1. Division · Saturday, 27 June 2026. Final score 4–2 (half-time 3–2). Rebuilt from the season as it stood that morning, our rating would have been 67% for over 2.5 goals. This match is older than our frozen ratings ledger, which keeps 30 days, so that figure is a reconstruction from pre-match data rather than a number we published at the time — a distinction worth making, because only the frozen ones prove what we actually said beforehand.
Open this match in the app →| Market | Yes | No | Our call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Over 2.5 goals | 67% | 33% | Over |
| Over 3.5 goals | 44% | 56% | no pick |
| Both teams to score | 65% | 35% | Yes |
The result model puts Haugesund at 46%, the draw at 24% and Kongsvinger at 31%, from expected goals of 1.81 and 1.44.
The league sets the starting point. 1. Division has produced over 2.5 goals in 65% of its matches, and that is where a team with no record of its own would sit.
Each side's own record. Haugesund have 9 in 12 this season (3 of 5 at home), Kongsvinger 10 in 12 (4 of 6 away). Those records are pulled toward the league rate with the weight of about 24 matches — enough that two or three unusual games cannot swing a rating — giving 69% and 71%.
Last season still counts, briefly. With 12 and 12 games played this season, last season's rates are still blended in and fade out entirely by game 40 — the point at which our testing showed they stop adding accuracy. A single season is part luck, so each club's record is first pulled toward the league average by 34 games' weight. That moves the two figures to 69% and 70%.
The mix. Weighted 40% home side, 40% away side and 20% league — the split that beat every alternative across 30,582 matches of testing — that gives 69%.
Goal expectation. Separately a Poisson model built from attack and defence strength — using real expected-goals data where the league has it — puts this match at 63%, from expected goals of 1.81 for Haugesund and 1.44 for Kongsvinger. Folding in 30% of that view gives 67%.
This breakdown is generated from the same inputs the rating uses, so it cannot describe a calculation we did not perform. The full model is set out in the methodology.
| Team | Games | O2.5 | O3.5 | BTTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Haugesund | 12 | 75% | 75% | 75% |
| Kongsvinger | 12 | 83% | 42% | 75% |
More: Haugesund season stats · Kongsvinger season stats · 1. Division table and form. Ratings are calibrated probabilities, not tips — a 60% call is expected to miss two times in five.