Don't Care if You Know Football or Not, Buying the Draw Is the Best Strategy for This World Cup?

Odaily星球日报2026-06-22 tarihinde yayınlandı2026-06-22 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

The article analyzes the 2026 FIFA World Cup group stage and argues that betting on a draw has been a surprisingly profitable strategy. Based on data from the prediction market Polymarket, a strategy of betting $1000 on a draw for each of the first 40 matches would have yielded a return of over 100%, despite only 13 matches ending in a draw. The core of the strategy is not the frequency of wins, but the high payout when low-probability draws occur, such as Spain's 0-0 draw with Cape Verde, where pre-match odds for a draw were only 5.5%. The article identifies common draw scores, like 1-1, which provide stability, and high-value 0-0 stalemates, where favorites fail to break down resilient defenses. It highlights Group G as an example, where 3 of the first 4 matches ended in draws, illustrating that draws are a tactical part of group stage calculus as teams often prioritize not losing. In conclusion, while strong teams remain favorites on the pitch, the article claims that for traders, betting on draws has so far produced the most significant profits.

Original | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina)

Author | Asher(@Asher_ 0210)

As the World Cup group stage progresses, a very counter-intuitive phenomenon is becoming increasingly clear—buying the favorite, doesn't necessarily make money; buying the underdog, isn't necessarily easy to hold onto either, but if you blindly buy the draw for every match, you might actually be raking it in.

Calculated based on Polymarket pre-match prediction data, if you put $1000 on "Draw" for every match, there have been 11 draws in the previous 36 matches (as shown below). That is to say, with a total investment of $36,000, the winnings from successful bets amount to $73,214. After deducting the principal, the net profit is $37,214, representing a return of over 100%.

Even more impressive, according to Polymarket pre-match prediction data, if we continue the strategy of "$1000 on Draw per match" for today's 4 matches (total investment of $4000). Looking at the results: Spain 4-0 Saudi Arabia, New Zealand 1-3 Egypt—these two resulted in a loss of the stake; but Belgium 0-0 Iran and Uruguay 2-2 Cape Verde were hits, with a combined payout of approximately $8,700. This means that even with only 2 hits out of the 4 matches today, the daily net profit is still around $4,700.

Including today's 4 matches, out of 40 World Cup group stage matches, there have been 13 draws. With a total investment of $40,000, the total payout from winning bets is approximately $81,914. After deducting all investments, the net profit is about $41,914, representing a return of nearly 105%.

A hit rate of 13/40 isn't particularly high, but the key to the draw strategy is never about "hitting often," but about "hitting big." The lower the pre-match probability of a draw, the higher the payout multiplier when it hits. Matches like Spain vs. Cape Verde with a 5.5% draw probability, Ecuador vs. Curaçao with an 8% draw probability, or Qatar vs. Switzerland with a 13% draw probability—hitting just a few of these is enough to turn the entire strategy from a small loss into a massive gain.

Cape Verde's Draw Against Spain Is the Most Typical "Liquidation Game" of the World Cup So Far

The Spain vs. Cape Verde group stage match wasn't just a big win for the draw strategy; it was also a nightmare for pre-match buyers backing the favorite.

In this group stage match, Spain's pre-match win probability was as high as 92%. Polymarket data shows that account @betoor619 (address: 0x70088c990ffae782c699b9250f5aa6cbe4e3c666) bought Spain to win in the World Cup group stage match Spain vs. Cape Verde. The match ended 0:0, resulting in a loss of $999,000 for this user.

It's worth noting that this user bought in at the 92-cent moment, meaning they staked $1 million in principal for a potential profit of $85,000. A seemingly sure-win trade ultimately resulted in a cold loss due to the 7 incredible saves by Cape Verde's 40-year-old goalkeeper and Cape Verde's extremely resilient defense.

0-0 and 1-1 Are Becoming the Main Theme of This World Cup So Far

Looking at the draw results that have hit so far, draws in this World Cup group stage aren't appearing randomly but are concentrated in a few typical scorelines.

The most common is 1-1. Canada vs. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Qatar vs. Switzerland, Brazil vs. Morocco, Belgium vs. Egypt, Saudi Arabia vs. Uruguay, Portugal vs. DR Congo, Czech Republic vs. South Africa—all ended with this score. The commonality in these matches is that neither side was completely without chances, nor did the weaker team simply park the bus until the end. More often, the stronger team failed to convert their advantage into a win, while the weaker team seized an opportunity to respond. The matches seemed back-and-forth, but in the end, neither side could truly break through the other.

