Home Favourites at 1.50 to 1.59: Win Rate Season by Season
Twenty-one seasons of European home sides at 1.50–1.59: how often they won, how the price compared, and what that gap was actually worth to a flat-stake bettor.
Written by Ella Yardley1X2 specialist
- 14 of 21seasons beating the priced rate
- 60.7%priced by the odds
- 62.1%won over 21 seasons
- 7,231European home sides priced 1.50–1.59
- Market
- 1X2
- The question
- Has the win rate of European home sides priced 1.50–1.59 changed over 21 seasons, and does the price keep up?
- Sample
- Football, 22 European divisions, 2005/06–2025/26; 155,987 matches with pre-match 1X2 prices
A home side at 1.50–1.59 is the most familiar price on any weekend coupon: clearly fancied, but not so short that you shrug it off. When I build my daily 1X2 tips page, this rung comes up constantly, so I wanted to know whether it behaves the same now as it did two decades ago, and whether the price has kept pace.
Across 22 European divisions from 2005/06 to 2025/26, 7,231 home sides were priced in this band and won 62.1% of the time, against 60.7% priced. That is a small edge in the bettor's favour on paper, and the actual rate beat the priced rate in 14 of the 21 seasons. Whether that edge survives the bookmaker's margin is a different question, and the last chart answers it.
Rung 1Season-by-season win rate swings around a flat price
This chart plots the priced home win rate against what actually happened, one season at a time. The priced line barely moves; the actual line jumps around it. The best season was 2006/07, when these sides won 67.2% of 351 games against 58.8% priced, and the weakest was 2016/17, with 57.9% from 337 games against 61.6% priced.
The latest complete season, 2025/26, came in at 63.4% from 328 games against 60.2% priced, which sits on the stronger side of the run.
View the data: home 1.50–1.59: win rate season by season
| Priced | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 2005/06 | 58.7% | 58.0% |
| 2006/07 | 58.8% | 67.2% |
| 2007/08 | 59.6% | 59.0% |
| 2008/09 | 60.5% | 63.0% |
| 2009/10 | 60.9% | 61.4% |
| 2010/11 | 60.9% | 62.8% |
| 2011/12 | 60.8% | 62.8% |
| 2012/13 | 61.1% | 59.6% |
| 2013/14 | 61.2% | 64.0% |
| 2014/15 | 61.5% | 58.1% |
| 2015/16 | 61.6% | 64.4% |
| 2016/17 | 61.6% | 57.9% |
| 2017/18 | 61.6% | 64.9% |
| 2018/19 | 61.8% | 62.3% |
| 2019/20 | 61.0% | 63.3% |
| 2020/21 | 60.8% | 63.4% |
| 2021/22 | 61.0% | 64.8% |
| 2022/23 | 61.1% | 66.2% |
| 2023/24 | 60.9% | 60.1% |
| 2024/25 | 60.8% | 59.5% |
| 2025/26 | 60.2% | 63.4% |
My honest read is that most of this zigzag is noise. A single season at this rung holds only a few hundred games, so swings of several points tell you very little on their own, and I would never back a price because last season ran hot. The steady part is the direction: actual finished above priced far more often than below.
Rung 2Grouped into eras, the gap is small and consistent
Pooling the seasons into three seven-year spans steadies the picture. In 2005/06–2011/12 these sides won 61.9% of 2,664 games against 60.0% priced. In 2012/13–2018/19 the two met exactly, at 61.5% from 2,488 games. In 2019/20–2025/26 the win rate rose to 63.0% from 2,079 games against 60.8% priced.
View the data: home 1.50–1.59: priced vs actual by era
| Priced | Actual | 95% range | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2005/06–2011/12 (2,664 games) | 60.0% | 61.9% | ±1.8 |
| 2012/13–2018/19 (2,488 games) | 61.5% | 61.5% | ±1.9 |
| 2019/20–2025/26 (2,079 games) | 60.8% | 63.0% | ±2.1 |
The error bars matter here: each era carries a range of around two points either way, so the middle era's perfect match and the recent era's gap are not wildly different in statistical terms. What I take from it is that the price has broadly kept up. It has not drifted badly out of line, but it has tended to sit slightly below reality rather than above it.
