📯2026/27 Champions League Pool | ⚽️ Discussion | sponsor TBA

[notblox1]

I know this is for champions league but since i dont want to descent into the abbys of the shitpost of any of the conference league threads im gonna post this here because is only a little comment about it.

We are having right now 20+ games on today schedule from Conference League, which is super crazy.

They ruined the Champions Legaue with hyperinflation of teams, and they did the same with world cup and other competitions.
I do like having more teams from Scandinavia, they are improving a lot same as Norway national teams, and I think this will continue to happen in future.
But I wont waste anything betting this early on Champions League, this are total random picks at this point.

[LTU_btc]

There is plenty of 2nd leg games today. Unfortunately I forgot it completely and didn't made any bets. So, if World Cup semifina between France and Spain is too mainstream for you, you can watch Larne - Tre Friori or Shamrock Rovers - Floriana which starts on the same time. Actually, it's quite interesting whether Rovers will be able to make comeback after unexpected loss 0:2 in first game.

[buwaytress]

I only have stats to follow here. So, Ararat Armenia are veterans in Europe qualifiers... but they're playing Riga who are really good at home and has a much better UEFA coefficient, so bookies are putting them 4/1. I think they'll also win so the ML is good enough for me but a small handicap is also value.

For me KuPS is also a great value 2/1 bet -- they're in the midst of league football, so to me match fitness should be top while their opponents from N Macedonia are on holiday, as evidenced by the first leg. Bookies probably priced them lower because of that first leg advantage...

Watch these bets burn of course... hahahahaha

I was so, so wrong. Both idiots fell to a 2-goal deficit, Ararat even worse just under half an hour, there must be something seriously wrong with the teams, and the bookies knew it. Didn't help that KuPS actually took it to extra time and qualified (so won in extra time). Who knew these North Macedonians could play football? Not I.

Hope swogerino was better than me at picking these guys out.

[darxiaomi]

Since we were running out of games from the world cup and we also are running out of "easy" picks in the WC thanks to now being in the final four teams and somehow all are good teams and contenders i tried to see into this qualifiers looking for some game to add value to my multibet, but guess what? i dont find anything good, maybe some really favorite teams with low odds but nothing more.

[notblox1]

Since we were running out of games from the world cup and we also are running out of "easy" picks in the WC thanks to now being in the final four teams and somehow all are good teams and contenders i tried to see into this qualifiers looking for some game to add value to my multibet, but guess what? i dont find anything good, maybe some really favorite teams with low odds but nothing more.

At this stage it is not worth taking anything from Champions League qualifications, but maybe next round things are going to be better.
I saw results from today matches and I saw several big surprises ,that could be fixed by Mafia or someone else.
Play-offs are starting in August and League phase in September, so we should get ready for that.

[LTU_btc]

So, after all Shamrock managed to make a comeback against Florian, but I didn't expected that it will be so big. Vikingur made a bit upset by making draw in away game with Gyor, it's positive result for them. BTW, it's strange to see that Hungary is represented in Champions league not by Ferencvaros.
Drita - Kauno Zalgiris 2:3 was roller-coaster with Zalgiris scoring decisive goal on 90+4 minute.
Inter Escalades (Andorra) vs Lincoln Red Imps (Gibraltar). Most interesting thing about this game that Mauricio Pochettino watched it in the stadium, something what you don't expect to see .

[LTU_btc]

2nd qualifying round starts today and some bigger names joins competition. Some games looks interesting to watch like Fenerebahche - Gornik, Thun - Dinamo Zagreb or most interesting game for me is Sturm - Hearts. A bit strange to see such low odds for Fenerbahche win, considering that's their first official game this season and such big teams often have slow start.

[BABY SHOES]

2nd qualifying round starts today and some bigger names joins competition. Some games looks interesting to watch like Fenerebahche - Gornik, Thun - Dinamo Zagreb or most interesting game for me is Sturm - Hearts. A bit strange to see such low odds for Fenerbahche win, considering that's their first official game this season and such big teams often have slow start.

The Saturm vs Hearts match was chosen for betting because this was a match that I thought would be interesting and tight, Saturm and Over 2.5 were paired Bets here, luckily I won a $150 freebet in the BTB pool... if this bet works I am happy, if I lose I will not feel lost because it is considered free money.

[notblox1]

World Cup is finally completed and we can slowly move to Champions League competition.
I dont like this early phase of qualifications, when most teams are still on vacation or they didnt start new season.
Maybe we could see one or two interesting teams, but I dont remember when I saw qualification team reaching far in Champions League group stage.

