Beating the Brownlow Medal

Once upon a time, in a land far, far away, Brownlow Medal night didn’t hold much significance to me. Sure it was nice to see Gavin Wanganeen and James Hird both pick up ‘Charlie’, but by and large the night was far from being a can’t miss event. That was until 2003, when it was pointed out to me that not only could you bet on the overall medal winner, but also on markets such as the top vote getter for each team and within various ‘custom groups’. Since then, Brownlow night has weaved its way into the upper echelon of my favourite betting nights of the year.

Over the intervening years I’ve taken publicly available votes from the media fraternity and converted them into a 3-2-1 structure, in order to establish a quasi-Brownlow count as voted on by journalists. By and large you could simply look at the ‘Player Of The Year’ leader boards to get a sense of the short list for the overall winner, but to analyse club-by-club markets and the like you need to delve into the detail. This year I’ve added a couple of new dimensions to the process in order to hopefully make the ratings a bit more robust, but we’ll come to those issues in due course.

A few primers before we delve into the ratings and recommended bets:

Firstly and most importantly, this is not one of those ‘leaked Brownlow votes’ pieces of analysis. Rather, it uses publicly available votes from the media fraternity as noted, along with some adjustments (explained in more detail later on) to estimate a series of ‘Brownlow ratings’, which are then converted into recommended process for various betting markets.

Secondly, despite some of the short prices on offer and cases where a person is seemingly a ‘sure thing’ to win a particular market, no such certainties exist.

In 2008, Nick Riewoldt (at odds of $1.20 to top the St Kilda vote) and Dean Cox ($1.30 to top the West Coast vote) were both rolled. Even more amazingly in 2009, Dane Swan (at odds of $1.03 to top the Collingwood vote!) was edged out by Scott Pendlebury, while Sam Mitchell (also at odds of $1.03 to top the Hawthorn vote!) tied on 13 votes with Brad Sewell. These should act as cautionary tales for anyone thinking of loading up on one of the many short-priced favourites on offer in 2011 or putting them all into a multi.

And finally, whilst the ratings system does its best to take into account discrepancies between the views of journalists awarding player votes and the views of umpires doing same, it is far from definitive.

By all means, use it as a guide to help inform some things you may not have thought about, or to help affirm/ refute some pre-existing ideas you have about this year’s Brownlow, but don’t take it as gospel. Whilst I’m yet to have a losing year on the Brownlow such a time will surely come, and indeed 2010 was a closer run thing than I’d have liked. This column will of course be judged on whether or not the recommended bets can turn a profit, but please don’t assume that it’s a case of ‘easy money’.

Brownlow ratings methodology – a four-step process

As flagged earlier, in previous years I’ve used a pretty straightforward process i.e. Step 1 from below. For this year, Steps 2 to 4 have been added, with the aim being to improve the estimation process of how umpires may vote in practice.

Step 1:

Convert the match-by-match votes from journalists into 3-2-1s for each game and add them up.

Not exactly any rocket science going on here.

 

Step 2:

Using the outcomes from Step 1, add the number of times each player ‘polled’ to the ‘votes’ they received.

This one delves a little more into punting philosophy and can best be explained by example. Suppose you’re evaluating a head-to-head market where according to Step 1, one player has polled 12 votes in four games (four best-on-ground performances) and another played has polled 11 votes across seven games. Who should be the favourite in that market?

I would argue that the 11 votes across seven games player should be slight favourite, and here’s why – in polling seven times, there is some upside risk that some of the 1-vote and 2-vote games could be elevated into 2-vote or 3-vote games, and thus their ‘upper limit’ may be 15 votes.

Compare this to the four best-on-grounds player. Granted, there may be some games where they didn’t poll with journalists but could do so with umpires, but their upside risk is limited while their downside risk (i.e. the chance that some of the 3-vote games turn into 1-vote or 2-vote games) is more pronounced.

Adding the votes plus times polled together gives 12 + 4 = 16 versus 11 + 7 = 18, which I think from a ratings perspective offers a more robust basis for evaluating risk/ reward in each market, which as punters is fundamentally what we’re trying to do!

