Match Analysis
Thursday 18 June 2026 · AI-driven form analysis
Other
leagueUSA
Charlotte Eagles
Home
South Carolina United FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
South Carolina United FC have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Charlotte Eagles concede 1.7 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Charlotte Eagles
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
South Carolina United FC
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Charlotte Eagles
Home
South Carolina United FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Charlotte Eagles attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Charlotte Eagles defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
South Carolina United FC attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
South Carolina United FC defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
South Carolina United FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
South Carolina United 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 — 71% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. South Carolina United FC show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5South Carolina United FC show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. South Carolina United FC show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
South Carolina United FC strong attack
South Carolina United FC stable defense
South Carolina United 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
South Carolina United FC have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Brooke House FC
Home
Inter Gainesville KF
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Brooke House FC have the clearer attacking edge at 3.0 goals per game, while Inter Gainesville KF concede 2.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Brooke House FC
At home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Inter Gainesville KF
Away from home, they average 0.50 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Brooke House FC
Home
Inter Gainesville KF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Brooke House FC attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Brooke House FC defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Inter Gainesville KF attack is weak at 0.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Inter Gainesville KF defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Brooke House FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 71% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 74/100. 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
74/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 69/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 74/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Brooke House FC strong attack
Brooke House FC scored in last 5
Inter Gainesville KF concessions at weak rate
Inter Gainesville KF conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 12
BTTS 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 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Louisville City FC II
Home
Dayton Dutch Lions
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.
Louisville City FC II
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Dayton Dutch Lions
Away from home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Louisville City FC II
Home
Dayton Dutch Lions
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Louisville City FC II attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Louisville City FC II defense is strong at 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Dayton Dutch Lions attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
Dayton Dutch Lions defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Louisville City FC II 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 88/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
88/100
Runner Up
Win · 85/100
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 88/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Louisville City FC II attack stays below 100%
Dayton Dutch Lions attack stays below 100%
Louisville City FC II Over 2.5 rate limit
Dayton Dutch Lions Over 2.5 rate limit
Louisville City FC II recent scoring is not high volume
Dayton Dutch Lions 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 11
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 39
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 41
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Miami AC W
Home
Lakeland United
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Lakeland United have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Miami AC W concede 2.8 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Miami AC W
At home, they average 1.75 goals scored and 2.75 goals conceded per game.
Lakeland United
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Miami AC W
Home
Lakeland United
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Miami AC W attack is average at 1.75 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Miami AC W defense is weak at 2.75 goals conceded per game.
Lakeland United attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Lakeland United defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Lakeland 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.
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 — 71% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 71/100. Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
71/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 70/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 71/100. Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Miami AC W attack strength 88%
Lakeland United attack strength 100%
Miami AC W scoring form 75%
Lakeland United scoring form 67%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 67%
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
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Rochester
Home
RKC Third Coast
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Rochester have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while RKC Third Coast concede 2.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Rochester
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
RKC Third Coast
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Rochester
Home
RKC Third Coast
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Rochester attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Rochester defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
RKC Third Coast attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
RKC Third Coast defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Rochester hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Rochester 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 2.5 · 85/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 86/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Rochester strong attack
Rochester stable defense
Rochester non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Rochester 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.
Port City FC
Home
Hickory
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Hickory have the clearer attacking edge at 2.5 goals per game, while Port City FC concede 3.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Port City FC
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Hickory
Away from home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Port City FC
Home
Hickory
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Port City FC attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Port City FC defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Hickory attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Hickory defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Hickory hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Hickory have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 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.
Port City FC attack strength 50%
Hickory attack strength 100%
Port City FC scoring form 100%
Hickory 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
Hickory 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.
New York City FC II
Home
Carolina Core
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.2 (home) and 1.4 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
New York City FC II
At home, they average 2.20 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Carolina Core
Away from home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
New York City FC II
Home
Carolina Core
Away
Supporting Reasoning
New York City FC II attack is strong at 2.20 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
New York City FC II defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Carolina Core attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Carolina Core defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
New York City FC II hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 64% confidence from recent form analysis.
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 · 76/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
New York City FC II scoring form 100%
Carolina Core scoring form 80%
New York City FC II attack strength 100%
Carolina Core attack strength 70%
Neither team attack < 70%
New York City FC II defense control
Carolina Core defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 60%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
New York City FC II have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 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 40
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Albany Rush
Home
AC Connecticut
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Albany Rush have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while AC Connecticut concede 2.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Albany Rush
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
AC Connecticut
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Albany Rush
Home
AC Connecticut
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Albany Rush attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Albany Rush defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
AC Connecticut attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
AC Connecticut defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Albany Rush hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 71% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 70/100. Albany Rush 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 1.5Albany Rush have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
70/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 69/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 70/100. Albany Rush 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.
Albany Rush strong attack
Albany Rush scored in last 5
AC Connecticut concessions at weak rate
AC Connecticut conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Annapolis Blues FC
Home
Hill City
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Annapolis Blues FC have the clearer attacking edge at 4.0 goals per game, while Hill City concede 4.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Annapolis Blues FC
At home, they average 4.00 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Hill City
Away from home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 4.00 goals conceded per game.
Annapolis Blues FC
Home
Hill City
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Annapolis Blues FC attack is strong at 4.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Annapolis Blues FC defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Hill City attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Hill City defense is weak at 4.00 goals conceded per game.
Annapolis Blues FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Annapolis Blues FC have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 74/100. 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
74/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 70/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 74/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Annapolis Blues FC strong attack
Annapolis Blues FC scored in last 5
Hill City concessions at weak rate
Hill City 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
Over 2.5 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.
Charlotte Independence 2
Home
Salem City FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Charlotte Independence 2 have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Salem City FC concede 2.7 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Charlotte Independence 2
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Salem City FC
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 2.67 goals conceded per game.
Charlotte Independence 2
Home
Salem City FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Charlotte Independence 2 attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Charlotte Independence 2 defense is strong at 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Salem City FC attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Salem City FC defense is weak at 2.67 goals conceded per game.
Charlotte Independence 2 hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Charlotte Independence 2 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 2.5 · 73/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 86/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Charlotte Independence 2 strong attack
Charlotte Independence 2 stable defense
Charlotte Independence 2 non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
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 4
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Christos FC
Home
Nova FC
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Nova FC have the clearer attacking edge at 3.8 goals per game, while Christos FC concede 1.8 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Christos FC
At home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 1.75 goals conceded per game.
Nova FC
Away from home, they average 3.75 goals scored and 1.75 goals conceded per game.
Christos FC
Home
Nova FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Christos FC attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Christos FC defense is weak at 1.75 goals conceded per game.
Nova FC attack is strong at 3.75 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Nova FC defense is weak at 1.75 goals conceded per game.
Nova 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.
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 69% confidence from recent form analysis.
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 · 84/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Christos FC scoring form 100%
Nova FC scoring form 100%
Christos FC attack strength 75%
Nova FC attack strength 100%
Neither team attack < 70%
Christos FC defense control
Nova FC defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 63%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Nova FC have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
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 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Connecticut Rush
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 Connecticut Rush concede 1.7 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Connecticut Rush
At home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Western Mass Pioneers
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Connecticut Rush
Home
Western Mass Pioneers
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Connecticut Rush attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Connecticut Rush defense is weak at 1.67 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.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 69% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 76/100. 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
76/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 70/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 76/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Western Mass Pioneers strong attack
Western Mass Pioneers stable defense
Western Mass Pioneers 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
Below 65% by 5
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 40
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Lionsbridge FC
Home
Patuxent Football Athletics
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Lionsbridge FC have the clearer attacking edge at 4.3 goals per game, while Patuxent Football Athletics concede 4.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Lionsbridge FC
At home, they average 4.33 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Patuxent Football Athletics
Away from home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 4.00 goals conceded per game.
Lionsbridge FC
Home
Patuxent Football Athletics
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Lionsbridge FC attack is strong at 4.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Lionsbridge FC defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Patuxent Football Athletics attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
Patuxent Football Athletics defense is weak at 4.00 goals conceded per game.
Lionsbridge FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Lionsbridge FC have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 82/100. 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
82/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 80/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 82/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Lionsbridge FC strong attack
Lionsbridge FC stable defense
Lionsbridge 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
Lionsbridge FC have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 8
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.
Pittsburgh Riverhounds 2
Home
Lorain County Leviathan
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Lorain County Leviathan show the better attacking return at 3.5 goals per game compared with Pittsburgh Riverhounds 2 at 1.5, but the gap is not wide enough to call this complete dominance.
