Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Languid_lizard t1_iyoo4ik wrote

Interesting. You can compare to the actual betting odds shown below. The simulator seems to treat the underdogs a little more favorably.

Brazil 27.3%

Argentina 16.1%

France 14.8%

Spain 11.8%

England 8.9%

Portugal 6.8%

Netherlands 4.7%

Croatia 2.5%

Japan 1.3%

Switzerland 1.3%

Morocco 1.1%

USA 1.0%

Senegal 0.9%

South Korea 0.6%

Poland 0.5%

Australia 0.4%

53

sageandbunyon t1_iyor6nz wrote

England 12% France 11% nahhhh

36

VogJam t1_iyqr5hz wrote

It’s the knock on effect from R16.

It predicts that Poland are 10% more likely to beat France than Senegal to beat England. Obviously if France are eliminated by Poland, they can’t reach the final, so France’s predictions are carrying that 10% disadvantage through to the other rounds. It’s not predicting that England will beat France, just that France are more likely to slip up in the R16.

5

mathsTeacher82 OP t1_iyoh4x9 wrote

I originally posted this chart an hour ago, but someone pointed out I had groups C and D paired incorrectly. Now Argentina has a greater chance of winning! (and Brazil less)

31

schroindinger t1_iypmv1f wrote

That is based on the elo, but they lost because they were playing with basically none of their main players and didn’t have a great incentive to win given they were already classified.

7

ExiledToTerminus t1_iyoy7ad wrote

Your simulation gives the U.S. a 1/25 chance (in the long run) of winning the whole thing? That seems...optimistic...

12

mathsTeacher82 OP t1_iyogy20 wrote

Data: Official FIFA rankings, updated using Elo rating system

Tools: Python for simulation, JavaScript (D3.js) for chart

This article describes the simulation algorithm and also the chart creation

11

hurricane14 t1_iyq8cg0 wrote

Something seems fairly flawed if it has the US as an average favorite in the quarterfinals - 22/41. They'll be heavy underdogs to Argentina and not enough of a favorite vs Australia to offset it in the off chance that they also pull the upset in the first round

0

TheyArentAny t1_iyou25u wrote

35% chance a nation will win their first world cup

11

tokoboy4 t1_iyqb714 wrote

Mark my words, its not going to be Australia.

8

Achillies2heel t1_iyorhm7 wrote

Well theres no Germany so Brazil seems like a shoein...😏

9

StAnger99 t1_iypwdas wrote

England at 12%? It’s coming home!

7

schrodingers_pp t1_iyownpb wrote

Oxford predicted Belgium will go to the final and lose to Brazil, they are out in first round.

These simulations are cool and all, but basing your simulation on ranking only doesn’t generate accurate predictions. You need to consider players recent form, team chemistry, injuries etc.

6

Newmanuel t1_iypyyfx wrote

there's a pretty accurate simulation site they use for Starcraft called aligulac that I found predicts tournaments better than humans all the time. The thing is, these are individual players with many games being played against each other. Most of the players in the world cup spend most of their games in different teams, so the dataset of games in their WC arrangement is too small to make accurate predictions from.

4

LesterGironimo t1_iyolpp7 wrote

Interesting article. I've not seen the dataset you used as on my phone. Will check it out. Great write up.

Football ain't like chess, but hard to see past Brazil. Aussies to knock out Argentina and the algo is out of whack.

5

NotNok t1_iypaaqa wrote

Australia 1/3 chance of beating Argentina? Praying for times like this

4

fifaBeastFC t1_iyonp53 wrote

I have a question; for example the Netherlands. If I read this correctly the Netherlands will reach the quarter finals in 59% and the semi finals in 35%. That means that there is a 63% chance the Netherlands wins the quarter finals when reached. But If I also do the same calculation for Argentina (66% quarter and 40% semi) they also win the quarter finals 60% of the times when reached.

