Premier League · England · Regular Season - 4
HT 1–2
Incorrect — we gave this result 23%
This verdict goes into the public record unchanged; we do not filter out the ones we get wrong. The model's track record
| Crystal Palace | Ipswich | |
|---|---|---|
| 11 | Shots | 12 |
| 4 | Shots on target | 6 |
| 9 | Shots inside the box | 8 |
| 3 | Goalkeeper saves | 2 |
| 6 | Corners | 3 |
| 0 | Offsides | 1 |
| 46% | Possession | 54% |
| 389 | Passes | 452 |
| 315 | Accurate passes |
Formation: 3-4-2-1 · Manager: P. Sage
Provider data — may change until the line-ups are announced. Last updated: Wednesday, 16 September 2026 at 15:11.
The referee for this match hasn't been announced by the data provider yet. We don't guess it.
This is a prediction, not a guarantee; a probability is not a certainty.
These sentences are built by a fixed template; every number in them comes straight from the model's computation, none invented while the text was written.
When the model has said 50–55% in the past, 1,337 of 2,542 predictions were correct (52.6%). Accuracy record →
| 370 |
| 6 | Fouls | 16 |
|---|
| 1 | Yellow cards | 3 |
|---|
| 1 | Red cards | 0 |
|---|
The measurements our data provider sent for this match. A row that was not measured shows “—”; writing 0 into an empty field would claim we measured it and found none.
Formation: 4-2-3-1 · Manager: G. O'Neil
Lineups are announced about an hour before kick-off and can still change until the first whistle. The list is shown exactly as the provider sends it and does not feed the prediction. Last updated: Saturday, 12 September 2026 at 14:14.
When the model has said 55–60% in the past, 2,565 of 4,457 predictions were correct (57.5%). Accuracy record →
These three values add up to 200%, not 100% — and that is not a mistake. The options are not mutually exclusive; every outcome is counted in two of them. For the same reason 1X plus X2 exceeds 100% by exactly the probability of a draw (26.1%).
First-half double chance
These values are not a fraction of the full-match prediction; they come from a separate model trained on the first-half scores of 1550 matches. Its edge over the base rate is markedly smaller than the full-match model's — the measured figure is on the accuracy record. Read them more cautiously. First-half goal markets are not published because they failed to beat the base rate.
Fouls
Corners
These figures are set to hold in at least 60% of matches; in the rest the count comes in below them. No upper bound is stated — we make no "at most" claim. Yellow cards were measured and are not published: there our model did not beat the historical average.
The 3+ goals prediction is not published for this match.
The model gives a probability below the baseline (57.1%). In backtesting the model's edge in the "fewer goals" direction could not be confirmed; we don't publish an unconfirmed prediction.
Expected goals comes out of a team's attack weighed against its opponent's defence. A strong attack is damped when it meets a strong defence — which is why comparing the ratings on their own is misleading.
Attack: Crystal Palace score close to the league average.
Opponent's defence: Ipswich concede 41% more than the league average — the defence is the weakest link in this match.
Result: These two effects give an expectation of 2.16 goals (including home advantage).
Attack: Ipswich score below the league average (22% fewer).
Opponent's defence: Crystal Palace's defence is close to the league average (1.05×), so it doesn't move the expectation much.
Result: These two effects give an expectation of 0.93 goals (including the away penalty).
A single scoreline is always less likely than an outcome: “home win” is the sum of 1-0, 2-0, 2-1 and dozens more. So the most likely single score can be a draw while the most likely outcome is a home win; the two do not contradict each other.
Ratings were computed from 1550 matches played in this league before kick-off; the team with fewer has 41 matches. No data from after the match was used. The model's track record is published unfiltered.