[buwaytress]

I know it's a bit early (and sorry to break up the relevant qualification match banter here) but would anyone like to weigh in on next season's format? The general idea at the moment, for this pool anyway, is to simply carry on with the existing format: a general score prediction coupled with outcome predictions.

The only aspect we seem to have some opinions on is the penalty, so before I tag everyone and ask, would there be any other aspects we'd like to look at? Ideally, no major changes. Last season we actually adjusted as we went along (mainly cosmetics and the way data is displayed) so we hope not to have much more to do before we set out looking for a new sponsor.

Floor's open!

[cryptofrka]

I'll chime in regarding penalties - because I'm one of the more vocal for them.

In current format, in which someone can YOLO 20x odds with no downside, penalties are needed. I guarantee you they are.
The only way in which penalties can be removed is when you've got something to lose - be it overall balance, a 20$ bet requirement, whatever.

Even in such cases, you'll have a disbalance. If Trofo, Hhampuz or myself are near the bottom, we can spam 20$ bets on 50x odds - we won't care much. Some others can't do that, and we're playing for a same initial buy-in, meaning that we should have the same (or fairly similar) terms when playing.
If 50% of the pool can't spam high odds tickets, it's not a good mechanic to allow these - it gives unnecessary advantage.

Penalties were a mechanism against a situation in which a semifinal game finishes 0-0 and 10 people from the bottom earn 80 points from it because they all play the highest odds on offer.
Whoever is against penalties, sure - I'll listen. But if we're looking for the people that predict CL results the best, then let's work towards a competition that is less luck-based.

[swogerino]

World Cup is finally completed and we can slowly move to Champions League competition.
I dont like this early phase of qualifications, when most teams are still on vacation or they didnt start new season.
Maybe we could see one or two interesting teams, but I dont remember when I saw qualification team reaching far in Champions League group stage.

I also probably will join this pool again and this time will make sure to put my picks correctly and not forget like 3 match days in a row. I personally like the qualification stage as I see team of the country where I live in when in fact they play today against Celje from Slovenia and I think it would be a nice evening for me watching this game. Just one month and we will be back in strong teams playing and I like if they have kept same format as last season.

[KTChampions]

~
Whoever is against penalties, sure - I'll listen. But if we're looking for the people that predict CL results the best, then let's work towards a competition that is less luck-based.

You're suggesting that we literally make reliable choices all the time, conditionally choosing a score of 2-1, i.e. repeating SuperBru  What would be the special feature of this pool then? It seems to me that risk should be encouraged, while "safe" choices should be punished because they're boring. Choosing risk and choosing bank management is fun and challenging. Why narrow the choice by introducing risk penalties?
Another issue is that we need to weed out those with endless money, but that's solved by rebuy limits. If the rebuy limit is low, no one will be able to tip the scales in their favor with just money.

[cryptofrka]

You're suggesting that we literally make reliable choices all the time, conditionally choosing a score of 2-1, i.e. repeating SuperBru  What would be the special feature of this pool then? It seems to me that risk should be encouraged, while "safe" choices should be punished because they're boring. Choosing risk and choosing bank management is fun and challenging. Why narrow the choice by introducing risk penalties?
Another issue is that we need to weed out those with endless money, but that's solved by rebuy limits. If the rebuy limit is low, no one will be able to tip the scales in their favor with just money.

There is incentive to hunt for 'weird' results already - you have bonus points for that. Not sure how is it set up exactly, but I know that going 2-1 isn't the best method here.

Penalties are not connected to result guessing at all. Penalties are connected with the 'betting' part, in which we have virtual stakes that earn us points.
If you have virtual stakes and are at the bottom of the table, you'll put your virtual stakes on 'Kane to miss penalty'. 9/10 times you'll fail with this, but if you hit - well, you'll jump from bottom to top immediately.

That is why penalties were introduced. I said from the start - if we remove penalties the 'stakes' we play with have to be real money. We'll still have the same issue though - if I'm near the bottom, I'll toss Hail Marys all the time.

A penalty system lets us properly balance between playing it safe and risking it, and it is a good method. What's your issue with it?

[KTChampions]

Penalties are not connected to result guessing at all. Penalties are connected with the 'betting' part, in which we have virtual stakes that earn us points.
If you have virtual stakes and are at the bottom of the table, you'll put your virtual stakes on 'Kane to miss penalty'. 9/10 times you'll fail with this, but if you hit - well, you'll jump from bottom to top immediately.