How is it possible that Both the Netherlands AND Argentina wins the quarter final more than 50% of the time. When reached.

Also; if you sum up the possibilities of the 4 countries (the Netherlands, Argentina, USA and Australia) to reach the semi finals I get 107%. Shouldn't this be 100% since its only possible that one country out of these four reach the semi finals

3

Languid_lizard t1_iyopaak wrote

The first point could potentially be explained by them having a higher % chance if they face USA or Australia in the second round. But yea the numbers don’t add up for the region so something seems a little off about the simulation.

3

mfb- t1_iyq4uwy wrote

> How is it possible that Both the Netherlands AND Argentina wins the quarter final more than 50% of the time. When reached.

If the Netherlands and Argentina have e.g. 50%/50% against each other but more than 50% chance against the other team (US/Australia) then you get more than 50% (conditional) chance to advance for both teams.

The 107% sum is odd, indeed.

2

hiphippo65 t1_iyorx5u wrote

The way it’s presented (x team reaches a certain level in xx% of simulations) you have a solid point. They necessarily have to add up to 100%. Even in factoring in rounding, it shouldn’t be off by 7%.

My guess is that it’s not in fact % of simulations, but instead % chance of reaching that level. Small difference in interpretation, doesn’t matter on the first round, but changes in the deeper rounds due to conditional probabilities. For example given Australia beats Argentina, their odds of reaching the semis is increased much more than say the USA beating the Netherlands.

1

Craygor t1_iyoul2r wrote

For a country where professional football(soccer) is ranked 4th (behind American Football, Baseball, & Basketball) the US is doing surprisingly well.

3

iamamuttonhead t1_iyp5fyi wrote

Professional soccer in the U.S. probably also trails college football and college basketball...

5

Bucksandreds t1_iyp9lll wrote

Culturally absolutely. Financially, I believe mls has surpassed NCAA basketball

2

LurkingChessplayer t1_iyqhkro wrote

Soccer is more popular than hockey in the US? I honestly never would’ve thought lol

1

sidney_rough_diamond t1_iyp4pj4 wrote

No way England have a better chance the France, and I am English.

3

Lachimanus t1_iyq61v8 wrote

On what is this based?

If you just look at other world cup performances, it does not make any sense.

Hopefully something like the last 4-10 years or so. France being the current world champion, this having a good team at hand should give them much higher chances of winning.

3

OrangeinDorne t1_iyols3u wrote

I wish it had the actually ELO posted under each country (sorry I’m a chess player). The linked article described how to calculate it but still doesn’t tell us what the actual rankings are.

2

saladThought t1_iyp6g2h wrote

U.S at 4% and Portugal at 5% cannot be the case.

2

alilweeb t1_iyoue08 wrote

Thid graph is giving brasil too much credit, were a shadow of our 2000s roster

1

scuac t1_iypw4e2 wrote

So you are saying there is a chance?

  • USA
1

a1drt t1_iyqc23n wrote

Argentine I think they may have a chance

1

Inevitable-Clue9840 t1_iyqx5bs wrote

Data aside, flags are really nice visuals and I like how you used them here!

1

VivaIbiza t1_iyr1qyg wrote

Koreans be like: So you are telling me there’s a chance?

1

tradtrad100 t1_iyremjo wrote

Argentina is the most grossly overrated team at this world cup

1

Jonathan-Shimshoni t1_iys6giw wrote

There must be a mistake here because Netherlands, USA, Argentina and Australia are all competing for exactly one SF spot, yet they have a combined 105% to get there.

It should equal exactly 100%.

Same case for France, England, Poland and Senegal. Should have a combined 100% to reach the semis yet they somehow have a combined 94%.

1

Whimax07 t1_iyqxu7s wrote

I assume thats made by someone from England.

0

navetzz t1_iyoxtdx wrote

It has been long since the last: "Why do the simple computation when I can run simulations and get an approximation of the result" posts.

−1