For traders, the value of 1-1 lies in its stability. It's not the most exaggerated source of profit, but it occurs frequently, forming the foundation of this "buy draw every match" strategy.

What really boosts the profits are the 0-0 draws.

Spain vs. Cape Verde is the most typical example. Spain was considered the absolute favorite pre-match, with only a 5.5% draw probability. But the match ended 0-0. If $1,000 was invested pre-match on the draw, the payout would be approximately $18,182. Ecuador vs. Curaçao follows a similar logic. With only an 8% draw probability, it also resulted in 0-0, with $1,000 invested corresponding to a payout of $12,500.

Therefore, the real money-making aspect of the draw strategy isn't about hitting every match, but rather that a few low-probability draws, when they do hit, come with very exaggerated payout multipliers. This is especially true for 0-0 matches, where the on-field action often involves the favorite team attacking constantly while the underdog's goalkeeper and defense repeatedly clear the ball.

Group G Is Even More Ridiculous: 3 Draws in 4 Matches

If Spain vs. Cape Verde represents low-probability draws, then Group G is more like a microcosm of the "draw density" in this group stage.

Out of the first 4 matches, Group G has produced 3 draws. In the first round: Belgium 1-1 Egypt, Iran 2-2 New Zealand; in the second round: Belgium 0-0 Iran. The only match with a decisive result was New Zealand vs. Egypt, but this doesn't change one fact: the overall rhythm of this group has been completely slowed down by draws.

Especially Belgium, who have drawn both of their group stage matches so far. For the team, this means the pressure to qualify from the group continues; but for those who bought a Belgium win pre-match, the outcome of both matches was the same—no loss, but their position wiped out.

This is also where the draw is most underestimated in prediction markets. The market prefers to buy the favorite to win because it seems more intuitive; but the real logic of group stage football isn't "the favorite must win," but rather that many teams are willing to settle for 1 point. The weaker team doesn't want to lose, the stronger team doesn't want to take risks too early. Once a match reaches a stalemate, a draw becomes a very realistic outcome.

3 draws in the first 4 matches of Group G indicates that draws are not accidental upsets, but part of the group stage tactical game. Especially when the points haven't been significantly separated, every team starts calculating—winning is of course best, but avoiding losing first is often the safer choice.

Summary

In this World Cup, the strong teams are still the main characters.

Spain will win, Brazil will win, and favorites will always have matches where they deliver a crushing victory. But if we look purely at trading profits, the most profitable script in the group stage so far might not be the big wins by the giants, but rather those recurring 1-1s, 0-0s, and 2-2s.

Those who bought the favorites are waiting for goals, those who bought the draw are waiting for the final whistle, and so far, the latter are laughing louder.

İlgili Sorular

QAccording to the article, what has been the most profitable betting strategy for the World Cup group stage so far?

AAccording to the article, the most profitable betting strategy so far has been to consistently bet on a draw in every match. Using a hypothetical strategy of betting $1000 on a draw for each of the first 40 group stage matches, the strategy yielded a net profit of approximately $41,914, representing a return of nearly 105%.

QWhy is the 'bet on draw' strategy considered effective despite a relatively low win rate?

AThe 'bet on draw' strategy is effective not because it wins frequently, but because it 'wins valuably'. The pre-match probability for a draw is often very low, which means the payout multiplier is very high when a draw does occur. Hitting just a few of these low-probability draws can turn the overall strategy from a slight loss into a significant profit.

QWhich specific match is highlighted as the most typical 'liquidation game' for favorite bettors?

AThe match between Spain and Cape Verde is highlighted as the most typical 'liquidation game'. One user on Polymarket bet $1 million on Spain to win when the probability was 92%, aiming for an $85,000 profit. The match ended 0-0, resulting in a loss of 99.9% of their stake.

QWhat are the two most common draw scorelines mentioned, and how do they differ in their impact on the betting strategy?

AThe two most common draw scorelines are 1-1 and 0-0. The 1-1 draws are more frequent and form the 'base' of the strategy's returns. The 0-0 draws, while less frequent, are the key profit drivers because they often occur in matches where one team is a heavy favorite, leading to very low pre-match draw probabilities and therefore extremely high payout multipliers when they hit.

QWhat does the high frequency of draws in Group G (3 draws in 4 matches) illustrate about the nature of group stage matches?

