The model missed the final outcome (Connecticut FC win 2–1).
The model had projected New York RB II at 36.6%, but the full-time result went the other way.
Tracked markets vs full-time result
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 New York RB II Connecticut FC ✖ Incorrect
- Correct Score Insights 1-1, 0-1, 1-0, 1-2, 2-1 2-1 ✔ Correct
Model vs Closing Market
| Outcome | Model | Closing Market | Difference | Signal |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Connecticut FC | 33.8% | 45.5% | -11.7 pp | Market Higher |
| Draw | 29.6% | 24.3% | +5.3 pp | Model Higher |
| New York RB II | 36.6% | 30.2% | +6.4 pp | Model Higher |
The closing market estimates Connecticut FC's win probability at 45.5%, compared with the model's estimate of 33.8%, a difference of 11.7 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 Connecticut FC win 2–1.
Market Assessment
The market is materially more optimistic about Connecticut FC 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 2–1 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 New York RB II; match finished Connecticut FC
Market lesson
The closing market differed from the model on New York RB II by 11.7 percentage points (48.3% vs model 36.6%) — in this case the market view proved closer.
Prediction Timeline
How this prediction moved from forecast to full-time review.
-
Jul 19, 2026 · 21:59 UTC Forecast generated
- Model 1X2 · Connecticut FC 33.8% · Draw 29.6% · New York RB II 36.6%
- xG · Connecticut FC 1.27 — New York RB II 1.33
-
Jul 19, 2026 · 21:29 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
- 1X2 odds · Connecticut FC 2.04 · Draw 3.72 · New York RB II 3.02
- Implied 1X2 · Connecticut FC 45.0% · Draw 24.7% · New York RB II 30.4%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Jul 19, 2026 · 21:59 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE1
- 1X2 odds · Connecticut FC 2.01 · Draw 3.76 · New York RB II 3.03
- Implied 1X2 · Connecticut FC 45.5% · Draw 24.3% · New York RB II 30.2%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Jul 19, 2026 · 22:00 UTC Kickoff
-
FT Full-time result Connecticut FC win · 2–1
-
FT Prediction missed 1X2 lean did not match full-time result
-
Archived Prediction review
Historical Snapshot
Frozen at kickoff — the model output as it stood before the match started.
Pre-match metrics (historical context)
- Validation: Warning
- Large market gap (12 pp)
- No strong statistical edge
- Market has already priced much of the edge
- Validation warning
Validation Report
Immutable SnapshotModel 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.
Explore More Predictions Content
Get Premium Predictions for Connecticut FC & New York RB II!
Unlock in-depth analysis, exclusive betting tips, and match forecasts with our premium subscription service.
Subscribe Now
MLS Next Pro — Standings
| # | TEAM | MP | W | D | L | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Columbus Crew II | 28 | 17 | 0 | 11 | 48 |
