Match Analysis
Thursday 11 June 2026 · AI-driven form analysis
Other
leagueUSA
St. Louis Ambush
Home
Springfield 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.
St. Louis Ambush
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Springfield FC
Away from home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 2.67 goals conceded per game.
St. Louis Ambush
Home
Springfield FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
St. Louis Ambush attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
St. Louis Ambush defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Springfield FC attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Springfield FC defense is weak at 2.67 goals conceded per game.
Springfield FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
St. Louis Ambush 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: Over 1.5 Goals — 56% 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 · 73/100
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.
Springfield FC strong attack
Springfield FC scored in last 5
St. Louis Ambush concessions at weak rate
St. Louis Ambush 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 7
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Win <65
Below 65% by 15
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Hattiesburg FC
Home
Red River FC
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 3.0 (home) and 1.7 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Hattiesburg FC
At home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Red River FC
Away from home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Hattiesburg FC
Home
Red River FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Hattiesburg FC attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Hattiesburg FC defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Red River FC attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Red River FC defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Hattiesburg FC 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 — 68% 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.
Hattiesburg FC scoring form 100%
Red River FC scoring form 100%
Hattiesburg FC attack strength 100%
Red River FC attack strength 84%
Neither team attack < 70%
Hattiesburg FC defense control
Red River FC defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 83%
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
Hattiesburg 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 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 27
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.
Hill Country Lobos
Home
AHFC Royals
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.0 (home) and 1.5 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Hill Country Lobos
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
AHFC Royals
Away from home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Hill Country Lobos
Home
AHFC Royals
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Hill Country Lobos attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Hill Country Lobos defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
AHFC Royals attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
AHFC Royals defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Hill Country Lobos 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.
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 — 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 2.5 · 78/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Hill Country Lobos scoring form 100%
AHFC Royals scoring form 100%
Hill Country Lobos attack strength 100%
AHFC Royals attack strength 75%
Neither team attack < 70%
Hill Country Lobos defense control
AHFC Royals defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 100%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Hill Country Lobos 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 7
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.
Houston FC
Home
Global Football Innovation Academy
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Global Football Innovation Academy have the clearer attacking edge at 5.0 goals per game, while Houston FC concede 3.5 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Houston FC
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 3.50 goals conceded per game.
Global Football Innovation Academy
Away from home, they average 5.00 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Houston FC
Home
Global Football Innovation Academy
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Houston FC attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Houston FC defense is weak at 3.50 goals conceded per game.
Global Football Innovation Academy attack is strong at 5.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Global Football Innovation Academy defense is weak at 2.33 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
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 · 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.
Houston FC scoring form 100%
Global Football Innovation Academy scoring form 100%
Houston FC attack strength 100%
Global Football Innovation Academy attack strength 100%
Neither team attack < 70%
Houston FC defense control
Global Football Innovation Academy defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 100%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Houston 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 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.
Jackson Boom
Home
Little Rock Rangers
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Little Rock Rangers averages 2.3 goals per game while the opponent concedes 3.0 — a clear attacking dominance in recent form.
Jackson Boom
At home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Little Rock Rangers
Away from home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Jackson Boom
Home
Little Rock Rangers
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Jackson Boom attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
Jackson Boom defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Little Rock Rangers attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Little Rock Rangers defense is strong at 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Little Rock Rangers hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Little Rock Rangers 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: Little Rock Rangers to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Little Rock Rangers show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinLittle Rock Rangers 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 · 92/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Little Rock Rangers show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Little Rock Rangers strong attack
Little Rock Rangers stable defense
Little Rock Rangers 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
Little Rock Rangers 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 11
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 35
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Manhattan SC
Home
Morris Elite SC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Manhattan SC have the clearer attacking edge at 2.3 goals per game, while Morris Elite SC concede 3.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Manhattan SC
At home, they average 2.25 goals scored and 2.75 goals conceded per game.
Morris Elite SC
Away from home, they average 0.67 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Manhattan SC
Home
Morris Elite SC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Manhattan SC attack is strong at 2.25 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Manhattan SC defense is weak at 2.75 goals conceded per game.
