The data was taken from:
http://www.risc.uni-linz.ac.at/non-official/rsssf/ec/ecomp.html
We usually say that it's an advantage to have the second leg at
home. That seems to be true, as the first leg home team only
have a winning percentage of 45%, as opposed to the expected
50%. Why this is, I do not know.
If the home team wins the first leg, the winning percentage
goes up to 67%. A one goal win gives 57% (1-0: 63%, 2-1: 53%).
Getting another goal helps a lot: 72% (2-0: 71%, 3-1: 75%).
Winning by 3 goals almost decides it: 90%.
A home draw is not good - it drops the chance to 31%. 0-0
is best with 35%, 1-1 gives 25%.
A home defeat is a disaster. A mere 5%. No need to go into
details, the statistical material is too thin for that.
Keeping the zero is often seen as a primary goal, and it
does give an overall 61% chance, as opposed to the 45%
initial, and the meager 36% if you do allow a single goal.
But keep in mind that 0-0 only gives 35%, and 1-0 gives
63%, so getting a goal yourself is very important.
In summary:
0-0: 35%
1-1: 25%
2-2: 36%
1-0: 63%
2-0: 71%
3-0: 88%
2-1: 53%
3-1: 75%
3-2: 39%
Victory margin:
+1: 57%
+2: 72%
+3: 90%
>1: 78%
>2: 93%
>Anyone who have followed the European cups, will have ideas on
>the value of a first leg score. 1-0 is a good result for the home
>team, 2-1 is good for the away team, etc. I thought it would be
>fun to see how well those perceptions match the actual results.
>So I collected quarterfinal and semifinal results from the 3 cups
>from 1980 to 1998. I only used these late round results, in order
>to avoid poorly matched opponents, which could bias the result.
>I have then calculated the aggregate winning percentage for the
>first leg home team. Penalty shootouts are counted as a half win.
>This is no fancy analysis - it's just a lot of number added
>together for fun. Take it for what it is.
>
>The data was taken from:
>http://www.risc.uni-linz.ac.at/non-official/rsssf/ec/ecomp.html
>
>We usually say that it's an advantage to have the second leg at
>home. That seems to be true, as the first leg home team only
>have a winning percentage of 45%, as opposed to the expected
>50%. Why this is, I do not know.
Is there a difference in the distribution of scores between the two
legs?
What are the probablities of winning based on the score in the
second leg? Maybe the advantage to the home team in the second
leg is that they know what score will hold up.
This might explain why if the scoring margin in the first match +1,
the likelihood of the initial host winning decreases as more goals
are scored.
1st P(W) 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4
1-0 63% et [1] [1] [1]
2-1 57% [2] et [1] [1]
3-2 39% [2] [2] et [1]
That is if the first match is high scoring but close, the host in the
second match will win in a low scoring close match. If they do get
a lead, they can play for the two-legged draw, and advance on away
goals.
> Anyone who have followed the European cups, will have ideas on
> the value of a first leg score. 1-0 is a good result for the home
> team, 2-1 is good for the away team, etc. I thought it would be
> fun to see how well those perceptions match the actual results.
> So I collected quarterfinal and semifinal results from the 3 cups
> from 1980 to 1998. I only used these late round results, in order
> to avoid poorly matched opponents, which could bias the result.
>
> In summary:
> 0-0: 35%
> 1-1: 25%
> 2-2: 36%
>
> 1-0: 63%
> 2-0: 71%
> 3-0: 88%
>
> 2-1: 53%
> 3-1: 75%
>
> 3-2: 39%
>
For all European games 1955-1992 the success rates after a given home
result were:
0-0 30%
1-1 20%
2-2 16%
1-0 55%
2-0 75%
3-0 91%
2-1 43%
3-1 70%
3-2 43%
Remember the away goal rule was not introduced for all rounds of all
competitions until 1970-71.
--
Paul