AFL Early Rounds: How Much Does Last Season's Ladder Still Count?
Last season's ladder still predicts the opening rounds of the AFL. The market leans on it slightly too hard in Round 1, and that is where the value turns.
Written by Tahlia WhitmoreAFL Predictions specialist
- Sport
- AFL
- Question
- In the opening rounds of an AFL season, how often does the club that finished higher last year win, and does the price over- or under-rate it?
- Sample
- AFL premiership matches 2000-2024 (2020 excluded), 4,731 matches
- Last year's higher finisher winning in Round 159.1%
- Last year's higher finisher winning, Round 18 on61.7%
- Return backing it in Round 1−13.3%
- Games analysed4,468
Every autumn the same habit comes back: look at last year's ladder and assume it tells you who wins the opening rounds. I wanted to know how much of that holds up. Across 4,468 home-and-away games from 2000-2024 (2020 excluded), the club that finished higher the previous season won 61.4%. In Round 1 that slipped to 59.1%, and from Round 18 on it sat at 61.7%.
The more interesting part is the price. In priced Round 1 games the higher finisher was rated at 61.1% but won 55.3%, and backing it returned −13.3%. The ladder still counts in the opening weeks. The market just counts it a little too heavily before a ball has been bounced in anger. My weekly reasoning on top of this lives on my AFL betting tips page. This study is about the calendar alone.
Window 1Last year's ladder holds steady, and big gaps matter more
The lower line is every game. It barely moves: 59.1% in Round 1, 60.3% in Rounds 2-3, a peak of 62.9% in Rounds 7-11, then 61.7% from Round 18 on. Last season's order is a stubborn signal. Lists turn over, coaches change and the pre-season hype machine runs hot, but the better club from last year still wins more often than not.
The upper line is where I pay attention. When the higher finisher ended 8+ places clear, it won 59.7% of 62 games in Round 1, which is almost no better than the average game. By Rounds 2-3 that jumped to 72.8%. Round 1 flattens even the widest gaps. You get fresh legs, unfamiliar match-ups and sides that have not yet shown what their summer actually built.
View the data: side that finished higher last season: win % by round
| All games | Finished 8+ places higher | |
|---|---|---|
| Round 1 | 59.1% | 59.7% |
| Rounds 2-3 | 60.3% | 72.8% |
| Rounds 4-6 | 59.7% | 67.2% |
| Rounds 7-11 | 62.9% | 73.7% |
| Rounds 12-17 | 61.6% | 70.5% |
| Round 18 on | 61.7% | 73.6% |
The top 4 against clubs that finished 13th or lower tells the same story. The top-4 side won 68.8% of 149 games in Rounds 1-6, 77.3% in Rounds 7-17 and 80.6% from Round 18 on. Be careful with that late figure, though. By then the current ladder is doing some of the work, so it is not purely last season talking.
Window 2Fair odds shorten from 1.69 to 1.59 by midseason
The table turns those win rates into fair odds. Round 1 carries a fair price of 1.69 for last year's higher finisher. Rounds 7-11 sit at 1.59, and the back half settles at 1.62. Those are the prices you would need just to break even before any margin is taken out.
The main caveat sits in the Round 1 row. There are only 203 games, and the 95% range runs from 52.3-65.9%. That is wide enough to swallow most of the story. The later blocks have far more games behind them, so their ranges are tighter and I trust them more.
| Rounds | Games | Won | 95% range | Fair odds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Round 1 | 203 | 59.1% | 52.3-65.9% | 1.69 |
| Rounds 2-3 | 402 | 60.3% | 55.5-65.1% | 1.66 |
| Rounds 4-6 | 601 | 59.7% | 55.8-63.6% | 1.68 |
| Rounds 7-11 | 989 | 62.9% | 59.9-65.9% | 1.59 |
| Rounds 12-17 | 1,125 | 61.6% | 58.8-64.4% | 1.62 |
| Round 18 on | 1,148 | 61.7% | 58.9-64.5% | 1.62 |
Window 3Round 1 is where price runs ahead of results
This chart pits the market's rating against what actually happened. In Round 1 the higher finisher was priced at 61.1% and won 55.3% of 114 games. That is the widest gap on the board, and it runs the wrong way for anyone backing reputation. By Rounds 2-3 the two figures sit close together, at 64.6% priced and 63.3% won.
