Predictions / Football / Austria. Regionalliga - West / Bischofshofen vs Hohenems

Prediction Audit: Bischofshofen vs Hohenems Prediction, Odds & AI Betting Tips

Jun 13, 2026 - 15:00
3 1.29
7 1.27
xG Accuracy: 13%

The model missed the final outcome (Hohenems win 3–7).

The model had projected Bischofshofen at 38.5%, but the full-time result went the other way.

Tracked markets vs full-time result

Prediction grade F

Each row compares the pre-match model lean to the full-time result.

  • Market Prediction Result Outcome
  • Over / Under 2.5 Under 2.5 Over 2.5 (10 goals) ✖ Incorrect
  • Both Teams To Score BTTS Yes Yes ✔ Correct
  • 1X2 Bischofshofen Hohenems ✖ Incorrect
  • Correct Score Insights 1-1, 1-0, 0-1, 2-1, 1-2 3-7 ✖ Incorrect

Model vs Closing Market

Moderate Disagreement

The closing market prices Bischofshofen higher than the statistical model.

Largest probability gap: Bischofshofen -9.2 pp

Outcome Model Closing Market Difference Signal
Bischofshofen 38.5% 47.7% -9.2 pp Market Higher
Draw 27.9% 21.4% +6.4 pp Model Higher
Hohenems 33.6% 30.8% +2.8 pp Aligned

The closing market estimates Bischofshofen's win probability at 47.7%, compared with the model's estimate of 38.5%, a difference of 9.2 percentage points. This highlights a disagreement between the model and market consensus, without indicating which view is ultimately correct.

Model probabilities are generated from the statistical xG model using a Poisson distribution. Closing market probabilities are derived from consensus closing 1X2 odds after margin removal. Values represent implied probabilities rather than betting recommendations. Closing snapshot: PRE1.

After full time, the result was Hohenems win 3–7.

Market Assessment

The market and model broadly agree on Bischofshofen. The remaining divergence may reflect differences in team-strength assumptions rather than a directional disagreement.

  • Monitor line movement before kickoff — not a betting recommendation.

Post Match Insights

What worked

  • Expected goals projected a high-scoring match (ΣxG 2.56) — 10 goals materialised
  • Both Teams To Score (Yes) matched the full-time result

What failed

  • Over / Under 2.5: model leaned Under 2.5; match finished Over 2.5 (10 goals)
  • 1X2: model leaned Bischofshofen; match finished Hohenems

Market lesson

The closing market differed from the model on Bischofshofen by 9.2 percentage points (47.7% vs model 38.5%) — in this case the market view proved closer.

Premium betting site stake: New users can use the promo code FHn2uDc1 to receive $100 cash.

Prediction Timeline

How this prediction moved from forecast to full-time review.

  1. Jun 13, 2026 · 20:15 UTC Forecast generated
    • Model 1X2 · Bischofshofen 38.5% · Draw 27.9% · Hohenems 33.7%
    • xG · Bischofshofen 1.29 — Hohenems 1.27
  2. Jun 13, 2026 · 14:29 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
    • 1X2 odds · Bischofshofen 1.86 · Draw 4.14 · Hohenems 2.88
    • Implied 1X2 · Bischofshofen 47.7% · Draw 21.4% · Hohenems 30.8%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  3. Jun 13, 2026 · 14:59 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE1
    • 1X2 odds · Bischofshofen 1.86 · Draw 4.14 · Hohenems 2.88
    • Implied 1X2 · Bischofshofen 47.7% · Draw 21.4% · Hohenems 30.8%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  4. Jun 13, 2026 · 15:00 UTC Kickoff
  5. FT Full-time result Hohenems win · 3–7
  6. FT Prediction missed 1X2 lean did not match full-time result
  7. Archived Prediction review

Historical Snapshot

Frozen at kickoff — the model output as it stood before the match started.