Pittsburgh Riverhounds 2
At home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Lorain County Leviathan
Away from home, they average 3.50 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Pittsburgh Riverhounds 2
Home
Lorain County Leviathan
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Pittsburgh Riverhounds 2 attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Pittsburgh Riverhounds 2 defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Lorain County Leviathan attack is strong at 3.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Lorain County Leviathan defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Lorain County Leviathan hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 71% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. Lorain County Leviathan 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 1.5Lorain County Leviathan 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 · 80/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. Lorain County Leviathan 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.
Lorain County Leviathan strong attack
Lorain County Leviathan scored in last 5
Pittsburgh Riverhounds 2 concessions at weak rate
Pittsburgh Riverhounds 2 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
Below 65% by 5
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.
San Francisco Glens SC
Home
Academica SC
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.
San Francisco Glens SC
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Academica SC
Away from home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 2.67 goals conceded per game.
San Francisco Glens SC
Home
Academica SC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
San Francisco Glens SC attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
San Francisco Glens SC defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Academica SC attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Academica SC defense is weak at 2.67 goals conceded per game.
Academica SC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
San Francisco Glens SC 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 67/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
67/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 67/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
San Francisco Glens SC scoring form 100%
Academica SC scoring form 67%
San Francisco Glens SC attack strength 50%
Academica SC attack strength 84%
Neither team attack < 70%
San Francisco Glens SC defense control
Academica SC defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 58%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Win <65
Below 65% by 6
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 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.
Sporting JAX II
Home
Nona FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Nona FC show the better attacking return at 2.0 goals per game compared with Sporting JAX II at 0.3, but the gap is not wide enough to call this complete dominance.
Sporting JAX II
At home, they average 0.25 goals scored and 1.25 goals conceded per game.
Nona FC
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Sporting JAX II
Home
Nona FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Sporting JAX II attack is weak at 0.25 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Sporting JAX II defense is average at 1.25 goals conceded per game.
Nona FC attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Nona FC defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Nona FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 81/100. 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
81/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 70/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 81/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Nona FC strong attack
Nona FC stable defense
Nona 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
Nona FC have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 3
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Virginia Beach United
Home
Bethesda SC
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.
Virginia Beach United
At home, they average 3.33 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Bethesda SC
Away from home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Virginia Beach United
Home
Bethesda SC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Virginia Beach United attack is strong at 3.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Virginia Beach United defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Bethesda SC attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Bethesda SC 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
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 — 90% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
96/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 90/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Virginia Beach United attack strength 100%
Bethesda SC attack strength 100%
Virginia Beach United scoring form 100%
Bethesda SC 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
Virginia Beach 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 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 31
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.
Wake FC
Home
North Carolina FC U23
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
North Carolina FC U23 have the clearer attacking edge at 2.5 goals per game, while Wake FC concede 3.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Wake FC
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
North Carolina FC U23
Away from home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Wake FC
Home
North Carolina FC U23
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Wake FC attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Wake FC defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
North Carolina FC U23 attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
North Carolina FC U23 defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
North Carolina FC U23 hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
North Carolina FC U23 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 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.
Wake FC attack strength 50%
North Carolina FC U23 attack strength 100%
Wake FC scoring form 100%
North Carolina FC U23 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
North Carolina FC U23 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.
Apotheos
Home
Swarm FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Swarm FC have the clearer attacking edge at 2.7 goals per game, while Apotheos concede 1.7 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Apotheos
At home, they average 0.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Swarm FC
Away from home, they average 2.67 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Apotheos
Home
Swarm FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Apotheos attack is weak at 0.33 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Apotheos defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Swarm FC attack is strong at 2.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Swarm FC defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Swarm FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Swarm FC have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Swarm FC show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Swarm FC 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. Swarm FC show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Swarm FC strong attack
Swarm FC stable defense
Swarm 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
Swarm FC have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 1
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 9
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
East Atlanta FC
Home
Montgomery United FC
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Montgomery United FC have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while East Atlanta FC concede 3.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
East Atlanta FC
At home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Montgomery United FC
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
East Atlanta FC
Home
Montgomery United FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
East Atlanta FC attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
East Atlanta FC defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Montgomery United FC attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Montgomery United FC defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Montgomery United 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.
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 87/100. 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
87/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 86/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 87/100. 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.
East Atlanta FC attack strength 67%
Montgomery United FC attack strength 100%
East Atlanta FC scoring form 100%
Montgomery United 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
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Montgomery United 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 1
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.
Virginia Marauders
Home
Charlottesville Blues
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Charlottesville Blues averages 2.5 goals per game while the opponent concedes 2.3 — a clear attacking dominance in recent form.
Virginia Marauders
At home, they average 0.67 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Charlottesville Blues
Away from home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Virginia Marauders
Home
Charlottesville Blues
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Virginia Marauders attack is weak at 0.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Virginia Marauders defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Charlottesville Blues attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Charlottesville Blues defense is strong at 0.00 goals conceded per game.
Charlottesville Blues hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Charlottesville Blues 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: Charlottesville Blues to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Charlottesville Blues show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinCharlottesville Blues 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. Charlottesville Blues show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Charlottesville Blues strong attack
Charlottesville Blues stable defense
Charlottesville Blues 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
Charlottesville Blues 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 21
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 23
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Westchester Flames
Home
Ironbound
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.8 (home) and 3.0 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Westchester Flames
At home, they average 2.75 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Ironbound
Away from home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Westchester Flames
Home
Ironbound
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Westchester Flames attack is strong at 2.75 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Westchester Flames defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Ironbound attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Ironbound defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Away team scored in only 2/5 recent games — BTTS or high-goal markets carry extra risk here.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 2.5 Goals — 90% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
96/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 90/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Westchester Flames attack strength 100%
Ironbound attack strength 100%
Westchester Flames scoring form 100%
Ironbound 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
Westchester Flames 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 25
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.
Columbus United FC
Home
Birmingham Legion FC 2
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.3 (home) and 1.7 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Columbus United FC
At home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Birmingham Legion FC 2
Away from home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Columbus United FC
Home
Birmingham Legion FC 2
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Columbus United FC attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Columbus United FC defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Birmingham Legion FC 2 attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Birmingham Legion FC 2 defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Columbus United FC 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 — 84% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 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.
Columbus United FC scoring form 100%
Birmingham Legion FC 2 scoring form 100%
Columbus United FC attack strength 100%
Birmingham Legion FC 2 attack strength 84%
Neither team attack < 70%
Columbus United FC defense control
Birmingham Legion FC 2 defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 83%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Columbus United 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 17
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.
Jackson Boom
Home
Red River FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Jackson Boom average 0.0 goals scored and concede 3.0 per game. Red River FC average 1.7 scored and 1.3 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Jackson Boom
At home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Red River FC
Away from home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Jackson Boom
Home
Red River FC
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.
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.
Red River FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Red River FC have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
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 · 68/100
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.
Red River FC strong attack
Red River FC scored in last 5
Jackson Boom concessions at weak rate
Jackson Boom conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 9
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 18
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Memphis
Home
Little Rock Rangers
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Memphis average 1.5 goals scored and concede 1.0 per game. Little Rock Rangers average 2.3 scored and 0.3 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Memphis
At home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Little Rock Rangers
Away from home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Memphis
Home
Little Rock Rangers
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Memphis attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Memphis defense is average at 1.00 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 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 95/100. Little Rock Rangers show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Little 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 2.5 · 70/100
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
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
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 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Rockford Raptors
Home
Sueno FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.5 (home) and 1.5 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Rockford Raptors
At home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 2.25 goals conceded per game.
Sueno FC
Away from home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Rockford Raptors
Home
Sueno FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Rockford Raptors attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Rockford Raptors defense is weak at 2.25 goals conceded per game.
Sueno FC attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Sueno FC defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Sueno FC have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 86% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 83/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
83/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 73/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 83/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Rockford Raptors scoring form 75%
Sueno FC scoring form 75%
Rockford Raptors attack strength 75%
Sueno FC attack strength 75%
Neither team attack < 70%
Rockford Raptors defense control
Sueno FC defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 63%
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 7
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 31
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.
St. Louis Ambush
Home
Des Moines Menace
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.
Des Moines Menace
Away from home, they average 0.67 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
St. Louis Ambush
Home
Des Moines Menace
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.
Des Moines Menace attack is weak at 0.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Des Moines Menace defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
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
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
St. Louis Ambush attack stays below 100%
Des Moines Menace attack stays below 100%
St. Louis Ambush Over 2.5 rate limit
Des Moines Menace Over 2.5 rate limit
St. Louis Ambush recent scoring is not high volume
Des Moines Menace recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 14
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 16
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Win <65
Below 65% by 16
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 35
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Weston FC
Home
FC Miami City Champions
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.