From there the market is close to the mark. Rounds 7-11 even tip slightly the other way, with 64.9% priced against 66.1% won. Rounds 12-17 and Round 18 on are within a point or so. The bookmakers adjust quickly once there is current form to price. The overreach happens only in the opening round, when last year's ladder is the loudest information they have.
View the data: last season's higher finisher: priced vs won
| Priced | Won | 95% range | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Round 1 (114 games) | 61.1% | 55.3% | ±9.1 |
| Rounds 2-3 (225 games) | 64.6% | 63.3% | ±6.3 |
| Rounds 4-6 (336 games) | 63.4% | 63.1% | ±5.2 |
| Rounds 7-11 (544 games) | 64.9% | 66.1% | ±4 |
| Rounds 12-17 (642 games) | 63.0% | 62.5% | ±3.7 |
| Round 18 on (725 games) | 61.6% | 61.9% | ±3.5 |
Window 4Backing the lower finisher only paid in Round 1
Flat-stake returns put the gap in money terms. In Round 1, backing last season's higher finisher returned −13.3%, while the lower finisher returned +13.2%. That is the only block on the chart with a positive bar. Everywhere else both sides lose, which is what you expect once the margin bites.
Rounds 7-11 are the mirror image of the opening week. The higher finisher returned −3.6% against −12.2% for the lower finisher, so the better club from last year was the less costly side to hold. Rounds 2-3 and Round 18 on are close to a coin flip between two losing options.
View the data: flat-stake return backing each side, by round
| Last season's higher finisher | Lower finisher | |
|---|---|---|
| Round 1 | −13.3% | +13.2% |
| Rounds 2-3 | −8.0% | −7.5% |
| Rounds 4-6 | −7.2% | −10.9% |
| Rounds 7-11 | −3.6% | −12.2% |
| Rounds 12-17 | −5.2% | −9.9% |
| Round 18 on | −8.0% | −8.3% |
None of this is a system. Returns a few points either side of zero can come from chance alone, and the Round 1 sample is thin. What I take from it is a lean, not a rule. In the opening round I am more willing to side with the club the ladder underrates, especially where the ground and early-season conditions suit its contested game.
Best window
- Question Round 1 reputation
In priced Round 1 games, last year's higher finisher was rated at 61.1% but won 55.3%. Demand a reason beyond the old ladder before taking the shorter price.
- Respect big gaps after Round 1
Sides that finished 8+ places higher won 59.7% in Round 1, then 72.8% in Rounds 2-3. Wide gaps start to bite from the second week.
- Favour pedigree in midseason
In Rounds 7-11 backing last season's higher finisher returned −3.6% against −12.2% for the lower finisher. It was the least costly side to be on, not a profitable one.
Questions bettors ask
How often does last season's higher AFL finisher win in Round 1?
Across 203 Round 1 games from 2000-2024 (2020 excluded), it won 59.1%. That works out to fair odds of 1.69, although the 95% range is wide at 52.3-65.9%.
Is it profitable to back last year's better AFL team early in the season?
Not on these records. Backing the higher finisher returned −13.3% in Round 1 and −8.0% in Rounds 2-3. Only the lower finisher in Round 1 showed a positive return, of +13.2%.
Do last season's top 4 sides beat the bottom clubs in the early rounds?
Usually, but less reliably than later on. Against clubs that finished 13th or lower, the top-4 side won 68.8% of games in Rounds 1-6, compared with 80.6% from Round 18 on.
I'm Tahlia Whitmore, and I write the weekly AFL predictions at fixedmatches.vip — where ground size, travel and contested ball matter more than the ladder ever lets on.
View profile →
