[quote="PDG1978, post: 29499619, member: .. Top scorer: 9-2 Juergen Klinsmann (Germany) 5-1 Patrick Kluivert (Netherlands) 8-1 Fabrizio Ravanelli (Italy) 10-1 Dennis Bergkamp (Netherlands), Davor Suker (Croatia) Hmmm, why did we not all have a bet on Shearer for top scorer (>10/1)? To be fair he'd been on an International goal drought before the tournament![/quote] Rightly so ... betting based on STATS (accumulative ) before the tournament started. Ironically often the ODDS are better than the EVENS For example: - WC98: every bet went to Ronaldo 6/1, and Suker beat the odds with 25/1 - WC02: every bet went for Henry, Raul, Batistuta ... but Ronaldo was back (<25/1)! - WC06: every bet went for Ronaldo(9/1), Adriano (10/1) and Henry/Nistelrooy (14/1), but Klose came out form nowhere (25/1) to win it - Wc2010: was the closest one with Villa as top 11/1 (but Sneijder and Muller came out from now here to claim sharing the prize with <50/1) Now we'll see how it goes with WC2014 Goldenboot: Messi 8/1, Neymar 13/1 CR7 16/1 Kun 18/1 Suarez 19/1
Bet 365 odds in June 2002 FourFourTwo: Argentina - 4/1 France - 4/1 Italy - 6/1 Brazil - 13/2 Spain - 9/1 Portugal - 11/1 Germany - 12/1 England - 12/1 Russia - 33/1 Paraguay - 33/1 Uruguay - 40/1 Cameroon - 40/1 Poland - 40/1 Japan - 40/1 Croatia - 50/1 Belgium - 50/1 Turkey - 50/1 Republic of Ireland - 50/1 Sweden - 66/1 Denmark - 66/1 Nigeria - 80/1 Mexico - 80/1 South Africa - 100/1 South Korea - 100/1 USA - 100/1 Senegal - 100/1 Ecuador - 100/1 Slovenia - 125/1 Tunisia - 150/1 Costa Rica - 150/1 Saudi Arabia - 200/1 China - 250/1 Good odds on Brazil (didn't check other posts in the thread to compare though just now) but it was only each way on top two so no value bets on South Korea or Turkey in actuality.
Good addition. I'll place the euro 96 topscorer odds (pre-tournament) here too: Ladbrokes had this as odds for euro 96 topscorer pre tournament: Jurgen Klinsmann 9/2; Patrick Kluivert 5/1; Fabrizio Ravanelli 8/1; Oliver Bierhoff, Dennis Bergkamp 10/1; Alan Shearer, Hristo Stoichkov, Davor Suker 12/1. Daily Mail said: Klinsmann 9/2; Kluivert 5/1; Ravanelli 8/1; Suker, Bergkamp 10/1; Djorkaeff and Shearer 12/1. EURO 96 (Ladbrokes): 9-2 Germany, 5-1 Italy, 11-2 Holland, 6-1 England, 7-1 Spain, 8-1 France, 10-1 Portugal, 12-1 Croatia, 16-1 Russia, Bulgaria, 20-1 Romania, 25-1 Denmark, 50-1 Switzerland, 66-1 Czech Republic, 80- 1 Scotland, Turkey.
Can't believe it... I found odds from '66 even with progression. What's really surprising to me is that North Korea's odds are a lot better than I suspected 18.june Brazil 2:1 England 5:1 Argentina 7:1 Italy 9:1 Soviet Union 9:1 Germany 14:1 Portugal 14:1 Hungary 20:1 Spain 28:1 France 28:1 Uruguay 40:1 Chile 50:1 Bulgaria 66:1 Switzerland 100:1 Mexico 100:1 North Korea 200:1 25:June Brazil 7:4 England 9:2 Argentina 7:1 Italy 9:1 Soviet Union 10:1 Germany 14:1 Portugal 16:1 Hungary 20:1 Spain 28:1 France 33:1 Uruguay 40:1 Chile 50:1 Bulgaria 66:1 Switzerland 100:1 Mexico 150:1 North Korea 150:1 2. Juli Brazil 6:4 England 4:1 Argentina 9:1 Italy 9:1 Soviet Union 11:1 Germany 12:1 Portugal 16:1 Hungary 20:1 Spain 25:1 France 33:1 Uruguay 40:1 Chile 50:1 Bulgaria 66:1 Switzerland 100:1 Mexico 150:1 North Korea 150:1 Last 24 Hours before kickoff: Brazil 7:4 England 9:2 Argentina 8:1 Italy 9:1 Germany 10:1 (the sign in the picture says 14:1, but the article claims the odds dropped to 10:1) Soviet Union 11:1 Hungary 20:1 Portugal 22:1 Spain 25:1 France 25:1 Uruguay 40:1 Chile 50:1 Bulgaria 50:1 North Korea 100:1 Switzerland 125:1 Mexico 200:1
30 May 1970 World Cup Odds William Hill: 3-1 England 7-2 Brazil 6-1 Italy 9-1 Uruguay and West Germany 12-1 Mexico,Peru and USSR 25-1 Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia 33-1 Belgium 40-1 Sweden 50-1 Rumania 500-1 El Salvador, Israel and Morocco
the '66 odds are from kicker, '70 from guardian they are behind a payway though, I can't post the link
Not the odds but a forecast of some important managers/ex players of who would win the 1986 World Cup (Corriere dello Sport)
