1. Division · Sunday, 16 August 2026. Final score 3–2 (half-time 1–0). Rebuilt from the season as it stood that morning, our rating would have been 77% 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 | 77% | 23% | Over |
| Over 3.5 goals | 57% | 43% | Over |
| Both teams to score | 74% | 26% | Yes |
The result model puts Kongsvinger at 47%, the draw at 18% and Haugesund at 34%, from expected goals of 2.84 and 2.45.
The league sets the starting point. 1. Division has produced over 2.5 goals in 66% of its matches, and that is where a team with no record of its own would sit.
Each side's own record. Kongsvinger have 15 in 17 this season (8 of 8 at home), Haugesund 14 in 17 (8 of 9 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 75% and 73%.
Last season still counts, briefly. With 17 and 17 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 72% and 73%.
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 71%.
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 90%, from expected goals of 2.84 for Kongsvinger and 2.45 for Haugesund. Folding in 30% of that view gives 77%.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kongsvinger | 17 | 88% | 53% | 82% |
| Haugesund | 17 | 82% | 76% | 82% |
More: Kongsvinger season stats · Haugesund season stats · 1. Division table and form. Ratings are calibrated probabilities, not tips — a 60% call is expected to miss two times in five.