1. Division · Monday, 5 October 2026. Final score 0–2 (half-time 0–1). Rebuilt from the season as it stood that morning, our rating would have been 73% for over 2.5 goals. This game was not captured by our pre-kick-off freeze, 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 | 73% | 27% | Over |
| Over 3.5 goals | 48% | 52% | Over |
| Both teams to score | 70% | 30% | Yes |
The result model puts Moss at 23%, the draw at 20% and Kongsvinger at 58%, from expected goals of 1.47 and 2.4.
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. Moss have 21 in 23 this season (9 of 11 at home), Kongsvinger 19 in 23 (7 of 11 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 79% and 74%.
Last season still counts, briefly. With 23 and 23 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 75% 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 72%.
Head to head. These sides have met 7 times in three years, producing over 2.5 goals in 71%. That nudges the number 5% of the way toward the head-to-head pattern — deliberately small, because fixtures change more than reputations do — landing on 72%.
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 74%, from expected goals of 1.47 for Moss and 2.4 for Kongsvinger. Folding in 30% of that view gives 73%.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moss | 23 | 91% | 57% | 87% |
| Kongsvinger | 23 | 83% | 57% | 83% |
More: Moss 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.