Serie A · Italy · Regular Season - 12
Incorrect — we gave this result 25%
This verdict goes into the public record unchanged; we do not filter out the ones we get wrong. The model's track record
| Inter | AC Milan | |
|---|---|---|
| 20 | Shots | 7 |
| 6 | Shots on target | 3 |
| 12 | Shots inside the box | 4 |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 6 |
| 9 | Corners | 1 |
| 2 | Offsides | 3 |
| 64% | Possession | 36% |
| 624 | Passes | 361 |
| 563 | Accurate passes |
3.50
yellows per match
1.00
reds per match
6
matches of data
6 matches is a small sample — these averages are noisy and should not be read as a tendency.
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 45–50% in the past, 1,541 of 3,251 predictions were correct (47.4%). Accuracy record →
| 301 |
| 7 | Fouls | 9 |
|---|
| 1 | 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.
When the model has said 50–55% in the past, 2,597 of 5,092 predictions were correct (51.0%). 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 (28.0%).
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 1257 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.
The 3+ goals prediction is not published for this match.
The model gives a probability below the baseline (47.2%). In backtesting the model's edge in the "fewer goals" direction could not be confirmed; we don't publish an unconfirmed prediction.
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: Inter score 54% more than the league's average team — one of the sharpest attacks in the league.
Opponent's defence: AC Milan's defence is close to the league average (0.92×), so it doesn't move the expectation much.
Result: These two effects give an expectation of 1.73 goals (including home advantage).
Attack: AC Milan score above the league average (36% more).
Opponent's defence: Inter concede 21% fewer than the league average, which pulls the expectation down.
Result: A strong attack meets a strong defence. The two largely cancel and the expectation drops to 1.08 goals — markedly lower than the attack alone would promise.
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 1257 matches played in this league before kick-off; the team with fewer has 125 matches. No data from after the match was used. The model's track record is published unfiltered.