Morris Elite SC attack is weak at 0.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Morris Elite SC defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Manhattan SC 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 75/100. 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
75/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 73/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 75/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Manhattan SC strong attack
Manhattan SC scored in last 5
Morris Elite SC concessions at weak rate
Morris Elite 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 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 10
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.
Midwest United FC
Home
Oakland County FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Oakland County FC have the clearer attacking edge at 2.5 goals per game, while Midwest United FC concede 3.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Midwest United FC
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Oakland County FC
Away from home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Midwest United FC
Home
Oakland County FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Midwest United FC attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Midwest United FC defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Oakland County FC attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Oakland County FC defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Oakland County FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Oakland County 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.
Home team scored in only 1/5 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 85/100. 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
85/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 85/100. 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.
Midwest United FC attack strength 50%
Oakland County FC attack strength 100%
Midwest United FC scoring form 100%
Oakland County 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
Oakland County 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 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.
River Light FC
Home
Edgewater Castle
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
River Light FC average 1.5 goals scored and concede 1.0 per game. Edgewater Castle average 0.8 scored and 2.5 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
River Light FC
At home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Edgewater Castle
Away from home, they average 0.75 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
River Light FC
Home
Edgewater Castle
Away
Supporting Reasoning
River Light FC attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
River Light FC defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Edgewater Castle attack is weak at 0.75 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Edgewater Castle defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
River Light FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
River Light 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 — 72% 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 · 75/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 88/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
River Light FC strong attack
River Light FC stable defense
River Light 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 1.5 ≥65
BTTS 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 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 15
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 33
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
El Nacional
Home
Vargas Torres
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Weak attacking output from both sides — neither team averages more than 1.2 goals per game. Limited goal threat across the board.
El Nacional
At home, they average 0.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Vargas Torres
Away from home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
El Nacional
Home
Vargas Torres
Away
Supporting Reasoning
El Nacional attack is weak at 0.33 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
El Nacional defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Vargas Torres attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
Vargas Torres defense is strong at 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Vargas Torres have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Weak attacking teams are unpredictable — form can suddenly improve or the sample window may be small.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 90% 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.
El Nacional attack stays below 100%
Vargas Torres attack stays below 100%
El Nacional Over 2.5 rate limit
Vargas Torres Over 2.5 rate limit
El Nacional recent scoring is not high volume
Vargas Torres 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 21
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 41
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 41
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 54
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Boston City FC
Home
Western Mass Pioneers
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Western Mass Pioneers have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Boston City FC concede 3.5 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Boston City FC
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 3.50 goals conceded per game.
Western Mass Pioneers
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Boston City FC
Home
Western Mass Pioneers
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Boston City FC attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Boston City FC defense is weak at 3.50 goals conceded per game.
Western Mass Pioneers attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Western Mass Pioneers defense is strong at 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Western Mass Pioneers 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.
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 — 69% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 88/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
88/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 83/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 88/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Boston City FC scoring form 100%
Western Mass Pioneers scoring form 67%
Boston City FC attack strength 100%
Western Mass Pioneers attack strength 100%
Neither team attack < 70%
Boston City FC defense control
Western Mass Pioneers defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 67%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
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.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
Western Mass Pioneers 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.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 65
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Marin FC Legends
Home
San Francisco City
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
San Francisco City have the clearer attacking edge at 5.5 goals per game, while Marin FC Legends concede 4.3 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Marin FC Legends
At home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 4.33 goals conceded per game.
San Francisco City
Away from home, they average 5.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Marin FC Legends
Home
San Francisco City
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Marin FC Legends attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Marin FC Legends defense is weak at 4.33 goals conceded per game.
San Francisco City attack is strong at 5.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
San Francisco City defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
San Francisco 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.
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 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.
Marin FC Legends attack strength 100%
San Francisco City attack strength 100%
Marin FC Legends scoring form 67%
San Francisco City 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
San Francisco 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.
Over 1.5 ≥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.
