Analysis Report - 2025-12-07
📱 Download Now On Google Play 🔮 View PredictionsAcross Europe’s leagues, the prediction set performed strongly on 1X2, under 3.5 goals, and over 1.5 goals, with mixed results in the under 2.5 goals and both teams to score markets. The matches highlighted recurring themes: tight defensive contests in Spain and Italy, open attacking battles in Portugal and France, and a couple of surprise goal patterns in high-profile fixtures.
Barakaldo 1–2 Real Aviles (Spain)
Prediction: 12 (either team to win) | Odds: 1.29 | Outcome: Won
With a prediction on a decisive result rather than a draw, this match delivered exactly that as Real Aviles edged a 2–1 away victory. The three goals underline an open, attacking game and suggest both sides created enough chances to make the “no draw” prediction strong.
Lusitania 3–2 Portimonense (Portugal)
Prediction: 1X (home or draw) | Odds: 1.29 | Outcome: Won
Lusitania’s 3–2 win confirmed the expectation that the hosts would avoid defeat. The five-goal thriller points to defensive vulnerabilities on both sides, but Lusitania’s attacking edge and home advantage made the double-chance angle robust even in a high-variance scoreline.
Ravenna 2–1 Pontedera (Italy)
Prediction: 1 (home win) | Odds: 1.44 | Outcome: Won
Ravenna converted clear favoritism into a narrow 2–1 victory. The odds already reflected a strong home side versus underdog dynamic, and although the margin was slim, Ravenna’s ability to find multiple goals at home validated the prediction of a straight home win.
Monopoli 1966 1–1 Atalanta U23 (Italy)
Prediction: 1X (home or draw) | Odds: 1.42 | Outcome: Won
A balanced 1–1 draw showed that Atalanta U23 were dangerous enough to avoid defeat but not dominate. The prediction leaned on Monopoli’s home solidity, and the draw protection captured the outcome perfectly in what was a relatively tight, low-scoring contest.
Arenteiro 1–0 Talavera (Spain)
Prediction: Under 2.5 goals | Odds: 1.44 | Outcome: Won
The 1–0 scoreline matched expectations of a cagey, low-scoring game, likely driven by conservative approaches and limited attacking firepower. With only one goal scored, the prediction aligned cleanly with the matchup profile.
Cremonese 2–0 Lecce (Italy)
Prediction: Under 2.5 goals | Odds: 1.53 | Outcome: Won
Cremonese’s 2–0 win stayed just under the 2.5 line. Italian top-flight games between mid-table or defensively organised sides often lean towards disciplined defenses and few clear chances, and this match fit that trend, with Cremonese efficient rather than explosive.
Napoli 2–1 Juventus (Italy)
Prediction: Under 2.5 goals | Odds: 1.53 | Outcome: Lost
The prediction underestimated the attacking quality on both sides. A 2–1 result pushed the total to three goals, just above the threshold. Despite both teams having strong defensive structures, clashes between top Serie A sides often feature decisive attacking moments and late goals, which turned this under call into a miss.
Perugia 1–2 Ternana (Italy)
Prediction: Under 2.5 goals | Odds: 1.47 | Outcome: Lost
A 2–1 away win for Ternana mirrored the Napoli–Juventus pattern: the prediction anticipated a tight, low-scoring affair but encountered more open play and clinical finishing than expected. Local or closely matched rivalry-type fixtures can boost intensity and lead to extra goals, which undercut the under 2.5 call.
Waldhof Mannheim 2–1 Saarbrücken (Germany)
Prediction: Under 3.5 goals | Odds: 1.44 | Outcome: Won
A 2–1 scoreline in Germany’s 3. Liga showed good attacking intent without becoming a goal fest. Both teams scored but did not generate the volume needed to threaten four or more goals, perfectly matching the expectation of a competitive yet restrained contest.
Cosenza 1–0 Picerno (Italy)
Prediction: Under 3.5 goals | Odds: 1.37 | Outcome: Won
A single goal decided the match, highlighting conservative tactics and limited offensive creativity. These conditions are ideal for unders on a higher line like 3.5; even if one side had found a second, the prediction would still have held.
Utrecht 1–1 Twente (Netherlands)
Prediction: Under 3.5 goals | Odds: 1.40 | Outcome: Won
Although the Eredivisie often produces high-scoring games, this 1–1 draw was more controlled. Strong organisation from both sides, combined with mutual respect, kept the total to two goals, well within the under 3.5 margin.
Mechelen 1–0 Charleroi (Belgium)
Prediction: Under 3.5 goals | Odds: 1.40 | Outcome: Won
The 1–0 result fits the pattern of tight Pro League matches between relatively even teams, where neither wants to overcommit. Few chances and solid defensive work from both sides ensured the total stayed comfortably under four goals.
