Modelling the 22, 23 and 24-Point Cut-Offs in the Treble Chance

Why does one week’s dividend floor land on 24 points while another week it is 23 or 22? Part of the answer is pure football, but part of it is pure arithmetic: some points totals can be reached by far more combinations of results than others, which structurally affects how many entries cluster around a given tally. Working through a simplified model makes this concrete.

Setting Up a Simplified Scoring Model

To keep the maths manageable, this model uses a simplified version of treble chance scoring across ten selected matches: a score draw (both teams score, level scoreline) is worth 3 points, a no-score draw (0-0) is worth 2 points, and any other result is worth 0 points for this illustration. Real-world coupon scoring systems can vary by operator and have historically included finer gradations, so treat this strictly as a teaching model rather than a claim about any specific coupon’s exact rulebook.

Which Combinations Reach Each Total

Out of ten selections, here are the only ways, under this simplified model, to land on exactly 24, 23 or 22 points.

The pattern count for 22 points is verified by adding the three component combinations: choosing which 2 of 10 matches are score draws and which 8 of the remaining 8 are no-score draws gives 45 patterns; choosing 4 score draws and 5 no-score draws among the rest gives 1,260; and choosing 6 score draws and 2 no-score draws gives a further 1,260. Added together that is 2,565 distinct patterns, noticeably more than the 1,095 patterns available for 24 points.

From Pattern Count to Dividend Floor

More available patterns does not, on its own, guarantee more actual winners in a specific week; that still depends on how likely score draws and no-score draws genuinely are in that round’s fixtures. But it does mean that, all else being equal, a lower points total has structurally more routes by which an entry can reach it, simply because there are more ways to mix and match which of the ten matches contribute which type of result. This is a key reason why dividend floors for the top tier so often sit a few points below the theoretical maximum rather than exactly at it: the sheer combinatorial weight of the lower totals pulls more entries toward them.

Adding a Rough Probability Layer

Pattern counts alone do not capture how likely a score draw actually is in any given match. Using an illustrative historical rate of around 12% for score draws across a typical set of ten selections, modelled with a standard binomial distribution, the chance of getting at least a given number of score draws looks like this.

Reaching 8 score draws out of 10, the pattern that alone reaches 24 points under this model, is vanishingly unlikely in any single week under a realistic score-draw rate. That is precisely why real dividend floors depend so heavily on the mixed combinations, like 6 score draws plus 3 no-score draws, rather than on the single cleanest route to the maximum.

Why 23 Sits Between the Other Two

The middle total in this illustration, 23 points, is a useful example of why these totals cannot simply be ranked by proximity to the maximum. It has 1,740 combinatorial patterns, more than 24 points but fewer than 22 points, placing it in between on pure pattern count. In practice, which of these three totals ends up being the actual paying tier in any given week depends on the specific mix of score draws and no-score draws that genuinely occurred, not on the pattern count alone. The combinatorics explain the structural tendency; the week’s actual football results decide the outcome within that structure.

It is also worth noting that this model treats every selected match as independent and equally likely to produce a score draw, which is a simplification. In reality, some fixtures are far more prone to low-scoring parity than others, for reasons covered elsewhere on this site, such as fixture congestion, pitch condition and match-state psychology late in games. A real points distribution across any given week’s coupon reflects all of those factors layered on top of the basic combinatorics shown here.

What This Means in Practice

• Points totals near the realistic middle of the distribution, rather than the theoretical maximum, are where most genuine competition for the top tier actually happens most weeks.
• A week with unusually few score draws nationally can still produce a workable dividend floor if no-score draws are plentiful instead, because of how many mixed combinations reach the same total.
• Selectors chasing the absolute maximum score are, in combinatorial terms, chasing one of the rarest possible outcomes, not a realistic weekly target.

This model is deliberately simplified to make the arithmetic followable; it is not a working replica of any specific operator’s live scoring system, and none of the probabilities above should be read as a forecast for any actual upcoming round. Treat it as a way of understanding why the published dividend floor moves around from week to week, rather than as a basis for selecting specific matches.

Keep stakes modest and set a budget before looking at a single fixture. Pools coupons are a game of chance intended for adults aged 18 and over, and no amount of combinatorics changes the fundamental uncertainty of a weekend of football results.