Match Analysis
Friday 12 June 2026 · AI-driven form analysis
Other
leagueUSA
Utah United
Home
Flatirons Rush
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Utah United average 1.5 goals scored and concede 0.8 per game. Flatirons Rush average 1.0 scored and 2.3 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Utah United
At home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 0.75 goals conceded per game.
Flatirons Rush
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Utah United
Home
Flatirons Rush
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Utah United attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Utah United defense is strong at 0.75 goals conceded per game.
Flatirons Rush attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Flatirons Rush defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Utah United hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Utah United have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 72% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 78/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
78/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 69/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 78/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Utah United strong attack
Utah United stable defense
Utah United non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 16
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 20
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 33
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Lansing City Football
Home
Kalamazoo FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Kalamazoo FC have the clearer attacking edge at 3.8 goals per game, while Lansing City Football concede 4.5 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Lansing City Football
At home, they average 0.75 goals scored and 4.50 goals conceded per game.
Kalamazoo FC
Away from home, they average 3.75 goals scored and 2.25 goals conceded per game.
Lansing City Football
Home
Kalamazoo FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Lansing City Football attack is weak at 0.75 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Lansing City Football defense is weak at 4.50 goals conceded per game.
Kalamazoo FC attack is strong at 3.75 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Kalamazoo FC defense is weak at 2.25 goals conceded per game.
Kalamazoo FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 85/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Selection Score
85/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 76/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 85/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Kalamazoo FC strong attack
Kalamazoo FC scored in last 5
Lansing City Football concessions at weak rate
Lansing City Football conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 12
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
San Juan SC
Home
Project 51O
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Project 51O have the clearer attacking edge at 3.8 goals per game, while San Juan SC concede 3.5 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
San Juan SC
At home, they average 1.25 goals scored and 3.50 goals conceded per game.
Project 51O
Away from home, they average 3.75 goals scored and 1.75 goals conceded per game.
San Juan SC
Home
Project 51O
Away
Supporting Reasoning
San Juan SC attack is average at 1.25 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
San Juan SC defense is weak at 3.50 goals conceded per game.
Project 51O attack is strong at 3.75 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Project 51O defense is weak at 1.75 goals conceded per game.
Project 51O hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. Project 51O have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Project 51O have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
92/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 82/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. Project 51O have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Project 51O strong attack
Project 51O scored in last 5
San Juan SC concessions at weak rate
San Juan SC conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Capo
Home
FC Tucson
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Capo average 2.0 goals scored and concede 2.6 per game. FC Tucson average 0.8 scored and 1.0 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Capo
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 2.60 goals conceded per game.
FC Tucson
Away from home, they average 0.75 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Capo
Home
FC Tucson
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Capo attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Capo defense is weak at 2.60 goals conceded per game.
FC Tucson attack is weak at 0.75 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
FC Tucson defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Capo hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
FC Tucson have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 71% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 70/100. Capo have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Capo have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
70/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 75/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 70/100. Capo have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Capo strong attack
Capo scored in last 5
FC Tucson concessions at weak rate
FC Tucson conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 4
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 40
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Central Coast Mariners Youth
Home
Hakoah Sydney City East
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.0 (home) and 2.0 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Central Coast Mariners Youth
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Hakoah Sydney City East
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Central Coast Mariners Youth
Home
Hakoah Sydney City East
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Central Coast Mariners Youth attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Central Coast Mariners Youth defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Hakoah Sydney City East attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Hakoah Sydney City East defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Away team scored in only 1/5 recent games — BTTS or high-goal markets carry extra risk here.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 2.5 Goals — 90% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
96/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 90/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Central Coast Mariners Youth attack strength 100%
Hakoah Sydney City East attack strength 100%
Central Coast Mariners Youth scoring form 100%
Hakoah Sydney City East scoring form 100%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 100%
Match has defensive vulnerability
Profile A (both attack >=100%) or Profile B (attack >=100% and opponent defense <=40%) matches
Market Fit Scores
Over 2.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Central Coast Mariners Youth have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 65
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Darwin Olympic
Home
Garuda FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Garuda FC have the clearer attacking edge at 1.3 goals per game, while Darwin Olympic concede 2.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Darwin Olympic
At home, they average 4.33 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Garuda FC
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 6.00 goals conceded per game.
Darwin Olympic
Home
Garuda FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Darwin Olympic attack is strong at 4.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Darwin Olympic defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Garuda FC attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Garuda FC defense is weak at 6.00 goals conceded per game.
Darwin Olympic hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Away team scored in only 2/5 recent games — BTTS or high-goal markets carry extra risk here.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 2.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 75/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
75/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 74/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 75/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Darwin Olympic attack strength 100%
Garuda FC attack strength 67%
Darwin Olympic scoring form 67%
Garuda FC scoring form 67%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 100%
Match has defensive vulnerability
Profile A (both attack >=100%) or Profile B (attack >=100% and opponent defense <=40%) matches
Market Fit Scores
Over 2.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Manly United
Home
Sydney United 58
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Manly United
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Sydney United 58
Away from home, they average 0.80 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Manly United
Home
Sydney United 58
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Manly United attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Manly United defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Sydney United 58 attack is weak at 0.80 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Sydney United 58 defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 82% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 86/100. Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
Selection Score
86/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 86/100. Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
Manly United attack stays below 100%
Sydney United 58 attack stays below 100%
Manly United Over 2.5 rate limit
Sydney United 58 Over 2.5 rate limit
Manly United recent scoring is not high volume
Sydney United 58 recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 16
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Win <65
Below 65% by 19
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 22
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Brunswick City
Home
Eltham Redbacks
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Brunswick City have the clearer attacking edge at 3.0 goals per game, while Eltham Redbacks concede 2.5 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Brunswick City
At home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Eltham Redbacks
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Brunswick City
Home
Eltham Redbacks
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Brunswick City attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Brunswick City defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Eltham Redbacks attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Eltham Redbacks defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Brunswick City hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Brunswick City have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 86/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
86/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 85/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 86/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Brunswick City strong attack
Brunswick City stable defense
Brunswick City non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Brunswick City have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Campbelltown City
Home
West Torrens Birkalla
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.4 (home) and 1.4 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Campbelltown City
At home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
West Torrens Birkalla
Away from home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Campbelltown City
Home
West Torrens Birkalla
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Campbelltown City attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Campbelltown City defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
West Torrens Birkalla attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
West Torrens Birkalla defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
West Torrens Birkalla have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 66% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 81/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Selection Score
81/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 76/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 81/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Campbelltown City strong attack
Campbelltown City scored in last 5
West Torrens Birkalla concessions at weak rate
West Torrens Birkalla conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 9
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 27
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Marconi Stallions
Home
Sydney FC Youth
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Marconi Stallions
At home, they average 0.80 goals scored and 0.40 goals conceded per game.
