The model missed the final outcome (Chattanooga win 0–1).
The model had projected Chicago Fire II at 36.1%, 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 Under 2.5 (1 goals) ✔ Correct
- Both Teams To Score BTTS No No ✔ Correct
- 1X2 Chicago Fire II Chattanooga ✖ Incorrect
- Correct Score Insights 1-1, 1-0, 0-1, 2-1, 1-2 0-1 ✔ Correct
Model vs Closing Market
| Outcome | Model | Closing Market | Difference | Signal |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chicago Fire II | 36.1% | 36.2% | -0.1 pp | Aligned |
| Draw | 29.6% | 24.2% | +5.4 pp | Model Higher |
| Chattanooga | 34.2% | 39.6% | -5.4 pp | Market Higher |
The statistical model estimates Draw's win probability at 29.6%, compared with the closing market's implied probability of 24.2%, a difference of 5.4 percentage points. This highlights a substantial disagreement between the model's assessment and the market consensus, rather than 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 Chattanooga win 0–1.
Market Assessment
The fair estimate shows a modest edge over current market pricing on Draw.
- Monitor line movement before kickoff — not a betting recommendation.
Post Match Insights
What worked
- Both Teams To Score (No) matched the full-time result
- Under 2.5 goals aligned with the xG profile
- Exact score 0–1 fell within the model's highlighted bins
What failed
- 1X2: model leaned Chicago Fire II; match finished Chattanooga
Market lesson
The closing market differed from the model on Chicago Fire II by 5.4 percentage points (30.7% vs model 36.1%) — in this case the market view proved closer.
Prediction Timeline
How this prediction moved from forecast to full-time review.
-
Sep 20, 2026 · 18:00 UTC Forecast generated
- Model 1X2 · Chicago Fire II 36.1% · Draw 29.7% · Chattanooga 34.2%
- xG · Chicago Fire II 1.32 — Chattanooga 1.28
-
Sep 20, 2026 · 17:31 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
- 1X2 odds · Chicago Fire II 2.53 · Draw 3.78 · Chattanooga 2.31
- Implied 1X2 · Chicago Fire II 36.2% · Draw 24.2% · Chattanooga 39.6%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Sep 20, 2026 · 18:00 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE1
- 1X2 odds · Chicago Fire II 2.53 · Draw 3.78 · Chattanooga 2.31
- Implied 1X2 · Chicago Fire II 36.2% · Draw 24.2% · Chattanooga 39.6%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Sep 20, 2026 · 18:00 UTC Kickoff
-
FT Full-time result Chattanooga win · 0–1
-
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: Pass
- No strong statistical edge
- Direction agrees with model lean
- Validation passed
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 Chicago Fire II & Chattanooga!
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 |