambda _ A = 1 {,} 55), (\lambda _ B = 1 {,} 10).

Then:

(P_A(0)=e^{-1. 55}\approx 0{,}212), (P_A(1)\approx 0{,}329), (P_A(2)\approx 0{,}255).
(P_B(0)=e^{-1. 10}\approx 0{,}333), (P_B(1)\approx 0{,}366), (P_B(2)\approx 0{,}201).
By folding (multiplying and summing over all k), we get the probabilities of outcomes and totals (for example, (P (\text {TB} 2 {,} 5)) - the sum of all pairs (k_A+k_B\ge3)).

💡 In practice, use a table of up to 5-6 goals, this covers 99% of cases.

Important: add corrections to:

"0-0" and draws (the correlation of goals scored reduces the frequency of draws in pure Poisson - you can introduce a draw factor).
Red cards, late goals, matchup style (pace and standards affect distribution).

6) Construction of "process" assessment instead of "countable"

Why "xG is better than the score": the score is a discrete total, xG is the sum of the quality of the moments. The team could "generate" 2. 0 xG and not scoring is not "bad form," but dispersion.

Approach:

Build an xG For − xG Against trend with decreasing weights.
Adjust for the strength of the opponent (ajast opponent).
Match with a raw score to identify overbought/oversold teams in the market.

7) From data to bet: a step-by-step framework

1. Collection and cleaning

Last 10-15 games + season averages.

Lineups, injuries, referee, weather, calendar.

Remove the obvious outliers (playing in the minority of 60 minutes, etc.) or mark them.

2. Strength assessment

Elo/Power Rating + home factor.

The xG trend (or similar metrics for the sport) with the ajast opponent.

3. Match model

For football: (\lambda _ A ,\lambda _ B) → Poisson; for basketball - tempo + eFG% + ORB/TO → points forecast; for tennis - draw/game/set probability models.

Simulate 10-50 thousand Monte Carlo iterations (if you can) and get the distribution of outcomes/totals/odds.

4. Comparison with line

Coefficient → implicit probability (p_\text{imp}=1/k).

If (p_\text{vasha}> p_\text{imp}) are candidates for value.

Estimate the size of the edge: (\text {edge} = p_\text{vasha} - p_\text{imp}).

5. Bet size and risk

For a beginner: flat rate 0.5-1.5% of the bank.

Semi-Kelly, if confident in the calibration of probabilities.

6. Accounting and validation

Journal: date, market, copy, (p_\text{vasha}), amount, result, comment.

Weekly: probability calibration (10% buckets: from rates with a score of 60% should go ≈60%).

A/B test: compare the results of bets "on account" vs "on the xG model."

8) Qualitative factors that change numbers

Match-up and style. Fast flanks against slow fullbacks, pick-and-roll against weak arc defense, a team that gives a lot of 3PA to the opponent.

Overrated "series of victories." Often it's calendar + luck (PDO/conversion/saves). Test robustness through process metrics.

Rotation and fatigue. Back-to-back and long trips reduce attack efficiency and defensive intensity.

9) Mini checklists

Before the match

Lineups and leader status updated
Clarified home factor, weather/coverage/referee
Recalculated (\lambda )/ratings/probabilities
Comparison with bookmaker's line and margin
There is an explainable value (why is the market wrong?)

After the match

Updated log (ref, (p), result, xG/process)
The causes of deviations were recorded (injury on the 15th, red, penalty, "garbage time")
Calibration: Do my 55% actually go ≈55%?

10) Frequent mistakes and how to avoid them

Head-to-head retraining. Solution: H2H weight limit and statute of limitations.

Margin and market ignores. Solution: always count (p_\text{imp}) and look for edge, not "predict the winner."

Small sample. Solution: supporting seasonal average + declining weights.

No validation. Solution: calibration curves, backtest, log.

Statistics and match history work when you: (1) rely on process metrics (xG, quality ratings), (2) adjust data for context (home/away, calendar, referee, weather), (3) turn the forecast into probabilities, and then compare them with line and margin, and (4) manage risk in a disciplined manner and keep a journal. Then the "match history" ceases to be a set of myths and turns into a tool for finding a real value.