Weston FC
At home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
FC Miami City Champions
Away from home, they average 0.50 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Weston FC
Home
FC Miami City Champions
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Weston FC attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Weston FC defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
FC Miami City Champions attack is weak at 0.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
FC Miami City Champions defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Weston 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.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 65/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
65/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 65/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Weston FC attack stays below 100%
FC Miami City Champions attack stays below 100%
Weston FC Over 2.5 rate limit
FC Miami City Champions Over 2.5 rate limit
Weston FC recent scoring is not high volume
FC Miami City Champions recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 15
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 20
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Win <65
Below 65% by 24
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 30
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Fort Worth Vaqueros
Home
McKinney Chupacabras 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.
Fort Worth Vaqueros
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 7.00 goals conceded per game.
McKinney Chupacabras FC
Away from home, they average 3.50 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Fort Worth Vaqueros
Home
McKinney Chupacabras FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Fort Worth Vaqueros attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Fort Worth Vaqueros defense is weak at 7.00 goals conceded per game.
McKinney Chupacabras FC attack is strong at 3.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
McKinney Chupacabras FC defense is strong at 0.50 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
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: McKinney Chupacabras FC to Win — 56% 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
WinNo team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
86/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 77/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 86/100. 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
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
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.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Springfield FC
Home
Peoria City
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Peoria City have the clearer attacking edge at 3.0 goals per game, while Springfield FC concede 4.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Springfield FC
At home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 4.00 goals conceded per game.
Peoria City
Away from home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Springfield FC
Home
Peoria City
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Springfield FC attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Springfield FC defense is weak at 4.00 goals conceded per game.
Peoria City attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Peoria City defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Peoria City hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Peoria City have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Peoria City show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Peoria City show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Peoria City show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Peoria City strong attack
Peoria City stable defense
Peoria City non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Peoria City have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Vancouver Whitecaps II
Home
The Town FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.2 (home) and 1.6 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Vancouver Whitecaps II
At home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
The Town FC
Away from home, they average 1.60 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Vancouver Whitecaps II
Home
The Town FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Vancouver Whitecaps II attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Vancouver Whitecaps II defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
The Town FC attack is average at 1.60 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
The Town FC defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
The Town FC have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 83% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 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 · 69/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 85/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Vancouver Whitecaps II scoring form 80%
The Town FC scoring form 80%
Vancouver Whitecaps II attack strength 60%
The Town FC attack strength 80%
Neither team attack < 70%
Vancouver Whitecaps II defense control
The Town FC defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 70%
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 8
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
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.
Laredo Heat
Home
Twin City Toucans
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Laredo Heat averages 2.3 goals per game while the opponent concedes 3.0 — a clear attacking dominance in recent form.
Laredo Heat
At home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Twin City Toucans
Away from home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Laredo Heat
Home
Twin City Toucans
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Laredo Heat attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Laredo Heat defense is strong at 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Twin City Toucans attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
Twin City Toucans defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Laredo Heat hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Laredo Heat 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: Laredo Heat to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Laredo Heat show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinLaredo Heat show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Laredo Heat show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Laredo Heat strong attack
Laredo Heat stable defense
Laredo Heat 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
Laredo Heat 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.
Forward Madison FC
Home
Fort Wayne FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Forward Madison FC show the better attacking return at 3.0 goals per game compared with Fort Wayne FC at 1.5, but the gap is not wide enough to call this complete dominance.
Forward Madison FC
At home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Fort Wayne FC
Away from home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Forward Madison FC
Home
Fort Wayne FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Forward Madison FC attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Forward Madison FC defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Fort Wayne FC attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Fort Wayne FC defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Forward Madison FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 73% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 86/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Forward Madison FC scoring form 100%
Fort Wayne FC scoring form 100%
Forward Madison FC attack strength 100%
Fort Wayne FC attack strength 75%
Neither team attack < 70%
Forward Madison FC defense control
Fort Wayne FC defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 88%
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
Forward Madison 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 40
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Tacoma Defiance
Home
Houston Dynamo II
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Houston Dynamo II show the better attacking return at 2.0 goals per game compared with Tacoma Defiance at 1.0, but the gap is not wide enough to call this complete dominance.
Tacoma Defiance
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Houston Dynamo II
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Tacoma Defiance
Home
Houston Dynamo II
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Tacoma Defiance attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Tacoma Defiance defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Houston Dynamo II attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Houston Dynamo II defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Houston Dynamo II 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.
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 69% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 70/100. Houston Dynamo II have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Houston Dynamo II have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
70/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 69/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 70/100. Houston Dynamo II have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Houston Dynamo II strong attack
Houston Dynamo II scored in last 5
Tacoma Defiance concessions at weak rate
Tacoma Defiance 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 6
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.
Amsg FC
Home
Ventura County Fusion
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Ventura County Fusion have the clearer attacking edge at 2.8 goals per game, while Amsg FC concede 2.3 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Amsg FC
At home, they average 0.33 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Ventura County Fusion
Away from home, they average 2.75 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Amsg FC
Home
Ventura County Fusion
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Amsg FC attack is weak at 0.33 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Amsg FC defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Ventura County Fusion attack is strong at 2.75 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Ventura County Fusion defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Ventura County Fusion 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: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Ventura County Fusion show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Ventura County Fusion 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. Ventura County Fusion show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Ventura County Fusion strong attack
Ventura County Fusion stable defense
Ventura County Fusion 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
Ventura County Fusion 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 4
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 8
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Davis Legacy
Home
Marin FC Legends
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Davis Legacy average 1.7 goals scored and concede 1.0 per game. Marin FC Legends average 1.0 scored and 3.0 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Davis Legacy
At home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Marin FC Legends
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Davis Legacy
Home
Marin FC Legends
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Davis Legacy attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Davis Legacy defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Marin FC Legends attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Marin FC Legends defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Davis Legacy hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Davis Legacy 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.
WIN had the highest score at 78/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
78/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 75/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 78/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Davis Legacy strong attack
Davis Legacy stable defense
Davis Legacy 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 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.
Southern California Seahorses
Home
Redlands
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.
Southern California Seahorses
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Redlands
Away from home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Southern California Seahorses
Home
Redlands
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Southern California Seahorses attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Southern California Seahorses defense is average at 1.33 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.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Away team scored in only 2/5 recent games — BTTS or high-goal markets carry extra risk here.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 67/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
67/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 67/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Southern California Seahorses scoring form 67%
Redlands scoring form 67%
Southern California Seahorses attack strength 50%
Redlands attack strength 100%
Neither team attack < 70%
Southern California Seahorses defense control
Redlands defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 67%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 3
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Win <65
Below 65% by 7
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.
Capo
Home
City SC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.0 (home) and 3.0 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Capo
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 2.60 goals conceded per game.
City SC
Away from home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Capo
Home
City SC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Capo attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Capo defense is weak at 2.60 goals conceded per game.
City SC attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
City SC defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
City SC 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 2.5 Goals — 86% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
96/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 92/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Capo attack strength 100%
City SC attack strength 100%
Capo scoring form 100%
City SC scoring form 100%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 80%
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
City 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 1.5 ≥65
Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 31
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.
FC Gute
Home
Falu
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
FC Gute
At home, they average 0.50 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Falu
Away from home, they average 0.67 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
FC Gute
Home
Falu
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FC Gute attack is weak at 0.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
FC Gute defense is strong at 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Falu attack is weak at 0.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Falu defense is strong at 0.67 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
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 82% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
74/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Gute attack stays below 100%
Falu attack stays below 100%
FC Gute Over 2.5 rate limit
Falu Over 2.5 rate limit
FC Gute recent scoring is not high volume
Falu recent scoring is not high volume
Combined Over 2.5 trend is low
Combined BTTS trend is low
At least one defensive profile is stable
Market Fit Scores
Under 3.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 23
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Win <65
Below 65% by 27
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 38
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 57
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Brommapojkarna W
Home
Vittsjo GIK W
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.8 (home) and 1.4 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Brommapojkarna W
At home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Vittsjo GIK W
Away from home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Brommapojkarna W
Home
Vittsjo GIK W
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Brommapojkarna W attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Brommapojkarna W defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Vittsjo GIK W attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Vittsjo GIK W defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Vittsjo GIK W have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 66% confidence from recent form analysis.
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.