McKinney Chupacabras FC
Home
Lubbock Matadors
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
McKinney Chupacabras FC average 1.3 goals scored and concede 0.3 per game. Lubbock Matadors average 0.7 scored and 1.7 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
McKinney Chupacabras FC
At home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Lubbock Matadors
Away from home, they average 0.67 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
McKinney Chupacabras FC
Home
Lubbock Matadors
Away
Supporting Reasoning
McKinney Chupacabras FC attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
McKinney Chupacabras FC defense is strong at 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Lubbock Matadors attack is weak at 0.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Lubbock Matadors defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
McKinney Chupacabras FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
McKinney Chupacabras 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 — 73% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 87/100. 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
87/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 87/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
McKinney Chupacabras FC strong attack
McKinney Chupacabras FC stable defense
McKinney Chupacabras 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 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 10
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 16
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 20
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
West Texas
Home
Texoma
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.
West Texas
At home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Texoma
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
West Texas
Home
Texoma
Away
Supporting Reasoning
West Texas attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
West Texas defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Texoma attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Texoma defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
West Texas hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
West Texas 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 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 75/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
75/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 68/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 75/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
West Texas scoring form 67%
Texoma scoring form 100%
West Texas attack strength 84%
Texoma attack strength 50%
Neither team attack < 70%
West Texas defense control
Texoma defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 83%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Win <65
Below 65% by 1
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 33
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Tampa Bay Rowdies
Home
Charleston Battery
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Tampa Bay Rowdies average 1.0 goals scored and concede 1.5 per game. Charleston Battery average 3.5 scored and 2.0 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Tampa Bay Rowdies
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Charleston Battery
Away from home, they average 3.50 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Tampa Bay Rowdies
Home
Charleston Battery
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Tampa Bay Rowdies attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Tampa Bay Rowdies defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Charleston Battery attack is strong at 3.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Charleston Battery defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Charleston Battery hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Tampa Bay Rowdies 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 84/100. Charleston Battery 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 1.5Charleston Battery 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 · 77/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. Charleston Battery 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.
Charleston Battery strong attack
Charleston Battery scored in last 5
Tampa Bay Rowdies concessions at weak rate
Tampa Bay Rowdies 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 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
City SC
Home
Stars 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.
City SC
At home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Stars FC
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
City SC
Home
Stars FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
City SC attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
City SC defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Stars FC attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Stars FC defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
City SC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Stars 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.
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.
City SC scoring form 100%
Stars FC scoring form 100%
City SC attack strength 84%
Stars FC attack strength 50%
Neither team attack < 70%
City SC defense control
Stars FC defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 83%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 6
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 7
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Win <65
Below 65% by 14
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.
Real Colorado
Home
CISA
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
CISA have the clearer attacking edge at 2.3 goals per game, while Real Colorado concede 2.7 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Real Colorado
At home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 2.67 goals conceded per game.
CISA
Away from home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 4.67 goals conceded per game.
Real Colorado
Home
CISA
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Real Colorado attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Real Colorado defense is weak at 2.67 goals conceded per game.
CISA attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
CISA defense is weak at 4.67 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.
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
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 — 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 · 88/100
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.
Real Colorado attack strength 100%
CISA attack strength 100%
Real Colorado scoring form 100%
CISA 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
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Real Colorado 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 7
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.
Boise
Home
Richmond Kickers
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Boise average 1.5 goals scored and concede 0.5 per game. Richmond Kickers average 0.3 scored and 1.7 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Boise
At home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Richmond Kickers
Away from home, they average 0.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Boise
Home
Richmond Kickers
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Boise attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Boise defense is strong at 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Richmond Kickers attack is weak at 0.33 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Richmond Kickers defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Boise hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Boise 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 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 · 65/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 88/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Boise strong attack
Boise stable defense
Boise 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 7
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 10
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 27
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Monterey Bay FC
Home
Sporting Jax
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Monterey Bay FC averages 2.3 goals per game while the opponent concedes 2.0 — a clear attacking dominance in recent form.
