Predictions / Football / Norway. 1. Division / Moss vs Raufoss

Prediction Audit: Moss vs Raufoss Prediction, Odds & AI Betting Tips

Moss Moss
Jul 26, 2026 - 15:00
1 1.32
2 1.28
xG Accuracy: 75%
Raufoss Raufoss

The model missed the final outcome (Raufoss win 1–2).

The model had projected Moss at 42.3%, 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 (3 goals) ✖ Incorrect
  • Both Teams To Score BTTS Yes Yes ✔ Correct
  • 1X2 Moss Raufoss ✖ Incorrect
  • Correct Score Insights 1-1, 1-0, 0-1, 2-1, 1-2 1-2 ✔ Correct

Model vs Closing Market

Strong Disagreement

The closing market prices Moss higher than the statistical model.

Largest probability gap: Moss -14.7 pp

Outcome Model Closing Market Difference Signal
Moss 42.3% 57.0% -14.7 pp Market Higher
Draw 27.8% 23.8% +4.1 pp Aligned
Raufoss 29.8% 19.2% +10.6 pp Model Edge

The closing market estimates Moss's win probability at 57.0%, compared with the model's estimate of 42.3%, a difference of 14.7 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: PRE5.

After full time, the result was Raufoss win 1–2.

Market Assessment

The market is materially more optimistic about Moss than the current fair estimate.

  • Investors may be incorporating information not fully reflected in the baseline model.
  • Tournament-specific context can shift market pricing.

Post Match Insights

What worked

  • Expected goals projected a high-scoring match (ΣxG 2.60) — 3 goals materialised
  • Both Teams To Score (Yes) matched the full-time result
  • Exact score 1–2 fell within the model's highlighted bins

What failed

  • Over / Under 2.5: model leaned Under 2.5; match finished Over 2.5 (3 goals)
  • 1X2: model leaned Moss; match finished Raufoss

Market lesson

The closing market differed from the model on Moss by 14.7 percentage points (57.0% vs model 42.3%) — 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. Jul 26, 2026 · 19:49 UTC Forecast generated
    • Model 1X2 · Moss 42.3% · Draw 27.8% · Raufoss 29.8%
    • xG · Moss 1.32 — Raufoss 1.28
  2. Jul 26, 2026 · 14:33 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
    • 1X2 odds · Moss 1.67 · Draw 4.01 · Raufoss 4.96
    • Implied 1X2 · Moss 57.0% · Draw 23.8% · Raufoss 19.2%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  3. Jul 26, 2026 · 14:56 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE5
    • 1X2 odds · Moss 1.67 · Draw 4.01 · Raufoss 4.96
    • Implied 1X2 · Moss 57.0% · Draw 23.8% · Raufoss 19.2%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  4. Jul 26, 2026 · 15:00 UTC Kickoff
  5. FT Full-time result Raufoss win · 1–2
  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: Monitor
Historical Decision Monitor
Outcome Missed
Pre-match metrics (historical context)
Prediction Reliability 56/100 · Moderate
  • Validation: Warning
  • Large market gap (15 pp)
Evidence ★★★★★
  • No strong statistical edge
  • Market has already priced much of the edge
  • Validation warning
Pricing proximity (inverse gap) 26/100
Betting Confidence 44/100

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Jul 23, 2026 · 13:56 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-1453127

Closing Odds 1.67
AI Fair Odds —
CLV Pending
Final Result Raufoss win · Moss 1–2 Raufoss
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

Pre-match snapshot for this fixture.

  • League: Norwegian 1st Division
  • Fixture: Moss vs Raufoss
  • Kickoff: 2026-07-26 15:00:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 10.0% · Draw 45.0% · Away 45.0%
  • xG (showing): Moss 1.32 — Raufoss 1.28 (total xG ≈ 2.6)
  • 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: Monitor

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

September 20, 2026 (UTC)

Related Predictions

See Upcoming 1. Division Matches Track Moss Next Match Prediction Track Raufoss Next Match Prediction View Today's Football Predictions

Get Premium Predictions for Moss & Raufoss!

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

Subscribe Now
Back to Predictions
1. Division 1. Division — Standings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Haugesund 22 16 1 5 49
2 Kongsvinger 22 14 5 3 47
3 Stromsgodset 22 13 6 3 45
4 Stabaek 22 13 3 6 42
5 Bryne 23 11 2 10 35
6 hodd 22 10 4 8 34
7 ODD Ballklubb 22 9 6 7 33
8 Egersund 22 8 5 9 29
9 Lyn 22 8 4 10 28
10 Ranheim 22 7 4 11 25
11 Strommen 22 7 4 11 25
12 Sandnes ULF 22 7 3 12 24
13 Sogndal 22 6 5 11 23
14 Moss 22 6 4 12 22
15 Asane 23 5 5 13 20
16 Raufoss 22 6 1 15 19
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Haugesund 22 68 37 +31 49
2 Kongsvinger 22 63 34 +29 47
3 Stromsgodset 22 58 31 +27 45
4 Stabaek 22 55 28 +27 42
5 Ranheim 22 52 57 -5 25
6 ODD Ballklubb 22 42 35 +7 33
7 Lyn 22 38 44 -6 28
8 hodd 22 37 40 -3 34
9 Sogndal 22 37 51 -14 23
10 Moss 22 36 51 -15 22
11 Egersund 22 35 39 -4 29
12 Asane 23 34 52 -18 20
13 Strommen 22 33 48 -15 25
14 Bryne 23 32 31 +1 35
15 Sandnes ULF 22 31 40 -9 24
16 Raufoss 22 26 59 -33 19