Brommapojkarna W scoring form 80%
Vittsjo GIK W scoring form 100%
Brommapojkarna W attack strength 90%
Vittsjo GIK W attack strength 70%
Neither team attack < 70%
Brommapojkarna W defense control
Vittsjo GIK W defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 70%
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
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 33
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Fountain Gate FC
Home
Young Africans
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Young Africans have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Fountain Gate FC concede 2.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Fountain Gate FC
At home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Young Africans
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Fountain Gate FC
Home
Young Africans
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Fountain Gate FC attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
Fountain Gate FC defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Young Africans attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Young Africans defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Young Africans hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Young Africans have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 90/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 70/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 90/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Young Africans strong attack
Young Africans stable defense
Young Africans 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
Young Africans 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 7
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 17
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Pamba SC
Home
Mtibwa Sugar
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Pamba SC have the clearer attacking edge at 3.0 goals per game, while Mtibwa Sugar concede 2.3 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Pamba SC
At home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Mtibwa Sugar
Away from home, they average 0.33 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Pamba SC
Home
Mtibwa Sugar
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Pamba SC attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Pamba SC defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Mtibwa Sugar attack is weak at 0.33 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Mtibwa Sugar defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Pamba SC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Pamba SC 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 — 75% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. Pamba 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.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Pamba 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.
Selection Score
84/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 74/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. Pamba 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.
Pamba SC strong attack
Pamba SC scored in last 5
Mtibwa Sugar concessions at weak rate
Mtibwa Sugar 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 10
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Meshakhte Tkibuli
Home
FC Gagra
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
FC Meshakhte Tkibuli
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 3.67 goals conceded per game.
FC Gagra
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
FC Meshakhte Tkibuli
Home
FC Gagra
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FC Meshakhte Tkibuli attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
FC Meshakhte Tkibuli defense is weak at 3.67 goals conceded per game.
FC Gagra attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
FC Gagra defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
FC Gagra have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Away team scored in only 2/5 recent games — BTTS or high-goal markets carry extra risk here.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 73/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
73/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 73/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Meshakhte Tkibuli scoring form 100%
FC Gagra scoring form 67%
FC Meshakhte Tkibuli attack strength 50%
FC Gagra attack strength 50%
Neither team attack < 70%
FC Meshakhte Tkibuli defense control
FC Gagra defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 83%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Win <65
Below 65% by 14
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 20
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Olympique Dcheira
Home
FAR Rabat
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.
Olympique Dcheira
At home, they average 0.80 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
FAR Rabat
Away from home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Olympique Dcheira
Home
FAR Rabat
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Olympique Dcheira attack is weak at 0.80 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Olympique Dcheira defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
FAR Rabat attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
FAR Rabat defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
FAR Rabat hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
FAR Rabat 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: FAR Rabat to Win — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 78/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
WinNo team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
78/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 72/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 78/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
FAR Rabat strong attack
FAR Rabat stable defense
FAR Rabat 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
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 3
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 23
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
RS Berkane
Home
Olympic Club de Safi
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.
RS Berkane
At home, they average 0.60 goals scored and 0.20 goals conceded per game.
Olympic Club de Safi
Away from home, they average 0.60 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
RS Berkane
Home
Olympic Club de Safi
Away
Supporting Reasoning
RS Berkane attack is weak at 0.60 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
RS Berkane defense is strong at 0.20 goals conceded per game.
Olympic Club de Safi attack is weak at 0.60 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Olympic Club de Safi defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Under 3.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 90/100. Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 90/100. Attacking output is limited, goal trend support is low, and defensive structure supports control, supporting the under 3.5 market.
RS Berkane attack stays below 100%
Olympic Club de Safi attack stays below 100%
RS Berkane Over 2.5 rate limit
Olympic Club de Safi Over 2.5 rate limit
RS Berkane recent scoring is not high volume
Olympic Club de Safi 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 10
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 26
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 40
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Union Yacoub El-Mansour
Home
Hassania Agadir
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.
Union Yacoub El-Mansour
At home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Hassania Agadir
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Union Yacoub El-Mansour
Home
Hassania Agadir
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Union Yacoub El-Mansour attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Union Yacoub El-Mansour defense is weak at 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Hassania Agadir attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Hassania Agadir defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Hassania Agadir 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 82/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
82/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 82/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Union Yacoub El-Mansour scoring form 100%
Hassania Agadir scoring form 80%
Union Yacoub El-Mansour attack strength 60%
Hassania Agadir attack strength 50%
Neither team attack < 70%
Union Yacoub El-Mansour defense control
Hassania Agadir defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 70%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 1
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
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 33
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Eskilstuna United DFF W
Home
Piteaa W
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.
Eskilstuna United DFF W
At home, they average 0.60 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Piteaa W
Away from home, they average 0.80 goals scored and 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Eskilstuna United DFF W
Home
Piteaa W
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Eskilstuna United DFF W attack is weak at 0.60 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Eskilstuna United DFF W defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Piteaa W attack is weak at 0.80 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Piteaa W defense is weak at 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Eskilstuna United DFF W 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 86/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
86/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 86/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Eskilstuna United DFF W attack stays below 100%
Piteaa W attack stays below 100%
Eskilstuna United DFF W Over 2.5 rate limit
Piteaa W Over 2.5 rate limit
Eskilstuna United DFF W recent scoring is not high volume
Piteaa W 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 17
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 20
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 35
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
IFK Gothenburg
Home
Vaalerenga
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.0 (home) and 1.4 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
IFK Gothenburg
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Vaalerenga
Away from home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
IFK Gothenburg
Home
Vaalerenga
Away
Supporting Reasoning
IFK Gothenburg attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
IFK Gothenburg defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Vaalerenga attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Vaalerenga defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
IFK Gothenburg hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Vaalerenga have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 63% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 87/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
87/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 80/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 87/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
IFK Gothenburg scoring form 80%
Vaalerenga scoring form 60%
IFK Gothenburg attack strength 100%
Vaalerenga attack strength 70%
Neither team attack < 70%
IFK Gothenburg defense control
Vaalerenga defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 70%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
IFK Gothenburg have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FCI Levadia U21
Home
Tartu JK Welco
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output and consistent scoring trends. This creates a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
FCI Levadia U21
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Tartu JK Welco
Away from home, they average 2.80 goals scored and 0.60 goals conceded per game.
FCI Levadia U21
Home
Tartu JK Welco
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FCI Levadia U21 attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
FCI Levadia U21 defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Tartu JK Welco attack is strong at 2.80 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Tartu JK Welco defense is strong at 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Tartu JK Welco have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Away defense is well-organized (avg 0.6 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 2.5 Goals — 71% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
96/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 86/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
FCI Levadia U21 attack strength 100%
Tartu JK Welco attack strength 100%
FCI Levadia U21 scoring form 100%
Tartu JK Welco scoring form 100%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 70%
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
Tartu JK Welco 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.
Nomme United U21
Home
Talinna Kalev
Away
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.
Nomme United U21
At home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 2.40 goals conceded per game.
Talinna Kalev
Away from home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Nomme United U21
Home
Talinna Kalev
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Nomme United U21 attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Nomme United U21 defense is weak at 2.40 goals conceded per game.
Talinna Kalev attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Talinna Kalev defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 88% 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 · 84/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Nomme United U21 scoring form 100%
Talinna Kalev scoring form 80%
Nomme United U21 attack strength 70%
Talinna Kalev attack strength 90%
Neither team attack < 70%
Nomme United U21 defense control
Talinna Kalev 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
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 18
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.
Douanes Niamey
Home
AS FAN
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Douanes Niamey average 3.3 goals scored and concede 0.0 per game. AS FAN average 1.0 scored and 1.0 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Douanes Niamey
At home, they average 3.33 goals scored and 0.00 goals conceded per game.
AS FAN
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Douanes Niamey
Home
AS FAN
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Douanes Niamey attack is strong at 3.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Douanes Niamey defense is strong at 0.00 goals conceded per game.
AS FAN attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
AS FAN defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Douanes Niamey hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Douanes Niamey 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: Douanes Niamey to Win — 93% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Douanes Niamey show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinDouanes Niamey 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. Douanes Niamey show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Douanes Niamey strong attack
Douanes Niamey stable defense
Douanes Niamey 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
Douanes Niamey 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 14
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Olympic Niamey
Home
Liberte
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
Olympic Niamey
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Liberte
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Olympic Niamey
Home
Liberte
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Olympic Niamey attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Olympic Niamey defense is strong at 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Liberte attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Liberte defense is strong at 0.67 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.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Home defense has been very tight recently (avg 0.67 conceded) — goals against them are harder to come by.
Away defense is well-organized (avg 0.67 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
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.
Olympic Niamey scoring form 100%
Liberte scoring form 100%
Olympic Niamey attack strength 50%
Liberte attack strength 67%
Neither team attack < 70%
Olympic Niamey defense control
Liberte defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 67%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Win <65
Below 65% by 12
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 15
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 34
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Tahoua
Home
Espoir
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.
