🎯

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

📋

Poisson rates Tianjin Teda at 47% — current form provides partial corroboration, though signals are mixed in this Meizhou Kejia vs Tianjin Teda encounter.

✍️ Match Preview

Analysis

Tianjin Teda make the trip to Wuhua County Olympic Sports Centre to face Meizhou Kejia in Super League, Regular Season - 16. The match kicks off on Sunday 29 June 2025 at 12:00 UTC.

Form

Meizhou Kejia (all games): 3W 1D 6L across 10 Super League fixtures this term — 1.00 PPG. Last five: L L D W L. They are averaging 1.30 goals per game and conceding 2.30 — a modest attacking output that tempers optimism on the Over 2.5 market. However, 2.30 goals conceded per game is a concern — opposing attacks have exploited them regularly. 2 clean sheets from 10 outings provides some defensive foundation. Both teams have scored in 70% of their games — a high BTTS rate that carries real weight in the goals markets.

At home at Wuhua County Olympic Sports Centre, Meizhou Kejia have gone 4W 2D 4L this season (10 games, 1.40 PPG). At home they are averaging 1.10 goals scored and 1.60 conceded per game. BTTS has landed in 60% of their home matches — a rate that supports the Yes angle in this fixture.

Tianjin Teda's overall Super League record this term: 6W 0D 4L from 10 games (1.80 PPG). Last five: L W L W L. They are scoring at 1.50 per game and conceding 1.90. 3 clean sheets from 10 outings suggests some defensive organisation. Both teams have scored in 60% of their games — a noteworthy BTTS rate that supports the Yes market.

On the road, Tianjin Teda have gone 2W 1D 7L from 10 away fixtures this term (0.70 PPG). Away from home they average 1.30 goals scored and 2.50 conceded per game. Both teams have scored in 80% of their away matches — a high BTTS rate on the road that directly informs this fixture. Their away PPG of 0.70 is notably below their overall 1.80 — form away from home has been a clear weakness this season.

The travelling side arrive in better shape. Tianjin Teda are 0.80 PPG clear of Meizhou Kejia in recent Super League fixtures (1.80 vs 1.00). Backing the visitors outright or on Draw No Bet are both valid approaches where the price allows.

In terms of goals, both squads have been finding the net consistently (using home/away splits) — Meizhou Kejia have seen both teams score in 60% of their games, Tianjin Teda in 80%. That combined rate is a strong statistical case for BTTS Yes as a standalone play.

Head-to-Head

Form and model data should carry more weight here — the historical record is too balanced to provide a directional steer. From 7 meetings: Meizhou Kejia 1W, Tianjin Teda 2W, 4D.

The 7 previous meetings have averaged 2.6 goals per game — a neutral rate that provides no strong lean on the goals market from the H2H alone. The most recent clash, on 23 Feb 2025, ended 2–2 with a draw.

The head-to-head offers no strong directional steer in either the result or goals markets. Form, the predictive model and current market pricing should carry more weight than the historical record for this fixture.

Trading Data

Meizhou Kejia goal-timing and half-time pattern breakdown (60 games, 30 at home): they score before half-time in 73% of fixtures in home games; when goalless at HT, a second-half goal follows 65% of the time; BTTS occurs in 63% of their matches (home games); Over 2.5 goals lands in 57% of games (home games); they fail to score in 30% of games.

Tianjin Teda goal-timing and half-time pattern breakdown (60 games, 30 at away): they score before half-time in 77% of fixtures in away games; when goalless at HT, a second-half goal follows 65% of the time; BTTS occurs in 67% of their matches (away games); Over 2.5 goals lands in 57% of games (away games).

From a combined perspective, both sides have high BTTS rates — Meizhou Kejia 62% and Tianjin Teda 62% — which reinforces the BTTS Yes angle from in-play data. The over/under 2.5 picture is inconclusive from the in-play data (Meizhou Kejia 60% | Tianjin Teda 50%).

Poisson Model

The Poisson distribution model projects Meizhou Kejia 1.59 xG and Tianjin Teda 1.97 xG. These expected goals figures are the primary input: they feed a goal-probability matrix across all scoreline combinations to derive the result and market probabilities below. Underlying strength ratings: Meizhou Kejia attack 0.880 / defence 1.486 | Tianjin Teda attack 0.996 / defence 1.075. League average goals — home 1.678 / away 1.328. Data: 45 Meizhou Kejia games / 45 Tianjin Teda games used (CurrentSeason).

Result probabilities: Meizhou Kejia 32% | Draw 22% | Tianjin Teda 47%. Fair-value odds: Meizhou Kejia 3.12 | Draw 4.55 | Tianjin Teda 2.13. Tianjin Teda hold a narrow Poisson edge at 47% — the draw (22%) is close enough to merit draw-inclusive market consideration.

Goals markets: Over 2.5 probability 69% | BTTS probability 68% | Total xG 3.55. Over 2.5 is the model's clear signal at 69% — a total xG of 3.55 means the expected score alone exceeds the 2.5 threshold, making the Over not just likely but structurally supported by both sides' attack/defence profiles. BTTS Yes at 68% reflects that both xG figures (1.59 / 1.97) are above the threshold where scoring blanks become the primary outcome — both sides are projected to find the net.

Final Verdict

Poisson rates Tianjin Teda as the most likely outcome at 47% — moderate model lean. Current-season form corroborates the Poisson lean — partial multi-source support. Draw probability of 22% warrants consideration of Double Chance or Draw No Bet on Tianjin Teda if the outright odds are short. The opposing side holds a 32% win probability per the model — this is not a banker and should be staked accordingly.

The Poisson model projects 3.55 xG in total — Over 2.5 at 69% — reasonable confidence, supported by form averaging 3.2 goals per game.

Poisson assigns a 68% probability to BTTS Yes based on the attack/defence strength model. Form rates corroborate: Meizhou Kejia 60% | Tianjin Teda 80% BTTS from recent games.

The outsider holds a 32% win probability per the model — this is not a banker and should not be treated as one. Proportionate stakes are appropriate given the genuine contest the data projects.

🔮 Your Prediction

Sign in to submit your prediction and see how it compares to the rest of the community.

💡 Key Insights