World Cup Semi Finals England vs Argentina - My Picks
0.5% Over 2.5 goals at 39c (good to 44c)
0.5% Both teams to score at 52c (good to 56c)
(Optional) 0.5% Game to go to penalties at 19c (good to 22c)
The second semi final will begin shortly between England and Argentina. This will be a fiery semi final as the two countries have a historical football rivalry going back to the 1980s when Diego Maradona scored his infamous "Hand of God" goal before going an mazy run to score one of the all time World Cup goals. It was a tense matchup even back then due to the military conflict between England and Argentina. This conflict may go back to before many fans were born but there is certainly no love lost between these teams when it comes to football.
England made it to the semi final with an athletic, transition based system under Thomas Tuchel. This has been effective against opponents who play more openly, such as Croatia and Mexico while struggling more against opponents who are able to match them physically, such as DR Congo and Norway. When they have the ball and are looking for a goal, they have looked to Jude Bellingham and Harry Kane to provide the big moments. They have generally provided said moments but doubts remain over the general performances.
Argentina meanwhile have built a team around Lionel Messi, winning all three group games before playing tight knockout games against Cape Verde, Egypt and Switzerland. They took the lead early in two of those games but they have not been the strongest at holding on to a lead. They have slowed the tempo down too much at times but they have also shown an ability to radically escalate the temperature of the match when they need a goal or two.
Both teams have their structural issues. Neither has been able to exert the level of control on games that they would like and both have been vulnerable to transitions from their opponents. Both however have been very strong at playing out their desired game state late into games, with England surviving a late onslaught against Mexico when they had ten men and also shutting up shop in extra time when Norway were chasing an equaliser. Argentina despite looking quite poor at times have dug deep and fought with real determination, never knowing when they're beaten.
This is the kind of game where I can both teams having an opportunity to eke out an advantage but not necessarily holding a compelling advantage. If Argentina score a goal in the first half, I am far from convinced they would be able to hold on to that lead. I would feel similarly about England. Although I can see it being a tight game, I also think there is a component of volatility that may not quite be priced in. England are able to defend a lead if they're putting ten men behind the ball in the closing stages but Argentina is a team that will take whatever risks necessary if they're chasing a game. That's why I see some value both in game total over and both teams to score. I don't think it's going to be a tidy, straightforward affair for either team. I can see it being a bit nervy later on even if one team has a 2-0 lead. I would not be surprised if this turns out to be a game where both teams trade blows but don't quite have enough to land a knockout punch and end up being separated on penalties. I already have futures on penalty shootouts which is why I have the penalty shootout as an optional pick. This game could end up being quite an ugly one compared to last night's.
UFC OKC Sherdog prelim picks
https://www.sherdog.com/news/articles/1/Preview-UFC-Oklahoma-City-prelims-201915
First, four factors dictate whether there is major turnover in the Senate in a midterm election independent of the favorability of the Senate map (due to only one-third of seats being up in any given midterm). Often, as was the case in both 2018 and 2022, is that incumbents are not destined to lose seats, outside of realigning elections in unfavorable maps. This cycle's map favors the GOP, which is why the prediction markets and most forecasters expect a GOP majority in the 2027 Senate. The four factors that prove dangerous to the incumbent party are: first, a recession or cost of living crisis; second, a war; third, a major scandal; and fourth, a sense of betrayal in the voter group that backed the incumbent amongst some portion of their prior electoral coalition. Five midterms feature some combingation of those factors in some significant degree: 1930, 1946, 1958, 1974 and 2006.
Without those factors present in multiple forms, the incumbent party can expect to hold on to seats in states it previously won outside the national margin. When those factors are present, the landscape shifts dramatically. Examining those White House incumbent seats that showed a state-wide election decided by single digits in the prior decade produces the following probabilities: the incumbent White House party lost at least 67% of its incumbent held seats, as much as 85% of its incumbent held seats, and an average of 75% of its incumbent hold seats, rarely upsetting the opposition party in any seat and often losing a surprise or two in seats considered completely safe.