Tahoua
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Espoir
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Tahoua
Home
Espoir
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Tahoua attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Tahoua defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Espoir attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Espoir defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Tahoua hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Espoir 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 84/100. Tahoua 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 1.5Tahoua have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
84/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 79/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. Tahoua 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.
Tahoua strong attack
Tahoua scored in last 5
Espoir concessions at weak rate
Espoir 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.
Win <65
Below 65% by 5
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.
FC Elva
Home
Viimsi JK
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.0 (home) and 1.4 (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.
Viimsi JK
Away from home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 0.60 goals conceded per game.
FC Elva
Home
Viimsi JK
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.
Viimsi JK attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Viimsi JK defense is strong at 0.60 goals conceded per game.
FC Elva hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Viimsi JK 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 0.6 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 63% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 76/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
76/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 69/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 76/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Elva scoring form 60%
Viimsi JK scoring form 80%
FC Elva attack strength 100%
Viimsi JK attack strength 70%
Neither team attack < 70%
FC Elva defense control
Viimsi JK defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 40%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 7
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 10
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Tallinn
Home
Flora Tallinn U21
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Flora Tallinn U21 have the clearer attacking edge at 2.2 goals per game, while FC Tallinn concede 2.4 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
FC Tallinn
At home, they average 0.80 goals scored and 2.40 goals conceded per game.
Flora Tallinn U21
Away from home, they average 2.20 goals scored and 2.20 goals conceded per game.
FC Tallinn
Home
Flora Tallinn U21
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FC Tallinn attack is weak at 0.80 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
FC Tallinn defense is weak at 2.40 goals conceded per game.
Flora Tallinn U21 attack is strong at 2.20 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Flora Tallinn U21 defense is weak at 2.20 goals conceded per game.
Flora Tallinn U21 hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 72% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. Flora Tallinn U21 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 1.5Flora Tallinn U21 have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
92/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 75/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. Flora Tallinn U21 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.
Flora Tallinn U21 strong attack
Flora Tallinn U21 scored in last 5
FC Tallinn concessions at weak rate
FC Tallinn 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
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Maardu Linnameeskond
Home
Nomme Kalju U21
Away
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.
Maardu Linnameeskond
At home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Nomme Kalju U21
Away from home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Maardu Linnameeskond
Home
Nomme Kalju U21
Away
Supporting Reasoning
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.
Nomme Kalju U21 attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Nomme Kalju U21 defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Nomme Kalju U21 hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Maardu Linnameeskond have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 86% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 87/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
87/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 87/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Maardu Linnameeskond scoring form 60%
Nomme Kalju U21 scoring form 100%
Maardu Linnameeskond attack strength 70%
Nomme Kalju U21 attack strength 90%
Neither team attack < 70%
Maardu Linnameeskond defense control
Nomme Kalju U21 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 3
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Dinamo Tbilisi
Home
FC Samgurali Tskhaltubo
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.5 (home) and 2.0 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Dinamo Tbilisi
At home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
FC Samgurali Tskhaltubo
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 2.67 goals conceded per game.
Dinamo Tbilisi
Home
FC Samgurali Tskhaltubo
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Dinamo Tbilisi attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Dinamo Tbilisi defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
FC Samgurali Tskhaltubo attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
FC Samgurali Tskhaltubo defense is weak at 2.67 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.
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
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 — 65% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 73/100. Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
73/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 69/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 73/100. Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Dinamo Tbilisi attack strength 100%
FC Samgurali Tskhaltubo attack strength 100%
Dinamo Tbilisi scoring form 50%
FC Samgurali Tskhaltubo scoring form 67%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 58%
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
Below 65% by 5
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 53
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
BK Haecken W
Home
FC Rosengaard W
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
BK Haecken W hold the stronger defensive numbers at 0.4 goals conceded per game, while FC Rosengaard W allow 1.4. Any edge in this fixture starts from defensive stability.
BK Haecken W
At home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 0.40 goals conceded per game.
FC Rosengaard W
Away from home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
BK Haecken W
Home
FC Rosengaard W
Away
Supporting Reasoning
BK Haecken W attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
BK Haecken W defense is strong at 0.40 goals conceded per game.
FC Rosengaard W attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
FC Rosengaard W defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
BK Haecken W 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.
Home defense has been very tight recently (avg 0.4 conceded) — goals against them are harder to come by.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 69% 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 · 71/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 85/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
BK Haecken W scoring form 100%
FC Rosengaard W scoring form 80%
BK Haecken W attack strength 90%
FC Rosengaard W attack strength 70%
Neither team attack < 70%
BK Haecken W defense control
FC Rosengaard W defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 40%
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 12
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Kristianstads DFF W
Home
IK Uppsala Fotboll W
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.2 (home) and 1.2 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Kristianstads DFF W
At home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
IK Uppsala Fotboll W
Away from home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 2.80 goals conceded per game.
Kristianstads DFF W
Home
IK Uppsala Fotboll W
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Kristianstads DFF W attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Kristianstads DFF W defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
IK Uppsala Fotboll W attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
IK Uppsala Fotboll W defense is weak at 2.80 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
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 — 85% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 68/100. 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
68/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 65/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 68/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Kristianstads DFF W strong attack
Kristianstads DFF W scored in last 5
IK Uppsala Fotboll W concessions at weak rate
IK Uppsala Fotboll W conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
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 14
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 28
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Lidkoepings FK
Home
Husqvarna FF
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Husqvarna FF have the clearer attacking edge at 3.0 goals per game, while Lidkoepings FK concede 2.3 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Lidkoepings FK
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Husqvarna FF
Away from home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Lidkoepings FK
Home
Husqvarna FF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Lidkoepings FK attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Lidkoepings FK defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Husqvarna FF attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Husqvarna FF defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Husqvarna FF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Husqvarna FF have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Husqvarna FF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Husqvarna FF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Husqvarna FF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Husqvarna FF strong attack
Husqvarna FF stable defense
Husqvarna FF non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Husqvarna FF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Jitex BK W
Home
KIF Orebro W
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Jitex BK W average 1.0 goals scored and concede 1.4 per game. KIF Orebro W average 2.6 scored and 0.6 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Jitex BK W
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
KIF Orebro W
Away from home, they average 2.60 goals scored and 0.60 goals conceded per game.
Jitex BK W
Home
KIF Orebro W
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Jitex BK W attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Jitex BK W defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
KIF Orebro W attack is strong at 2.60 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
KIF Orebro W defense is strong at 0.60 goals conceded per game.
KIF Orebro W hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
KIF Orebro W have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The weaker team may set up in a compact defensive block and frustrate through rare counter-attacks.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: KIF Orebro W to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. KIF Orebro W show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinKIF Orebro W 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. KIF Orebro W show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
KIF Orebro W strong attack
KIF Orebro W stable defense
KIF Orebro W 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
KIF Orebro W have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
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 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Gefle
Home
FC Stockholm Internazionale
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Gefle average 0.0 goals scored and concede 3.0 per game. FC Stockholm Internazionale average 1.7 scored and 0.7 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Gefle
At home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
FC Stockholm Internazionale
Away from home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Gefle
Home
FC Stockholm Internazionale
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Gefle attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
Gefle defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
FC Stockholm Internazionale attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
FC Stockholm Internazionale defense is strong at 0.67 goals conceded per game.
FC Stockholm Internazionale hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
FC Stockholm Internazionale have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 88/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
88/100
Runner Up
Under 3.5 · 65/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 88/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
FC Stockholm Internazionale strong attack
FC Stockholm Internazionale stable defense
FC Stockholm Internazionale non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Under 3.5 ≥65
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 6
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 32
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Hammarby TFF
Home
FC Jaerfaella
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.
Hammarby TFF
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
FC Jaerfaella
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Hammarby TFF
Home
FC Jaerfaella
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Hammarby TFF attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Hammarby TFF defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
FC Jaerfaella attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
FC Jaerfaella defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Hammarby TFF 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 81/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
81/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 81/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Hammarby TFF scoring form 100%
FC Jaerfaella scoring form 100%
Hammarby TFF attack strength 50%
FC Jaerfaella attack strength 50%
Neither team attack < 70%
Hammarby TFF defense control
FC Jaerfaella defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 100%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 14
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Win <65
Below 65% by 30
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Vasalunds
Home
Karlbergs BK
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Karlbergs BK have the clearer attacking edge at 2.3 goals per game, while Vasalunds concede 2.5 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Vasalunds
At home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Karlbergs BK
Away from home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Vasalunds
Home
Karlbergs BK
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Vasalunds attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Vasalunds defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Karlbergs BK attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Karlbergs BK defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Karlbergs BK hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Karlbergs BK have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 90/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
90/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 90/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Karlbergs BK strong attack
Karlbergs BK stable defense
Karlbergs BK 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
Karlbergs BK have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Eskilsminne IF
Home
FC Trollhaettan
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Eskilsminne IF have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while FC Trollhaettan concede 2.7 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Eskilsminne IF
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
FC Trollhaettan
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 2.67 goals conceded per game.
