Serie A · Italy · Regular Season - 2

Napoli–Como

1–2

HT 1–2

Kick-off: Sunday, 30 August 2026 at 16:30
Status: Match Finished

What the model said, and what happened

Incorrect — we gave this result 32%double chance: correct

This verdict goes into the public record unchanged; we do not filter out the ones we get wrong. The model's track record

Goals and red cards

17'ComoMartin Baturina (assist: Assane Diao)
30'NapoliRasmus Højlund (assist: Amir Rrahmani)
34'ComoAnastasios Douvikas (assist: Martin Baturina)

Match statistics

Match statistics
Napoli		Como
13	Shots	21
2	Shots on target	6
9	Shots inside the box	13
4	Goalkeeper saves	1
2	Corners	7
7	Offsides	0
41%	Possession	59%
425	Passes	606
370	Accurate passes

What we expected, and what happened

Expected goals before kick-off: Napoli 1.14 · Como 1.16. On the pitch: 1-2.
Shots Napoli 13 · Como 21; on target 2 and 6.
Como kept the ball more (59%).

Unavailable players

Napoli

A. Buongiornoout · Knee Injury
L. Marianucciout · Knee Injury
P. Mazzocchiout · Knee Injury
M. Folorunshodoubtful · not in squad
Rafa Maríndoubtful · injury

Como

J. Addaiout · Achilles Tendon Injury
W. Kambwalaout · Transfer negotiations

Provider data — may change until the line-ups are announced. Last updated: Thursday, 17 September 2026 at 06:10.

Referee

Luca Pairetto, Italy→

5.40

yellows per match

0.20

reds per match

matches of data

10 matches is a small sample — these averages are noisy and should not be read as a tendency.

Model prediction

Why this prediction?

The model puts the most likely outcome at 38.5%: “Napoli to win”. Second comes “Como to win” at 31.7%.
Behind that distribution are the expected goals: 1.26 for Napoli, 1.12 for Como.
The highest double chance value is 70.2% (12 — any result other than a draw).
These values were computed from 1,535 past matches.

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.

Napoli to win38.5%

Draw29.8%

Como to win31.7%

When the model has said 35–40% in the past, 1,562 of 4,187 predictions were correct (37.3%). Accuracy record →

8	Fouls	5

1	Yellow cards	0

0	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.

When the model has said 50–55% in the past, 2,597 of 5,092 predictions were correct (51.0%). Accuracy record →

Double chance

1X — Napoli win or draw68.3%

12 — any result other than a draw70.2%

X2 — draw or Como win61.5%

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 (29.8%).

First half

Actual: 1–2

Napoli lead at half-time29.8%

Level at half-time46.1%

Como lead at half-time24.1%

First-half double chance

1X — Napoli ahead or level75.9%

12 — not level at half-time53.9%

X2 — level or Como ahead70.2%

These values are not a fraction of the full-match prediction; they come from a separate model trained on the first-half scores of 1535 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.

Expected fouls and corners

Fouls

Napoli: at least 10Actual: 8
Como: at least 11Actual: 5

Corners

Napoli: at least 4Actual: 2
Como: at least 3Actual: 7

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.

Goals market

The 3+ goals prediction is not published for this match.

The model gives a probability below the baseline (47.2%). In backtesting the model's edge in the "fewer goals" direction could not be confirmed; we don't publish an unconfirmed prediction.

What these probabilities rest on

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.

How many goals Napoli score1.14

Attack: Napoli score close to the league average.

Opponent's defence: Como concede 24% fewer than the league average, which pulls the expectation down.

Result: These two effects give an expectation of 1.14 goals (including home advantage).

How many goals Como score1.16

Attack: Como score above the league average (26% more).

Opponent's defence: Napoli concede 25% fewer than the league average, which pulls the expectation down.

Result: These two effects give an expectation of 1.16 goals (including the away penalty).

Most likely scorelines

1–115.1%1–010.8%0–19.4%

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 1535 matches played in this league before kick-off; the team with fewer has 77 matches. No data from after the match was used. The model's track record is published unfiltered.

Week 2 of the season. This prediction was computed from previous seasons. Summer transfers, budget changes and squad rebuilds aren't in the ratings yet — the model can only see that a team has been rebuilt once new results come in.

We measured this: the bias is only pronounced in the opening week. In this week the model's overall accuracy does not separate from the rest of the season — that is, we found no measurable flaw. The one tendency across all opening weeks is that home wins are called slightly too often (said 43.0%, got 41.9%; n=583).

This sample is small and not statistically established, which is why we do not correct the model for it. The correction we tried (pulling probabilities toward the league average) didn't win on holdout, so it wasn't added. Read opening-week predictions with a little more caution.