I don't think there is a patten to be unearthed. People forget there is a massive element of luck in an individual game which makes it all the more entertaining. After all how many other games can you win by just scoring one point?
My point is whether it's better to back a team higher in the league that's gone off the boil (think Chelsea) or a lower team that hit a run of recent form (Swansea springs to mind).
I'd say there can be a massive element of luck in a game, but it's not mandatory. You raised the point some time back about certain analysts disregarding 1-0 wins I think, and I certainly see the validity in that.
Backing a higher team without form or lower with form?.. If you were a certain type then you'd say class was permanent and back that way regardless I suppose. I'm not a betting person of any degree, but I'd guess the bookies in your example will still shorten the odds of Chelsea over Swansea, after all other factors have been taken in consideration.
What happened to Leicester's matchday odds in their title winning season? Did the bookies follow the then recent evidence and make them favorites as the season progressed, or were they still classed as underdogs when playing the likes of Man Utd?