🎯

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

📰

Prediction vindicated as Al-Ittihad FC edge out Al Najma 0-1.

📝 Match Report

How It Unfolded

Al-Ittihad FC beat Al Najma 0-1 at King Abdullah Sports City Stadium, Regular Season - 3, in the 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 Al Najma 1.38 xG and Al-Ittihad FC 2.25 xG, a combined 3.63. The scoreboard read 0-1 for 1 actual goal. Al Najma fell 1.4 short of their projected output. Al-Ittihad FC landed 1.2 under their projected return. Those figures were built on strength ratings of Al Najma attack 0.86 / defence 1.15 against Al-Ittihad FC attack 1.36 / defence 1.02, drawn from 2/36 games (Blended).

On the result, the model split it Al Najma 23% | Draw 20% | Al-Ittihad FC 57%, with Al-Ittihad FC to win its most likely call at 57%. That is exactly how it finished — the model's leading outcome was vindicated.

Goals & Markets

The model rated Over 2.5 goals at 70%. The game delivered 1, so it stayed under — the opposite of the projected direction. Over 1.5 had been 88% and missed. Over 3.5 was 49% and did not. On both teams to score, the model sat at 67% and the match did not — a miss on BTTS. Historically the two sides average 100% Over 2.5 across their same-competition games (Al Najma 100%, Al-Ittihad FC 100%), a base rate that pointed the other way from today's under. Their combined BTTS history runs at 100%, which did not match the one-sided outcome.

Form vs Result

On form, Al-Ittihad FC arrived the stronger side — 3.00 PPG against 0.00. That form edge translated into the three points. Al Najma managed 0 against a 1.00 scoring average — below par going forward and conceded 1 against a 2.50 average — tighter than their form line. Al-Ittihad FC managed 1 against a 4.50 scoring average — below par going forward and conceded 0 against a 2.00 average — tighter than their form line.

Verdict

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

💡 Key Insights