Kristiansund BK vs Valerenga: why the model makes it Valerenga at 43%
Our model leans to Valerenga here, but not by much: 43% (fair odds 2.33) against 25% for the draw. Published scoreline: 1-2, the likeliest exact score within that result.
More →Our model leans to Valerenga here, but not by much: 43% (fair odds 2.33) against 25% for the draw. Published scoreline: 1-2, the likeliest exact score within that result.
More →Our model leans to Las Palmas here, but not by much: 47% (fair odds 2.13) against 27% for the draw. Published scoreline: 2-1, the likeliest exact score within that result.
More →Our model leans to Londrina here, but not by much: 47% (fair odds 2.13) against 25% for the draw. Published scoreline: 2-1, the likeliest exact score within that result.
More →Instituto Cordoba 2–2 Newell's Old Boys finished with a draw. The model got this one wrong. It leaned to Instituto Cordoba at 48%, and rated the actual result at 29%.
More →Inter 2–0 Como finished with Inter winning. The model had the right result: it gave that outcome 47%, though it expected 1-0 rather than 2–0.
More →Manchester United 4–4 Aston Villa finished with a draw. The model got this one wrong. It leaned to Manchester United at 41%, and rated the actual result at 23%.
More →Pumas UNAM 2–2 Club America finished with a draw. The model got this one wrong. It leaned to Pumas UNAM at 39%, and rated the actual result at 25%.
More →Tigres UANL 2–3 Cruz Azul finished with Cruz Azul winning. The model had the right result: it gave that outcome 39%, though it expected 1-2 rather than 2–3.
More →Our model leans to Brighton here, but not by much: 52% (fair odds 1.92) against 25% for the draw. Published scoreline: 2-1, the likeliest exact score within that result.
More →Our model leans to Lanus here, but not by much: 46% (fair odds 2.17) against 31% for the draw. Published scoreline: 0-1, the likeliest exact score within that result.
More →Deportes Tolima host Millonarios in a game our model cannot separate: 38% for the home side, 31% for the draw and 31% for the visitors.
More →Our model leans to Bucaramanga here, but not by much: 44% (fair odds 2.27) against 28% for the draw. Published scoreline: 0-1, the likeliest exact score within that result.
More →Our model leans to Junior here, but not by much: 55% (fair odds 1.82) against 25% for the draw. Published scoreline: 2-0, the likeliest exact score within that result.
More →Banfield 2–2 Atletico Tucuman finished with a draw. The model got this one wrong. It leaned to Banfield at 41%, and rated the actual result at 29%.
More →Fulham 1–1 Newcastle finished with a draw. The model got this one wrong. It leaned to Fulham at 40%, and rated the actual result at 29%.
More →Nottingham Forest 3–1 Manchester City finished with Nottingham Forest winning. The model got this one wrong. It leaned to Manchester City at 50%, and rated the actual result at 24%.
More →Tigre 1–0 Sarmiento Junin finished with Tigre winning. Our model had called it exactly: it published 1-0, a scoreline it rated at 14%.
More →Atlas host CF Pachuca in a game our model cannot separate: 37% for the home side, 27% for the draw and 36% for the visitors.
More →Our model leans to Inter Miami here, but not by much: 52% (fair odds 1.92) against 22% for the draw. Published scoreline: 2-1, the likeliest exact score within that result.
More →Orlando City SC host New England Revolution in a game our model cannot separate: 41% for the home side, 23% for the draw and 36% for the visitors.
More →