Sydney FC Youth
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Marconi Stallions
Home
Sydney FC Youth
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Marconi Stallions attack is weak at 0.80 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Marconi Stallions defense is strong at 0.40 goals conceded per game.
Sydney FC Youth attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Sydney FC Youth defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Marconi Stallions have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
74/100
Runner Up
Win · 66/100
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Marconi Stallions attack stays below 100%
Sydney FC Youth attack stays below 100%
Marconi Stallions Over 2.5 rate limit
Sydney FC Youth Over 2.5 rate limit
Marconi Stallions recent scoring is not high volume
Sydney FC Youth recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Win ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 7
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 13
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 28
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Blacktown Spartans
Home
Bankstown City Lions
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Bankstown City Lions have the clearer attacking edge at 1.7 goals per game, while Blacktown Spartans concede 1.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Blacktown Spartans
At home, they average 4.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Bankstown City Lions
Away from home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Blacktown Spartans
Home
Bankstown City Lions
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Blacktown Spartans attack is strong at 4.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Blacktown Spartans defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Bankstown City Lions attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Bankstown City Lions defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Blacktown Spartans hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Blacktown Spartans have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 88/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Blacktown Spartans scoring form 100%
Bankstown City Lions scoring form 100%
Blacktown Spartans attack strength 100%
Bankstown City Lions attack strength 84%
Neither team attack < 70%
Blacktown Spartans defense control
Bankstown City Lions defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 100%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Blacktown Spartans have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Eastern United FC
Home
Adelaide Olympic
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Eastern United FC
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Adelaide Olympic
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Eastern United FC
Home
Adelaide Olympic
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Eastern United FC attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Eastern United FC defense is strong at 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Adelaide Olympic attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Adelaide Olympic defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Eastern United FC have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Home defense has been very tight recently (avg 0.67 conceded) — goals against them are harder to come by.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 75/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
75/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 75/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Eastern United FC scoring form 67%
Adelaide Olympic scoring form 100%
Eastern United FC attack strength 50%
Adelaide Olympic attack strength 67%
Neither team attack < 70%
Eastern United FC defense control
Adelaide Olympic defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 67%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Win <65
Below 65% by 14
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 15
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 33
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Melbourne Knights
Home
Brunswick Juventus FC
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Melbourne Knights
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Brunswick Juventus FC
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Melbourne Knights
Home
Brunswick Juventus FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Melbourne Knights attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Melbourne Knights defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Brunswick Juventus FC attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Brunswick Juventus FC defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 65/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
65/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 65/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Melbourne Knights attack stays below 100%
Brunswick Juventus FC attack stays below 100%
Melbourne Knights Over 2.5 rate limit
Brunswick Juventus FC Over 2.5 rate limit
Melbourne Knights recent scoring is not high volume
Brunswick Juventus FC recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 16
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Win <65
Below 65% by 23
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 29
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Adelaide Comets
Home
West Adelaide
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output and consistent scoring trends. This creates a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Adelaide Comets
At home, they average 2.20 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
West Adelaide
Away from home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 2.40 goals conceded per game.
Adelaide Comets
Home
West Adelaide
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Adelaide Comets attack is strong at 2.20 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Adelaide Comets defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
West Adelaide attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
West Adelaide defense is weak at 2.40 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 2.5 Goals — 88% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
96/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 92/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Adelaide Comets attack strength 100%
West Adelaide attack strength 100%
Adelaide Comets scoring form 100%
West Adelaide scoring form 100%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 90%
Match has defensive vulnerability
Profile A (both attack >=100%) or Profile B (attack >=100% and opponent defense <=40%) matches
Market Fit Scores
Over 2.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Adelaide Comets have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 65
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Fountain Gate FC
Home
Azam FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Azam FC averages 2.0 goals per game while the opponent concedes 2.0 — a clear attacking dominance in recent form.
Fountain Gate FC
At home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Azam FC
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Fountain Gate FC
Home
Azam FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Fountain Gate FC attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
Fountain Gate FC defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Azam FC attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Azam FC defense is strong at 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Azam FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Azam FC have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The weaker team may set up in a compact defensive block and frustrate through rare counter-attacks.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Azam FC to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Azam FC show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinAzam FC show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Under 3.5 · 72/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Azam FC show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Azam FC strong attack
Azam FC stable defense
Azam FC non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Win Primary
Under 3.5 ≥65
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Azam FC have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 38
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Coastal Union
Home
Namungo FC
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Coastal Union
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Namungo FC
Away from home, they average 0.67 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Coastal Union
Home
Namungo FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Coastal Union attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Coastal Union defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Namungo FC attack is weak at 0.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Namungo FC defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Coastal Union have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Coastal Union to Win — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 68/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
WinNo team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
68/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 71/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 68/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Coastal Union strong attack
Coastal Union stable defense
Coastal Union non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Win Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 15
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Isloch
Home
Naftan Novopolotsk
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Isloch averages 3.0 goals per game while the opponent concedes 4.0 — a clear attacking dominance in recent form.