AThe high frequency of draws in Group G illustrates that draws are not merely accidental upsets, but are an integral part of group stage tactics. In the early stages, many teams prioritize not losing over aggressively seeking a win. The calculus for teams often involves securing at least 1 point to maintain their position, leading to more cautious play and a higher likelihood of drawn matches.

İlgili Okumalar

Beyond the Model Lies the Harness: Deepseek Enters the Arena, Why Has the Main Battlefield of China's AI Competition Shifted?

In mid-to-late May 2026, Deepseek internally established a new Harness team focused on code agent products, internally benchmarked against Anthropic's Claude Code. This move, marked by the formula "Model + Harness = Agent" in their job postings, signals a major shift in China's AI competition: the main battlefield is transitioning from developing large models to building toolchains and achieving workplace integration. Deepseek's direct involvement in Harness development aims to secure control over interface design and training data feedback loops, moving beyond open-sourcing powerful models. Harness, the runtime infrastructure for AI agents, handles everything beyond model reasoning—task orchestration, tool calling, context management, safety checks, and error recovery. It is crucial because agent products are not just outputs of model capability but also training grounds for it. Real-world task failures recorded by Harness can feed back into model training, creating a flywheel effect. Engineering Harness is more critical than optimizing prompts, as poor context management or error handling can drastically reduce agent success rates in multi-step, real-world scenarios. This shift is not isolated. Other major Chinese tech companies are also pursuing differentiated toolchain strategies. Tencent leverages its enterprise ecosystem (WeChat Work, Tencent Cloud) to build connectors for organizational-level AI collaboration and complex task delivery. Alibaba focuses on lowering automation barriers on the web with a front-end, browser-based GUI Agent framework, PageAgent. This diversification shows the industry recognizes that success lies not in a perfect general agent, but in vertically focused solutions built with robust engineering. The trend is validated by overseas success, such as Poland's Viktor, an AI coworker on Slack achieving $20M ARR by autonomously executing complex, multi-step tasks. This proves a shift in enterprise willingness to pay—from "AI-assisted generation" to "AI-autonomous execution." As Harness matures to provide safety guards and reliability, AI transitions from a human-supervised intern to an independent outsourcer. The competition now faces key engineering challenges: preventing "token explosion" through intelligent context compression, and building "thick frameworks" with features like sandbox isolation and checkpoint recovery for enterprise-grade stability. Geopolitical restrictions on tools like Claude Code further create a significant market vacuum for domestic solutions like Deepseek's Harness. For enterprises and developers, the focus must shift from comparing model benchmarks to evaluating a vendor's engineering capabilities, error recovery mechanisms, context management, and ecosystem compatibility when choosing AI products and platforms.

marsbit39 dk önce

Beyond the Model Lies the Harness: Deepseek Enters the Arena, Why Has the Main Battlefield of China's AI Competition Shifted?

marsbit39 dk önce

Soaring Export Data for Memory Chips, Market Is Redefining the Valuation Anchor for Memory Stocks

Korean storage export data for the first 20 days of June shows substantial year-on-year increases in both value and price-per-kilogram for categories like DRAM, NAND, and SSDs. This signals a potential shift beyond simple demand recovery, indicating rising prices and a product mix shift towards higher-value items, possibly influenced by AI infrastructure needs. A key point is that the surge in price-per-kilogram is not simply a uniform chip price hike. It reflects a combination of actual price increases and, more importantly, an export structure increasingly dominated by high-value-density products like HBM (High-Bandwidth Memory) and advanced DRAM, which are critical for AI servers. This suggests AI-driven demand may be spilling over from just HBM into broader memory markets. SK Hynix stands to benefit directly due to its leading HBM position. For Samsung and Micron, the implication is potential for greater margin elasticity if the tightness in high-end memory spreads to enterprise SSD and NAND prices. However, the storage sector remains cyclical. Risks include supply expansion, inventory changes, and potential slowdowns in broader AI capital expenditure. Ultimately, while the strong export data supports upward revisions for storage company earnings and fuels discussion of an "AI infrastructure bottleneck premium," a definitive valuation shift from a cyclical to a structural story depends on upcoming quarterly reports. Investors need confirmation from SK Hynix, Samsung, and Micron that improvements in average selling prices, product mix, and, crucially,毛利率 are sustained over multiple quarters.

marsbit2 saat önce

Soaring Export Data for Memory Chips, Market Is Redefining the Valuation Anchor for Memory Stocks

marsbit2 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
Futures
活动图片