The model missed the final outcome (Cavalry FC win 2–1).
The model had projected Forge at 42.6%, 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 Over 2.5 Over 2.5 (3 goals) ✔ Correct
- Both Teams To Score BTTS Yes Yes ✔ Correct
- 1X2 Forge Cavalry FC ✖ Incorrect
- Correct Score Insights 1-2, 1-1, 2-2, 2-1, 1-3 2-1 ✔ Correct
Model vs Closing Market
| Outcome | Model | Closing Market | Difference | Signal |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cavalry FC | 34.9% | 37.4% | -2.6 pp | Aligned |
| Draw | 22.6% | 30.9% | -8.3 pp | Market Higher |
| Forge | 42.6% | 31.7% | +10.8 pp | Model Edge |
The statistical model estimates Forge's win probability at 42.6%, compared with the closing market's implied probability of 31.7%, a difference of 10.8 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 Cavalry FC win 2–1.
Market Assessment
The statistical fair estimate is materially higher than the market on Forge.
- The model may see a slower-scoring or closer matchup than the market.
- Monitor line movement before kickoff — not a betting recommendation.
Post Match Insights
What worked
- Expected goals projected a high-scoring match (ΣxG 3.98) — 3 goals materialised
- Both Teams To Score (Yes) matched the full-time result
- Over 2.5 goals aligned with the xG profile
What failed
- 1X2: model leaned Forge; match finished Cavalry FC
Market lesson
The closing market differed from the model on Forge by 10.8 percentage points (31.8% vs model 42.6%) — in this case the market view proved closer.
Prediction Timeline
How this prediction moved from forecast to full-time review.
-
Aug 15, 2026 · 20:59 UTC Forecast generated
- Model 1X2 · Cavalry FC 34.9% · Draw 22.6% · Forge 42.6%
- xG · Cavalry FC 1.89 — Forge 2.09
-
Aug 15, 2026 · 20:29 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
- 1X2 odds · Cavalry FC 2.45 · Draw 2.97 · Forge 2.89
- Implied 1X2 · Cavalry FC 37.4% · Draw 30.9% · Forge 31.7%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Aug 15, 2026 · 20:59 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE1
- 1X2 odds · Cavalry FC 2.45 · Draw 2.97 · Forge 2.89
- Implied 1X2 · Cavalry FC 37.4% · Draw 30.9% · Forge 31.7%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Aug 15, 2026 · 21:00 UTC Kickoff
-
FT Full-time result Cavalry 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 (11 pp)
- High xG deviation from league baseline (55%+)
- Statistical edge detected
- 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 Cavalry FC & Forge!
Unlock in-depth analysis, exclusive betting tips, and match forecasts with our premium subscription service.
Subscribe Now
Canadian Premier League — Standings
| # | TEAM | MP | W | D | L | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cavalry FC | 23 | 16 | 5 | 2 | 53 |
| 2 | Forge | 23 | 14 | 5 | 4 | 47 |
| 3 | Atlético Ottawa | 24 | 11 | 4 | 9 | 37 |
| 4 | Vancouver FC | 25 | 9 | 6 | 10 | 33 |
| 5 | HFX Wanderers FC | 24 | 7 | 5 | 12 | 26 |
| 6 | Supra du Quebec | 23 | 7 | 4 | 12 | 25 |
| 7 | York United | 23 | 5 | 9 | 9 | 24 |
| 8 | Pacific FC | 23 | 2 | 8 | 13 | 14 |
| # | TEAM | MP | GS | GC | +/- | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cavalry FC | 23 | 48 | 13 | +35 | 53 |
| 2 | York United | 23 | 36 | 53 | -17 | 24 |
| 3 | Forge | 23 | 35 | 17 | +18 | 47 |
| 4 | Vancouver FC | 25 | 35 | 33 | +2 | 33 |
| 5 | Atlético Ottawa | 24 | 35 | 39 | -4 | 37 |
| 6 | HFX Wanderers FC | 24 | 35 | 39 | -4 | 26 |
| 7 | Supra du Quebec | 23 | 31 | 44 | -13 | 25 |
| 8 | Pacific FC | 23 | 30 | 47 | -17 | 14 |
| # | TEAM | MP | xG | xGC | +/- | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cavalry FC | 23 | 7.3 | 2.4 | +4.9 | 53 |
| 2 | Pacific FC | 23 | 12.1 | 9.3 | +2.8 | 14 |
| 3 | Forge | 23 | 8.3 | 6.8 | +1.5 | 47 |
| 4 | Vancouver FC | 25 | 6.4 | 5.8 | +0.6 | 33 |
| 5 | Supra du Quebec | 23 | 9.9 | 10.1 | -0.2 | 25 |
| 6 | HFX Wanderers FC | 24 | 9.0 | 10.8 | -1.8 | 26 |
| 7 | Atlético Ottawa | 24 | 6.8 | 9.3 | -2.5 | 37 |
| 8 | York United | 23 | 7.3 | 12.5 | -5.2 | 24 |