Isloch
At home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Naftan Novopolotsk
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 4.00 goals conceded per game.
Isloch
Home
Naftan Novopolotsk
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Isloch attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Isloch defense is strong at 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Naftan Novopolotsk attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Naftan Novopolotsk defense is weak at 4.00 goals conceded per game.
Isloch hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Isloch have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The weaker team may set up in a compact defensive block and frustrate through rare counter-attacks.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Isloch to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 91/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
WinNo team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
91/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 85/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 91/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Isloch strong attack
Isloch stable defense
Isloch non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Win Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Isloch have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Olympic Club de Safi
Home
KACM
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Olympic Club de Safi
At home, they average 0.60 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
KACM
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Olympic Club de Safi
Home
KACM
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Olympic Club de Safi attack is weak at 0.60 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Olympic Club de Safi defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
KACM attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
KACM defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 86/100. Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
Selection Score
86/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 86/100. Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
Olympic Club de Safi attack stays below 100%
KACM attack stays below 100%
Olympic Club de Safi Over 2.5 rate limit
KACM Over 2.5 rate limit
Olympic Club de Safi recent scoring is not high volume
KACM recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Win <65
Below 65% by 20
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 26
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 38
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FUS Rabat
Home
MAS Fes
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
FUS Rabat
At home, they average 0.80 goals scored and 0.60 goals conceded per game.
MAS Fes
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
FUS Rabat
Home
MAS Fes
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FUS Rabat attack is weak at 0.80 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
FUS Rabat defense is strong at 0.60 goals conceded per game.
MAS Fes attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
MAS Fes defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 82% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
74/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FUS Rabat attack stays below 100%
MAS Fes attack stays below 100%
FUS Rabat Over 2.5 rate limit
MAS Fes Over 2.5 rate limit
FUS Rabat recent scoring is not high volume
MAS Fes recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 3
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 14
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Win <65
Below 65% by 18
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 33
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FK Tukums 2000
Home
BFC Daugavpils
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
FK Tukums 2000
At home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
BFC Daugavpils
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
FK Tukums 2000
Home
BFC Daugavpils
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FK Tukums 2000 attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
FK Tukums 2000 defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
BFC Daugavpils attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
BFC Daugavpils defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
BFC Daugavpils have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Away team scored in only 2/5 recent games — BTTS or high-goal markets carry extra risk here.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 83/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
83/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 83/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
FK Tukums 2000 scoring form 100%
BFC Daugavpils scoring form 100%
FK Tukums 2000 attack strength 67%
BFC Daugavpils attack strength 50%
Neither team attack < 70%
FK Tukums 2000 defense control
BFC Daugavpils defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 100%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Win <65
Below 65% by 8
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 8
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 15
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 16
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Iberia 1999
Home
Spaeri
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
FC Iberia 1999
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 0.75 goals conceded per game.
Spaeri
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
FC Iberia 1999
Home
Spaeri
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FC Iberia 1999 attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
FC Iberia 1999 defense is strong at 0.75 goals conceded per game.
Spaeri attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Spaeri defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
FC Iberia 1999 have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Home defense has been very tight recently (avg 0.75 conceded) — goals against them are harder to come by.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 81/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
81/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 81/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Iberia 1999 scoring form 100%
Spaeri scoring form 100%
FC Iberia 1999 attack strength 50%
Spaeri attack strength 50%
Neither team attack < 70%
FC Iberia 1999 defense control
Spaeri defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 75%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Win <65
Below 65% by 14
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 15
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FC KTP
Home
EIF
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.8 (home) and 1.2 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
FC KTP
At home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
EIF
Away from home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 1.20 goals conceded per game.
FC KTP
Home
EIF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FC KTP attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
FC KTP defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
EIF attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
EIF defense is average at 1.20 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
FC KTP have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 63% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 69/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
69/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 72/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 69/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
FC KTP strong attack
FC KTP stable defense
FC KTP non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 Primary
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 3
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FK Panevezys
Home
FK Transinvest
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
FK Panevezys average 1.0 goals scored and concede 2.2 per game. FK Transinvest average 1.6 scored and 1.4 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
FK Panevezys
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.20 goals conceded per game.
FK Transinvest
Away from home, they average 1.60 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
FK Panevezys
Home
FK Transinvest
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FK Panevezys attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
FK Panevezys defense is weak at 2.20 goals conceded per game.
FK Transinvest attack is average at 1.60 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
FK Transinvest defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
FK Transinvest hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
FK Transinvest have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 69% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 83/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Selection Score
83/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 74/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 83/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
FK Transinvest strong attack
FK Transinvest scored in last 5
FK Panevezys concessions at weak rate
FK Panevezys conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 6
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
JaePS
Home
PK-35 Helsinki
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
JaePS average 0.6 goals scored and concede 2.2 per game. PK-35 Helsinki average 1.6 scored and 0.2 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
JaePS
At home, they average 0.60 goals scored and 2.20 goals conceded per game.
PK-35 Helsinki
Away from home, they average 1.60 goals scored and 0.20 goals conceded per game.
JaePS
Home
PK-35 Helsinki
Away
Supporting Reasoning
JaePS attack is weak at 0.60 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
JaePS defense is weak at 2.20 goals conceded per game.
