1. Division · Sunday, 25 October 2026 · 16:00. Our rating makes this 69% to go over 2.5 goals, so our lean is over. The 1. Division average is 66%.
Open this match in the app →| Market | Yes | No | Our call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Over 2.5 goals | 69% | 31% | Over |
| Over 3.5 goals | 47% | 53% | Over |
| Both teams to score | 66% | 34% | Yes |
The result model puts Sogndal at 30%, the draw at 23% and Kongsvinger at 47%, from expected goals of 1.53 and 1.95.
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. Sogndal have 19 in 26 this season (7 of 12 at home), Kongsvinger 22 in 27 (8 of 13 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 70% and 74%.
Last season still counts, briefly. With 26 and 27 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 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 70%.
Head to head. These sides have met 5 times in three years, producing over 2.5 goals in 60%. 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 70%.
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 68%, from expected goals of 1.53 for Sogndal and 1.95 for Kongsvinger. Folding in 30% of that view gives 69%.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sogndal | 26 | 73% | 58% | 65% |
| Kongsvinger | 27 | 81% | 59% | 78% |
More: Sogndal 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.