Monterey Bay FC
At home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Sporting Jax
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Monterey Bay FC
Home
Sporting Jax
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Monterey Bay FC attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Monterey Bay FC defense is strong at 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Sporting Jax attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Sporting Jax defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Monterey Bay FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Monterey Bay 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: Monterey Bay FC 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.
Monterey Bay FC strong attack
Monterey Bay FC stable defense
Monterey Bay 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
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
Monterey Bay 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 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.
Ventura County Fusion
Home
Redlands
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Ventura County Fusion average 0.0 goals scored and concede 0.0 per game. Redlands average 2.3 scored and 1.7 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Ventura County Fusion
At home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Redlands
Away from home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Ventura County Fusion
Home
Redlands
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Ventura County Fusion attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
Ventura County Fusion defense is strong at 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Redlands attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Redlands defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Redlands hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Ventura County Fusion 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 — 72% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 72/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
72/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 68/100
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 72/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Ventura County Fusion attack stays below 100%
Redlands attack stays below 100%
Ventura County Fusion Over 2.5 rate limit
Redlands Over 2.5 rate limit
Ventura County Fusion recent scoring is not high volume
Redlands 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 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 32
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 32
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 40
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Academica SC
Home
Almaden FC
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.
Academica SC
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Almaden FC
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Academica SC
Home
Almaden FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Academica SC attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Academica SC defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Almaden FC attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Almaden FC defense is strong at 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Academica SC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Almaden FC 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 0.67 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
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 — 63% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 78/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
78/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 78/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Academica SC scoring form 100%
Almaden FC scoring form 67%
Academica SC attack strength 100%
Almaden FC attack strength 67%
Neither team attack < 70%
Academica SC defense control
Almaden FC defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 67%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
Academica SC 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 9
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 13
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.
Snohomish United
Home
Ballard FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Snohomish United average 3.2 goals scored and concede 0.6 per game. Ballard FC average 1.0 scored and 1.0 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Snohomish United
At home, they average 3.20 goals scored and 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Ballard FC
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Snohomish United
Home
Ballard FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Snohomish United attack is strong at 3.20 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Snohomish United defense is strong at 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Ballard FC attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Ballard FC defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Snohomish United hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Snohomish 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 — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Snohomish United show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Snohomish United 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. Snohomish United show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Snohomish United strong attack
Snohomish United stable defense
Snohomish 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
Snohomish United 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 1
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Phoenix Rising FC
Home
Louisville City 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.
Phoenix Rising FC
At home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Louisville City FC
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Phoenix Rising FC
Home
Louisville City FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Phoenix Rising FC attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Phoenix Rising FC defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Louisville City FC attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Louisville City FC defense is strong at 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Phoenix Rising FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Louisville City 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.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 76/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
76/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 76/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Phoenix Rising FC attack stays below 100%
Louisville City FC attack stays below 100%
Phoenix Rising FC Over 2.5 rate limit
Louisville City FC Over 2.5 rate limit
Phoenix Rising FC recent scoring is not high volume
Louisville City 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
Win <65
Below 65% by 14
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 29
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
AV Alta
Home
Sarasota Paradise
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
AV Alta have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Sarasota Paradise concede 2.3 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
AV Alta
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Sarasota Paradise
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
AV Alta
Home
Sarasota Paradise
Away
Supporting Reasoning
AV Alta attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
AV Alta defense is strong at 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Sarasota Paradise attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Sarasota Paradise defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
AV Alta hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
AV Alta 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 — 73% 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 · 86/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 86/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
AV Alta strong attack
AV Alta stable defense
AV Alta 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 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
AV 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.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Ninh Binh FC
Home
Viettel
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Ninh Binh FC average 2.2 goals scored and concede 0.8 per game. Viettel average 1.2 scored and 1.2 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Ninh Binh FC
At home, they average 2.20 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Viettel
Away from home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 1.20 goals conceded per game.
Ninh Binh FC
Home
Viettel
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Ninh Binh FC attack is strong at 2.20 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Ninh Binh FC defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Viettel attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Viettel defense is average at 1.20 goals conceded per game.