Score a $100 Free Bet from Luxbet!

 

Step 3:

Use ‘Step 1’ estimates and observed outcomes from 2008 to 2010 to estimate any bias between the votes of journalists and the votes of umpires.

This step is the product of being stung in successive years by either (a) betting on a player whom journalists clearly rate more highly than umpires and/ or (b) betting against a player whom umpires clearly rate more highly than journalists.

What we need here is a ratio of umpire votes to ‘adjusted journalist votes’, which will be referred to as a ‘Brownlow Ratio’ because I lack imagination.

In order to avoid spurious cases where umpires awarded two votes to one from the journalist (causing a Brownlow Ratio of 200 per cent), analysis has been restricted to cases where across the three years there were at least ten votes allocated by either the umpires or the journalists (and in many cases both).

For example, Adelaide’s Scott Thompson received 41 Brownlow votes over the past three years (15 in 2008, 11 in 2009 and 15 last year) compared to 28 ‘journalist votes’ over the same period (11 in 2008, three in 2009 and 14 last year). His Brownlow Ratio is therefore 41/28 = 146 per cent. On that analysis alone, if the journalists allocated him 11 votes, you could expect the umpires to award him around 16 votes.

Now compare this to Hawthorn’s Luke Hodge. Hodge received 25 Brownlow votes over the past three years (two in 2008, seven in 2009 and 16 last year) compared to 44 ‘journalist votes’ over the same period (11 in 2008, seven in 2009 and 26 last year). His Brownlow Ratio is therefore 25/44 = 56 per cent. On that analysis alone, if the journalists allocated him 16 votes, you could expect the umpires to award him only around nine votes.

Side note: I really wish I’d thought of the Brownlow Ratio before seeing Hodge’s 26 ‘journalist votes’ last year and happily stepping into the $9.00 about him winning the medal outright last year. Or before placing about half a dozen wagers last year that the Brownlow Ratio-amended ratings would have suggested were a bad idea. Better late than never I suppose.

Back to the ratio: to be fair, some of these ratios can get pretty skewed and are often distorted by a single year out of the three, so let’s set a range – the Brownlow Ratio cannot drop below 80 per cent, nor can it exceed 125 per cent (essentially the inverse of 80 per cent).

Most if not all of you aren’t reading this to evaluate statistical methods, so let’s put some real life examples to the test as per below:

 

Key players for whom 2008-2010 ‘Brownlow Ratio’ set at maximum 125 per cent

Scott Thompson – Adelaide (41 Brownlow votes, 28 journalist votes)

Simon Black – Brisbane (45 Brownlow votes, 32 journalist votes)

Bryce Gibbs – Carlton (28 Brownlow votes, 20 journalist votes)

Scott Pendlebury – Collingwood (41 Brownlow votes, 22 journalist votes)

Joel Selwood – Geelong (56 Brownlow votes, 34 journalist votes)

Joel Corey – Geelong (22 Brownlow votes, 14 journalist votes)

Andrew Swallow – North Melbourne (18 Brownlow votes, 13 journalist votes)

Matthew Boyd – Western Bulldogs (46 Brownlow votes, 29 journalist votes)

Matthew Priddis – West Coast (25 Brownlow votes, 16 journalist votes)

 

Key players for whom 2008-2010 ‘Brownlow Ratio’ set at minimum of 80 per cent

Steve Johnson – Geelong (24 Brownlow votes, 31 journalist votes)

Jimmy Bartel – Geelong (32 Brownlow votes, 44 journalist votes)

Luke Hodge – Hawthorn (25 Brownlow votes, 44 journalist votes)

Brent Harvey – North Melbourne (39 Brownlow votes, 55 journalist votes)

Brendan Goddard – St Kilda (34 Brownlow votes, 45 journalist votes)

Dean Cox – West Coast (8 Brownlow votes, 23 journalist votes)

Side note: In the last three years I have backed Harvey (2008), Goddard (2009) and Hodge (2010) to win the Brownlow Medal. And you wonder why the ‘Brownlow Ratio’ has been introduced for 2011.