I have the Sunday Times World Cup 2002 odds. They came from a 64-page World Cup guide. Odds to win the World Cup: France 4-1 Uruguay 66-1 Denmark 80-1 Senegal 150-1 Spain 8-1 Slovenia 150-1 South Africa 200-1 Paraguay 50-1 Brazil 6-1 Turkey 66-1 China 300-1 Costa Rica 200-1 Portugal 12-1 Poland 80-1 USA 200-1 South Korea 150-1 Ireland 80-1 Germany 14-1 Cameroon 50-1 Saudi Arabia 250-1 England 9-1 Argentina 4-1 Sweden 66-1 Nigeria 100-1 Italy 6-1 Ecuador 100-1 Croatia 66-1 Mexico 100-1 Japan 66-1 Russia 50-1 Belgium 80-1 Tunisia 200-1 The same guide also showed odds from sportingbet.com Odds to win the World Cup: France 4/1 Argentina 9/2 Brazil 6/1 Italy 6/1 Spain 8/1 Portugal 11/1 England 12/1 Germany 14/1 Cameroon 40/1 Paraguay 40/1 Odds to top each group: Group F Argentina 7/10 England 5/2 Sweden 7/1 Nigeria 8/1 Group A France 2/9 Uruguay 13/2 Denmark 15/2 Senegal 22/1 Group B Spain 4/9 Paraguay 4/1 Slovenia 13/2 South Africa 10/1 Group C Brazil 2/7 Turkey 9/2 Costa Rica 8/1 China 20/1 Group D Portugal 8/15 Poland 11/4 South Korea 8/1 USA 10/1 Group E Germany 8/11 Cameroon 3/1 Ireland 7/2 S. Arabia 14/1 Group G Italy 4/11 Croatia 5/1 Ecuador 8/1 Mexico 8/1 Group H Russia 15/8 Japan 15/8 Belgium 12/5 Tunisia 7/1
Talking of odds following the World Cup draw, there are some given for the 1990 WC in this video at 5.28, as follows: Italy - 7/2 Brazil/Netherlands - 9/2 W.Germany - 6/1 Argentina - 8/1 USSR - 12/1 England/Spain - 14/1 Belgium/Uruguay/Yugoslavia - 25/1 Rep of Ireland/Scotland/Sweden - 33/1
1990 odds (with some from other sports too) from Boyle Bookmakers, as reported by the Drogheda Independent of Ireland, on 25th of May:
Here is a Daily Mirror preview of the groups/tournament, with their estimations about how things might go:
Odds before the semi-finals, from Stanley Leisure bookmakers, as reported in the Liverpool Echo (Argentina favourites, with France not far behind, then West Germany, and Belgium being the outsiders)
https://elpais.com/diario/1982/06/01/deportes/391730409_850215.html WORLD CUP 1982 "Brazil is the favorite to win the 82 World Cup, according to British bookmakers. Argentina, defending champions, on the other hand, only appears in fourth place, behind the Federal Republic of Germany and Spain. The list established by the British bookmakers is as follows": Brazil, 2-1 Federal Republic of Germany, 10-3 Spain, 6-1 Argentina, 9-1 Soviet Union and England, 11-1 Italy 16-1 France and Poland, 23-1 Scotland, 25-1 Belgium, 28-1 Czechoslovakia, 33-1 Yugoslavia and Peru, 40-1 Austria and Hungary, 51-1 Chile, 66-1 Northern Ireland, 150-1 Kuwait, 200-1 New Zealand, 400-1 Honduras, 1000-1 El Salvador, 1500-1 Algeria and Cameroon, 2000-1 Algeria and Cameroon, despite being 2000-1 and not going beyond the first phase, made a very worthy World Cup. Cameroon lost none of their three games (including one against eventual champions Italy) and Algeria were knocked out after one of the most embarrassing matchups in soccer history between Germany and Austria saw the Algerians out on golaverage. On the other hand Spain and Argentina very well in betting, but they made a World Cup to forget.
1986 World Cup odds as in December 1985 (published in the Sunday People on the 15th, before the draw took place I think in that case): 11/4 - Brazil 9/2 - Argentina 7 - Uruguay 11 - Mexico 14 - Denmark, England, France, Italy, West Germany 20 - USSR Maradona is quoted in a piece by Mike Langley saying he thinks Argentina can win and produce a great performance, despite some criticism back home. Langely says Maradona is "now everyone's selection for superstardom" but that Maradona drew his attention to two other youngsters, "First, Enzo Scifo. I think he'll be a revelation. I pick him before anyone in Europe. He's the next big star." and "Secondly Michael Laudrup. He's the Young Dane who so nearly went to Liverpool but changed his mind and came out here to Italy". He also said it's possible for England to have a good World Cup, but only if they let the ball do the work, and Italy look a better bet because they know how to produce results.
Tommy Doherty was one who was tipping France around that time though (he wrote the piece before the draw seemingly, even if it was published shortly after it):