Eliteserien · Norway · Regular Season - 7
HT 0–1
Incorrect — we gave this result 12%
This verdict goes into the public record unchanged; we do not filter out the ones we get wrong. The model's track record
| Bodo/Glimt | Molde | |
|---|---|---|
| 25 | Shots | 4 |
| 8 | Shots on target | 3 |
| 20 | Shots inside the box | 4 |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 8 |
| 11 | Corners | 1 |
| 3 | Offsides | 2 |
| 60% | Possession | 40% |
| 632 | Passes | 427 |
| 553 | Accurate passes |
Provider data — may change until the line-ups are announced. Last updated: Saturday, 19 September 2026 at 15:10.
3.15
yellows per match
0.19
reds per match
26
matches of data
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 65–70% in the past, 1,039 of 1,527 predictions were correct (68.0%). Accuracy record →
| 348 |
| 10 | Fouls | 12 |
|---|
| 0 | Yellow cards | 3 |
|---|
| 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 55–60% in the past, 3,524 of 6,225 predictions were correct (56.6%). 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 (18.7%).
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 1015 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.
When the model has said 65–70% in the past, 969 of 1,384 predictions were correct (70.0%). Accuracy record →
The league's historical "3+ goals" rate is 60.3%. For this match the model gives a value above that baseline — and in backtesting the model's edge was confirmed only in this direction.
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: Bodo/Glimt score 57% more than the league's average team — one of the sharpest attacks in the league.
Opponent's defence: Molde's defence is close to the league average (0.87×), so it doesn't move the expectation much.
Result: These two effects give an expectation of 2.36 goals (including home advantage).
Attack: Molde score above the league average (16% more).
Opponent's defence: Bodo/Glimt concede 29% fewer than the league average, which pulls the expectation down.
Result: These two effects give an expectation of 0.96 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 1015 matches played in this league before kick-off; the team with fewer has 126 matches. No data from after the match was used. The model's track record is published unfiltered.