 

Key players for whom 2008-2010 ‘Brownlow Ratio’ lies between 80 and 125 per cent

Chris Judd – Carlton – 119 per cent (68 Brownlow votes, 57 journalist votes)

Marc Murphy – Carlton – 97 per cent (31 Brownlow votes, 32 journalist votes)

Dane Swan – Collingwood – 81 per cent (48 Brownlow votes, 59 journalist votes)

Jobe Watson – Essendon – 119 per cent (31 Brownlow votes, 26 journalist votes)

Gary Ablett – Geelong – 111 per cent (78 Brownlow votes, 70 journalist votes)

Sam Mitchell – Hawthorn – 93 per cent (43 Brownlow votes, 46 journalist votes)

Lance Franklin – Hawthorn – 94 per cent (34 Brownlow votes, 36 journalist votes)

Leigh Montagna – St Kilda – 112 per cent (38 Brownlow votes, 34 journalist votes)

Nick Dal Santo – St Kilda – 84 per cent (27 Brownlow votes, 32 journalist votes)

Adam Goodes – Sydney – 119 per cent (51 Brownlow votes, 43 journalist votes)

Side note: Notice former Brownlow winners in Judd, Ablett and Goodes all having ratios which exceed 100 per cent whilst the beaten 2010 favourite in Dane Swan has a ratio barely about the 80 per cent ‘minimum’? This ratio matters.

 

Step 4:

Take (Step 1 + Step 2) x Step 3 ratio and scale it back to ensure that only 1,122 rating points (i.e. 6 points per game x 187 games) are allocated in total..

Strictly speaking this isn’t necessary, but since a total of 1,122 votes are allocated via applying the 3-2-1 process for each of the 187 home and away season matches, scaling the ratings back to this level brings them closer to approximating how votes may be allocated to each player.

 

Brownlow player ratings and recommended bets

Okay, we’ve gone through the details of how these ratings have been constructed, now let’s get to the good stuff. Who should you back and at what prices should you do so? Let’s start with the overall winner and Round 12 overall leader, before moving into the team-by-team and finally the custom group and head-to-head markets.

* Please also note that prices noted below were correct at the time I placed my own wagers, just over a week prior to the count. In the week leading up to the Medal count the markets can fluctuate quite a bit – sometimes to your benefit, sometimes to your detriment – so use your best judgement in evaluating how to interpret both the ratings below and these potential market fluctuations. As a rule of thumb, I would not recommend a bet unless the available price was 20 per cent or more above the rated price for those rated around $2.00 or shorter, and 50 per cent above the rated price once you start to look at longer-priced options.

 

Overall winner (* indicates a player ineligible to win the Brownlow Medal due to suspension)

Unadjusted votes:  Sam Mitchell* 25 votes (polled in 11 games), Chris Judd 23 (9), Marc Murphy 22 (10), Dane Swan 22 (9), Dean Cox 22 (9), Matthew Boyd 21 (10), Adam Goodes 20 (7), Brent Moloney 18 (7), Lance Franklin* 18 (7), Joel Selwood* 17 (9), Gary Ablett 17 (8), Scott Pendlebury 17 (7), Simon Black 16 (7)

Ratings:  Boyd 26.0, Judd 25.5, Mitchell* 22.5, Goodes 21.5, Selwood* 21.5, Murphy 20.5, Pendlebury 20.0, Black 19.0, Ablett 18.5, Swan 17.0, Cox 16.5, Moloney 16.0, Andrew Swallow 16.0, Jobe Watson 16.0, Franklin* 15.5

Rated odds:  Boyd $3.10, Judd $3.50, Goodes $10, Murphy $14, Pendlebury $17, Black $21, Ablett $26, Swan $51, Cox $81, Moloney $101, Swallow $101, Watson $101, others $201 or more.