Same question - what's your issue with it?
What's wrong with those at the very top (even if their advantage is great) feeling pressure from below and being forced to take greater risks?
This is where the excitement and interest lie - one crazy bet can send you soaring. If you take the risk away, it's a turtle race.

That is why penalties were introduced. I said from the start - if we remove penalties the 'stakes' we play with have to be real money. We'll still have the same issue though - if I'm near the bottom, I'll toss Hail Marys all the time.

A penalty system lets us properly balance between playing it safe and risking it, and it is a good method. What's your issue with it?

Nope. Getting a couple of penalties = falling out of the top contenders. Penalties force you to diversify six points between six outcomes with odds of 1.5 to ensure you avoid penalties. Insanely interesting!
I don't care if someone constantly makes Ave Maria bets - it's freedom to choose a strategy - wait until competitors destroy themselves or increase your own risk.

[Trofo]

Penalties are not connected to result guessing at all. Penalties are connected with the 'betting' part, in which we have virtual stakes that earn us points.
If you have virtual stakes and are at the bottom of the table, you'll put your virtual stakes on 'Kane to miss penalty'. 9/10 times you'll fail with this, but if you hit - well, you'll jump from bottom to top immediately.

Same question - what's your issue with it?
What's wrong with those at the very top (even if their advantage is great) feeling pressure from below and being forced to take greater risks?
This is where the excitement and interest lie - one crazy bet can send you soaring. If you take the risk away, it's a turtle race.

That is why penalties were introduced. I said from the start - if we remove penalties the 'stakes' we play with have to be real money. We'll still have the same issue though - if I'm near the bottom, I'll toss Hail Marys all the time.

A penalty system lets us properly balance between playing it safe and risking it, and it is a good method. What's your issue with it?

Nope. Getting a couple of penalties = falling out of the top contenders. Penalties force you to diversify six points between six outcomes with odds of 1.5 to ensure you avoid penalties. Insanely interesting!
I don't care if someone constantly makes Ave Maria bets - it's freedom to choose a strategy - wait until competitors destroy themselves or increase your own risk.

I don't feel strongly about it so I am keeping mostly away from this discussion. Whatever rules end up being, I will read trough them and adapt my strategy.

That being said I liked penalties since they give you some incentive to think about bank management. Without them, there is always next week to throw hail mary plays without any consequence. When we are betting for real, you are loosing your own money and that is checking mechanism. I like when we have some sort of constraints which help quality and knowledge rise to the the top. My biggest issue with Superbru is that they award so much more points to correct score which are in my opinion just luck. Close scores are the metric that shows best competitors for me.

[cryptofrka]

Same question - what's your issue with it?

I love risk. What you're suggesting isn't it though. Playing risky has to have a downside - which is exactly what we have now.
Go for safe picks? Sure, you can. You'll maybe be near the top, maybe in the middle. But if you place 6x stakes at 1.50 odds all the time, you probably won't get top prizes.

That means you have to take a risk - and have to decide with how many stakes you're willing to take it.
I won 2nd place with a penalty. Many did - and people have a wide variety of picks, meaning that there are different strategies being used.

Check the winner's picks throughout the season. Check picks from buwaytress - and he was near the top too.

I do not want to have to protect myself from Hail Marys all the time from all members. That isn't a competition mechanics, it's a lottery draw. If I do well 90% of the competition, I do expect that a single outcome with highest odds can't drop me 10 places and do not want to defend 'under 2,5 corners' in the final week just because odds on it are 27 and I lose it all if it hits.

Honestly, I'd never play what you're suggesting. I hope we're fully misunderstanding each other here, what I'm reading is 20x worse than Superbru.

[KTChampions]

Same question - what's your issue with it?

I love risk. What you're suggesting isn't it though. Playing risky has to have a downside - which is exactly what we have now.
Go for safe picks? Sure, you can. You'll maybe be near the top, maybe in the middle. But if you place 6x stakes at 1.50 odds all the time, you probably won't get top prizes.

That means you have to take a risk - and have to decide with how many stakes you're willing to take it.
I won 2nd place with a penalty. Many did - and people have a wide variety of picks, meaning that there are different strategies being used.

Check the winner's picks throughout the season.

