Jupiler Pro League · Belgium · Regular Season - 1

Club Brugge KV–Kortrijk

3–0

HT 1–0

Kick-off: Friday, 7 August 2026 at 18:45
Status: Match Finished

What the model said, and what happened

Prediction 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

30'Club Brugge KVH. Vetlesen
68'Club Brugge KVCarlos Forbs (assist: M. Diakhon)
74'Club Brugge KVN. Tresoldi (penalty)

Match statistics

Match statistics
Club Brugge KV		Kortrijk
20	Shots	9
8	Shots on target	3
13	Shots inside the box	5
2	Goalkeeper saves	5
6	Corners	1
2	Offsides	1
74%	Possession	26%
774	Passes	271
700	Accurate passes

What we expected, and what happened

Expected goals before kick-off: Club Brugge KV 2.63 · Kortrijk 0.57. On the pitch: 3-0.
Shots Club Brugge KV 20 · Kortrijk 9; on target 8 and 3.
Club Brugge KV kept the ball more (74%).

Referee

Lothar D'hondt, Belgium→

4.50

yellows per match

0.25

reds per match

matches of data

Model prediction

Why this prediction?

The model puts the most likely outcome at 82.3%: “Club Brugge KV to win”. Second comes “a draw” at 12.9%.
Behind that distribution are the expected goals: 2.63 for Club Brugge KV, 0.57 for Kortrijk.
The highest double chance value is 95.2% (1X — Club Brugge KV win or draw).
These values were computed from 1,126 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.

Club Brugge KV to win82.3%

Draw12.9%

Kortrijk to win4.8%

When the model has said 80–85% in the past, 501 of 593 predictions were correct (84.5%). Accuracy record →

6	Fouls	10

1	Yellow cards	1

0	Red cards	0

First half

Actual: 1–0

Club Brugge KV lead at half-time67.6%

Level at half-time28.8%

Kortrijk lead at half-time3.6%

First-half double chance

1X — Club Brugge KV ahead or level96.4%

12 — not level at half-time71.2%

X2 — level or Kortrijk ahead32.4%

These values are not a fraction of the full-match prediction; they come from a separate model trained on the first-half scores of 1126 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

Club Brugge KV: at least 9Actual: 6
Kortrijk: at least 10Actual: 10

Corners

Club Brugge KV: at least 6Actual: 6
Kortrijk: at least 3Actual: 1

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.

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 Club Brugge KV score2.63

Attack: Club Brugge KV score 57% more than the league's average team — one of the sharpest attacks in the league.

Opponent's defence: Kortrijk concede 18% more than the league average, which pushes the expectation up.

Result: A strong attack meets a weak defence. The effects compound and the expectation rises to 2.63 goals.

How many goals Kortrijk score0.57

Attack: Kortrijk score below the league average (25% fewer).

Opponent's defence: Club Brugge KV concede 17% fewer than the league average, which pulls the expectation down.

Result: These two effects give an expectation of 0.57 goals (including the away penalty).

Most likely scorelines

2–014.5%3–012.9%1–09.9%

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.

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.