Eskilsminne IF
Home
FC Trollhaettan
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Eskilsminne IF attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Eskilsminne IF defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
FC Trollhaettan attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
FC Trollhaettan defense is weak at 2.67 goals conceded per game.
Eskilsminne IF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Eskilsminne IF have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 70% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 74/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
74/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 71/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 74/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Eskilsminne IF strong attack
Eskilsminne IF stable defense
Eskilsminne IF non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Eskilsminne IF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Joenkoepings Soedra
Home
Lunds BK
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Joenkoepings Soedra show the better attacking return at 2.3 goals per game compared with Lunds BK at 1.3, but the gap is not wide enough to call this complete dominance.
Joenkoepings Soedra
At home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Lunds BK
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Joenkoepings Soedra
Home
Lunds BK
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Joenkoepings Soedra attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Joenkoepings Soedra defense is strong at 0.33 goals conceded per game.
Lunds BK attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Lunds BK defense is strong at 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Joenkoepings Soedra 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.
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 69% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 70/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
70/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 70/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Joenkoepings Soedra strong attack
Joenkoepings Soedra stable defense
Joenkoepings Soedra 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 16
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 26
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 27
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Skoevde AIK
Home
Haessleholms IF
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.5 (home) and 2.3 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Skoevde AIK
At home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Haessleholms IF
Away from home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Skoevde AIK
Home
Haessleholms IF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Skoevde AIK attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Skoevde AIK defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Haessleholms IF attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Haessleholms IF defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
Haessleholms IF 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.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 67% 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.
Skoevde AIK scoring form 100%
Haessleholms IF scoring form 100%
Skoevde AIK attack strength 75%
Haessleholms IF attack strength 100%
Neither team attack < 70%
Skoevde AIK defense control
Haessleholms IF defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 75%
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
Haessleholms 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 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Trelleborgs FF
Home
FC Rosengaard
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Trelleborgs FF show the better attacking return at 3.5 goals per game compared with FC Rosengaard at 1.5, but the gap is not wide enough to call this complete dominance.
Trelleborgs FF
At home, they average 3.50 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
FC Rosengaard
Away from home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Trelleborgs FF
Home
FC Rosengaard
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Trelleborgs FF attack is strong at 3.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Trelleborgs FF defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
FC Rosengaard attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
FC Rosengaard defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Trelleborgs FF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Away team scored in only 2/5 recent games — BTTS or high-goal markets carry extra risk here.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 2.5 Goals — 73% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 88/100. 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
88/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 86/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 88/100. 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.
Trelleborgs FF attack strength 100%
FC Rosengaard attack strength 75%
Trelleborgs FF scoring form 100%
FC Rosengaard scoring form 100%
Combined Over 2.5 trend is 75%
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
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Trelleborgs FF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Tvaakers IF
Home
Aengelholms FF
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Tvaakers IF average 1.8 goals scored and concede 1.5 per game. Aengelholms FF average 1.3 scored and 2.3 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Tvaakers IF
At home, they average 1.75 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Aengelholms FF
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Tvaakers IF
Home
Aengelholms FF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Tvaakers IF attack is average at 1.75 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Tvaakers IF defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Aengelholms FF attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Aengelholms FF defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Tvaakers IF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Tvaakers IF 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 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 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 · 74/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 78/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Tvaakers IF scoring form 100%
Aengelholms FF scoring form 67%
Tvaakers IF attack strength 88%
Aengelholms FF attack strength 67%
Neither team attack < 70%
Tvaakers IF defense control
Aengelholms FF 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.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 3
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 4
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 33
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Grebbestads IF
Home
Vaenersborgs IF
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Grebbestads IF have the clearer attacking edge at 2.3 goals per game, while Vaenersborgs IF concede 3.7 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Grebbestads IF
At home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Vaenersborgs IF
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 3.67 goals conceded per game.
Grebbestads IF
Home
Vaenersborgs IF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Grebbestads IF attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Grebbestads IF defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Vaenersborgs IF attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Vaenersborgs IF defense is weak at 3.67 goals conceded per game.
Grebbestads IF 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.
WIN had the highest score at 76/100. 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
76/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 70/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 76/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Grebbestads IF strong attack
Grebbestads IF stable defense
Grebbestads IF non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Grebbestads IF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 4
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 37
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Herrestads AIF
Home
IFK Skoevde FK
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.
Herrestads AIF
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
IFK Skoevde FK
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Herrestads AIF
Home
IFK Skoevde FK
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Herrestads AIF attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Herrestads AIF defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
IFK Skoevde FK attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
IFK Skoevde FK defense is strong at 0.67 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.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Away defense is well-organized (avg 0.67 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
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 65/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
65/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 65/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Herrestads AIF scoring form 100%
IFK Skoevde FK scoring form 67%
Herrestads AIF attack strength 50%
IFK Skoevde FK attack strength 67%
Neither team attack < 70%
Herrestads AIF defense control
IFK Skoevde FK defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 50%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Win <65
Below 65% by 11
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 15
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 22
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Skiljebo SK
Home
IK Franke
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Skiljebo SK have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while IK Franke concede 2.3 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Skiljebo SK
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
IK Franke
Away from home, they average 1.25 goals scored and 2.25 goals conceded per game.
Skiljebo SK
Home
IK Franke
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Skiljebo SK attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Skiljebo SK defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
IK Franke attack is average at 1.25 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
IK Franke defense is weak at 2.25 goals conceded per game.
Skiljebo SK hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Skiljebo SK have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 69% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. Skiljebo SK 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 1.5Skiljebo SK have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
92/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 82/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. Skiljebo SK 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.
Skiljebo SK strong attack
Skiljebo SK scored in last 5
IK Franke concessions at weak rate
IK Franke conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Viggbyholms IK FF
Home
Aengby IF
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Aengby IF have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Viggbyholms IK FF concede 3.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Viggbyholms IK FF
At home, they average 0.67 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Aengby IF
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Viggbyholms IK FF
Home
Aengby IF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Viggbyholms IK FF attack is weak at 0.67 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Viggbyholms IK FF defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Aengby IF attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Aengby IF defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Aengby IF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Aengby IF have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Aengby IF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Aengby IF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 70/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Aengby IF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Aengby IF strong attack
Aengby IF stable defense
Aengby IF non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Aengby IF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 1
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 8
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
FK Karlskrona
Home
IFK Karlshamn
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
IFK Karlshamn have the clearer attacking edge at 1.5 goals per game, while FK Karlskrona concede 1.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
FK Karlskrona
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
IFK Karlshamn
Away from home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
FK Karlskrona
Home
IFK Karlshamn
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FK Karlskrona attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
FK Karlskrona defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
IFK Karlshamn attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
IFK Karlshamn defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
FK Karlskrona hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
FK Karlskrona 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 1.5 Goals — 72% 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.
FK Karlskrona scoring form 100%
IFK Karlshamn scoring form 100%
FK Karlskrona attack strength 100%
IFK Karlshamn attack strength 75%
Neither team attack < 70%
FK Karlskrona defense control
IFK Karlshamn defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 100%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 ≥65
FK Karlskrona 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.
Soelvesborgs GOIF
Home
Raeppe GOIF
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 1.3 (home) and 1.5 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Soelvesborgs GOIF
At home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Raeppe GOIF
Away from home, they average 1.50 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Soelvesborgs GOIF
Home
Raeppe GOIF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Soelvesborgs GOIF attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Soelvesborgs GOIF defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Raeppe GOIF attack is average at 1.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Raeppe GOIF defense is strong at 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Raeppe GOIF 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 0.5 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
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 — 62% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 86/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
86/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 86/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Soelvesborgs GOIF scoring form 100%
Raeppe GOIF scoring form 100%
Soelvesborgs GOIF attack strength 67%
Raeppe GOIF attack strength 75%
Neither team attack < 70%
Soelvesborgs GOIF defense control
Raeppe GOIF defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 75%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 3
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 7
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 14
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 15
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Staffanstorp United FC
Home
Linero IF
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Linero IF have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Staffanstorp United FC concede 1.7 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Staffanstorp United FC
At home, they average 3.33 goals scored and 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Linero IF
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Staffanstorp United FC
Home
Linero IF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Staffanstorp United FC attack is strong at 3.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Staffanstorp United FC defense is weak at 1.67 goals conceded per game.