Ninh Binh FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Ninh Binh 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 — 70% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 85/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
85/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 76/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 85/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Ninh Binh FC scoring form 100%
Viettel scoring form 100%
Ninh Binh FC attack strength 100%
Viettel attack strength 60%
Neither team attack < 70%
Ninh Binh FC defense control
Viettel 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 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Ninh Binh 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.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 31
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Nam Dinh
Home
Ho Chi Minh City FC
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.4 (home) and 1.8 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Nam Dinh
At home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Ho Chi Minh City FC
Away from home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 1.20 goals conceded per game.
Nam Dinh
Home
Ho Chi Minh City FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Nam Dinh attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Nam Dinh defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Ho Chi Minh City FC attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Ho Chi Minh City FC defense is average at 1.20 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Ho Chi Minh City FC 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 — 64% 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 · 81/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Nam Dinh scoring form 80%
Ho Chi Minh City FC scoring form 100%
Nam Dinh attack strength 70%
Ho Chi Minh City FC attack strength 90%
Neither team attack < 70%
Nam Dinh defense control
Ho Chi Minh City FC defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 80%
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.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 8
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Tampere United
Home
OLS
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Tampere United average 2.8 goals scored and concede 0.0 per game. OLS average 1.4 scored and 1.4 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Tampere United
At home, they average 2.80 goals scored and 0.00 goals conceded per game.
OLS
Away from home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Tampere United
Home
OLS
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Tampere United attack is strong at 2.80 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Tampere United defense is strong at 0.00 goals conceded per game.
OLS attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
OLS defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Tampere United hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Tampere United 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: Tampere United to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Tampere United show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinTampere United 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 · 80/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Tampere United show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Tampere United strong attack
Tampere United stable defense
Tampere 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
Win Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Tampere United 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 7
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Elva
Home
Maardu Linnameeskond
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 Elva
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Maardu Linnameeskond
Away from home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
FC Elva
Home
Maardu Linnameeskond
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FC Elva attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
FC Elva defense is weak at 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Maardu Linnameeskond attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Maardu Linnameeskond defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
FC Elva 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 — 83% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 78/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
78/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 69/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 78/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Elva scoring form 60%
Maardu Linnameeskond scoring form 60%
FC Elva attack strength 100%
Maardu Linnameeskond attack strength 70%
Neither team attack < 70%
FC Elva defense control
Maardu Linnameeskond defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 60%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 14
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Helsingborgs IF
Home
Landskrona BoIS
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Helsingborgs IF average 0.8 goals scored and concede 1.8 per game. Landskrona BoIS average 1.8 scored and 0.8 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Helsingborgs IF
At home, they average 0.80 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Landskrona BoIS
Away from home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Helsingborgs IF
Home
Landskrona BoIS
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Helsingborgs IF attack is weak at 0.80 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Helsingborgs IF defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Landskrona BoIS attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Landskrona BoIS defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Landskrona BoIS hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Landskrona BoIS 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 89/100. 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
89/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 70/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 89/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Landskrona BoIS strong attack
Landskrona BoIS stable defense
Landskrona BoIS 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
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 3
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 9
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 16
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
IF Sylvia
Home
AC Studenterna
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
IF Sylvia have the clearer attacking edge at 2.4 goals per game, while AC Studenterna concede 4.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
IF Sylvia
At home, they average 2.40 goals scored and 2.20 goals conceded per game.
AC Studenterna
Away from home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 4.00 goals conceded per game.
IF Sylvia
Home
AC Studenterna
Away
Supporting Reasoning
IF Sylvia attack is strong at 2.40 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
IF Sylvia defense is weak at 2.20 goals conceded per game.
AC Studenterna attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
AC Studenterna defense is weak at 4.00 goals conceded per game.
IF Sylvia 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 84/100. IF Sylvia 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 1.5IF Sylvia 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 1.5 · 73/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. IF Sylvia 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.
IF Sylvia strong attack
IF Sylvia scored in last 5
AC Studenterna concessions at weak rate
AC Studenterna 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 21
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Vaestra Froelunda
Home
Onsala BK
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.4 (home) and 1.2 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Vaestra Froelunda
At home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Onsala BK
Away from home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Vaestra Froelunda
Home
Onsala BK
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Vaestra Froelunda attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Vaestra Froelunda defense is weak at 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Onsala BK attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Onsala BK defense is weak at 1.80 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.
