Serie B · Italy · Regular Season - 1
HT 0–0
| Virtus Entella | Juve Stabia | |
|---|---|---|
| 10 | Shots | 10 |
| 2 | Shots on target | 2 |
| 7 | Shots inside the box | 5 |
| 1 | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
| 5 | Corners | 7 |
| 1 | Offsides | 2 |
| 46% | Possession | 54% |
| 318 | Passes | 376 |
| 247 | Accurate passes |
There's no card data for this referee from before this match yet. We don't invent an average; it will appear here once the data exists.
No probability is published for this match.
One of the teams has only 0 matches in this league (at least 10 are required). A percentage produced from thin data is a guess dressed as certainty — we don't show it.
| 314 |
| 14 | Fouls | 14 |
|---|
| 2 | Yellow cards | 2 |
|---|
| 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.
Week 1 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 and we're not hiding it: in the opening week of past seasons the model came in 3.3 points below the accuracy it claimed (n=220) — for the rest of the season it beats its own claim. The tendency points this way, though it is not proof on its own: in the opening week it slightly over-calls home wins (said 42.7%, got 39.5%) and slightly under-calls draws (said 26.1%, got 28.2%).
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.