| 1 | Crown Legacy | 26 | 19 | 0 | 7 | 54 |
| 1 | Austin II | 26 | 19 | 0 | 7 | 59 |
| 2 | New England II | 28 | 16 | 0 | 12 | 48 |
| 2 | Chattanooga | 26 | 17 | 0 | 9 | 50 |
| 2 | Portland Timbers II | 26 | 18 | 0 | 8 | 54 |
| 3 | New York City II | 28 | 16 | 0 | 12 | 47 |
| 3 | Atlanta United II | 26 | 14 | 0 | 12 | 45 |
| 3 | Houston Dynamo FC II | 26 | 18 | 0 | 8 | 51 |
| 4 | Connecticut FC | 28 | 16 | 0 | 12 | 46 |
| 4 | LA Galaxy II | 26 | 17 | 0 | 9 | 50 |
| 5 | New York RB II | 28 | 15 | 0 | 13 | 46 |
| 5 | St. Louis City II | 26 | 14 | 0 | 12 | 43 |
| 6 | Bethlehem Steel | 28 | 14 | 0 | 14 | 43 |
| 6 | Los Angeles II | 26 | 13 | 0 | 13 | 42 |
| 7 | Toronto II | 28 | 13 | 0 | 15 | 39 |
| 7 | Tacoma Defiance | 26 | 13 | 0 | 13 | 39 |
| 8 | FC Cincinnati II | 28 | 7 | 0 | 21 | 20 |
| 8 | North Texas | 26 | 13 | 0 | 13 | 38 |
| 9 | Orlando City II | 26 | 14 | 0 | 12 | 41 |
| 9 | Minnesota United II | 25 | 12 | 0 | 13 | 37 |
| 10 | San Jose Earthquakes II | 26 | 12 | 0 | 14 | 36 |
| 11 | Real Monarchs | 25 | 11 | 0 | 14 | 29 |
| 12 | Chicago Fire II | 26 | 13 | 0 | 13 | 39 |
| 12 | Whitecaps II | 26 | 10 | 0 | 16 | 27 |
| 13 | Huntsville City | 26 | 12 | 0 | 14 | 38 |
| 13 | Swope Park Rangers | 26 | 6 | 0 | 20 | 20 |
| 14 | Carolina Core | 26 | 9 | 0 | 17 | 28 |
| 14 | Colorado Rapids II | 26 | 5 | 0 | 21 | 18 |
| 16 | Fort Lauderdale CF | 26 | 4 | 0 | 22 | 15 |
| # | TEAM | MP | GS | GC | +/- | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Crown Legacy | 26 | 63 | 36 | +27 | 54 |
| 2 | Connecticut FC | 28 | 59 | 52 | +7 | 46 |
| 3 | New York RB II | 28 | 58 | 48 | +10 | 46 |
| 4 | Atlanta United II | 26 | 57 | 40 | +17 | 45 |
| 5 | LA Galaxy II | 26 | 54 | 34 | +20 | 50 |
| 6 | Austin II | 26 | 51 | 21 | +30 | 59 |
| 7 | Houston Dynamo FC II | 26 | 51 | 30 | +21 | 51 |
| 8 | Chattanooga | 26 | 51 | 38 | +13 | 50 |
| 9 | New York City II | 28 | 50 | 44 | +6 | 47 |
| 10 | Orlando City II | 26 | 50 | 51 | -1 | 41 |
| 11 | Columbus Crew II | 28 | 49 | 43 | +6 | 48 |
| 12 | Chicago Fire II | 26 | 49 | 45 | +4 | 39 |
| 13 | Toronto II | 28 | 48 | 56 | -8 | 39 |
| 14 | New England II | 28 | 47 | 42 | +5 | 48 |
| 15 | San Jose Earthquakes II | 26 | 45 | 36 | +9 | 36 |
| 16 | Los Angeles II | 26 | 43 | 44 | -1 | 42 |
| 17 | Huntsville City | 26 | 43 | 45 | -2 | 38 |
| 18 | St. Louis City II | 26 | 41 | 37 | +4 | 43 |
| 19 | North Texas | 26 | 41 | 39 | +2 | 38 |
| 20 | Tacoma Defiance | 26 | 39 | 40 | -1 | 39 |
| 21 | Whitecaps II | 26 | 38 | 55 | -17 | 27 |
| 22 | Bethlehem Steel | 28 | 37 | 40 | -3 | 43 |
| 23 | Carolina Core | 26 | 37 | 50 | -13 | 28 |
| 24 | Real Monarchs | 25 | 36 | 50 | -14 | 29 |
| 25 | Portland Timbers II | 26 | 35 | 27 | +8 | 54 |
| 26 | Minnesota United II | 25 | 35 | 36 | -1 | 37 |
| 27 | FC Cincinnati II | 28 | 32 | 62 | -30 | 20 |
| 28 | Swope Park Rangers | 26 | 32 | 68 | -36 | 20 |
| 29 | Fort Lauderdale CF | 26 | 27 | 63 | -36 | 15 |
| 30 | Colorado Rapids II | 26 | 26 | 50 | -24 | 18 |