Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2602.15673

Leicester's Tale: Another Perspective on the EPL 2015/16 Through Expected Goals (xG) Modelling

Sheikh Badar Ud Din Tahir·Leonardo Egidi·Nicola Torelli
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Probabilistic modeling is an effective tool for evaluating team performance and predicting outcomes in sports. However, an important question that hasn't been fully explored is whether these models can reliably reflect actual performance while assigning meaningful probabilities to rare results that differ greatly from expectations. In this study, we create an inference-based probabilistic framework built on expected goals (xG). This framework converts shot-level event data into season-level simulations of points, rankings, and outcome probabilities. Using the English Premier League 2015/16 season as a data, we demonstrate that the framework captures the overall structure of the league table. It correctly identifies the top-four contenders and relegation candidates while explaining a significant portion of the variance in final points and ranks. In a full-season evaluation, the model assigns a low probability to extreme outcomes, particularly Leicester City's historic title win, which stands out as a statistical anomaly. We then look at the ex ante inferential and early-diagnostic role of xG by only using mid-season information. With first-half data, we simulate the rest of the season and show that teams with stronger mid-season xG profiles tend to earn more points in the second half, even after considering their current league position. In this mid-season assessment, Leicester City ranks among the top teams by xG and is given a small but noteworthy chance of winning the league. This suggests that their ultimate success was unlikely but not entirely detached from their actual performance. Our analysis indicates that expected goals models work best as probabilistic baselines for analysis and early-warning diagnostics, rather than as certain predictors of rare season outcomes.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Sheikh Badar Ud Din Tahir, Leonardo Egidi, Nicola Torelli. 2026-02-17. Leicester's Tale: Another Perspective on the EPL 2015/16 Through Expected Goals (xG) Modelling. https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.15673

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