Home – Draw – Away: Systematic Betting

Looking at possible home, draw and away bet combinations

  • Teams playing at home: Back or lay home; back or lay the draw; back or lay away
  • Teams playing away: Back or lay home; back or lay the draw; back or lay away

As you can see there are 12 variations and one more of these is presented below:

English Premier League Betting Table: Backing the Draw

English Premier League teams playing away (or at home = same annual totals): Backing the Draw with 10 units per match

Here, draws don’t look as bad as away results and two teams jump out, Everton and Fulham.

Over the five seasons both clubs finished with more away draws than any other team. Betting continuously with 10 € stakes on the draw in each team’s away matches, winnings over five years would have totalled 345.80 € and 553.70 € respectively.

Having evaluated all 12 tables our conclusions are as follows:

  • Back Fulham if they are at home
  • Back the Draw if Fulham is away
  • Back Manchester City when they are at home
  • Back Manchester Utd when they are at home
  • Back the Draw when Aston Villa plays at home

This strategy looks quite promising and in none of the past five years would it would have been necessary to increase the initial bank of 50 € (betting with equal stakes of 10 €).

The profit over five years would have accumulated to 1,601.29 € if the bets were placed at prices 10% above the standard Ladbrokes odds. Please note that betting exchange commissions (their ‘tax’ on your winnings) have not been considered in these calculations.

It should also be borne in mind that the system relies on all bets being placed regardless of whether two of your selected teams are playing against each other.

The graph below shows the development of the bank each year if starting with 50 €:

Development of the bank:
(Starting bank 50 €: Backing Fulham, Manchester City and Manchester United to win at home; Backing the draw in all Aston Villa home games; Backing the draw in all Fulham away matches @ 10 € stake per game)

According to this graph there would never have been the necessity to increase the initial bank if adhering strictly to the 10 € stake per game, and apart from a brief spell during the 2007-2008 season, the bank would never have dropped under its original value of 50 €.

Even in the worst year (2007-2008) the ‘interest’ on the starting capital amounted to 125.54% (on a 50 € starting bank). No bank anywhere in the world offers such high interest on cash investments. In the best year (2008-2009) the ‘interest’ rate on the starting capital was a massive 1,137.10%, through nothing more than employing a simple system of backing three teams to win at home, one to draw at home, and one to draw away from home whenever the circumstances fitted:

Strategy and winnings

Of course, any systematic style of betting requires enormous discipline and it is only possible to win by sticking religiously to the chosen staking plan (in our example 10 € each fixture), without experimentation along the way. The system also relies on a ‘full game’ approach (i.e. no greening-up in-play), and depends on all bets being placed throughout the course of the entire season.

As much as the desire for quick profits is understandable, picking and choosing games, arbitrary changes of stakes, or deviations from the original staking plan will undoubtedly create irregularities in the betting bank, leading to possible chasing of losses, and then perhaps to full loss.

Of course, starting with such a small bank as 50 € and ending-up with just 62.77 € profit at the end of season 2006-2007 is surely not enough to make a living from, but bear in mind the capital return is still 125.54% (no saving account would return as much).

Although the 2008-2009 season would have been much more lucrative with a return of 568.55 € from a 50€ start, this too is still relatively small.

Last Update: 24 July 2011

Categories:1x2 Betting Case Studies

28 Responses to “Home – Draw – Away: Systematic Betting”

  1. 16 January 2018 at 12:22 am #

    Is there a formula to place bet on all three option and win (whatever happens) Home – Draw – Away

    • 16 January 2018 at 4:31 pm #

      Hi Adam,

      if you are referring to arbing/dutching, here’s an article on that topic: Dutching – Ausnutzen von Underround (Backen) & Overround (Layen)

      Unfortunately, it’s in German only, so you will have to use Google.Translate to understand it. Sorry! However, I tried hard to write in short sentences so that an automated translation is still understandable.

      Have fun! 🙂

  2. 22 September 2016 at 7:58 am #

    Hello Soccerwidow!

    I would like to ask that if I calulcate the percentage of draws in 5 seasons of data and for example it’s average is 27, with a standard deviation of 3 % , I have to calculate the average odds for theese events to know that if this is profitable or not?

    for example:
    24 to 30 % draws percentage
    bookmakers are offered for theese events an average of 2,85 odds (35%)

    This means that betting always on draws, can bring us profit?


    • 28 September 2016 at 11:27 am #

      Hi sarkec, this isn’t a question which is a straight forward answer. Sorry!

      If you wish to work out a Back or Lay the Draw strategy you will need to get a few HDAFU table. There you will find inflection point graphs which help to identify the odds clusters which are long-term profitable.

  3. 27 May 2016 at 12:40 pm #

    If it’s guaranteed, why not increase the bank to maximise profit ie £2000 bank, £400 stake a game?

  4. 17 March 2016 at 5:57 pm #

    Hi Sander,

    Ladbrokes is a middle of the road bookmaker and we were attempting to simulate betting exchange odds hence the 10% mark-up on Ladbrokes’ odds (see picture captions).

    Hope this helps.

  5. 9 March 2016 at 2:26 am #

    But is assuming 10% on top of Ladbrokes odds not way too much? F.e. if home has an odd of 1.70, no other bookie will have odds of 1.87. So this is definitely a game changer.

Leave a Reply / Comment

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.