It usually takes a few weeks of a new season to iron out the main bugs in updated and new scripts (and why, exactly, are bugs always 'ironed'?) and to get into the swing of knowing what data goes where. This season has been no exception.

If you pootle around the MoS website - and, by pootle, I mean search - you'll find a number of posts using the terms 'overround' and 'vig' (or 'vigorish'). Today I want to provide a quick refresher on what those terms mean and why they should be important to you if you ever think about placing wagers of your own.

This week, the TAB's over/under markets went up well before Centrebet's, and Centrebet released theirs over an extended period, which means that the data in the table below spans an atypically long timespan since each market has been recorded as close to its opening as I was able.

It's hard to find a dissenting voice this week amongst the MoS Head-to-Head Tipsters, with even Home Sweet Home tipping against the favourites in only three games.

We noted last year that Adelaide, as far as the MoS Team Rating Systems were concerned, were very unlucky not to progress further in the competition. Their big win over GWS this weekend only served to reinforce that view.

From an accuracy point-of-view, the first round of 2017 was a poor one for the MoS Head-to-Head Tipsters, though that's probably to be expected when only four favourites and an equal-favourite prevail.

We'll need to review our approach to the over/under market this season, I think, since, if this week is a guide, opening markets will be less generously priced.

I'm flipping the order of the sections in the weekly Wagers & Tips blog this year, providing the tips and predictions before the wagers. I think that everyone who comes here is interested in the tips, but only a subset are interested in the wagers as well. And, populism is all the rage right now ...

Today, a couple of new voices share their analysis here on MoS: sport lovers Declan Walpole and PhD student, Robert Nguyen, who've teamed up to have crack at rating the AFLW Teams after two full rounds, and using their ratings to predict the results for the upcoming round.

If history chooses to repeat one of the themes of 2016, please let it be the largely unembarrassing performances of MoS' bookmaker-input free Tipsters and Predictors, and the resultant profitability of the MoS Funds. (I'd wish for something grander on the global stage, but I suspect that's just courting disappointment.)

Both ChiPS and MARS expected the Swans to prevail in the Grand Final, so their loss saw them drop Ratings Points (RPs) on both Systems. Regardless, the Swans end the season as the top-rated team by ChiPS and MARS, while the Dogs finish 7th.

So, MoSSBODS finishes the season by tipping the winner of the Grand Final to move it three tips clear of BKB at season's end with a score of 152 from 207 (73%).

This year, I introduced MoSSBODS in the hope that it would, without any Bookmaker input at all, perform creditably enough in picking winners, help Investors make a little money, and, occasionally, make contrarian but, in hindsight, prescient predictions.

Neither ChiPS nor MARS predicted either of the weekend's upsets, with the result that both of the underdog victors gained Rating Points (RPs) on the two Systems.

Clearly, not an ideal weekend for Investors as all four wagers were trousered by the Bookmaker, but it'd be a stone-cold heart that didn't rejoice at least a little at the results, especially in the Dogs' progress to a Grand Final after so, so long.

Last weekend, both the Head-to-Head and Line Funds passed entirely on proceedings, leaving the Over/Under Fund to provide the round's only wagering action. This weekend, the opposite is true, and Investors find themselves with two head-to-head bets, two line bets, and no over/under bets at all.

There's no movement at all in the ranking of any of the 18 teams after the second week of the Finals, despite some fairly sizable re-ratings from MARS, at least.

Experience has taught me, more than once, that it's unwise to crow too loudly or too long when your statistical modelling approach has proven prescient. Nonetheless, history shows that simple stats modelling here on MoS has highlighted, for example, Freo's fatal flaws last year well before they bowed out of the Finals, and similarly has questioned the credentials of the Roos this season after they went 9 and 0.

If MoSSBODS is anywhere near the mark, we're in for a couple of very close games this weekend, closer even than is implied by the roughly 2-goal handicaps that bookmakers have set for these games.

Sure, any win's a good win in a Final, but the opinion of ELO-style team rating systems is influenced more by margins than results.