The model missed the final outcome (Draw 1–1).
The model had projected Beijing Guoan at 49.4%, 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 Under 2.5 (2 goals) ✖ Incorrect
- Both Teams To Score BTTS Yes Yes ✔ Correct
- 1X2 Beijing Guoan Draw ✖ Incorrect
- Correct Score Insights 1-1, 2-1, 1-2, 2-2, 1-0 1-1 ✔ Correct
Model vs Closing Market
| Outcome | Model | Closing Market | Difference | Signal |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beijing Guoan | 49.4% | 68.9% | -19.5 pp | Market Higher |
| Draw | 24.1% | 17.7% | +6.3 pp | Model Higher |
| Shenyang Urban | 26.5% | 13.4% | +13.2 pp | Model Edge |
The closing market estimates Beijing Guoan's win probability at 68.9%, compared with the model's estimate of 49.4%, a difference of 19.5 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 Draw 1–1.
Market Assessment
The market is materially more optimistic about Beijing Guoan 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
- Both Teams To Score (Yes) matched the full-time result
- Exact score 1–1 fell within the model's highlighted bins
What failed
- Over / Under 2.5: model leaned Over 2.5; match finished Under 2.5 (2 goals)
- 1X2: model leaned Beijing Guoan; match finished Draw
Market lesson
The closing market differed from the model on Beijing Guoan by 19.5 percentage points (68.9% vs model 49.4%) — in this case the market view proved closer.
Prediction Timeline
How this prediction moved from forecast to full-time review.
-
Jul 17, 2026 · 19:22 UTC Forecast generated
- Model 1X2 · Beijing Guoan 49.5% · Draw 24.0% · Shenyang Urban 26.5%
- xG · Beijing Guoan 2.00 — Shenyang Urban 1.44
-
Jul 17, 2026 · 11:04 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
- 1X2 odds · Beijing Guoan 1.39 · Draw 5.40 · Shenyang Urban 7.16
- Implied 1X2 · Beijing Guoan 68.9% · Draw 17.7% · Shenyang Urban 13.4%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Jul 17, 2026 · 11:34 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE1
- 1X2 odds · Beijing Guoan 1.39 · Draw 5.40 · Shenyang Urban 7.16
- Implied 1X2 · Beijing Guoan 68.9% · Draw 17.7% · Shenyang Urban 13.4%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Jul 17, 2026 · 11:35 UTC Kickoff
-
FT Full-time result Draw · 1–1
-
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 (19 pp)
- No strong statistical edge
- Pricing remains divergent
- 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 Beijing Guoan & Shenyang Urban!
Unlock in-depth analysis, exclusive betting tips, and match forecasts with our premium subscription service.
Subscribe Now
Super League — Standings
| # | TEAM | MP | W | D | L | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Chengdu Better City | 26 | 15 | 7 | 4 | 52 |
| 2 | Dalian Zhixing | 26 | 12 | 4 | 10 | 40 |
| 3 | Beijing Guoan | 26 | 11 | 10 | 5 | 38 |
| 4 | Yunnan Yukun | 26 | 11 | 5 | 10 | 38 |
| 5 | Qingdao Youth Island | 26 | 8 | 14 | 4 | 38 |
| 6 | Shandong Luneng | 26 | 13 | 4 | 9 | 37 |
| 7 | SHANGHAI SIPG | 26 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 33 |
| 8 | Shanghai Shenhua | 26 | 12 | 5 | 9 | 31 |
| 9 | Chongqing Tongliang Long | 26 | 7 | 10 | 9 | 31 |
| 10 | Hangzhou Greentown | 26 | 10 | 6 | 10 | 31 |
| 11 | Sichuan Jiuniu | 26 | 8 | 4 | 14 | 28 |
| 12 | Henan Jianye | 26 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 27 |
| 13 | Shenyang Urban | 26 | 7 | 4 | 15 | 25 |
| 14 | Tianjin Teda | 26 | 9 | 8 | 9 | 25 |
| 15 | Wuhan Three Towns | 26 | 5 | 11 | 10 | 21 |
| 16 | Qingdao Jonoon | 26 | 6 | 3 | 17 | 14 |
| # | TEAM | MP | GS | GC | +/- | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Yunnan Yukun | 26 | 54 | 51 | +3 | 38 |
| 2 | Shanghai Shenhua | 26 | 52 | 46 | +6 | 31 |
| 3 | Chengdu Better City | 26 | 51 | 30 | +21 | 52 |
| 4 | Beijing Guoan | 26 | 49 | 33 | +16 | 38 |
| 5 | Shandong Luneng | 26 | 46 | 43 | +3 | 37 |
| 6 | Hangzhou Greentown | 26 | 45 | 43 | +2 | 31 |
| 7 | SHANGHAI SIPG | 26 | 40 | 33 | +7 | 33 |
| 8 | Wuhan Three Towns | 26 | 39 | 46 | -7 | 21 |
| 9 | Dalian Zhixing | 26 | 38 | 42 | -4 | 40 |
| 10 | Tianjin Teda | 26 | 36 | 32 | +4 | 25 |
| 11 | Sichuan Jiuniu | 26 | 34 | 45 | -11 | 28 |
| 12 | Shenyang Urban | 26 | 34 | 47 | -13 | 25 |
| 13 | Qingdao Jonoon | 26 | 34 | 53 | -19 | 14 |
| 14 | Henan Jianye | 26 | 33 | 35 | -2 | 27 |
| 15 | Qingdao Youth Island | 26 | 31 | 32 | -1 | 38 |
| 16 | Chongqing Tongliang Long | 26 | 27 | 32 | -5 | 31 |
| # | TEAM | MP | xG | xGC | +/- | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Beijing Guoan | 26 | 4.4 | 0.1 | +4.3 | 38 |
| 2 | Shenyang Urban | 26 | 2.8 | 0.8 | +2.0 | 25 |
| 3 | Tianjin Teda | 26 | 1.5 | 0.6 | +0.9 | 25 |
| 4 | Chengdu Better City | 26 | 2.1 | 1.5 | +0.6 | 52 |
| 5 | Qingdao Youth Island | 26 | 1.8 | 1.2 | +0.6 | 38 |
| 6 | Yunnan Yukun | 26 | 2.6 | 2.3 | +0.3 | 38 |
| 7 | Dalian Zhixing | 26 | 2.3 | 2.0 | +0.3 | 40 |
| 8 | Hangzhou Greentown | 26 | 1.7 | 1.5 | +0.2 | 31 |
| 9 | Shanghai Shenhua | 26 | 1.5 | 1.7 | -0.2 | 31 |
| 10 | Wuhan Three Towns | 26 | 2.0 | 2.3 | -0.3 | 21 |
| 11 | Qingdao Jonoon | 26 | 1.5 | 2.1 | -0.6 | 14 |
| 12 | SHANGHAI SIPG | 26 | 1.2 | 1.8 | -0.6 | 33 |
| 13 | Sichuan Jiuniu | 26 | 0.6 | 1.5 | -0.9 | 28 |
| 14 | Chongqing Tongliang Long | 26 | 0.8 | 2.8 | -2.0 | 31 |
| 15 | Shandong Luneng | 26 | 2.4 | 7.0 | -4.6 | 37 |
| 16 | Henan Jianye | 26 | — | — | — | 27 |