PK-35 Helsinki attack is average at 1.60 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
PK-35 Helsinki defense is strong at 0.20 goals conceded per game.
PK-35 Helsinki hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
PK-35 Helsinki have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 88/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
88/100
Runner Up
Under 3.5 · 88/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 88/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
PK-35 Helsinki strong attack
PK-35 Helsinki stable defense
PK-35 Helsinki non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Under 3.5 ≥65
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 23
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
PK-35 Vantaa W
Home
KuPS W
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
KuPS W have the clearer attacking edge at 3.0 goals per game, while PK-35 Vantaa W concede 3.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
PK-35 Vantaa W
At home, they average 0.60 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
KuPS W
Away from home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 1.60 goals conceded per game.
PK-35 Vantaa W
Home
KuPS W
Away
Supporting Reasoning
PK-35 Vantaa W attack is weak at 0.60 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
PK-35 Vantaa W defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
KuPS W attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
KuPS W defense is weak at 1.60 goals conceded per game.
KuPS W hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. KuPS W have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selected Market
Over 1.5KuPS W have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
92/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 82/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. KuPS W have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
KuPS W strong attack
KuPS W scored in last 5
PK-35 Vantaa W concessions at weak rate
PK-35 Vantaa W conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Inter II
Home
FC Jazz
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.0 (home) and 1.4 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
FC Inter II
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
FC Jazz
Away from home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.20 goals conceded per game.
FC Inter II
Home
FC Jazz
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FC Inter II attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
FC Inter II defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
FC Jazz attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
FC Jazz defense is average at 1.20 goals conceded per game.
FC Inter II hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
FC Jazz have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 83% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 80/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
FC Inter II scoring form 100%
FC Jazz scoring form 100%
FC Inter II attack strength 100%
FC Jazz attack strength 70%
Neither team attack < 70%
FC Inter II defense control
FC Jazz defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 100%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
FC Inter II have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 6
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
SalPa
Home
KuPS Akatemia
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.4 (home) and 1.8 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
SalPa
At home, they average 2.40 goals scored and 2.60 goals conceded per game.
KuPS Akatemia
Away from home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 2.60 goals conceded per game.
SalPa
Home
KuPS Akatemia
Away
Supporting Reasoning
SalPa attack is strong at 2.40 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
SalPa defense is weak at 2.60 goals conceded per game.
KuPS Akatemia attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
KuPS Akatemia defense is weak at 2.60 goals conceded per game.
SalPa hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 88% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. SalPa have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selected Market
Over 1.5SalPa have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
92/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 87/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. SalPa have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
SalPa strong attack
SalPa scored in last 5
KuPS Akatemia concessions at weak rate
KuPS Akatemia conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 12
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Olympic Niamey
Home
Sahel
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Olympic Niamey
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Sahel
Away from home, they average 0.50 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Olympic Niamey
Home
Sahel
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Olympic Niamey attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Olympic Niamey defense is strong at 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Sahel attack is weak at 0.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Sahel defense is strong at 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Olympic Niamey hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
74/100
Runner Up
Win · 71/100
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Olympic Niamey attack stays below 100%
Sahel attack stays below 100%
Olympic Niamey Over 2.5 rate limit
Sahel Over 2.5 rate limit
Olympic Niamey recent scoring is not high volume
Sahel recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Win ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 10
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 23
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Belshina Bobruisk
Home
BATE Borisov
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Belshina Bobruisk
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
BATE Borisov
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Belshina Bobruisk
Home
BATE Borisov
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Belshina Bobruisk attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Belshina Bobruisk defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
BATE Borisov attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
BATE Borisov defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Belshina Bobruisk hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 75/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
75/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 75/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Belshina Bobruisk scoring form 67%
BATE Borisov scoring form 100%
Belshina Bobruisk attack strength 100%
BATE Borisov attack strength 50%
Neither team attack < 70%
Belshina Bobruisk defense control
BATE Borisov defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 83%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 4
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Win <65
Below 65% by 13
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 31
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Aaland United W
Home
HJK Helsinki W
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output and consistent scoring trends. This creates a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Aaland United W
At home, they average 2.80 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
HJK Helsinki W
Away from home, they average 3.80 goals scored and 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Aaland United W
Home
HJK Helsinki W
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Aaland United W attack is strong at 2.80 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Aaland United W defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
HJK Helsinki W attack is strong at 3.80 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
HJK Helsinki W defense is strong at 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
HJK Helsinki W have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The weaker team may set up in a compact defensive block and frustrate through rare counter-attacks.
Away defense is well-organized (avg 0.6 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 2.5 Goals — 91% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
96/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 86/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Aaland United W attack strength 100%
HJK Helsinki W attack strength 100%
Aaland United W scoring form 100%
HJK Helsinki W scoring form 100%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 90%
Match has defensive vulnerability
Profile A (both attack >=100%) or Profile B (attack >=100% and opponent defense <=40%) matches
Market Fit Scores
Over 2.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
HJK Helsinki W have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Win ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 65
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Dziugas Telsiai
Home
FA Siauliai
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.4 (home) and 1.8 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Dziugas Telsiai
At home, they average 2.40 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
FA Siauliai
Away from home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Dziugas Telsiai
Home
FA Siauliai
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Dziugas Telsiai attack is strong at 2.40 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Dziugas Telsiai defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
FA Siauliai attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
FA Siauliai defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Dziugas Telsiai hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Dziugas Telsiai have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 65% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 80/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Dziugas Telsiai scoring form 80%
FA Siauliai scoring form 100%
Dziugas Telsiai attack strength 100%
FA Siauliai attack strength 90%
Neither team attack < 70%
Dziugas Telsiai defense control
FA Siauliai defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 70%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Dziugas Telsiai have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 8
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Follo
Home
Kjelsaas
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Kjelsaas have the clearer attacking edge at 2.5 goals per game, while Follo concede 2.3 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Follo
At home, they average 0.67 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Kjelsaas
Away from home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Follo
Home
Kjelsaas
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Follo attack is weak at 0.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Follo defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Kjelsaas attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Kjelsaas defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Kjelsaas hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Kjelsaas have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Kjelsaas show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Kjelsaas show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 73/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Kjelsaas show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Kjelsaas strong attack
Kjelsaas stable defense
Kjelsaas non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Kjelsaas have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FK Liepaja
Home
SK Super Nova
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
FK Liepaja averages 2.5 goals per game while the opponent concedes 1.7 — a clear attacking dominance in recent form.