Linero IF attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Linero IF defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
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 — 74% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
96/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 90/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Staffanstorp United FC attack strength 100%
Linero IF attack strength 100%
Staffanstorp United FC scoring form 100%
Linero IF 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
Staffanstorp United 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.
Fraensta IK
Home
Friska Viljor
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Friska Viljor hold the stronger defensive numbers at 0.5 goals conceded per game, while Fraensta IK allow 2.0. Any edge in this fixture starts from defensive stability.
Fraensta IK
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Friska Viljor
Away from home, they average 1.25 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
Fraensta IK
Home
Friska Viljor
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Fraensta IK attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Fraensta IK defense is weak at 2.00 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.
Neither team has a clear 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 — 69% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 76/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
76/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 76/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Fraensta IK scoring form 100%
Friska Viljor scoring form 75%
Fraensta IK attack strength 50%
Friska Viljor attack strength 63%
Neither team attack < 70%
Fraensta IK 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 3
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 18
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 19
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Kubikenborgs IF
Home
Gottne IF
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average 2.5 (home) and 3.0 (away) goals per game with open defenses on both ends. Goals are expected from both sides.
Kubikenborgs IF
At home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Gottne IF
Away from home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Kubikenborgs IF
Home
Gottne IF
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.
Gottne IF attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Gottne IF defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Gottne IF have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Open matches are volatile: an early goal, red card, or tactical shift can completely change the dynamic.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Away team scored in only 2/5 recent games — BTTS or high-goal markets carry extra risk here.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 2.5 Goals — 90% confidence from recent form analysis.
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selected Market
Over 2.5Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Selection Score
96/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 90/100
Selection Reason
OVER 2.5 had the highest score at 96/100. Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Kubikenborgs IF attack strength 100%
Gottne IF attack strength 100%
Kubikenborgs IF scoring form 100%
Gottne IF 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 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.
IFK Norrkoeping W
Home
Vaexjoe W
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
IFK Norrkoeping W
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Vaexjoe W
Away from home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 1.80 goals conceded per game.
IFK Norrkoeping W
Home
Vaexjoe W
Away
Supporting Reasoning
IFK Norrkoeping W attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
IFK Norrkoeping W defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Vaexjoe W attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Vaexjoe W defense is weak at 1.80 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
IFK Norrkoeping W 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 77/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Under 3.5Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
77/100
Runner Up
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 77/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
IFK Norrkoeping W attack stays below 100%
Vaexjoe W attack stays below 100%
IFK Norrkoeping W Over 2.5 rate limit
Vaexjoe W Over 2.5 rate limit
IFK Norrkoeping W recent scoring is not high volume
Vaexjoe W 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 5
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 17
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 22
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 29
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Husqvarna FF
Home
Elfsborg
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Elfsborg hold the stronger defensive numbers at 0.4 goals conceded per game, while Husqvarna FF allow 2.2. Any edge in this fixture starts from defensive stability.
Husqvarna FF
At home, they average 1.60 goals scored and 2.20 goals conceded per game.
Elfsborg
Away from home, they average 1.40 goals scored and 0.40 goals conceded per game.
Husqvarna FF
Home
Elfsborg
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Husqvarna FF attack is average at 1.60 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Husqvarna FF defense is weak at 2.20 goals conceded per game.
Elfsborg attack is average at 1.40 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Elfsborg defense is strong at 0.40 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
Elfsborg 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 0.4 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 69% 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 · 69/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 90/100. Both teams score consistently and both teams concede often enough, supporting the BTTS market.
Husqvarna FF scoring form 80%
Elfsborg scoring form 100%
Husqvarna FF attack strength 80%
Elfsborg attack strength 70%
Neither team attack < 70%
Husqvarna FF defense control
Elfsborg defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 60%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 9
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Linkoepings FC W
Home
Alingsas FC United W
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Linkoepings FC W average 2.4 goals scored and concede 0.4 per game. Alingsas FC United W average 0.4 scored and 1.4 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Linkoepings FC W
At home, they average 2.40 goals scored and 0.40 goals conceded per game.
Alingsas FC United W
Away from home, they average 0.40 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Linkoepings FC W
Home
Alingsas FC United W
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Linkoepings FC W attack is strong at 2.40 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Linkoepings FC W defense is strong at 0.40 goals conceded per game.
Alingsas FC United W attack is weak at 0.40 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Alingsas FC United W defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Linkoepings FC W hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Linkoepings FC W have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The weaker team may set up in a compact defensive block and frustrate through rare counter-attacks.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Linkoepings FC W to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Linkoepings FC W show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinLinkoepings FC W 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. Linkoepings FC W show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Linkoepings FC W strong attack
Linkoepings FC W stable defense
Linkoepings FC W 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
Linkoepings FC W have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 7
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 8
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 15
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Arlanda
Home
IFK Stocksund
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
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.
FC Arlanda
At home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
IFK Stocksund
Away from home, they average 2.67 goals scored and 1.33 goals conceded per game.
FC Arlanda
Home
IFK Stocksund
Away
Supporting Reasoning
FC Arlanda attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
FC Arlanda defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
IFK Stocksund attack is strong at 2.67 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
IFK Stocksund defense is average at 1.33 goals conceded per game.
IFK Stocksund 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.
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 — 64% 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 2.5 · 71/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 78/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
FC Arlanda scoring form 100%
IFK Stocksund scoring form 67%
FC Arlanda attack strength 84%
IFK Stocksund attack strength 100%
Neither team attack < 70%
FC Arlanda defense control
IFK Stocksund defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 50%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 5
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 18
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.
Ahlafors IF
Home
Skara FC
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Skara FC show the better attacking return at 2.0 goals per game compared with Ahlafors IF at 1.0, but the gap is not wide enough to call this complete dominance.
Ahlafors IF
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Skara FC
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Ahlafors IF
Home
Skara FC
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Ahlafors IF attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
Ahlafors IF defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Skara FC attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Skara FC defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Skara FC hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Home team scored in only 1/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 71% confidence from recent form analysis.
BTTS had the highest score at 83/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selected Market
Over 1.5BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Selection Score
83/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 72/100
Selection Reason
BTTS had the highest score at 83/100. BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Ahlafors IF scoring form 100%
Skara FC scoring form 100%
Ahlafors IF attack strength 50%
Skara FC attack strength 100%
Neither team attack < 70%
Ahlafors IF defense control
Skara FC defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 100%
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
Skara 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.
Vaenersborgs FK
Home
Stenungsunds IF
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Stenungsunds IF have the clearer attacking edge at 2.5 goals per game, while Vaenersborgs FK concede 3.3 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Vaenersborgs FK
At home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 3.33 goals conceded per game.
Stenungsunds IF
Away from home, they average 2.50 goals scored and 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Vaenersborgs FK
Home
Stenungsunds IF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Vaenersborgs FK attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Vaenersborgs FK defense is weak at 3.33 goals conceded per game.
Stenungsunds IF attack is strong at 2.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Stenungsunds IF defense is weak at 2.50 goals conceded per game.
Stenungsunds IF 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.
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 1.5 Goals — 69% 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.
Vaenersborgs FK scoring form 100%
Stenungsunds IF scoring form 100%
Vaenersborgs FK attack strength 84%
Stenungsunds IF attack strength 100%
Neither team attack < 70%
Vaenersborgs FK defense control
Stenungsunds IF defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 100%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
Stenungsunds 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 11
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.
IFK Kumla
Home
IK Tord
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Both teams average below 1.3 goals per game and have kept solid defensive shapes. A low-scoring, controlled fixture is expected.
IFK Kumla
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
IK Tord
Away from home, they average 0.00 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
IFK Kumla
Home
IK Tord
Away
Supporting Reasoning
IFK Kumla attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
IFK Kumla defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
IK Tord attack is weak at 0.00 goals per game and they scored in 0 of their last 5 matches.
IK Tord defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
IFK Kumla 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
—
Selection Reason
UNDER 3.5 had the highest score at 74/100. Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
IFK Kumla attack stays below 100%
IK Tord attack stays below 100%
IFK Kumla Over 2.5 rate limit
IK Tord Over 2.5 rate limit
IFK Kumla recent scoring is not high volume
IK Tord 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 11
No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 21
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 40
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Dalstorps IF
Home
BK Astrio
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Dalstorps IF averages 3.5 goals per game while the opponent concedes 2.3 — a clear attacking dominance in recent form.
Dalstorps IF
At home, they average 3.50 goals scored and 0.50 goals conceded per game.
BK Astrio
Away from home, they average 0.33 goals scored and 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Dalstorps IF
Home
BK Astrio
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Dalstorps IF attack is strong at 3.50 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Dalstorps IF defense is strong at 0.50 goals conceded per game.