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.
BTTS had the highest score at 85/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
85/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 67/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 85/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Vaestra Froelunda scoring form 80%
Onsala BK scoring form 80%
Vaestra Froelunda attack strength 70%
Onsala BK attack strength 60%
Neither team attack < 70%
Vaestra Froelunda defense control
Onsala BK defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 80%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
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.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 26
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Motala AIF FK
Home
IFK Kumla
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.
Motala AIF FK
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 0.00 goals conceded per game.
IFK Kumla
Away from home, they average 0.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Motala AIF FK
Home
IFK Kumla
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Motala AIF FK attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Motala AIF FK defense is strong at 0.00 goals conceded per game.
IFK Kumla attack is weak at 0.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
IFK Kumla defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Motala AIF FK 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
Win · 75/100
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.
Motala AIF FK attack stays below 100%
IFK Kumla attack stays below 100%
Motala AIF FK Over 2.5 rate limit
IFK Kumla Over 2.5 rate limit
Motala AIF FK recent scoring is not high volume
IFK Kumla 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 24
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 36
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 38
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Hestrafors IF
Home
Dalstorps IF
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 3.3 (home) and 2.3 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Hestrafors IF
At home, they average 3.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Dalstorps IF
Away from home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Hestrafors IF
Home
Dalstorps IF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Hestrafors IF attack is strong at 3.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Hestrafors IF defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Dalstorps IF attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Dalstorps IF 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
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 — 87% 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.
Hestrafors IF attack strength 100%
Dalstorps IF attack strength 100%
Hestrafors IF scoring form 100%
Dalstorps IF scoring form 100%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 83%
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
Hestrafors 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
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.
Gottne IF
Home
Friska Viljor
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Gottne IF average 2.7 goals scored and concede 1.3 per game. Friska Viljor average 1.3 scored and 0.5 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Gottne IF
At home, they average 2.67 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Friska Viljor
Away from home, they average 1.25 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Gottne IF
Home
Friska Viljor
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Gottne IF attack is strong at 2.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Gottne IF defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Friska Viljor attack is average at 1.25 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Friska Viljor defense is strong at 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Gottne IF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Friska Viljor 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 0.5 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 68% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 78/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
78/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 78/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Gottne IF scoring form 100%
Friska Viljor scoring form 75%
Gottne IF attack strength 100%
Friska Viljor attack strength 63%
Neither team attack < 70%
Gottne IF defense control
Friska Viljor defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 75%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 7
Gottne 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
Below 65% by 7
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 8
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 40
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Kubikenborgs IF
Home
Lucksta
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Lucksta have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Kubikenborgs IF concede 2.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Kubikenborgs IF
At home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Lucksta
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 3.33 goals conceded per game.
Kubikenborgs IF
Home
Lucksta
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Kubikenborgs IF attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Kubikenborgs IF defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Lucksta attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Lucksta defense is weak at 3.33 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
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 — 70% 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.
Kubikenborgs IF attack strength 100%
Lucksta attack strength 100%
Kubikenborgs IF scoring form 100%
Lucksta 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
Kubikenborgs 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
Below 65% by 19
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.
BK Astrio
Home
Lindome GIF
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
BK Astrio average 0.5 goals scored and concede 2.0 per game. Lindome GIF average 1.5 scored and 1.0 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
BK Astrio
At home, they average 0.50 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Lindome GIF
Away from home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
BK Astrio
Home
Lindome GIF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
BK Astrio attack is weak at 0.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
BK Astrio defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Lindome GIF attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Lindome GIF defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Lindome GIF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Lindome GIF 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 — 73% 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 · 70/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 88/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Lindome GIF strong attack
Lindome GIF stable defense
Lindome GIF 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 7
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 22
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Al-Shabab SC
Home
Al-Jahra
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Weak attacking output from both sides — neither team averages more than 1.2 goals per game. Limited goal threat across the board.
