Share of the pitch
Who wins
| Boston Utd | Draw | Kidderminster | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Goals model | 41% | 28% | 31% |
| Elo model | 45% | 27% | 27% |
Why this prediction
-
Overall strength Neutral
Boston Utd and Kidderminster are rated almost level (1037 and 1040).
-
Home advantage Favours Boston Utd
Playing at home is worth about 65 rating points, which adds 9 points to Boston Utd's chance of winning and takes the same from Kidderminster's.
-
Attack against defence Favours Boston Utd
Expected goals 1.4 to 1.1. Boston Utd score 0.5 a match against an average side (15th in National League); Kidderminster concede 2.6 (8th best defence).
-
Last 5 matches Neutral
Boston Utd WWLLL, lost 24 rating points; Kidderminster LDLDD, lost 10 rating points. Already counted in the ratings above.
Rating, last 12 months
Boston UtdKidderminster
09/12
09/15
09/19
09/26
09/29
10/03
10/10
10/24
10/27
10/31
09/11
09/16
09/19
09/26
09/29
10/03
10/10
10/27
10/31
Bars show total goals in each of the last 10 matches, oldest on the left: the team's goals in its colour, conceded in grey. The dashed line is 2.5 goals.
Total goals
Both teams to score & clean sheets
Most likely scores
- 1-1
- 1-0
- 0-0
- 0-1
- 2-1
- 2-0
- 1-2
- 0-2
Every score
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 9 | 9 | 5 | 2 | 1 | |
| 1 | 11 | 13 | 7 | 3 | 1 | |
| 2 | 8 | 9 | 5 | 2 | 1 | |
| 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | ||
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||
| 5 |
Half-time result
First-half goals
Half-time / full-time
| Half-time ↓ Full-time → | Boston Utd | Draw | Kidderminster |
|---|---|---|---|
| Boston Utd | 30%3.29 | 7%14.12 | 3%37.17 |
| Level | 10%9.72 | 17%5.95 | 13%7.49 |
| Kidderminster | 1%— | 3%31.85 | 15%6.53 |
Corners
Most corners
Corner totals are hard to call: over 9.5 the model's log loss is 0.685 against 0.693 for a naive guess, across 30,937 past matches. Which side wins more corners is called much better.
Cards
Over 4.5 cards, the model's log loss is 0.653 against 0.682 for a naive guess, across 33,146 past matches. The referee matters a lot and isn't in the model.
They haven't met in the data.