The rule of six in sports betting

New Betting Tips » Betting Guides » The rule of six in sports betting

After many articles based on different articles, and even based on current topics of the betting universe, today I’m introducing a concept, the rule of six, regarding what I think about in certain circumstances and situations in the world of sports betting.


I’m speaking about “my” rule of six matches, and that recently a famous bookmaker wrote something about it, on a very complex article regarding the efficiency and randomness in sports betting. That article, on its conclusion stage, spoke about a suspicion of mine, that I had due to some experiences I had gone through on my day-to-day in sports betting.

The six matches rule was something that I kept realizing as I continued making bets, especially when betting on certain reference teams from my betting model, where I saw that every 6 bets, something escaped what was standard from that team, and I’m speaking about everything, goals, their superior trend to win the match or even score their “usual” goal.

Something escaped the pattern, with something going wrong at the 6th match, and the article of the bookmaker comes to say I was right, with the standard error of our model appearing on every 6th match, where something “out of order” can occur.

On the article that disproves my idea, we can read a lot of conclusions based on statistical results from the Premier League, which responds to what I also defend, that the Premier League is one of the most complicated leagues to bet on and with more adjustments from the


Everything is right, but let’s explain how I’ve reached this conclusion of the rule of six. Explanation of the Rule of Six:

On my statistical model, it showed that certain teams had a slight trend to repeat certain patterns. Goals, for example, teams that score a lot, but that also concede. That situation allowed us to “play” on several fields, with “Both teams to score” being a good example, and on the team goals, and even on extreme cases exploring the positive Asian handicap.

Obviously the model adapts according to the opponent they are facing and on the comparative study, it has some deviations here and there, but it has a good hit rate in the long term, if we follow those so-called “reference” teams.


That way, explaining in a way everyone understands, the teams played and kept varying, yes, but within the variance we would keep “playing”, but every 6th match, things would crumble immensely, independently of what team we were analysing.

That way, on the analysis I made, because yes, with every lost bet, I tried to learn from them, the lost bets, the rule of six once again got into my head and I could not understand why.

After this article, the explanation is there, in only two words: efficiency and randomness. Yes, these are aspects that are there, and we don’t even realise them. The article studied several standard deviations and confirmed it again with a comprehensive sampling and the conclusion is that every 6 rounds, the deviations were there, be it due to lack of efficiency or simply “natural” randomness.

We will now explore these concepts that I consider relevant to be able to look into and perceive in the future in sports betting.


All of us are sick of hearing, at least those of us who bet on football, that betting on a low-scoring sport is more complicated that betting on a high-scoring sport.

That way, betting on football is in theory being more exposed to efficiency and randomness, while still combining the teams’ performances, which we call “form” and the randomness of the own team.

These are two complex topics, efficiency and randomness, what many call form or team’s record, but on the mathematical side of “thing” it is only a change, something “out of the box” that escapes the pattern and that is visible on a standard statistical analysis, for example.

This study was based on the CLV (Closing Line Value) odds and was very centred around the Premier League and the clubs that compete on it.

That way, the study is focused on the top tier of football in the world and in one of the best leagues as well. Something is certain, I sympathize with the choice made on the analysis. That way, the conclusion that was mentioned on the article mentions that the odds are always aligned with the more real approximation from what was envisaged before the match.


The study mentions and claims that whoever goes after some mistake from the bookmaker regarding the Premier League has to be very brave.

The bookmaker, from what was said in the study, is able to predict this “standard deviation” like anyone, and on this “rule of six”, they
adjust and leave very little margin of error. Right?

Of course, the margin is so short, and don’t forget about the juice in sports betting, right?

To counter this study even more, it was only based on the so-called fair odds, without the “normal” juice given by the bookmaker.

This situation reinforces even more the theory of every 6th match where we naturally realize that the deviation provoked by the efficiency or randomness is followed by the bookmaker.


Forgive me for my rant at this critical point, but if it is difficult, it continues being very difficult with these algorithms giving us very little margin to bet, even on that bookmaker!

The reference bookmaker is very commonly used for its liquidity, but they’re very correct on the odds they offer, and they don’t let you down when we go after their “mistake” on the quest for the Theory of Value.

The conclusion that I reach for now is that betting on this bookmaker is just for betting professionals because only they will be able to “circumvent” questions like these.

We also have to speak about the so-called EV+, because it is inevitable to speak about it, because we have to bet on a bookmaker like this with this kind of “protection” only in the long term and with strategies within this line, where the bettor can come out on top but in the long term.

The central issue is that, even if the bookmaker makes a mistake on an adjustment, the juice can relatively cover that mistake, with more or less profit, but always in profit. Basically, fellow bettors, here we can understand why the professional bettors look for this bookmaker and why many unexperienced bettors struggle to obtain the desired long-term profit.

Especially if betting on the Premier League. We’ll now try to explain what’s going on with the lack of efficiency or the natural deviation from thins on this final section.


By ruthlessly analysing a team, we know they don’t always win, here and there they dip in terms of performance levels, losing points, conceding goals and varying in terms of performance. There are a lot of external aspects to the competition that can be related to this standard deviation from the teams in terms of behaviour.

But according to the study, the key is really that number of matches, six, with that being the result that was closer to the statistical truth.


We can then conclude and apparently the bookmaker confirms that idea, proving it through the adjustment of odds and the calculated juice, that we might be closer to the “raw truth” from the teams.

There are several examples of varying performances. In the study, they even mention Liverpool for example, where the six-match theory is well explained. Sometimes it is hard to understand the number six, but it might have no explanation, since the study also mentions the randomness of occurrences.

Let’s say, in other words, “just because”, because variance forces that famous adjustment, something that isn’t able to be explained which means it isn’t “palpable”, but at least mathematics help us predicting it and detecting it.

Forms, physical fatigue or physical conditions can sometimes not be that clear or even the number of shots on goals are surely the aspects that the bookmakers or the statistical “providers” keep in mind.

Basically, as a whole, the lack of form, even if it is minimal, or the lack of crosses or counter attacks can be and are considered, and it gives the idea that something is changing. A lot of bettors utilize the moving averages for example, but that’s a topic for a different article, I’ll only leave this motto here.

Obviously there are bad matches, every team goes through them, but that is clear, the question is understanding when that “meltdown” is about to occur. That’s the key question, before the worst thing happens, we are able to realize the signs that the bookmakers give to adjust ourselves, be it for a better or worse performance.


It is not wise to mess around with the bookmakers and we don’t do it as well. I hope I’ve managed to transmit “my” idea that others also realized it happened in other words.

All of this might not be linear, and a lot of aspects might drift away from the six-match theory, but the theory is true for most of them. The study proved it and confirmed it twice.

All of this might not be useful for you, and this theory might be good for nothing, but it serves as a warning sign, to tell you that something can “escape” the natural pattern, for good or bad.


Being slightly ahead, having the potential adjustment in mind is taking the right odds, without a lot of juice and with an “edge”.

Understanding that something will change can be very advantageous, for me and for us, and that’s why I’m not completely against having statistics as a weighing baseline in this world of sports betting.

That’s it for today, I hope I was able to deliver the message, since it’s not easy sometimes. Good luck!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *