Trend verifier
“They’re 5-0 against the line at this ground.” “They’ve won round 1 eleven years running.” Streaks like that are found by looking, and a big enough table contains every streak you could wish for. This page puts the record next to the only number that decides anything: how often chance produces a run that strong.
Loading…
Check a trend
Type a team and pick a situation. Partial names work — “melbourne”, “panthers”, “chiefs”.
Results appear here, each with the chance of seeing a run that strong.
Strongest streaks found — and what they’re worth
Check a player prop
Partial names work — “hopkins”, “kelce”, “gibbs”.
Each split comes back with the chance of seeing a run that strong, holding the player’s own hit rate fixed.
Market-by-market: found vs chance
The kind of split people quote
Why a 5-0 record usually means nothing
A market priced near even money produces a 5-0 run about one time in 32. That sounds unlikely until you count how many chances there are. Across one code we test every team against every venue, round, day, referee and opponent, for three markets and every scope the sport has — tens of thousands of cells. At one-in-32, a table that size contains hundreds of perfect 5-0 runs even if no team has any venue or round effect at all.
So the honest question is never “what is the streak?” It is “how many streaks this strong would I expect to find if nothing were real?” This page answers that by re-running the identical search over shuffled results: each game keeps its venue, round, day, referee and opponent, but the outcomes are reshuffled within each team’s own fixtures. That holds the team’s actual record fixed — a good side still wins as often as it really did — and destroys only the link between situation and result. Any streaks that still turn up are, by construction, coincidence.
If the real data holds 487 streaks and shuffled data averages 444, then finding one tells you nothing. That is what all three codes currently look like.
Frequently asked questions
Does a low chance figure mean the trend is real?
No. It means that one cell is unusual in isolation. Because thousands of cells are searched, hundreds will look unusual by accident. A low figure earns a trend a place on a watchlist, not a bet — record what it would say and check it going forward.
Why hold each team’s record fixed?
Otherwise a strong team’s good record at a ground counts as a venue effect. If a side wins 70% of everything, 70% at one stadium is not a finding. Shuffling within the team’s own games removes that confusion.
Why does the NRL have no quarter markets?
Rugby league plays halves. There are no quarters to analyse and no data to invent them from, so the NRL offers the full game and each half only.
Do betting trends actually beat their own baseline?
| Code | Predictions graded | Trend hit rate | Matched baseline | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NRL | 8,251 | 55.3% | 57.5% | -2.1 |
| AFL | 18,291 | 53.6% | 56.6% | -2.9 |
| NFL | 17,168 | 56.5% | 59.6% | -3 |
The answer measured here is no. Across all four codes, situational trends hit at or below the rate the same teams were already achieving over the same matches, so the apparent edge is the baseline, not a finding. The comparison is against each team's own rate — never 50%, never the league average — because a trend that fires mostly on good teams will look predictive against any other yardstick.