Historical verdict: Observe
Historical Decision No Primary Bet
Outcome Missed
Pre-match metrics (historical context)
Prediction Reliability 74/100 · High
  • Validation: Pass
Evidence ★★★★★
  • No strong statistical edge
  • Direction agrees with model lean
  • Validation passed
Pricing proximity (inverse gap) 53/100
Betting Confidence 77/100

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Jul 24, 2026 · 18:03 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-1623132

Closing Odds 1.86
AI Fair Odds —
CLV Pending
Final Result Hohenems win · Bischofshofen 3–7 Hohenems
Prediction ✖ Missed
Decision Grade F

Model Performance

This prediction contributes to:

  • Primary Bets ROI (180d): -100.0%

Review FAQ

How accurate was the prediction?
This page grades directional markets (1X2, Over/Under 2.5, BTTS) against the full-time result. The prediction grade reflects how many of those tracked markets matched reality.
What does xG Accuracy measure?
xG Accuracy compares the model's pre-match expected-goals profile to the actual scoreline — not whether every market hit. A strong directional review can coexist with a moderate xG accuracy score.
Why wasn't the exact score predicted?
Correct-score outcomes are low-probability tails even when the model reads the match profile well. We highlight top score bins for context; missing the exact line does not invalidate a directional review.
Does this improve the AI record?
Each finished match is logged in our validation pipeline. Aggregated hit rates and CLV studies are published separately — this page is the per-match audit trail.

Predictions are for informational purposes only. Always gamble responsibly and within your limits. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

AI match briefing

AI Match Summary

Quick read on how the model reads this matchup.

  • League: Regionalliga - West
  • Fixture: Bischofshofen vs Hohenems
  • Kickoff: 2026-06-13 15:00:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 45.0% · Draw 45.0% · Away 10.0%
  • xG (showing): Bischofshofen 1.29 — Hohenems 1.27 (total xG ≈ 2.56)
  • Value headline: None — no positive EV could be estimated on tracked lines at current best prices (missing odds or thin book depth).
  • Structural leans (not bets): See the Over/Under and BTTS cards for any directional lean text.
  • BTTS (model): Yes N/A · No N/A
  • Correct score (top bin): N/A

When book depth is thin or odds are missing, EV may be unavailable even though the model still prefers one side on totals or BTTS — wait for cleaner prices or skip.

Prefer skipping to over-staking when the engine is honest about missing edge.

Historical Recommendation

Historical Decision: No Primary Bet

Outcome: Missed — Pre-match 1X2 lean did not match the full-time result.

Risk Factors Considered Before Kickoff

  • Price movement: implied probabilities and EV move with odds.
  • Sample / data gaps: low-information leagues widen forecast bands.
  • In-play state: goals and red cards are not modelled here.
  • Scoreline variance: the most likely scoreline is still usually a low absolute probability outcome (often well below 20%).

Last Updated

October 03, 2026 (UTC)

Get Premium Predictions for Bischofshofen & Hohenems!

Unlock in-depth analysis, exclusive betting tips, and match forecasts with our premium subscription service.

Subscribe Now
Back to Predictions
Regionalliga - West Regionalliga - West — Standings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Wacker Innsbruck 31 27 2 2 83
2 Kuchl 31 21 2 8 65
3 Seekirchen 31 19 4 8 61
4 Imst 31 18 7 6 61
5 Dornbirn 31 16 4 11 52
6 Bischofshofen 31 16 3 12 51
7 SVG Reichenau 31 14 3 14 45
8 Hohenems 31 11 11 9 44
9 Schwaz 32 13 5 14 44
10 Kitzbühel 31 13 4 14 43
11 Wals-Grünau 31 10 8 13 38
12 TSV St. Johann 31 9 5 17 32
13 Lustenau 31 8 7 16 31
14 Rheindorf Altach II 31 7 6 18 27
15 Kufstein 31 5 10 16 25
16 Pinzgau Saalfelden 31 6 6 19 24
17 Lauterach 31 5 5 21 20
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Wacker Innsbruck 31 83 18 +65 83
2 Seekirchen 31 82 47 +35 61
3 Imst 31 68 38 +30 61
4 Kuchl 31 61 40 +21 65
5 Dornbirn 31 61 44 +17 52
6 Bischofshofen 31 58 42 +16 51
7 Schwaz 32 57 56 +1 44
8 Hohenems 31 53 49 +4 44
9 Wals-Grünau 31 53 64 -11 38
10 Lustenau 31 46 77 -31 31
11 TSV St. Johann 31 44 55 -11 32
12 SVG Reichenau 31 43 52 -9 45
13 Kitzbühel 31 42 43 -1 43
14 Lauterach 31 40 78 -38 20
15 Rheindorf Altach II 31 35 70 -35 27
16 Kufstein 31 31 49 -18 25
17 Pinzgau Saalfelden 31 24 59 -35 24
Regionalliga - West Austria. Regionalliga - West Predictions