FK Liepaja
At home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
SK Super Nova
Away from home, they average 0.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
FK Liepaja
Home
SK Super Nova
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FK Liepaja attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
FK Liepaja defense is strong at 0.50 goals conceded per game.
SK Super Nova attack is weak at 0.33 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
SK Super Nova defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
FK Liepaja hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
FK Liepaja have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The weaker team may set up in a compact defensive block and frustrate through rare counter-attacks.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: FK Liepaja to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. FK Liepaja show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinFK Liepaja show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. FK Liepaja show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
FK Liepaja strong attack
FK Liepaja stable defense
FK Liepaja non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Win Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
FK Liepaja have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 10
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Zalgiris Vilnius
Home
Riteriai
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Zalgiris Vilnius show the better attacking return at 1.6 goals per game compared with Riteriai at 0.4, but the gap is not wide enough to call this complete dominance.
Zalgiris Vilnius
At home, they average 1.60 goals scored and 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Riteriai
Away from home, they average 0.40 goals scored and 2.60 goals conceded per game.
Zalgiris Vilnius
Home
Riteriai
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Zalgiris Vilnius attack is average at 1.60 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Zalgiris Vilnius defense is weak at 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Riteriai attack is weak at 0.40 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Riteriai defense is weak at 2.60 goals conceded per game.
Zalgiris Vilnius hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 75% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 83/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Selection Score
83/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 67/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 83/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Zalgiris Vilnius strong attack
Zalgiris Vilnius scored in last 5
Riteriai concessions at weak rate
Riteriai conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 9
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 13
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 14
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Varhaug
Home
Viking 2
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Varhaug
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Viking 2
Away from home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Varhaug
Home
Viking 2
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Varhaug attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Varhaug defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Viking 2 attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Viking 2 defense is strong at 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Viking 2 hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Viking 2 have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 82/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
82/100
Runner Up
Win · 78/100
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 82/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Varhaug attack stays below 100%
Viking 2 attack stays below 100%
Varhaug Over 2.5 rate limit
Viking 2 Over 2.5 rate limit
Varhaug recent scoring is not high volume
Viking 2 recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Win ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 20
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 28
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 34
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Umeaa
Home
Piteaa
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.3 (home) and 1.5 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Umeaa
At home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Piteaa
Away from home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Umeaa
Home
Piteaa
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Umeaa attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Umeaa defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Piteaa attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Piteaa defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Umeaa have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 63% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 65/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
65/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 65/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Umeaa attack stays below 100%
Piteaa attack stays below 100%
Umeaa Over 2.5 rate limit
Piteaa Over 2.5 rate limit
Umeaa recent scoring is not high volume
Piteaa recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 9
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 27
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Lunds BK
Home
Ariana FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Ariana FC have the clearer attacking edge at 3.7 goals per game, while Lunds BK concede 3.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Lunds BK
At home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Ariana FC
Away from home, they average 3.67 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Lunds BK
Home
Ariana FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Lunds BK attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Lunds BK defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Ariana FC attack is strong at 3.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Ariana FC defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 2.5 Goals — 74% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
96/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 90/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Lunds BK attack strength 100%
Ariana FC attack strength 100%
Lunds BK scoring form 100%
Ariana FC scoring form 100%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 100%
Match has defensive vulnerability
Profile A (both attack >=100%) or Profile B (attack >=100% and opponent defense <=40%) matches
Market Fit Scores
Over 2.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Lunds BK have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 17
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 65
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Stenungsunds IF
Home
Ahlafors IF
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 3.7 (home) and 2.8 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Stenungsunds IF
At home, they average 3.67 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Ahlafors IF
Away from home, they average 2.75 goals scored and 0.75 goals conceded per game.
Stenungsunds IF
Home
Ahlafors IF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Stenungsunds IF attack is strong at 3.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Stenungsunds IF defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Ahlafors IF attack is strong at 2.75 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Ahlafors IF defense is strong at 0.75 goals conceded per game.
