Prediction Audit: Lidingö vs Enskede Prediction, Odds & AI Betting Tips

Aug 23, 2026 - 11:00
1 1.32
3 1.28
xG Accuracy: 57%

The model missed the final outcome (Enskede win 1–3).

The model had projected Lidingö at 36.1%, 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 (4 goals) ✖ Incorrect
  • Both Teams To Score BTTS Yes Yes ✔ Correct
  • 1X2 Lidingö Enskede ✖ Incorrect
  • Correct Score Insights 1-1, 1-0, 0-1, 2-1, 1-2 1-3 ✖ Incorrect

Model vs Closing Market

Strong Disagreement

The closing market prices Enskede higher than the statistical model.

Largest probability gap: Enskede -13.7 pp

Outcome Model Closing Market Difference Signal
Lidingö 36.1% 26.8% +9.3 pp Model Higher
Draw 29.6% 25.3% +4.4 pp Aligned
Enskede 34.2% 47.9% -13.7 pp Market Higher

The closing market estimates Enskede's win probability at 47.9%, compared with the model's estimate of 34.2%, a difference of 13.7 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: PRE1.

After full time, the result was Enskede win 1–3.

Market Assessment

The market is materially more optimistic about Enskede 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) — 4 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 (4 goals)
  • 1X2: model leaned Lidingö; match finished Enskede

Market lesson

The closing market differed from the model on Lidingö by 13.7 percentage points (49.8% vs model 36.1%) — 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. Aug 23, 2026 · 10:59 UTC Forecast generated
    • Model 1X2 · Lidingö 36.1% · Draw 29.7% · Enskede 34.2%
    • xG · Lidingö 1.32 — Enskede 1.28
  2. Aug 23, 2026 · 10:31 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
    • 1X2 odds · Lidingö 3.31 · Draw 3.51 · Enskede 1.85
    • Implied 1X2 · Lidingö 26.8% · Draw 25.3% · Enskede 47.9%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  3. Aug 23, 2026 · 10:59 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE1
    • 1X2 odds · Lidingö 3.31 · Draw 3.51 · Enskede 1.85
    • Implied 1X2 · Lidingö 26.8% · Draw 25.3% · Enskede 47.9%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  4. Aug 23, 2026 · 11:00 UTC Kickoff
  5. FT Full-time result Enskede win · 1–3
  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 (14 pp)
Evidence ★★★★★
  • No strong statistical edge
  • Market has already priced much of the edge
  • Validation warning
Pricing proximity (inverse gap) 10/100
Monitoring Confidence 19/100

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Aug 17, 2026 · 00:59 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-4359873

Closing Odds 1.85
AI Fair Odds —
CLV Pending
Final Result Enskede win · Lidingö 1–3 Enskede
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

Below is a compact, numbers-first snapshot aligned with the same engine as the cards above.

  • League: Division 2 - Norra Svealand
  • Fixture: Lidingö vs Enskede
  • Kickoff: 2026-08-23 11:00:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 36.1% · Draw 29.7% · Away 34.2%
  • xG (showing): Lidingö 1.32 — Enskede 1.28 (total xG ≈ 2.6)
  • Value headline: None — no positive EV on tracked lines at current best prices (same as the decision block: no default bet).
  • Structural leans (not bets): Structural lean (model): O/U 2.5 Under 2.5 (Under 2.5 51.8% · Over 2.5 48.2%); BTTS Yes (Yes 54.5% · No 45.5%) Value lean (pricing): O/U 2.5 Under 2.5; BTTS Yes
  • BTTS (model): Yes 54.5% · No 45.5%
  • Correct score (top bin): 1-1 (12.5%)

Saying “no value” on a snapshot is a feature, not a bug: it protects readers from forcing a play when the edge is not there.

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 29, 2026 (UTC)

Get Premium Predictions for Lidingö & Enskede!

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

Subscribe Now
Back to Predictions
Division 2 - Norra Svealand Division 2 - Norra Svealand — Standings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Skiljebo 23 16 5 2 53
2 Sunnersta 23 15 5 3 50
3 Angby 22 13 6 3 45
4 Enskede 22 13 4 5 43
5 Falu BS 22 12 5 5 41
6 Täby 23 11 5 7 38
7 Gute 23 9 5 9 32
8 Bollstanäs 22 7 7 8 28
9 Franke 22 7 4 11 25
10 Lidingö 23 5 5 13 20
11 Kungsängen 22 3 10 9 19
12 Viggbyholms IK 23 5 4 14 19
13 Korsnäs 23 3 5 15 14
14 Helges 23 2 4 17 10
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Sunnersta 23 57 19 +38 50
2 Skiljebo 23 54 24 +30 53
3 Angby 22 46 25 +21 45
4 Täby 23 39 25 +14 38
5 Bollstanäs 22 38 42 -4 28
6 Gute 23 37 33 +4 32
7 Enskede 22 36 23 +13 43
8 Falu BS 22 35 25 +10 41
9 Franke 22 35 39 -4 25
10 Lidingö 23 26 48 -22 20
11 Kungsängen 22 24 34 -10 19
12 Korsnäs 23 24 54 -30 14
13 Viggbyholms IK 23 23 46 -23 19
14 Helges 23 20 57 -37 10