Summary:  Matthew Boyd is unquestionably the play here. He was the stand out performer in a mediocre team, a la Paul Kelly’s Brownlow win in 1995. Umpires have a track record of finding him in their votes (see the Brownlow ratios above) and despite a significant dip in the overall form of the Bulldogs, he was a frequent visitor to the pointy end of the votes cast by journalists. His price to win varies from about $9 to $17 (at Luxbet), but he represents terrific value throughout that price range.

Recommended bet:  1.5 units on Boyd at $17 (Luxbet).

 

Round 12 leader (* indicates a player ineligible to win this market based on rules set out by Centrebet, Sportsbet and Luxbet)

Unadjusted votes:  Marc Murphy 16 votes (polled in 7 games), Dean Cox 16 (6), Joel Selwood* 13 (7), Jobe Watson 12 (5), Sam Mitchell* 12 (5), Lance Franklin* 12 (4), Brent Moloney 11 (4), Dale Thomas* 10 (5), Chris Judd 9 (4), Adam Goodes 9 (3), Matthew Boyd 8 (4), Gary Ablett 8 (4), Scott Pendlebury 8 (3), Simon Black 7 (3)

Ratings:  Selwood 16.5*, Murphy 15.0, Watson 13.5, Cox 11.5, Judd 10.5, Mitchell* 10.5, Boyd 10.0, Franklin* 10.0, Thomas* 9.5, Moloney 9.5, Goodes 9.5, Pendlebury 9.0, Ablett 9.0, Black 8.5, Andrew Swallow 8.5

Rated odds:  Murphy $2.40, Watson $4.20, Cox $10, Judd $16, Boyd $21, Moloney $26, Goodes $26, Pendlebury $41, Ablett $41, Black $67, Swallow $67, others $101 or more.

Summary:  Murphy is a deserving favourite, but the $1.90 available with many agencies is too short for my liking. Judd is significantly under the odds as second favourite at around the $2.50 to $3.00 quote. The two worth consideration here are Jobe Watson and Dean Cox. Watson and the Bombers started the year very strongly and his history with the umpires’ votes is a pretty positive one. Cox started the season magnificently for the Eagles and it is only his history of being overlooked by the umpires that has tempered my enthusiasm for this pick. Nonetheless at $17 he is worth a small wager.

Recommended bet:  0.5 units on Watson at $7.50 (Centrebet), 0.25 units on Cox at $17 (Centrebet, Luxbet).

 

Most votes from each club

As indicated very early on in this column, occasionally a red-hot favourite in a club market can be defeated. As a consequence there are certain players whom while deserving of such marked favouritism, do not warrant any value at quotes of $1.10 and shorter and thus should not be wagered upon, nor should they be taken on. These favourites are listed below:

Adelaide:  Scott Thompson (rating of 13.5, next best Adelaide rating of 4.5)

Brisbane:  Simon Black (rating of 19.0, next best Brisbane rating of 6.5)

Essendon:  Jobe Watson (rating of 16.0, next best Essendon rating of 7.5)

Gold Coast:  Gary Ablett (rating of 18.5, next best Gold Coast rating of 5.0)

Melbourne:  Brent Moloney (rating of 16.0, next best Melbourne rating of 6.5)

Sydney:  Adam Goodes (rating of 21.5, next best Sydney rating of 11.0)

Western Bulldogs:  Matthew Boyd (rating of 26.0, next best Bulldogs rating of 15.5, third best rating of 5.5)

With those seven ‘hot pot’ clubs dealt with, let’s look at ratings (and rated odds) for the key protagonists from the remaining ten:

 

Carlton

Ratings:  Chris Judd 25.5 (rated odds of $1.40), Marc Murphy 20.5 ($3.70), Bryce Gibbs 11.0 ($51).

Summary:  In the proverbial two-horse race at Carlton, Murphy can be bet as the outsider for 1 unit at the $4.75 on offer.

 

Collingwood

Ratings:  Scott Pendlebury 20.0 ($1.80), Dane Swan 17.0 ($3.20), Dale Thomas 12.0 ($17), Travis Cloke 12.0 ($17).

