matrisx.com
FixturesLeaguesTrack recordAccountPricing
TR·EN
TR·EN
FixturesLeaguesTrack recordAccount
Analytics platform · not a betting siteTrack recordThe last 7 daysLegal noticeRefund policyPrivacyiletisim@matrisx.comFollow on X
← Fixtures

Superliga · Denmark · Regular Season - 1

Sonderjyske–FC Midtjylland

2–3

HT 2–2

Kick-off
Sunday, 26 July 2026 at 12:00
Status
Match Finished
Venue
Haderslev Fodbold Stadion, Hadeslev
𝕏Share on X

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

  • 26'⚽FC MidtjyllandMads Bech Sørensen (assist: Valdemar Byskov)
  • 27'⚽SonderjyskeM. Jensen (assist: Olti Hyseni)
  • 35'⚽FC MidtjyllandValdemar Byskov (assist: D. Osorio)
  • 45'⚽SonderjyskeMohamed Cherif Haidara (assist: Olti Hyseni)
  • 66'⚽FC MidtjyllandJ. Emefile (assist: P. Billing)

Match statistics

Match statistics
SonderjyskeFC Midtjylland
17Shots12
4Shots on target5
14Shots inside the box5
2Goalkeeper saves1
5Corners4
2Offsides1
42%Possession58%
321Passes456
215Accurate passes

What we expected, and what happened

  • Expected goals before kick-off: Sonderjyske 1.33 · FC Midtjylland 1.75. On the pitch: 2-3.
  • Shots Sonderjyske 17 · FC Midtjylland 12; on target 4 and 5.
  • FC Midtjylland kept the ball more (58%).

Referee

S. Funder→

2.91

yellows per match

0.18

reds per match

11

matches of data

11 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 46.9%: “FC Midtjylland to win”. Second comes “Sonderjyske to win” at 27.9%.
  • ·Behind that distribution are the expected goals: 1.33 for Sonderjyske, 1.75 for FC Midtjylland.
  • ·The highest double chance value is 74.7% (12 — any result other than a draw).
  • ·These values were computed from 650 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.

Sonderjyske to win27.9%
Draw25.3%
FC Midtjylland to win46.9%

When the model has said 45–50% in the past, 2,196 of 4,685 predictions were correct (46.9%). Accuracy record →

355
14Fouls10
1Yellow cards2
0Red cards0

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.

Both teams to score
64.1%

When the model has said 60–65% in the past, 2,347 of 3,894 predictions were correct (60.3%). Accuracy record →

Double chance

1X — Sonderjyske win or draw53.1%
12 — any result other than a draw74.7%
X2 — draw or FC Midtjylland win72.1%

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 (25.3%).

First half

Actual: 2–2
Sonderjyske lead at half-time16.8%
Level at half-time39.2%
FC Midtjylland lead at half-time44.0%

First-half double chance

1X — Sonderjyske ahead or level56.0%
12 — not level at half-time60.8%
X2 — level or FC Midtjylland ahead83.2%

These values are not a fraction of the full-match prediction; they come from a separate model trained on the first-half scores of 650 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

Sonderjyske
at least 11Actual: 14
FC Midtjylland
at least 11Actual: 10

Corners

Sonderjyske
at least 4Actual: 5
FC Midtjylland
at least 5Actual: 4

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

3+ goals60.4%

When the model has said 60–65% in the past, 1,830 of 2,908 predictions were correct (62.9%). Accuracy record →

The league's historical "3+ goals" rate is 56.0%. For this match the model gives a value above that baseline — and in backtesting the model's edge was confirmed only in this direction.

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 Sonderjyske score1.33

Attack: Sonderjyske score close to the league average.

Opponent's defence: FC Midtjylland's defence is close to the league average (0.90×), so it doesn't move the expectation much.

Result: These two effects give an expectation of 1.33 goals (including home advantage).

How many goals FC Midtjylland score1.75

Attack: FC Midtjylland score above the league average (18% more).

Opponent's defence: Sonderjyske's defence is close to the league average (1.10×), so it doesn't move the expectation much.

Result: These two effects give an expectation of 1.75 goals (including the away penalty).

Most likely scorelines

1–112.1%1–210.3%2–17.6%

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 650 matches played in this league before kick-off; the team with fewer has 54 matches. No data from after the match was used. The model's track record is published unfiltered.

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.