Stenungsunds IF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Ahlafors IF have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Away defense is well-organized (avg 0.75 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 2.5 Goals — 69% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 90/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 90/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Stenungsunds IF attack strength 100%
Ahlafors IF attack strength 100%
Stenungsunds IF scoring form 67%
Ahlafors IF scoring form 100%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 88%
Match has defensive vulnerability
Profile A (both attack >=100%) or Profile B (attack >=100% and opponent defense <=40%) matches
Market Fit Scores
Over 2.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Ahlafors IF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 53
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
IFK Karlshamn
Home
Soelvesborgs GOIF
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
IFK Karlshamn
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Soelvesborgs GOIF
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
IFK Karlshamn
Home
Soelvesborgs GOIF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
IFK Karlshamn attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
IFK Karlshamn defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Soelvesborgs GOIF attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Soelvesborgs GOIF defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Soelvesborgs GOIF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 70/100. Soelvesborgs GOIF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Soelvesborgs GOIF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
70/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 66/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 70/100. Soelvesborgs GOIF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Soelvesborgs GOIF strong attack
Soelvesborgs GOIF scored in last 5
IFK Karlshamn concessions at weak rate
IFK Karlshamn conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 1
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Win <65
Below 65% by 5
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 28
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Lilla Torg FF
Home
Staffanstorp United FC
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Lilla Torg FF
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Staffanstorp United FC
Away from home, they average 0.50 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Lilla Torg FF
Home
Staffanstorp United FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Lilla Torg FF attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Lilla Torg FF defense is strong at 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Staffanstorp United FC attack is weak at 0.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Staffanstorp United FC defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Lilla Torg FF have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Lilla Torg FF to Win — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 75/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
WinNo team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
75/100
Runner Up
Under 3.5 · 65/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 75/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Lilla Torg FF strong attack
Lilla Torg FF stable defense
Lilla Torg FF non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Win Primary
Under 3.5 ≥65
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 18
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 32
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
COD Meknes
Home
Renaissance Club Zemamra
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
COD Meknes
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Renaissance Club Zemamra
Away from home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.60 goals conceded per game.
COD Meknes
Home
Renaissance Club Zemamra
Away
Supporting Reasoning
COD Meknes attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
COD Meknes defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Renaissance Club Zemamra attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Renaissance Club Zemamra defense is weak at 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Renaissance Club Zemamra hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 74/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
74/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 74/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
COD Meknes scoring form 80%
Renaissance Club Zemamra scoring form 60%
COD Meknes attack strength 50%
Renaissance Club Zemamra attack strength 70%
Neither team attack < 70%
COD Meknes defense control
Renaissance Club Zemamra defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 70%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 1
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 17
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Win <65
Below 65% by 29
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Kinondoni MC
Home
Tabora United
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Kinondoni MC
At home, they average 0.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Tabora United
Away from home, they average 0.50 goals scored and 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Kinondoni MC
Home
Tabora United
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Kinondoni MC attack is weak at 0.33 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Kinondoni MC defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Tabora United attack is weak at 0.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Tabora United defense is strong at 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Tabora United have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 90/100. Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 90/100. Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
Kinondoni MC attack stays below 100%
Tabora United attack stays below 100%
Kinondoni MC Over 2.5 rate limit
Tabora United Over 2.5 rate limit
Kinondoni MC recent scoring is not high volume
Tabora United recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Win <65
Below 65% by 8
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 28
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 44
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 45
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Oesterlen FF
Home
Nosaby IF
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Oesterlen FF have the clearer attacking edge at 2.5 goals per game, while Nosaby IF concede 3.5 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Oesterlen FF
At home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Nosaby IF
Away from home, they average 0.50 goals scored and 3.50 goals conceded per game.
Oesterlen FF
Home
Nosaby IF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Oesterlen FF attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Oesterlen FF defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Nosaby IF attack is weak at 0.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Nosaby IF defense is weak at 3.50 goals conceded per game.
Oesterlen FF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Oesterlen FF have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Oesterlen FF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Oesterlen FF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Oesterlen FF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Oesterlen FF strong attack
Oesterlen FF stable defense
Oesterlen FF non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Oesterlen FF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Raeppe GOIF
Home
Oskarshamns AIK
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Raeppe GOIF
At home, they average 0.67 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Oskarshamns AIK
Away from home, they average 0.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Raeppe GOIF
Home
Oskarshamns AIK
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Raeppe GOIF attack is weak at 0.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Raeppe GOIF defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Oskarshamns AIK attack is weak at 0.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Oskarshamns AIK defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 82% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
74/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Raeppe GOIF attack stays below 100%
Oskarshamns AIK attack stays below 100%
Raeppe GOIF Over 2.5 rate limit
Oskarshamns AIK Over 2.5 rate limit
Raeppe GOIF recent scoring is not high volume
Oskarshamns AIK recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Win <65
Below 65% by 31
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 39
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Vittsjo GIK W
Home
Kristianstads DFF W
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Vittsjo GIK W hold the stronger defensive numbers at 0.8 goals conceded per game, while Kristianstads DFF W allow 1.8. Any edge in this fixture starts from defensive stability.
Vittsjo GIK W
At home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Kristianstads DFF W
Away from home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Vittsjo GIK W
Home
Kristianstads DFF W
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Vittsjo GIK W attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Vittsjo GIK W defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Kristianstads DFF W attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Kristianstads DFF W defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Vittsjo GIK W have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 70% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 76/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
76/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 72/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 76/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Vittsjo GIK W scoring form 100%
Kristianstads DFF W scoring form 60%
Vittsjo GIK W attack strength 70%
Kristianstads DFF W attack strength 60%
Neither team attack < 70%
Vittsjo GIK W defense control
Kristianstads DFF W defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 60%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 12
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 18
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Dinamo Batumi
Home
Dila Gori
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Dinamo Batumi have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Dila Gori concede 2.5 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Dinamo Batumi
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Dila Gori
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Dinamo Batumi
Home
Dila Gori
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Dinamo Batumi attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Dinamo Batumi defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Dila Gori attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Dila Gori defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Dinamo Batumi hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Dinamo Batumi have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Dinamo Batumi show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Dinamo Batumi show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 70/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Dinamo Batumi show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Dinamo Batumi strong attack
Dinamo Batumi stable defense
Dinamo Batumi non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Dinamo Batumi have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 2
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 28
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Aegir
Home
Breidablik
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Breidablik have the clearer attacking edge at 3.6 goals per game, while Aegir concede 2.4 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Aegir
At home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 2.40 goals conceded per game.