BK Astrio attack is weak at 0.33 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
BK Astrio defense is weak at 2.33 goals conceded per game.
Dalstorps IF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Dalstorps IF 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: Dalstorps IF to Win — 94% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Dalstorps IF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
WinDalstorps IF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Dalstorps IF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Dalstorps IF strong attack
Dalstorps IF stable defense
Dalstorps IF non-loss rate
Attack edge over opponent
Defensive edge over opponent
Recent scoring trend better than opponent
Opponent shows defensive or attacking weakness
Classification supports a winner profile
Market Fit Scores
Win Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
Dalstorps IF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 10
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
IF Bоеlan
Home
Onsala BK
Away
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Onsala BK have the clearer attacking edge at 1.7 goals per game, while IF Bоеlan concede 1.5 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
IF Bоеlan
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Onsala BK
Away from home, they average 1.67 goals scored and 2.67 goals conceded per game.
IF Bоеlan
Home
Onsala BK
Away
Supporting Reasoning
IF Bоеlan attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
IF Bоеlan defense is average at 1.50 goals conceded per game.
Onsala BK attack is average at 1.67 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Onsala BK defense is weak at 2.67 goals conceded per game.
Neither team has a clear attacking edge on the current numbers.
IF Bоеlan 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.
Home team scored in only 2/5 recent games — their attacking reliability is inconsistent.
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.
IF Bоеlan scoring form 100%
Onsala BK scoring form 100%
IF Bоеlan attack strength 100%
Onsala BK attack strength 84%
Neither team attack < 70%
IF Bоеlan defense control
Onsala BK defense control
Combined BTTS trend is 100%
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
IF Bоеlan 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 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Lindome GIF
Home
Aastorps FF
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Lindome GIF have the clearer attacking edge at 2.3 goals per game, while Aastorps FF concede 2.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Lindome GIF
At home, they average 2.33 goals scored and 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Aastorps FF
Away from home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Lindome GIF
Home
Aastorps FF
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Lindome GIF attack is strong at 2.33 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Lindome GIF defense is average at 1.00 goals conceded per game.
Aastorps FF attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Aastorps FF defense is weak at 2.00 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 — 76% confidence from recent form analysis.
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Lindome GIF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selected Market
Over 1.5Lindome GIF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
Selection Score
95/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 84/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 95/100. Lindome GIF show the clearest winner edge through stronger attack, steadier defense, better scoring trend, and weaker opposition resistance.
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
Lindome GIF have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Qviding FIF
Home
Galtabaecks BK
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Qviding FIF have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Galtabaecks BK concede 3.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Qviding FIF
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Galtabaecks BK
Away from home, they average 1.33 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Qviding FIF
Home
Galtabaecks BK
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Qviding FIF attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Qviding FIF defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Galtabaecks BK attack is average at 1.33 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Galtabaecks BK defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Qviding FIF hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 71% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. Qviding FIF 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 1.5Qviding FIF 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 · 81/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. Qviding FIF 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.
Qviding FIF strong attack
Qviding FIF scored in last 5
Galtabaecks BK concessions at weak rate
Galtabaecks BK conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 49
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Storfors AIK
Home
Taftea IK
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Taftea IK have the clearer attacking edge at 3.0 goals per game, while Storfors AIK concede 3.0 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Storfors AIK
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Taftea IK
Away from home, they average 3.00 goals scored and 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Storfors AIK
Home
Taftea IK
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Storfors AIK attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Storfors AIK defense is weak at 3.00 goals conceded per game.
Taftea IK attack is strong at 3.00 goals per game and they scored in 2 of their last 5 matches.
Taftea IK defense is strong at 0.67 goals conceded per game.
Taftea IK hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Taftea IK have the stronger defense on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
The focus team's output depends on maintaining their current attacking tempo — one off-day shifts the balance.
Away defense is well-organized (avg 0.67 conceded) — this limits the over-goal potential.
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. 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
84/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 80/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 84/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Taftea IK strong attack
Taftea IK scored in last 5
Storfors AIK concessions at weak rate
Storfors AIK conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 1.5 ≥65
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Neither team has a clear winner edge, but both teams show strong attacking output, consistent recent scoring, and a high over 2.5 trend. This is a stronger goal-market profile than win-market profile.
Over 1.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 25
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
International Tournament
internationalWorld Cup 2026
Ghana
Home
Panama
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.
Ghana
At home, they average 0.80 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Panama
Away from home, they average 1.80 goals scored and 2.20 goals conceded per game.
Ghana
Home
Panama
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Ghana attack is weak at 0.80 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Ghana defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
Panama attack is average at 1.80 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Panama defense is weak at 2.20 goals conceded per game.
Panama hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Neither defense has created a major statistical edge on the current numbers.
Risks & Considerations
Moderate confidence — treat this as a cautious pick and consider additional context.
Even in tight games, a single set piece or penalty can produce a result that defies the low-goal pattern.
Final Recommendation
Primary pick: Over 1.5 Goals — 56% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 70/100. 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
70/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 82/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 70/100. No team met the attack, scoring, and match-environment requirements for team over 1.5.
Panama strong attack
Panama scored in last 5
Ghana concessions at weak rate
Ghana conceded in last 5
Match environment supports goals
Opponent defense is not too strong for this team-goal line
Market Fit Scores
Over 1.5 ≥65
BTTS market conditions were not satisfied.
Over 1.5 Primary
Over 2.5 <65
Below 65% by 11
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Win <65
Below 65% by 21
No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 24
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Uzbekistan
Home
Colombia
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Colombia have the clearer attacking edge at 2.0 goals per game, while Uzbekistan concede 1.6 per game. The numbers lean toward the focus side without showing total dominance.
Uzbekistan
At home, they average 1.00 goals scored and 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Colombia
Away from home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Uzbekistan
Home
Colombia
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Uzbekistan attack is weak at 1.00 goals per game and they scored in 3 of their last 5 matches.
Uzbekistan defense is weak at 1.60 goals conceded per game.
Colombia attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 5 of their last 5 matches.
Colombia defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Colombia 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 — 70% confidence from recent form analysis.
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. Colombia 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 1.5Colombia have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Selection Score
92/100
Runner Up
Over 2.5 · 79/100
Selection Reason
TEAM OVER 1.5 had the highest score at 92/100. Colombia 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.
Colombia strong attack
Colombia scored in last 5
Uzbekistan concessions at weak rate
Uzbekistan 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.
Switzerland
Home
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
Switzerland average 2.0 goals scored and concede 0.8 per game. Bosnia and Herzegovina average 0.8 scored and 1.4 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
Switzerland
At home, they average 2.00 goals scored and 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Away from home, they average 0.80 goals scored and 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Switzerland
Home
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Away
Supporting Reasoning
Switzerland attack is strong at 2.00 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Switzerland defense is strong at 0.80 goals conceded per game.
Bosnia and Herzegovina attack is weak at 0.80 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
Bosnia and Herzegovina defense is average at 1.40 goals conceded per game.
Switzerland hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
Switzerland 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 86/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selected Market
Over 1.5No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Selection Score
86/100
Runner Up
Over 1.5 · 82/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 86/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
Switzerland strong attack
Switzerland stable defense
Switzerland 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
Switzerland have the best team-goal profile with strong scoring output, recent scoring consistency, and a match environment that still supports two or more goals from one side.
Over 2.5 ≥65
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Under 3.5 <65
Below 65% by 31
Under 3.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Veikkausliiga
Finland
AC Oulu
Home
IFK Mariehamn
Away
Form Analysis
Analysis Summary
AC Oulu average 1.2 goals scored and concede 0.4 per game. IFK Mariehamn average 0.2 scored and 2.0 conceded, so the matchup is decided by fine margins rather than one clear statistical advantage.
AC Oulu
At home, they average 1.20 goals scored and 0.40 goals conceded per game.
IFK Mariehamn
Away from home, they average 0.20 goals scored and 2.00 goals conceded per game.
AC Oulu
Home
IFK Mariehamn
Away
Supporting Reasoning
AC Oulu attack is average at 1.20 goals per game and they scored in 4 of their last 5 matches.
AC Oulu defense is strong at 0.40 goals conceded per game.
IFK Mariehamn attack is weak at 0.20 goals per game and they scored in 1 of their last 5 matches.
IFK Mariehamn defense is weak at 2.00 goals conceded per game.
AC Oulu hold the clearer attacking edge on the current numbers.
AC Oulu 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 · 66/100
Selection Reason
WIN had the highest score at 86/100. No team showed the clear superiority required for a win market.
AC Oulu strong attack
AC Oulu stable defense
AC Oulu 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.
Under 3.5 ≥65
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 29
Over 2.5 market conditions were not satisfied.
Legend