IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/col/000122/010898.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Which team will win the 2014 FIFA World Cup? A Bayesian approach for dummies

Author

Listed:
  • Andrés Ramírez Hassan
  • Johnatan Cardona Jiménez

Abstract

This paper presents several "ex ante" simulation exercises of the 2014 FIFA World Cup. Specifically, we estimate the probabilities of each national team advancing to different stages, using a basic Bayesian approach based on conjugate families. In particular, we use the Categorical-Dirichlet model in the first round and the Bernoulli-Beta model in the following stages. The novelty of our framework is given by the use of betting odds to elicit the hyperparameters of prior distributions. Additionally, we obtain the posterior distributions with the Highest Density Intervals of the probability to being champion for each team. We find that Brazil (19.95%), Germany (14.68%), Argentina (12.05%), and Spain (6.2%) have the highest probabilities of being champion. Finally, we identify some betting opportunities with our simulation exercises. In particular, Bosnia & Herzegovina is a promising, whereas Australia shows the lowest betting opportunities return.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrés Ramírez Hassan & Johnatan Cardona Jiménez, 2014. "Which team will win the 2014 FIFA World Cup? A Bayesian approach for dummies," Documentos de Trabajo de Valor Público 10898, Universidad EAFIT.
    • Handle: RePEc:col:000122:010898
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repository.eafit.edu.co/bitstream/handle/10784/1315/2014_03_Andres_Ramirez_Hassan.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Forrest, David & Goddard, John & Simmons, Robert, 2005. "Odds-setters as forecasters: The case of English football," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 551-564.
    2. Shin, Hyun Song, 1993. "Measuring the Incidence of Insider Trading in a Market for State-Contingent Claims," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(420), pages 1141-1153, September.
    3. Gianluca Baio & Marta Blangiardo, 2010. "Bayesian hierarchical model for the prediction of football results," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 253-264.
    4. D Dyte & S R Clarke, 2000. "A ratings based Poisson model for World Cup soccer simulation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 51(8), pages 993-998, August.
    5. Thomas, Seemon & Jacob, Joy, 2006. "A generalized Dirichlet model," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 76(16), pages 1761-1767, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jaume García & Levi Pérez & Plácido Rodríguez, 2017. "Forecasting football match results: are the many smarter than the few?," Chapters, in: Plácido Rodríguez & Brad R. Humphreys & Robert Simmons (ed.), The Economics of Sports Betting, chapter 5, pages 71-91, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. S Lessmann & M-C Sung & J E V Johnson, 2011. "Towards a methodology for measuring the true degree of efficiency in a speculative market," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(12), pages 2120-2132, December.
    3. Constantinou Anthony Costa & Fenton Norman Elliott, 2012. "Solving the Problem of Inadequate Scoring Rules for Assessing Probabilistic Football Forecast Models," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, March.
    4. da Costa, Igor Barbosa & Marinho, Leandro Balby & Pires, Carlos Eduardo Santos, 2022. "Forecasting football results and exploiting betting markets: The case of “both teams to score”," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 895-909.
    5. Ian McHale & Rose Baker, 2014. "Econometric modelling of match results and scores," Chapters, in: John Goddard & Peter Sloane (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Professional Football, chapter 9, pages 130-140, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Vincenzo Candila & Antonio Scognamillo, 2019. "On the Longshot Bias in Tennis Betting Markets: The Casco Normalization," Working Papers 3_236, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Statistiche, Università degli Studi di Salerno.
    7. Leitner, Christoph & Zeileis, Achim & Hornik, Kurt, 2010. "Forecasting sports tournaments by ratings of (prob)abilities: A comparison for the EUROÂ 2008," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 471-481, July.
    8. del Corral, Julio & Prieto-Rodríguez, Juan, 2010. "Are differences in ranks good predictors for Grand Slam tennis matches?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 551-563, July.
    9. Rómulo A. Chumacero, 2009. "Altitude or Hot Air?," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 10(6), pages 619-638, December.
    10. Gross, Johannes & Rebeggiani, Luca, 2018. "Chance or Ability? The Efficiency of the Football Betting Market Revisited," MPRA Paper 87230, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Montone, Maurizio, 2021. "Optimal pricing in the online betting market," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 344-363.
    12. Franke, Maximilian, 2020. "Do market participants misprice lottery-type assets? Evidence from the European soccer betting market," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-18.
    13. Oliver Merz & Raphael Flepp & Egon Franck, 2019. "Does sentiment harm market efficiency? An empirical analysis using a betting exchange setting," Working Papers 381, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    14. Egon Franck & Erwin Verbeek & Stephan Nüesch, 2013. "Inter-market Arbitrage in Betting," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(318), pages 300-325, April.
    15. Erik Å trumbelj, 2016. "A Comment on the Bias of Probabilities Derived From Betting Odds and Their Use in Measuring Outcome Uncertainty," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 17(1), pages 12-26, January.
    16. Federico Fioravanti & Fernando Delbianco & Fernando Tohmé, 2023. "The relative importance of ability, luck and motivation in team sports: a Bayesian model of performance in the English Rugby Premiership," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 32(3), pages 715-731, September.
    17. Giovanni Angelini & Luca De Angelis, 2017. "PARX model for football match predictions," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(7), pages 795-807, November.
    18. O'Leary, Daniel E., 2017. "Crowd performance in prediction of the World Cup 2014," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(2), pages 715-724.
    19. David Paton & Leighton Vaughan Williams, 2001. "Monopoly Rents and Price Fixing in Betting Markets," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 19(3), pages 265-278, November.
    20. Martin Kukuk & Stefan Winter, 2008. "An Alternative Explanation of the Favorite-Longshot Bias," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 79-96, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bayesian Approach; Conjugate Families; Simulation; World Cup;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C11 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Bayesian Analysis: General
    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General
    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:col:000122:010898. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Valor Público EAFIT - Centro de estudios e incidencia (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cieafco.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.