Our positive-edge calls: four from thirteen
Thirteen BAI8 calls carried a positive edge when published. Four won, against 5.8 expected. Every call, the flat-stake result, and why it proves nothing yet.
On this page
Thirteen BAI8 calls on the public record carried a positive edge when we published them. Four won and nine lost. Our own chances on those calls added up to 5.8 expected wins, so we are about two wins short of what we said. One unit on each at the quoted price would be 3.68 units down. That is a bad start, it is on the record, and it is not yet evidence either way.
All thirteen
| Date | Fixture | Pick | Our chance | Price quoted | Edge | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6 Oct | Braves v Dodgers (MLB) | Dodgers | 51.6% | 1.99, Matchbook | +1.3 pts | Won |
| 7 Oct | White Sox v Guardians (MLB) | White Sox | 52.4% | 1.92, Betfair | +0.4 pts | Lost |
| 8 Oct | White Sox v Guardians (MLB) | White Sox | 52.3% | 2.03, 1xBet | +3.1 pts | Lost |
| 9 Oct | Málaga v Espanyol | Espanyol | 38.9% | 2.86, Betfair | +3.9 pts | Lost |
| 9 Oct | Blue Jackets v Penguins (NHL) | Penguins | 51.3% | 2.06, Betfair | +2.7 pts | Lost |
| 10 Oct | Gençlerbirliği v Amedspor | Amedspor | 40.6% | 2.67, 1xBet | +3.1 pts | Lost |
| 10 Oct | Aston Villa v Brentford | Brentford | 37.5% | 2.69, 1xBet | +0.3 pts | Lost |
| 11 Oct | Elche v Celta Vigo | Celta Vigo | 36.6% | 2.75, Coolbet | +0.3 pts | Lost |
| 11 Oct | Crystal Palace v Nottingham Forest | Palace | 36.9% | 2.80, Betfair | +1.1 pts | Won |
| 11 Oct | Nice v Strasbourg | Strasbourg | 37.7% | 3.07, 1xBet | +5.1 pts | Lost |
| 11 Oct | Seahawks v 49ers (NFL) | 49ers | 52.2% | 2.58, Betfair | +13.5 pts | Won |
| 12 Oct | Brewers v Dodgers (MLB) | Brewers | 51.6% | 1.95, 1xBet | +0.4 pts | Won |
| 12 Oct | Levante v Sevilla | Sevilla | 37.6% | 2.84, Betfair | +2.4 pts | Lost |
The average edge was 2.9 points at an average price of 2.48. How each of these was graded is in how a BAI8 call gets settled on the record.
Why four from thirteen proves little
| Value | |
|---|---|
| Expected wins (sum of our chances) | 5.8 |
| Actual wins | 4 |
| One standard error on the win count | 1.8 |
| Flat one-unit result at quoted prices | −3.68 units |
Being 1.8 wins short with a standard error of 1.8 is ordinary. If every one of our chances were exactly right, four wins or fewer would still happen about 24% of the time. Seven of the thirteen were football picks at 36% to 41%, which lose most of the time even when the chance is right. A record this short cannot separate a real 3-point edge from none at all; the arithmetic is in how many bets before a record means anything.
Where it could genuinely be wrong
We would rather say this before the numbers force it. Three things would make these edges smaller than we stated:
- Stale quotes. Several prices were days old at kick-off. If the best price had gone by then, the edge was never really available.
- Draws. Six of the nine losses were football picks in three-way markets, where a draw also loses (Sevilla's 3–3 on Monday was one). If we underrate draws, it shows up exactly here.
- Small edges are thin. Four of the thirteen were under half a point. At that size the edge is inside quote noise.
How the chance itself is built is in how BAI8 prices a fixture.
What this does not tell you
It does not tell you the edges are real, and it does not tell you they are not. It covers thirteen calls in one week across four sports. We will publish the same table as it grows, wins and losses alike.
18+. Bet only what you can afford to lose.
Common questions
How have BAI8's positive-edge calls done?
Thirteen settled so far, four won and nine lost. Our own chances added up to 5.8 expected wins.
Would flat stakes on every positive-edge call have made money?
Not so far. One unit on each, at the price we quoted, would be 3.68 units down after thirteen calls.
Does four from thirteen mean the edges are wrong?
Not on its own. The shortfall is about one standard error, which is what a fair coin does regularly over thirteen tosses.