Auxerre 3–1 Metz (France)
Prediction: Over 1.5 goals | Odds: 1.30 | Outcome: Won
Four goals in total made this prediction straightforward. Both sides contributed on the scoreboard, reflecting attacking ambition and defensive frailties, common in mid-tier Ligue 1 fixtures where transitions are frequent and backlines can be stretched.
Monopoli 1966 1–1 Atalanta U23 (Italy)
Prediction: Over 1.5 goals | Odds: 1.31 | Outcome: Won
The 1–1 draw reached the two-goal requirement exactly. Even in a relatively even matchup, both sides managed to score, highlighting enough offensive quality to trust a low over line like 1.5.
Lusitania 3–2 Portimonense (Portugal)
Prediction: Over 1.5 goals | Odds: 1.30 | Outcome: Won
With five goals scored, this was one of the clearest overs of the day. The combination of Portimonense’s attacking DNA and Lusitania’s home approach produced sustained chances and a very high total, perfectly aligning with expectations.
Cavese 1919 0–1 Benevento (Italy)
Prediction: Over 1.5 goals | Odds: 1.35 | Outcome: Lost
Only one goal was scored, falling just short of the requirement. The match profile ended up more defensively oriented than anticipated, with Benevento controlling the game but not turning superiority into multiple goals, and Cavese failing to break through at all.
Erzgebirge Aue 2–2 Ingolstadt (Germany)
Prediction: Both teams to score (BTS) | Odds: 1.50 | Outcome: Won
A 2–2 draw is an ideal outcome for a BTS call. Both sides showed attacking intent and porous defending, typical of 3. Liga fixtures where matches can become stretched and transitions frequent.
Utrecht 1–1 Twente (Netherlands)
Prediction: Both teams to score (BTS) | Odds: 1.62 | Outcome: Won
Each side found the net once, confirming expectations of mutual attacking capability. Twente’s offensive strength and Utrecht’s home advantage combined to make at least one goal each highly plausible.
Lorient 1–0 Lyon (France)
Prediction: Both teams to score (BTS) | Odds: 1.70 | Outcome: Lost (despite a low total)
Only Lorient scored, meaning the BTS prediction failed. The match unfolded with Lyon’s attacking unit unable to convert against Lorient’s defensive setup. While the game was close, Lyon’s lack of cutting edge and Lorient’s focus on preserving a slim lead prevented the expected mutual scoring.
Vitesse 0–0 TOP Oss (Netherlands)
Prediction: Both teams to score (BTS) | Odds: 1.57 | Outcome: Lost
A 0–0 draw is the worst-case outcome for BTS. Either finishing quality was poor or both defenses overperformed, as neither side managed to break the deadlock. Given Dutch lower-league trends toward open games, this result was a notable outlier compared to the prediction.
1X2 market:
All four predictions (Barakaldo–Real Aviles, Lusitania–Portimonense, Ravenna–Pontedera, Monopoli–Atalanta U23) were correct. Double-chance predictions (12 and 1X) were particularly effective, leveraging home advantage and avoiding draws in matches with clear attacking profiles.
Over/Under 3.5 goals:
A perfect record. Every game (Waldhof Mannheim–Saarbrücken, Cosenza–Picerno, Utrecht–Twente, Mechelen–Charleroi) stayed under 3.5, showing strong alignment with the idea that many of these fixtures would be competitive but not wild in terms of scoring.
Over/Under 1.5 goals:
Three out of four predictions succeeded. Most matches comfortably cleared the 1.5 line, highlighting a general baseline of at least two goals in many European fixtures, with Cavese–Benevento the lone low-output exception.
Under 2.5 goals:
Split performance: two wins (Arenteiro–Talavera, Cremonese–Lecce) and two losses (Napoli–Juventus, Perugia–Ternana). The misses came in matches where attacking quality or rivalry intensity pushed totals just beyond the line, underscoring the finer margin of error around 2–3 goals.
Both teams to score:
Mixed results: two correct (Erzgebirge Aue–Ingolstadt, Utrecht–Twente) and two incorrect (Lorient–Lyon, Vitesse–TOP Oss). High-energy leagues like Germany’s 3. Liga and the Eredivisie supported the BTS angle, while defensive rigidity or poor finishing in France and the Dutch lower division led to surprises.
Overall, the predictions were most accurate where structural factors—home advantage, typical league goal patterns, and clear strength disparities—favoured more predictable outcomes. They were less reliable in high-variance scenarios, such as top-level clashes between elite sides and tightly contested derbies, where small tactical shifts or individual moments significantly impacted goal totals.