Predictions / Football / Lithuania. 1 Lyga / Be1 NFA vs Hegelmann II

Prediction Audit: Be1 NFA vs Hegelmann II Prediction, Odds & AI Betting Tips

Be1 NFA Be1 NFA
Aug 14, 2026 - 15:30
2 1.38
1 1.22
xG Accuracy: 79%
Hegelmann II Hegelmann II

AI correctly predicted the Be1 NFA win.

The match finished 2–1, validating the model's directional assessment.

Tracked markets vs full-time result

Prediction grade B-

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 Be1 NFA Be1 NFA ✔ Correct
  • Correct Score Insights 1-1, 1-0, 0-1, 2-1, 1-2 2-1 ✔ Correct

Model vs Closing Market

Strong Disagreement

The closing market prices Be1 NFA higher than the statistical model.

Largest probability gap: Be1 NFA -27.8 pp

Outcome Model Closing Market Difference Signal
Be1 NFA 39.0% 66.8% -27.8 pp Market Higher
Draw 29.5% 17.9% +11.6 pp Model Edge
Hegelmann II 31.5% 15.3% +16.2 pp Model Edge

The closing market estimates Be1 NFA's win probability at 66.8%, compared with the model's estimate of 39.0%, a difference of 27.8 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 model's directional lean matched the result (Be1 NFA win 2–1).

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)

Market lesson

Large model–market gaps do not automatically mean the market is right. Here the closing market priced Be1 NFA higher (66.8% vs model 39.0%, 27.8 pp), but the model's lean was validated (Be1 NFA win 2–1).

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 14, 2026 · 15:29 UTC Forecast generated
    • Model 1X2 · Be1 NFA 39.0% · Draw 29.5% · Hegelmann II 31.5%
    • xG · Be1 NFA 1.38 — Hegelmann II 1.22
  2. Aug 14, 2026 · 15:00 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
    • 1X2 odds · Be1 NFA 1.29 · Draw 4.80 · Hegelmann II 5.63
    • Implied 1X2 · Be1 NFA 66.8% · Draw 17.9% · Hegelmann II 15.3%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  3. Aug 14, 2026 · 15:29 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE1
    • 1X2 odds · Be1 NFA 1.29 · Draw 4.80 · Hegelmann II 5.63
    • Implied 1X2 · Be1 NFA 66.8% · Draw 17.9% · Hegelmann II 15.3%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  4. Aug 14, 2026 · 15:30 UTC Kickoff
  5. FT Full-time result Be1 NFA win · 2–1
  6. FT Prediction validated Directional lean matched full-time result
  7. Archived Prediction review

Historical Snapshot

Frozen at kickoff — the model output as it stood before the match started.

Historical verdict: Cautious / Wait

Historical label: Originally displayed as "Wait for validation".

Historical Decision Wait
Outcome Validated
Pre-match metrics (historical context)
Prediction Reliability 49/100 · Moderate
  • Validation: Warning
  • Large market gap (28 pp)
Evidence ★★★★★
  • No strong statistical edge
  • Market strongly disagrees on price
  • Validation warning
Pricing proximity (inverse gap) 0/100
Betting Confidence 31/100

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Aug 08, 2026 · 01:18 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-3227562

Closing Odds 1.29
AI Fair Odds —
CLV Pending
Final Result Be1 NFA win · Be1 NFA 2–1 Hegelmann II
Prediction ✔ Correct
Decision Grade B-

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

Quick read on how the model reads this matchup.

  • League: 1 Lyga
  • Fixture: Be1 NFA vs Hegelmann II
  • Kickoff: 2026-08-14 15:30:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 39.0% · Draw 29.5% · Away 31.5%
  • xG (showing): Be1 NFA 1.38 — Hegelmann II 1.22 (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 54.4% · No 45.6%) Value lean (pricing): O/U 2.5 Under 2.5; BTTS Yes
  • BTTS (model): Yes 54.4% · No 45.6%
  • 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.

If lines move materially, re-run generation or refresh — implied probabilities and any future EV readouts will change first.

Historical Recommendation

Historical Decision: Wait

Outcome: Validated — Pre-match lean validated against 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 28, 2026 (UTC)

Related Predictions

See Upcoming 1 Lyga Matches Track Be1 NFA Next Match Prediction Track Hegelmann II Next Match Prediction View Today's Football Predictions

Get Premium Predictions for Be1 NFA & Hegelmann II!

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

Subscribe Now
Back to Predictions
1 Lyga 1 Lyga — Standings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Minija 24 21 1 2 64
2 Babrungas 25 19 4 2 61
3 Be1 NFA 24 16 2 6 50
4 Neptūną Klaipėda 25 14 2 9 44
5 Tauras 25 13 4 8 43
6 Žalgiris II 25 13 4 8 43
7 BFA 25 13 4 8 43
8 Dainava 24 11 7 6 40
9 Atmosfera 24 8 6 10 30
10 Jonava 25 7 6 12 27
11 Garliava 24 6 4 14 22
12 Kauno Žalgiris II 24 7 1 16 22
13 Hegelmann II 25 7 1 17 22
14 Transinvest 2 25 6 3 16 21
15 FA Šiauliai II 25 4 5 16 17
16 Ekranas 25 4 2 19 14
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Minija 24 63 13 +50 64
2 Babrungas 25 43 11 +32 61
3 Be1 NFA 24 43 25 +18 50
4 Tauras 25 43 31 +12 43
5 BFA 25 39 35 +4 43
6 Žalgiris II 25 38 32 +6 43
7 Atmosfera 24 37 33 +4 30
8 Dainava 24 34 23 +11 40
9 Neptūną Klaipėda 25 33 30 +3 44
10 Hegelmann II 25 30 56 -26 22
11 Transinvest 2 25 29 58 -29 21
12 Jonava 25 28 33 -5 27
13 Garliava 24 27 30 -3 22
14 FA Šiauliai II 25 27 56 -29 17
15 Ekranas 25 25 58 -33 14
16 Kauno Žalgiris II 24 23 38 -15 22
1 Lyga Lithuania. 1 Lyga Predictions