Home, draw or away: six ways to forecast a result, all tested on the same five seasons, then how to tell a sure model from a well-informed one. Parts 8 to 14.
Three numbers known before kick-off, one model trained by gradient descent, and a probability for every result. Tested on five SPFL seasons it beats every model in the series so far and gets close to the bookmakers.
A decision tree predicts a match the way a pundit reasons, with a string of yes-or-no questions, and it learns which questions to ask from the data. On five SPFL test seasons two questions nearly match logistic regression; twelve fall apart.
One decision tree is jumpy, so grow a hundred, each on a slightly different set of matches, and average what they say. On five SPFL test seasons the forest fixes most of a single tree's wild guesses, and still finishes just behind logistic regression.
Start with a rough guess, look at what it got wrong, and fix a little of it with a small tree. Repeat a few hundred times. On five SPFL test seasons gradient boosting draws level with logistic regression, and shows where three numbers run out.
Four machine learning models stalled at the same score on three numbers per match. Rate every team's attack and defence from the goals they score and let in, refit before every matchday, and a classic football model finally gets past them.
Elo has dials to set, from how far one result moves a rating to how much home advantage is worth. Tuned on held-back seasons it draws level with Dixon-Coles on the test seasons. The dial that mattered most changed between eras, and no honest tuning could have seen it coming.
A forecast can lose by being wrong about its own confidence, or by knowing less. Splitting the Brier score into calibration and resolution shows which. On five SPFL test seasons Elo is as well calibrated as the bookmakers, and loses only because they know more.