Breidablik
Away from home, they average 3.60 goals scored and 2.80 goals conceded per game.
Aegir
Home
Breidablik
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Aegir attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Aegir defense is weak at 2.40 goals conceded per game.
Breidablik attack is strong at 3.60 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Breidablik defense is weak at 2.80 goals conceded per game.
Breidablik hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 72% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. Breidablik have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Breidablik have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
92/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 87/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. Breidablik have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Breidablik strong attack
Breidablik scored in last 5
Aegir concessions at weak rate
Aegir conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
IFK Skoevde FK
Home
Grebbestads IF
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Grebbestads IF have the clearer attacking edge at 3.5 goals per game, while IFK Skoevde FK concede 2.5 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
IFK Skoevde FK
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Grebbestads IF
Away from home, they average 3.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
IFK Skoevde FK
Home
Grebbestads IF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
IFK Skoevde FK attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
IFK Skoevde FK defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Grebbestads IF attack is strong at 3.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Grebbestads IF defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Grebbestads IF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Grebbestads IF have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Grebbestads IF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Grebbestads IF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Grebbestads IF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Grebbestads IF strong attack
Grebbestads IF stable defense
Grebbestads IF non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Grebbestads IF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 2
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Al-Salmiyah
Home
Kuwait SC
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.0 (home) and 1.3 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Al-Salmiyah
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Kuwait SC
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Al-Salmiyah
Home
Kuwait SC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Al-Salmiyah attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Al-Salmiyah defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Kuwait SC attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Kuwait SC defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Al-Salmiyah hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 64% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 70/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
70/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 70/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Al-Salmiyah strong attack
Al-Salmiyah stable defense
Al-Salmiyah non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 1
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 40
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Al Nasr
Home
Kazma
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Al Nasr
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Kazma
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Al Nasr
Home
Kazma
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Al Nasr attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Al Nasr defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Kazma attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Kazma defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Away team scored in only 2/5 recent games — BTTS or high-goal markets carry extra risk here.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 73/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
73/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 73/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Al Nasr scoring form 100%
Kazma scoring form 67%
Al Nasr attack strength 50%
Kazma attack strength 50%
Neither team attack < 70%
Al Nasr defense control
Kazma defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 83%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 22
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Win <65
Below 65% by 34
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Wexford FC
Home
Cork City
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Wexford FC average 1.0 goals scored and concede 1.5 per game. Cork City average 2.0 scored and 0.0 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Wexford FC
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Cork City
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Wexford FC
Home
Cork City
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Wexford FC attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Wexford FC defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Cork City attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Cork City defense is strong at 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Cork City hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Cork City have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The weaker team may set up in a compact defensive block and frustrate through rare counter-attacks.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Cork City to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Cork City show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinCork City show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 70/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Cork City show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Cork City strong attack
Cork City stable defense
Cork City non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Win Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Cork City have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 1
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 2
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 20
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Treaty United
Home
Bray Wanderers
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Bray Wanderers have the clearer attacking edge at 2.7 goals per game, while Treaty United concede 1.7 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Treaty United
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Bray Wanderers
Away from home, they average 2.67 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Treaty United
Home
Bray Wanderers
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Treaty United attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Treaty United defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Bray Wanderers attack is strong at 2.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Bray Wanderers defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Bray Wanderers hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 71% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. Bray Wanderers have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Bray Wanderers have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
84/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 79/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. Bray Wanderers have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Bray Wanderers strong attack
Bray Wanderers scored in last 5
Treaty United concessions at weak rate
Treaty United conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Kerry
Home
Athlone Town
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Kerry show the better attacking return at 1.7 goals per game compared with Athlone Town at 0.0, but the gap is not wide enough to call this complete dominance.
Kerry
At home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Athlone Town
Away from home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Kerry
Home
Athlone Town
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Kerry attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Kerry defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Athlone Town attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
Athlone Town defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Kerry hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 74% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 74/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
74/100
Runner Up
Under 3.5 · 74/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 74/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Kerry strong attack
Kerry stable defense
Kerry non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Under 3.5 ≥65
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 6
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 18
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 34
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Finn Harps
Home
UCD
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
UCD have the clearer attacking edge at 3.0 goals per game, while Finn Harps concede 3.5 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Finn Harps
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 3.50 goals conceded per game.
UCD
Away from home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Finn Harps
Home
UCD
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Finn Harps attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Finn Harps defense is weak at 3.50 goals conceded per game.
UCD attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
UCD defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
UCD hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
UCD have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 88/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
88/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 88/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
UCD strong attack
UCD stable defense
UCD non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
UCD have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 2
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Throttur Reykjavik
Home
HK Kopavogs
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
HK Kopavogs have the clearer attacking edge at 1.0 goals per game, while Throttur Reykjavik concede 1.6 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Throttur Reykjavik
At home, they average 2.40 goals scored and 1.60 goals conceded per game.
HK Kopavogs
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Throttur Reykjavik
Home
HK Kopavogs
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Throttur Reykjavik attack is strong at 2.40 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Throttur Reykjavik defense is weak at 1.60 goals conceded per game.
HK Kopavogs attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
HK Kopavogs defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Throttur Reykjavik hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 72% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 83/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
83/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 80/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 83/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Throttur Reykjavik scoring form 100%
HK Kopavogs scoring form 80%
Throttur Reykjavik attack strength 100%
HK Kopavogs attack strength 50%
Neither team attack < 70%
Throttur Reykjavik defense control
HK Kopavogs defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 60%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Throttur Reykjavik have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
IA Akranes
Home
Vikingur Reykjavik
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
IA Akranes average 1.4 goals scored and concede 1.0 per game. Vikingur Reykjavik average 3.4 scored and 0.6 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
IA Akranes
At home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Vikingur Reykjavik
Away from home, they average 3.40 goals scored and 0.60 goals conceded per game.
