1. SNL · Slovenia · Regular Season - 1

Aluminij–Maribor

0–0

HT 0–0

Kick-off: Sunday, 19 July 2026 at 16:00
Status: Match Finished

What the model said, and what happened

Ended level — we gave the draw 25%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

What we expected, and what happened

Expected goals before kick-off: Aluminij 1.03 · Maribor 1.76. On the pitch: 0-0.

Referee

A. Bubek→

4.65

yellows per match

0.24

reds per match

matches of data

Model prediction

Why this prediction?

The model puts the most likely outcome at 54.5%: “Maribor to win”. Second comes “a draw” at 25.1%.
Behind that distribution are the expected goals: 1.03 for Aluminij, 1.76 for Maribor.
The highest double chance value is 79.5% (X2 — draw or Maribor win).
These values were computed from 704 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.

Aluminij to win20.5%

Draw25.1%

Maribor to win54.5%

When the model has said 50–55% in the past, 1,799 of 3,473 predictions were correct (51.8%). Accuracy record →

Double chance

1X — Aluminij win or draw45.5%

12 — any result other than a draw74.9%

X2 — draw or Maribor win79.5%

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 (25.1%).

First half

Actual: 0–0

Aluminij lead at half-time10.6%

Level at half-time36.3%

Maribor lead at half-time53.2%

First-half double chance

1X — Aluminij ahead or level46.8%

12 — not level at half-time63.7%

X2 — level or Maribor ahead89.4%

These values are not a fraction of the full-match prediction; they come from a separate model trained on the first-half scores of 703 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

Aluminij: at least 12
Maribor: at least 11

Corners

Aluminij: at least 4
Maribor: at least 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+ goals53.6%

When the model has said 50–55% in the past, 2,683 of 4,996 predictions were correct (53.7%). Accuracy record →

The league's historical "3+ goals" rate is 52.3%. For this match the model gives a value above that baseline — and in backtesting the model's edge was confirmed only in this direction.

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 Aluminij score1.03

Attack: Aluminij score below the league average (23% fewer).

Opponent's defence: Maribor concede 23% fewer than the league average, which pulls the expectation down.

Result: These two effects give an expectation of 1.03 goals (including home advantage).

How many goals Maribor score1.76

Attack: Maribor score close to the league average.

Opponent's defence: Aluminij concede 17% more than the league average, which pushes the expectation up.

Result: These two effects give an expectation of 1.76 goals (including the away penalty).

Most likely scorelines

1–112.6%1–210.8%0–110.0%

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.