🎯

Fixture360 only lists fixtures from a curated set of leagues, chosen specifically to keep our prediction model accurate.

📰

Shock result as Genk defy the odds to beat KVC Westerlo 0-1.

📝 Match Report

How It Unfolded

Genk beat KVC Westerlo 0-1 at Het Kuipje, Regular Season - 13, in the Jupiler Pro League. With the result on the board, the sections below measure it against everything the model and the numbers projected in advance.

The Model vs The Result

The Poisson model went into this projecting KVC Westerlo 1.29 xG and Genk 1.23 xG, a combined 2.52. The scoreboard read 0-1 for 1 actual goal. KVC Westerlo fell 1.3 short of their projected output. Those figures were built on strength ratings of KVC Westerlo attack 0.93 / defence 0.97 against Genk attack 1.13 / defence 1.00, drawn from 42/42 games (CurrentSeason).

On the result, the model split it KVC Westerlo 36% | Draw 31% | Genk 33%, with KVC Westerlo to win its most likely call at 36%. The actual Genk win had been the model's second-ranked read at 33%, so the result diverged from the top call without being a shock.

Goals & Markets

The model rated Over 2.5 goals at 46%. The game delivered 1, so it stayed under — a call the model got right. Over 1.5 had been 74% and missed. On both teams to score, the model sat at 53% and the match did not — a miss on BTTS. Historically the two sides average 60% Over 2.5 across their same-competition games (KVC Westerlo 60%, Genk 60%), a base rate that pointed the other way from today's under. Their combined BTTS history runs at 62%, which did not match the one-sided outcome.

Trading Patterns vs Reality

KVC Westerlo's trading profile (52 games, 26 home) set some clear expectations: BTTS lands in 64% of their matches — today it did not.

Genk's trading profile (52 games, 26 away) set some clear expectations: BTTS lands in 62% of their matches — today it did not.

Form vs Result

On form, Genk arrived the stronger side — 1.87 PPG against 1.27. That form edge translated into the three points. KVC Westerlo (home/away splits) managed 0 against a 1.85 scoring average — below par going forward. Genk (home/away splits) conceded 0 against a 1.46 average — tighter than their form line.

Verdict

Grading the result against the stored data, 2 of 4 pre-match signals came in: result (miss), Over 2.5 (hit), BTTS (miss), form (hit). The model got the gist right while missing on the margins.

💡 Key Insights