This is the first thing I did, and it literally confirms that the most important thing is to avoid penalties. The highest placements for players with two penalties are 5th, 8th, and 9th. If the number of penalties is higher, then there's simply no point in talking about it - that's the end of the competition, meaning that literally mid-tournament, those who took risks (and failed) may simply stop playing.
There is not a single participant with a significant number of penalties but a good result = the risk is over-penalized, there is literally no point in taking risks.

Now let's check the thesis about the coefficient of 1.5: the winner Mia scored 5.95 + 20.40 + 25.10 + 1.15 + 1.55 + 1.1 + 2.35 + 14.75 + 3.1 + 2.55 + 4.55 + 6.95 + 3.19 + 14.45 + 1.45 + 1.9 + 5.3 = 115.79

The total number of points that were distributed was 6x17 = 102, i.e. the best of the best was able to knock out the coefficient of 115.79/102 = 1.13

It seems to me that with a little luck, bets with odds of 1.5 can very well bring the same result or even higher.
Expected result 102*0.95 (assume the bookmaker's margin is 5%) = 96.9 - very little different from the winner's result 115.79

Now let's assume someone played safe and scored 120 points, while someone else played riskily and also scored 120. The one who took risks (meaning he incurred penalties but also managed to get big multipliers) will receive a ton of penalties, and nothing will remain of his 120 points. The most extreme case: two successful rounds 6x10 = 120 points... plus 5x15 = 75% penalties.
What is the point of such a monstrous punishment for risk?

Honestly, I'd never play what you're suggesting. I hope we're fully misunderstanding each other here, what I'm reading is 20x worse than Superbru.

Yes, we definitely don't understand each other, it seems to me that you are suggesting that we not go far from SuperBru.
Overall, I'll accept any model, and if I do participate in the pool, I'll just adapt, just like Trofo said. Last season, I didn't read the rules carefully, so I fell into the penalty trap. But not anymore.

[cryptofrka]

...

I honestly don't feel like this at all. There is risk-taking involved for sure - but when you use statistical evaluations, it will always come down to the same numbers.
You see in Mia's example that it varies drastically per round - meaning that a huge variety of bets was taken. If it was what you say - it would be a boring 6pt per round continuously. This jumps from 1 to 25.

Mia beat your average by 20%, while taking risks. That is what is expected, no? Good risk taking?

This is the first thing I did, and it literally confirms that the most important thing is to avoid penalties.

This might be true, yes. What we might be looking for is a change inside the system though, not a wrecking ball that destroys 95% of the good mechanism to create a far worse one.

Run me through your idea. Everyone playing 5-5 scores and putting stakes on 'Cubarsi 2 or more goals'? Because that's what will happen if we remove the penalty system, and bets like these have nothing to do with risk.

The best thing about risk is knowing when to apply it. I'd say so many frustrated while being burned by penalties means that we're close to it being well balanced.

[KTChampions]

Mia beat your average by 20%, while taking risks. That is what is expected, no? Good risk taking?

Of course not. 100% not. just 20 points more than each participant should receive even with all bets at odds of 1.1, but at what cost? If a risk works against you a couple of times, you're simply eliminated from the main prize pool. If you don't take any risks at all, you've immediately beaten 70% of those who did. There's no reason to take any risks.
The smartest decision is to make super-safe bets = completely ignore this part of the contest. Those who read this discussion and understand the math will do just that.

This is the first thing I did, and it literally confirms that the most important thing is to avoid penalties.

This might be true, yes. What we might be looking for is a change inside the system though, not a wrecking ball that destroys 95% of the good mechanism to create a far worse one.

Run me through your idea. Everyone playing 5-5 scores and putting stakes on 'Cubarsi 2 or more goals'? Because that's what will happen if we remove the penalty system, and bets like these have nothing to do with risk.

The best thing about risk is knowing when to apply it. I'd say so many frustrated while being burned by penalties means that we're close to it being well balanced.

Personally, I see the wrecking ball in the fact that those who understand the tournament mechanics will make super-reliable bets. That's it. How is that better than the lottery?
And I don't see anything wrong with someone betting on a 5-5 score and maintaining their chances of winning until the end of the tournament.
If we run a competition with risk penalties, we get dull, reliable bets on the favorites from serious players, those who take risks quickly burn out and drop out by the second half of the tournament.
If there's no penalty, we get a fun mess where even the reliable leaders are forced to take bigger risks because there are a bunch of Yolo gamblers behind them.
I prefer the second option.