Summary:  Aside from the possibility of a speculator on Thomas at $34, nothing appeals on the Collingwood front. No recommend bet.

 

Fremantle

Ratings:  Matthew Pavlich 10.0 ($2.00), Nathan Fyfe 9.5 ($2.20).

Summary:  Pavlich at $2.45 (Sportsbet) is nice value in what should essentially be a two-horse race, so I will have 2 units on him.

 

Geelong

Ratings:  Joel Selwood 21.5 ($1.25), Joel Corey 15.0 ($8.00).

Summary:  Selwood is deserving of heavy favouritism but slightly under the odds. At the $26 on offer with Sportsbet, a small speculator (0.25 units) can be placed on Corey.

 

Hawthorn

Ratings:  Sam Mitchell 22.5 ($1.20), Lance Franklin 15.5 ($7.50).

Summary:  Mitchell is under the odds at $1.10 (let alone the $1.03 offered in some markets!). The $9 offered by Sportsbet for Franklin, whilst marginally over the odds, does not warrant a bet in my mind.

 

North Melbourne

Ratings:  Andrew Swallow 16.0 ($1.33), Daniel Wells 10.5 ($6.00), Drew Petrie 8.5 ($21), Todd Goldstein 8.0 ($26).

Summary:  Swallow would represent a 2 unit bet if you could get something in the $1.60 range, but none of that is on offer, so no recommended bet for the Kangaroos.

 

Port Adelaide

Ratings:  I’m not doing ratings for Port Adelaide this year for the same reason that I don’t buy scratchies or lottery tickets. If you have bought yourself a ticket in this lottery of a market, I hope you win. Let’s move on – quickly.

 

Richmond

Ratings:  Trent Cotchin 14.0 ($1.40), Dustin Martin 10.0 ($4.60).

Summary:  I think that Trent Cotchin represents outstanding value at the $2.42 offered by Sportsbet and is one of the two best bets on the 2011 board, and thus will be having 4 units on him.

 

St Kilda

Ratings:  Nick Dal Santo 14.5 ($1.55), Leigh Montagna 10.5 ($4.60), Brendan Goddard 8.0 ($15), Sam Fisher 7.5 ($21).

Summary:  Nick Dal Santo and Brendan Goddard are under the odds at $1.24 and $6.50 respectively, most likely a function of poor Brownlow Ratios in both instances. As a consequence, there’s some value about Leigh Montagna – bet 0.5 units on him at the $14 available with Sportsbet.

 

West Coast

Ratings:  Dean Cox 16.5 ($2.40), Daniel Kerr 15.0 ($3.30), Andrew Embley 12.5 ($6.50), Matthew Priddis 11.0 ($11).

Summary:  The $2.15 favourite inPriddis is seemingly beloved by umpires but didn’t feature all that prominently in journalist votes, whilst the $2.35 second favourite in Cox has a history of being overlooked by umpires. 0.5 units on Kerr at $6.50 (Sportsbet) and 0.25 units on Embley at $13 (Centrebet) are the recommended plays here.

 

Custom Groups

Centrebet – “In The Trenches”

Ratings:  Matthew Boyd 26.0 ($2.00), Sam Mitchell 22.5 ($3.20), Andrew Swallow 16.0 ($11), Brent Moloney 16.0 ($11), Matthew Priddis 11.0 ($41).

Summary:  The $5.00 on offer about Matthew Boyd may be the best bet of the night. With the price being so far over the rated odds, I have no hesitation in marking this as a 3 unit bet.

 

Centrebet – “Rucks”

Ratings:  Todd Goldstein 9.0 ($1.55), Matthew Leuenberger 6.5 ($4.20), Shane Mumford 4.0 ($13), Mark Jamar 1.0 ($41), Paddy Ryder 1.0 ($41).

Summary:  Goldstein at $1.65 is very fractional overs but given the outlay required to make decent money from an odds-on bet, it may be best to let him go. However, placing 0.5 units on Leuenberger at the generous $12 quote is worth serious consideration.

