Prediction Audit: Quorn vs Gainsborough Trinity Prediction, Odds & AI Betting Tips

Aug 25, 2026 - 18:45
2 1.33
2 1.27
xG Accuracy: 68%

The model missed the final outcome (Draw 2–2).

The model had projected Quorn at 36.6%, but the full-time result went the other way.

Tracked markets vs full-time result

Prediction grade F

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 (4 goals) ✖ Incorrect
  • Both Teams To Score BTTS Yes Yes ✔ Correct
  • 1X2 Quorn Draw ✖ Incorrect
  • Correct Score Insights 1-1, 1-0, 0-1, 2-1, 1-2 2-2 ✖ Incorrect

Model vs Closing Market

Strong Disagreement

The closing market prices Gainsborough Trinity higher than the statistical model.

Largest probability gap: Gainsborough Trinity -21.3 pp

Outcome Model Closing Market Difference Signal
Quorn 36.6% 21.5% +15.1 pp Model Edge
Draw 29.6% 23.5% +6.2 pp Model Higher
Gainsborough Trinity 33.8% 55.1% -21.3 pp Market Higher

The closing market estimates Gainsborough Trinity's win probability at 55.1%, compared with the model's estimate of 33.8%, a difference of 21.3 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 2–2.

Post Match Insights

What worked

  • Expected goals projected a high-scoring match (ΣxG 2.60) — 4 goals materialised
  • Both Teams To Score (Yes) matched the full-time result

What failed

  • Over / Under 2.5: model leaned Under 2.5; match finished Over 2.5 (4 goals)
  • 1X2: model leaned Quorn; match finished Draw

Market lesson

The closing market differed from the model on Quorn by 21.3 percentage points (57.9% vs model 36.6%) — in this case the market view proved closer.

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 25, 2026 · 18:48 UTC Forecast generated
    • Model 1X2 · Quorn 36.6% · Draw 29.6% · Gainsborough Trinity 33.8%
    • xG · Quorn 1.33 — Gainsborough Trinity 1.27
  2. Aug 25, 2026 · 18:17 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
    • 1X2 odds · Quorn 4.21 · Draw 3.85 · Gainsborough Trinity 1.64
    • Implied 1X2 · Quorn 21.5% · Draw 23.5% · Gainsborough Trinity 55.1%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  3. Aug 25, 2026 · 18:48 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE1
    • 1X2 odds · Quorn 4.21 · Draw 3.85 · Gainsborough Trinity 1.64
    • Implied 1X2 · Quorn 21.5% · Draw 23.5% · Gainsborough Trinity 55.1%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  4. Aug 25, 2026 · 18:45 UTC Kickoff
  5. FT Full-time result Draw · 2–2
  6. FT Prediction missed 1X2 lean did not match 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 Missed
Pre-match metrics (historical context)
Prediction Reliability 52/100 · Moderate
  • Validation: Warning
  • Large market gap (21 pp)
Evidence ★★★★★
  • No strong statistical edge
  • Pricing remains divergent
  • Validation warning
Pricing proximity (inverse gap) 0/100
Monitoring Confidence 14/100

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Aug 19, 2026 · 02:54 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-4554414

Closing Odds 1.64
AI Fair Odds —
CLV Pending
Final Result Draw · Quorn 2–2 Gainsborough Trinity
Prediction ✖ Missed
Decision Grade F

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: Non League Premier - Northern
  • Fixture: Quorn vs Gainsborough Trinity
  • Kickoff: 2026-08-25 18:45:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 36.6% · Draw 29.6% · Away 33.8%
  • xG (showing): Quorn 1.33 — Gainsborough Trinity 1.27 (total xG ≈ 2.6)
  • Value headline: None (actionable) — best tracked EV is about +0.2%, still below the +2.0% minimum for a headline / default stake (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 54.5% · No 45.5%) Value lean (pricing): O/U 2.5 Under 2.5; BTTS Yes
  • BTTS (model): Yes 54.5% · No 45.5%
  • Correct score (top bin): 1-1 (12.5%)

When book depth is thin or odds are missing, EV may be unavailable even though the model still prefers one side on totals or BTTS — wait for cleaner prices or skip.

Prefer skipping to over-staking when the engine is honest about missing edge.

Historical Recommendation

Historical Decision: Wait

Outcome: Missed — Pre-match 1X2 lean did not match 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 29, 2026 (UTC)

Get Premium Predictions for Quorn & Gainsborough Trinity!

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

Subscribe Now
Back to Predictions
Non League Premier - Northern Non League Premier - Northern — Standings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Cleethorpes Town 10 7 2 1 23
2 Avro 9 7 1 1 22
3 Redcar Athletic 10 6 4 0 22
4 Guiseley AFC 9 6 1 2 19
5 Warrington Town 9 5 2 2 17
6 Bury 9 5 1 3 16
7 Curzon Ashton 9 5 1 3 16
8 Workington 9 5 1 3 16
9 Gainsborough Trinity 9 4 1 4 13
10 Rylands 9 4 1 4 13
11 Alfreton Town 9 4 0 5 12
12 Whitby Town 9 4 0 5 12
13 Ashton United 9 3 2 4 11
14 Hyde United 10 3 2 5 11
15 AFC Emley 9 2 4 3 10
16 Lancaster City 9 3 1 5 10
17 Leek Town 10 2 3 5 9
18 Bamber Bridge 10 2 3 5 9
19 Stockton Town 10 2 2 6 8
20 Ilkeston Town 9 2 1 6 7
21 Quorn 9 1 3 5 6
22 United of Manchester 9 1 2 6 5
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Avro 9 28 16 +12 22
2 Cleethorpes Town 10 25 6 +19 23
3 Guiseley AFC 9 22 10 +12 19
4 Redcar Athletic 10 19 7 +12 22
5 Bury 9 19 8 +11 16
6 Leek Town 10 19 20 -1 9
7 Curzon Ashton 9 18 10 +8 16
8 Warrington Town 9 18 14 +4 17
9 Workington 9 17 15 +2 16
10 Alfreton Town 9 15 10 +5 12
11 Gainsborough Trinity 9 14 12 +2 13
12 Whitby Town 9 14 24 -10 12
13 Bamber Bridge 10 14 27 -13 9
14 Stockton Town 10 13 20 -7 8
15 Rylands 9 12 13 -1 13
16 United of Manchester 9 12 19 -7 5
17 Quorn 9 12 23 -11 6
18 Hyde United 10 11 19 -8 11
19 Ashton United 9 10 9 +1 11
20 Lancaster City 9 9 17 -8 10
21 AFC Emley 9 8 15 -7 10
22 Ilkeston Town 9 6 21 -15 7