IA Akranes
Home
Vikingur Reykjavik
Away
Supporting Reasoning
IA Akranes attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
IA Akranes defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Vikingur Reykjavik attack is strong at 3.40 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Vikingur Reykjavik defense is strong at 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Vikingur Reykjavik hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Vikingur Reykjavik have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Away defense is well-organized (avg 0.6 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 73% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 87/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
IA Akranes scoring form 100%
Vikingur Reykjavik scoring form 100%
IA Akranes attack strength 70%
Vikingur Reykjavik attack strength 100%
Neither team attack < 70%
IA Akranes defense control
Vikingur Reykjavik defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 60%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Vikingur Reykjavik have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
International Tournament
internationalWorld Cup 2026
South Korea
Home
Czechia
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.6 (home) and 1.8 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
South Korea
At home, they average 1.60 goals scored and 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Czechia
Away from home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
South Korea
Home
Czechia
Away
Supporting Reasoning
South Korea attack is average at 1.60 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
South Korea defense is strong at 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Czechia attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Czechia defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
South Korea have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Home defense has been very tight recently (avg 0.6 conceded) — goals against them are harder to come by.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 83% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 87/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
87/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 87/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
South Korea scoring form 60%
Czechia scoring form 100%
South Korea attack strength 80%
Czechia attack strength 90%
Neither team attack < 70%
South Korea defense control
Czechia defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 60%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 8
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 12
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 22
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Canada
Home
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Canada average 2.0 goals scored and concede 0.4 per game. Bosnia and Herzegovina average 0.8 scored and 1.4 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Canada
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 0.40 goals conceded per game.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Away from home, they average 0.80 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Canada
Home
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Canada attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Canada defense is strong at 0.40 goals conceded per game.
Bosnia and Herzegovina attack is weak at 0.80 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Bosnia and Herzegovina defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Canada hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Canada have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 74% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 86/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
86/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 82/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 86/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Canada strong attack
Canada stable defense
Canada non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Canada have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 31
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
3. Divisjon
leagueNorway
Alta
Home
Tromsoe 2
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.5 (home) and 2.0 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Alta
At home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Tromsoe 2
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Alta
Home
Tromsoe 2
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Alta attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Alta defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Tromsoe 2 attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Tromsoe 2 defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Away team scored in only 2/5 recent games — BTTS or high-goal markets carry extra risk here.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 2.5 Goals — 90% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
96/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 90/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Alta attack strength 100%
Tromsoe 2 attack strength 100%
Alta scoring form 100%
Tromsoe 2 scoring form 100%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 100%
Match has defensive vulnerability
Profile A (both attack >=100%) or Profile B (attack >=100% and opponent defense <=40%) matches
Market Fit Scores
Over 2.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Alta have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 65
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
League of Ireland Premier Division
leagueIreland
Waterford FC
Home
Sligo Rovers
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Waterford FC have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Sligo Rovers concede 2.3 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Waterford FC
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Sligo Rovers
Away from home, they average 0.67 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Waterford FC
Home
Sligo Rovers
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Waterford FC attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Waterford FC defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Sligo Rovers attack is weak at 0.67 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Sligo Rovers defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Waterford FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Waterford FC have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 90/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 90/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Waterford FC strong attack
Waterford FC stable defense
Waterford FC non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 17
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
St. Patrick's Athletic
Home
Drogheda United
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
St. Patrick's Athletic average 1.3 goals scored and concede 0.3 per game. Drogheda United average 0.5 scored and 2.0 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
St. Patrick's Athletic
At home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Drogheda United
Away from home, they average 0.50 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
St. Patrick's Athletic
Home
Drogheda United
Away
Supporting Reasoning
St. Patrick's Athletic attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
St. Patrick's Athletic defense is strong at 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Drogheda United attack is weak at 0.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Drogheda United defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
St. Patrick's Athletic hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
St. Patrick's Athletic have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 74% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 88/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
88/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 70/100
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 88/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
St. Patrick's Athletic attack stays below 100%
Drogheda United attack stays below 100%
St. Patrick's Athletic Over 2.5 rate limit
Drogheda United Over 2.5 rate limit
St. Patrick's Athletic recent scoring is not high volume
Drogheda United recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 32
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 34
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Galway United FC
Home
Dundalk
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Dundalk hold the stronger defensive numbers at 0.7 goals conceded per game, while Galway United FC allow 2.0. Any edge in this fixture starts from defensive stability.
Galway United FC
At home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Dundalk
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Galway United FC
Home
Dundalk
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Galway United FC attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Galway United FC defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Dundalk attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Dundalk defense is strong at 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Dundalk have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Away defense is well-organized (avg 0.67 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 69% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 77/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
77/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 69/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 77/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Galway United FC scoring form 67%
Dundalk scoring form 100%
Galway United FC attack strength 67%
Dundalk attack strength 67%
Neither team attack < 70%
Galway United FC defense control
Dundalk defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 67%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 8
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 17
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Shelbourne
Home
Shamrock Rovers
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.7 (home) and 1.7 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Shelbourne
At home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Shamrock Rovers
Away from home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Shelbourne
Home
Shamrock Rovers
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Shelbourne attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Shelbourne defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Shamrock Rovers attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Shamrock Rovers defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 84% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Shelbourne scoring form 100%
Shamrock Rovers scoring form 100%
Shelbourne attack strength 84%
Shamrock Rovers attack strength 84%
Neither team attack < 70%
Shelbourne defense control
Shamrock Rovers defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 83%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 4
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 6
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 29
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 33
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Legend