Al-Shabab SC
At home, they average 0.25 goals scored and 1.75 goals conceded per game.
Al-Jahra
Away from home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Al-Shabab SC
Home
Al-Jahra
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Al-Shabab SC attack is weak at 0.25 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Al-Shabab SC defense is weak at 1.75 goals conceded per game.
Al-Jahra attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
Al-Jahra 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
Weak attacking teams are unpredictable — form can suddenly improve or the sample window may be small.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 90% 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.
Al-Shabab SC attack stays below 100%
Al-Jahra attack stays below 100%
Al-Shabab SC Over 2.5 rate limit
Al-Jahra Over 2.5 rate limit
Al-Shabab SC recent scoring is not high volume
Al-Jahra 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 31
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 35
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 46
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 51
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
International Friendlies
International Friendlies
Bolivia
Home
Algeria
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Algeria have the clearer attacking edge at 2.4 goals per game, while Bolivia concede 2.2 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Bolivia
At home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 2.20 goals conceded per game.
Algeria
Away from home, they average 2.40 goals scored and 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Bolivia
Home
Algeria
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Bolivia attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Bolivia defense is weak at 2.20 goals conceded per game.
Algeria attack is strong at 2.40 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Algeria defense is strong at 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Algeria hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Algeria 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 1.5 · 83/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 86/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Algeria strong attack
Algeria stable defense
Algeria 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
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
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 13
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 13
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Maurice Revello Tournament
International
Venezuela U20
Home
Japan U20
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.
Venezuela U20
At home, they average 0.60 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Japan U20
Away from home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Venezuela U20
Home
Japan U20
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Venezuela U20 attack is weak at 0.60 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Venezuela U20 defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Japan U20 attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Japan U20 defense is weak at 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Japan U20 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
Over 1.5 · 66/100
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Venezuela U20 attack stays below 100%
Japan U20 attack stays below 100%
Venezuela U20 Over 2.5 rate limit
Japan U20 Over 2.5 rate limit
Venezuela U20 recent scoring is not high volume
Japan U20 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 met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 6
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Win <65
Below 65% by 10
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Portugal U20
Home
Canada U20
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Portugal U20 averages 3.0 goals per game while the opponent concedes 2.2 — a clear attacking dominance in recent form.
Portugal U20
At home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Canada U20
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.20 goals conceded per game.
Portugal U20
Home
Canada U20
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Portugal U20 attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Portugal U20 defense is strong at 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Canada U20 attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Canada U20 defense is weak at 2.20 goals conceded per game.
Portugal U20 hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Portugal U20 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: Portugal U20 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 1.5 · 83/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 91/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Portugal U20 strong attack
Portugal U20 stable defense
Portugal U20 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
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Portugal U20 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.
3. Divisjon
leagueNorway
Ulfstind
Home
Floeya
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.7 (home) and 2.7 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Ulfstind
At home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Floeya
Away from home, they average 2.67 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Ulfstind
Home
Floeya
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Ulfstind attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Ulfstind defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Floeya attack is strong at 2.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Floeya defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Floeya 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.
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 — 90% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 88/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
88/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 83/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 88/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Ulfstind scoring form 100%
Floeya scoring form 67%
Ulfstind attack strength 84%
Floeya attack strength 100%
Neither team attack < 70%
Ulfstind defense control
Floeya defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 67%
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
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
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
Mexico
Home
South Africa
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Mexico average 2.2 goals scored and concede 0.2 per game. South Africa average 0.6 scored and 1.0 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Mexico
At home, they average 2.20 goals scored and 0.20 goals conceded per game.
South Africa
Away from home, they average 0.60 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Mexico
Home
South Africa
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Mexico attack is strong at 2.20 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Mexico defense is strong at 0.20 goals conceded per game.
South Africa attack is weak at 0.60 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
South Africa defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Mexico hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Mexico 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: Mexico to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Mexico show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinMexico 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. Mexico show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Mexico strong attack
Mexico stable defense
Mexico 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
Mexico 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 6
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 20
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Legend