Rung 3Shorter home rungs show a wider gap than this one
The heatmap places this rung on the wider ladder of home prices, showing actual minus priced in each era. Shorter favourites carry the biggest gaps: at 1.10–1.19 the figure was +7.8 points, +3.3 points and +5.4 points across the three eras, and at 1.40–1.49 it was +4.8 points, +1.7 points and +3.8 points.
The 1.50–1.59 row is one of the quietest on the board, and the rung just above it, 1.60–1.69, ran at 0.0 points, +0.9 points and +2.0 points.
View the data: actual minus priced home win rate by era
| 2005/06–11/12 | 2012/13–18/19 | 2019/20–25/26 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.10–1.19 | 7.8 pts | 3.3 pts | 5.4 pts |
| 1.20–1.29 | 3.6 pts | 6.2 pts | 2.5 pts |
| 1.30–1.39 | 4.3 pts | 4.2 pts | 2.6 pts |
| 1.40–1.49 | 4.8 pts | 1.7 pts | 3.8 pts |
| 1.50–1.59 | 1.9 pts | 0 pts | 2.2 pts |
| 1.60–1.69 | 0 pts | 0.9 pts | 2 pts |
| 1.70–1.80 | 2.4 pts | 1.3 pts | 1.4 pts |
This is the familiar favourite-longshot pattern: the shorter the home price, the more the margin-stripped odds tend to undersell the favourite. At 1.50–1.59 that effect is still there, just thin. For a 1X2 bettor that means this rung is roughly fairly priced rather than generously priced.
Rung 4Flat-stake returns stay negative at the standard price
Here is the part that counts. Backing every home side in this band at the major-book price returned −4.9%, −5.5% and −2.8% across the three eras, and −4.5% over all 21 seasons. The fair price for the home win was 1.61, while the average major-book price was 1.54, so the margin swallows the small calibration edge and then some.
At the best available price the losses shrink to −0.8% overall, with the recent era edging to +0.4%. The average best price of 1.60 sits almost on the fair line.
View the data: home 1.50–1.59: flat-stake return by era
| Major-book price | Best price | |
|---|---|---|
| 2005/06–2011/12 | −4.9% | −0.8% |
| 2012/13–2018/19 | −5.5% | −1.7% |
| 2019/20–2025/26 | −2.8% | +0.4% |
| All seasons | −4.5% | −0.8% |
The main caveat is that best-price returns assume you got the single top quote on every bet, which few people manage, so read that column as a ceiling rather than a realistic result. None of this is a system; it describes past results, not future profit.
At this price
- Compare against 1.61
Fair odds for this rung were 1.61, so a quote well below that, like the average 1.54, means you are paying the margin in full. Treat 1.61 as your reference point before backing.
- Shop every price
The gap between −4.5% at the major-book price and −0.8% at the best is far larger than any edge in the win rate itself. Price shopping matters more than picking at this rung.
- Ignore one hot season
Seasons ranged from 57.9% to 67.2%, mostly on small samples. Judge this price on the long-run 62.1%, not on how it ran recently.
Questions bettors ask
How often do home favourites at 1.50–1.59 win?
Across 7,231 European games over 21 seasons they won 62.1% of the time. The margin-free odds implied 60.7%, so they won slightly more often than priced.
Is backing home sides at 1.50–1.59 profitable?
Not at the standard price: a flat stake on every one returned −4.5% at the major-book price over all seasons. Even at the best available price the overall return was −0.8%.
What are fair odds for a 1.50–1.59 home favourite?
Based on the actual win rate, fair odds were 1.61. The average major-book price was 1.54 and the average best price was 1.60.
I'm a 1X2 specialist who digs into form, team news, and the situational details most previews overlook before backing a match result.
View profile →