 

Centrebet – “The Finishers”

Ratings:  Travis Cloke 12.0 ($2.20), Drew Petrie 8.5 ($4.60), Steve Johnson 8.5 ($4.60), Steven Milne 4.5 ($21), Josh Kennedy 2.5 ($34).

Summary:  With Petrie and Johnson both well under the odds, Cloke can be bet for 1 unit at the $4.25 offered. I did contemplate suggesting 1.5 or 2 units here, but votes awarded to key forwards can be quite volatile, so some level of caution is advised.

 

Centrebet – “Possession Junkies”

Ratings:  Gary Ablett 21.5 ($2.20), Dane Swan 17.0 ($5.00), Jobe Watson 16.0 ($6.50), Nick Dal Santo 14.5 ($10), Scott Thompson 13.5 ($13).

Summary:  Much as with the “In The Trenches” group, the use of the Brownlow Ratio suggests a false favourite in this market. I’m happy to have 2 units on Gary Ablett at the $3.25 and hope that Dane Swan is once again overlooked by umpires.

 

Centrebet – “Rising Stars”

Ratings:  Luke Shuey 9.0 ($1.33), Daniel Menzel 3.0 ($10), Dyson Heppell 2.0 ($17), Shane Savage 2.0 ($17), Sam Reid 1.0 ($34).

Summary:  Only the lack of overall votes (and thus the reliance on outcomes for two or three games) prevents me from declaring Shuey in this market. No bet.

 

Head-to-head markets

This column has been going for over 3,000 words now and you’re all probably getting a bit tired, so let’s keep this section short and sweet. I like the following head-to-head plays, each for 2 units:

Matthew Boyd (rating of 26.0) to beat Dane Swan (17.0) at $1.90 with Centrebet.

Andrew Swallow (16.0) to beat Matthew Priddis (11.0) at $2.12 with Centrebet.

Simon Black (19.0) to beat Brent Moloney (16.0) at $2.35 with Centrebet.

 

Score a $100 Free Bet from Luxbet!

Summary of recommended bets (23.25 units in total)

1.5 units on Matthew Boyd at $17 (Luxbet) to win the Brownlow Medal

0.5 units on Jobe Watson at $7.50 (Centrebet) to lead the Brownlow Medal-eligible players vote after Round 12.

0.25 units on Dean Cox at $17.00 (Centrebet, Luxbet) to lead the Brownlow Medal-eligible players vote after Round 12.

1 unit on Marc Murphy at $4.75 (Centrebet) to receive the most votes for Carlton.

2 units on Matthew Pavlich at $2.45 (Sportsbet) to receive the most votes for Fremantle.

0.25 units on Joel Corey at $26 (Sportsbet) to receive the most votes for Geelong.

4 units on Trent Cotchin at $2.42 (Sportsbet) to receive the most votes for Richmond.

0.5 units on Leigh Montagna at $14.00 (Sportsbet) to receive the most votes for St Kilda.

0.5 units on Daniel Kerr at $6.50 (Sportsbet) to receive the most votes for West Coast.

0.25 units on Andrew Embley at $13.00 (Centrebet) to receive the most votes for West Coast.

3 units on Matthew Boyd at $5.00 (Centrebet) to receive the most votes from Centrebet’s “In The Trenches” group.

0.5 units on Matthew Leuenberger at $12.00 (Centrebet) to receive the most votes from Centrebet’s “Rucks” group.

1 unit on Travis Cloke at $4.25 (Centrebet) to receive the most votes from Centrebet’s “The Finishers” group.

2 units on Gary Ablett at $3.25 (Centrebet) to receive the most votes from Centrebet’s “Possession Junkies” group.

2 units on Matthew Boyd at $1.90 (Centrebet) to poll more votes than Dane Swan.

2 units on Andrew Swallow at $2.12 (Centrebet) to poll more votes than Matthew Priddis.

2 units on Simon Black at $2.35 (Centrebet) to poll more votes than Brent Moloney.

 

Thanks to Chris Hyde/Getty Images AsiaPac for use of the photo