AI correctly predicted the Lancaster City win.
The match finished 1–2, validating the model's directional assessment.
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 Over 2.5 (3 goals) ✖ Incorrect
- Both Teams To Score BTTS Yes Yes ✔ Correct
- 1X2 Lancaster City Lancaster City ✔ Correct
- Correct Score Insights 1-1, 0-1, 1-0, 1-2, 2-1 1-2 ✔ Correct
Model vs Closing Market
| Outcome | Model | Closing Market | Difference | Signal |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guiseley AFC | 32.4% | 48.2% | -15.8 pp | Market Higher |
| Draw | 29.6% | 24.6% | +5.0 pp | Aligned |
| Lancaster City | 38.0% | 27.2% | +10.8 pp | Model Edge |
The closing market estimates Guiseley AFC's win probability at 48.2%, compared with the model's estimate of 32.4%, a difference of 15.8 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: PRE10.
After full time, the model's directional lean matched the result (Lancaster City win 1–2).
Market Assessment
The market is materially more optimistic about Guiseley AFC 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
- 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 1–2 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 Lancaster City higher (53.8% vs model 38.0%, 15.8 pp), but the model's lean was validated (Lancaster City win 1–2).
Prediction Timeline
How this prediction moved from forecast to full-time review.
-
Aug 28, 2026 · 18:43 UTC Forecast generated
- Model 1X2 · Guiseley AFC 32.4% · Draw 29.6% · Lancaster City 38.0%
- xG · Guiseley AFC 1.24 — Lancaster City 1.36
-
Aug 28, 2026 · 18:23 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
- 1X2 odds · Guiseley AFC 1.89 · Draw 3.61 · Lancaster City 3.32
- Implied 1X2 · Guiseley AFC 47.8% · Draw 25.0% · Lancaster City 27.2%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Aug 28, 2026 · 18:43 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE10
- 1X2 odds · Guiseley AFC 1.90 · Draw 3.72 · Lancaster City 3.36
- Implied 1X2 · Guiseley AFC 48.2% · Draw 24.6% · Lancaster City 27.2%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Aug 28, 2026 · 18:45 UTC Kickoff
-
FT Full-time result Lancaster City win · 1–2
-
FT Prediction validated Directional lean matched 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 (16 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 Guiseley AFC & Lancaster City!
Unlock in-depth analysis, exclusive betting tips, and match forecasts with our premium subscription service.
Subscribe Now
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 |