Prediction Audit: Abha vs Al-Hazm Prediction, Odds & AI Betting Tips

Aug 13, 2026 - 16:15
1 0.82
2 0.82
xG Accuracy: 69%

The model missed the final outcome (Al-Hazm win 1–2).

The model had projected Draw at 35.1%, 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 (3 goals) ✖ Incorrect
  • Both Teams To Score BTTS No Yes ✖ Incorrect
  • 1X2 Draw Al-Hazm ✖ Incorrect
  • Correct Score Insights 0-0, 0-1, 1-0, 1-1, 0-2 1-2 ✖ Incorrect

Model vs Closing Market

Moderate Disagreement

The model rates Draw considerably stronger than the closing betting market.

Largest probability gap: Draw +7.4 pp

Outcome Model Closing Market Difference Signal
Abha 32.8% 37.7% -4.8 pp Aligned
Draw 35.1% 27.7% +7.4 pp Model Higher
Al-Hazm 32.0% 34.6% -2.6 pp Aligned

The statistical model estimates Draw's win probability at 35.1%, compared with the closing market's implied probability of 27.7%, a difference of 7.4 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 Al-Hazm win 1–2.

Market Assessment

The fair estimate shows a modest edge over current market pricing on Draw.

  • Monitor line movement before kickoff — not a betting recommendation.

Post Match Insights

What failed

  • Both Teams To Score: model leaned BTTS No; match finished BTTS Yes
  • Over / Under 2.5: model leaned Under 2.5; match finished Over 2.5 (3 goals)

Market lesson

The closing market differed from the model on Draw by 7.4 percentage points (27.7% vs model 35.1%) — 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 13, 2026 · 19:08 UTC Forecast generated
    • Model 1X2 · Abha 32.8% · Draw 35.1% · Al-Hazm 32.1%
    • xG · Abha 0.82 — Al-Hazm 0.82
  2. Aug 13, 2026 · 15:44 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
    • 1X2 odds · Abha 2.53 · Draw 3.44 · Al-Hazm 2.75
    • Implied 1X2 · Abha 37.7% · Draw 27.7% · Al-Hazm 34.6%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  3. Aug 13, 2026 · 16:14 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE1
    • 1X2 odds · Abha 2.53 · Draw 3.44 · Al-Hazm 2.75
    • Implied 1X2 · Abha 37.7% · Draw 27.7% · Al-Hazm 34.6%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  4. Aug 13, 2026 · 16:15 UTC Kickoff
  5. FT Full-time result Al-Hazm win · 1–2
  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: Monitor
Historical Decision Monitor
Outcome Missed
Pre-match metrics (historical context)
Prediction Reliability 75/100 · High
  • Validation: Pass
Evidence ★★★★★
  • No strong statistical edge
  • Direction agrees with model lean
  • Validation passed
Pricing proximity (inverse gap) 21/100
Monitoring Confidence 33/100

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Aug 07, 2026 · 01:43 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-3152339

Closing Odds 3.44
AI Fair Odds —
CLV Pending
Final Result Al-Hazm win · Abha 1–2 Al-Hazm
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

Pre-match snapshot for this fixture.

  • League: Pro League
  • Fixture: Abha vs Al-Hazm
  • Kickoff: 2026-08-13 16:15:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 0.0% · Draw 50.0% · Away 50.0%
  • xG (showing): Abha 0.82 — Al-Hazm 0.82 (total xG ≈ 1.64)
  • Value headline: None — no positive EV could be estimated on tracked lines at current best prices (missing odds or thin book depth).
  • Structural leans (not bets): See the Over/Under and BTTS cards for any directional lean text.
  • BTTS (model): Yes N/A · No N/A
  • Correct score (top bin): N/A

The decision block shows no default Primary: Primary needs consensus EV ≥ +5.0% plus strength/reliability/calibration gates. A separate Lean/tracked gate is +2.0% (selective only). Lean labels are directional only — not bankroll-sized recommendations.

Most likely correct score stays a low-probability tail: use it for context, not as a must-bet story.

Historical Recommendation

Historical Decision: Monitor

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 Abha & Al-Hazm!

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

Subscribe Now
Back to Predictions
Pro League Pro League — Standings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Al-Hilal Saudi FC 7 6 0 1 18
2 Al-Ittihad FC 7 5 2 0 17
3 Al-Nassr 7 5 1 1 16
4 Al-Qadisiyah FC 7 5 1 1 16
5 NEOM 7 5 0 2 15
6 Al-Ahli Jeddah 7 4 0 3 12
7 Al Kholood 7 3 3 1 12
8 Al Diriyah 7 3 2 2 11
9 Al-Ettifaq 7 3 2 2 11
10 Al-Hazm 7 2 2 3 8
11 Al Riyadh 7 2 2 3 8
12 Al-Fayha 7 1 3 3 6
13 Al Khaleej Saihat 7 0 5 2 5
14 Al Shabab 7 0 4 3 4
15 Al-Fateh 7 0 3 4 3
16 Al-Faisaly FC 7 0 3 4 3
17 Al Taawon 7 0 3 4 3
18 Abha 7 0 2 5 2
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Al-Hilal Saudi FC 7 23 5 +18 18
2 Al-Nassr 7 16 7 +9 16
3 Al-Qadisiyah FC 7 16 8 +8 16
4 Al-Ahli Jeddah 7 16 10 +6 12
5 NEOM 7 13 6 +7 15
6 Al-Ittihad FC 7 12 6 +6 17
7 Al Kholood 7 12 10 +2 12
8 Al-Ettifaq 7 11 11 0 11
9 Al Riyadh 7 8 16 -8 8
10 Al Diriyah 7 7 5 +2 11
11 Al-Hazm 7 7 9 -2 8
12 Al-Fayha 7 7 11 -4 6
13 Al Shabab 7 6 11 -5 4
14 Al-Faisaly FC 7 5 13 -8 3
15 Abha 7 5 13 -8 2
16 Al-Fateh 7 4 11 -7 3
17 Al Khaleej Saihat 7 3 10 -7 5
18 Al Taawon 7 3 12 -9 3
# TEAM MP xG xGC +/- PTS
1 Al-Hilal Saudi FC 7 13.7 4.9 +8.8 18
2 Al-Qadisiyah FC 7 9.1 3.6 +5.5 16
3 Al-Nassr 7 8.4 3.0 +5.4 16
4 Al Kholood 7 10.9 7.3 +3.6 12
5 Al-Ahli Jeddah 7 4.2 2.4 +1.8 12
6 Al-Ittihad FC 7 8.1 6.4 +1.7 17
7 Al-Ettifaq 7 6.7 5.7 +1.0 11
8 Al Diriyah 7 3.7 2.9 +0.8 11
9 Al Taawon 7 5.8 5.4 +0.4 3
10 NEOM 7 6.0 6.1 -0.1 15
11 Al Shabab 7 6.8 7.6 -0.8 4
12 Al-Fateh 7 4.5 6.9 -2.4 3
13 Al-Hazm 7 3.3 6.0 -2.7 8
14 Al Khaleej Saihat 7 4.2 7.2 -3.0 5
15 Abha 7 4.4 8.2 -3.8 2
16 Al Riyadh 7 3.4 8.5 -5.1 8
17 Al-Faisaly FC 7 4.5 9.7 -5.2 3
18 Al-Fayha 7 5.0 10.8 -5.8 6