AI correctly predicted the Exeter City win.
The match finished 2–0, 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 Over 2.5 Under 2.5 (2 goals) ✖ Incorrect
- Both Teams To Score BTTS Yes No ✖ Incorrect
- 1X2 Exeter City Exeter City ✔ Correct
- Correct Score Insights 1-1, 2-1, 1-2, 2-2, 1-0 2-0 ✖ Incorrect
Model vs Closing Market
| Outcome | Model | Closing Market | Difference | Signal |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exeter City | 42.8% | 47.0% | -4.2 pp | Aligned |
| Draw | 25.4% | 27.2% | -1.8 pp | Aligned |
| Accrington ST | 31.8% | 25.8% | +6.0 pp | Model Higher |
The statistical model estimates Accrington ST's win probability at 31.8%, compared with the closing market's implied probability of 25.8%, a difference of 6.0 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: PRE10.
After full time, the model's directional lean matched the result (Exeter City win 2–0).
Market Assessment
The fair estimate shows a modest edge over current market pricing on Accrington ST.
- Monitor line movement before kickoff — not a betting recommendation.
Post Match Insights
What failed
- Both Teams To Score: model leaned BTTS Yes; match finished BTTS No
- Over / Under 2.5: model leaned Over 2.5; match finished Under 2.5 (2 goals)
Market lesson
Large model–market gaps do not automatically mean the market is right. Here the closing market priced Exeter City more conservatively (36.8% vs model 42.8%, 6.0 pp), but the model's lean was validated (Exeter City win 2–0).
Prediction Timeline
How this prediction moved from forecast to full-time review.
-
Aug 22, 2026 · 14:00 UTC Forecast generated
- Model 1X2 · Exeter City 42.7% · Draw 25.4% · Accrington ST 31.8%
- xG · Exeter City 1.78 — Accrington ST 1.52
-
Aug 22, 2026 · 13:38 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
- 1X2 odds · Exeter City 2.03 · Draw 3.50 · Accrington ST 3.70
- Implied 1X2 · Exeter City 47.0% · Draw 27.2% · Accrington ST 25.8%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Aug 22, 2026 · 14:00 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE10
- 1X2 odds · Exeter City 2.03 · Draw 3.50 · Accrington ST 3.70
- Implied 1X2 · Exeter City 47.0% · Draw 27.2% · Accrington ST 25.8%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Aug 22, 2026 · 14:00 UTC Kickoff
-
FT Full-time result Exeter City win · 2–0
-
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: Pass
- No strong statistical edge
- Direction agrees with model lean
- Validation passed
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 Exeter City & Accrington ST!
Unlock in-depth analysis, exclusive betting tips, and match forecasts with our premium subscription service.
Subscribe Now
League Two — Standings
| # | TEAM | MP | W | D | L | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Barnet | 7 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 15 |
| 2 | Walsall | 7 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 13 |
| 3 | Grimsby | 7 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 13 |
| 4 | Gillingham | 7 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 12 |
| 5 | Cheltenham | 7 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 12 |
| 6 | Bristol Rovers | 7 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 12 |
| 7 | York | 7 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 11 |
| 8 | Chesterfield | 7 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 11 |
| 9 | Crewe | 7 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 11 |
| 10 | Tranmere | 7 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 10 |
| 11 | Fleetwood Town | 7 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 10 |
| 12 | Salford City | 7 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 10 |
| 13 | Swindon Town | 7 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 10 |
| 14 | Rotherham | 7 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 9 |
| 15 | Colchester | 7 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 9 |
| 16 | Oldham | 7 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 7 |
| 17 | Rochdale | 7 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 7 |
| 18 | Shrewsbury | 7 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 7 |
| 19 | Newport County | 7 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 6 |
| 20 | Exeter City | 7 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 6 |
| 21 | Accrington ST | 7 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 6 |
| 22 | Northampton | 7 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 6 |
| 23 | Port Vale | 7 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 5 |
| 24 | Crawley Town | 7 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 4 |
| # | TEAM | MP | GS | GC | +/- | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Barnet | 7 | 17 | 10 | +7 | 15 |
| 2 | Cheltenham | 7 | 14 | 11 | +3 | 12 |
| 3 | York | 7 | 13 | 10 | +3 | 11 |
| 4 | Bristol Rovers | 7 | 12 | 11 | +1 | 12 |
| 5 | Grimsby | 7 | 11 | 6 | +5 | 13 |
| 6 | Gillingham | 7 | 11 | 6 | +5 | 12 |
| 7 | Walsall | 7 | 10 | 4 | +6 | 13 |
| 8 | Chesterfield | 7 | 10 | 8 | +2 | 11 |
| 9 | Rotherham | 7 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 9 |
| 10 | Newport County | 7 | 10 | 11 | -1 | 6 |
| 11 | Accrington ST | 7 | 10 | 13 | -3 | 6 |
| 12 | Tranmere | 7 | 9 | 7 | +2 | 10 |
| 13 | Fleetwood Town | 7 | 8 | 7 | +1 | 10 |
| 14 | Salford City | 7 | 8 | 9 | -1 | 10 |
| 15 | Oldham | 7 | 8 | 9 | -1 | 7 |
| 16 | Colchester | 7 | 8 | 10 | -2 | 9 |
| 17 | Swindon Town | 7 | 8 | 11 | -3 | 10 |
| 18 | Crewe | 7 | 7 | 5 | +2 | 11 |
| 19 | Rochdale | 7 | 7 | 10 | -3 | 7 |
| 20 | Crawley Town | 7 | 6 | 13 | -7 | 4 |
| 21 | Shrewsbury | 7 | 5 | 11 | -6 | 7 |
| 22 | Exeter City | 7 | 4 | 5 | -1 | 6 |
| 23 | Northampton | 7 | 3 | 6 | -3 | 6 |
| 24 | Port Vale | 7 | 3 | 9 | -6 | 5 |
| # | TEAM | MP | xG | xGC | +/- | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Accrington ST | 7 | 3.0 | 0.5 | +2.5 | 6 |
| 2 | Walsall | 7 | 3.5 | 1.8 | +1.7 | 13 |
| 3 | Rotherham | 7 | 2.2 | 0.7 | +1.5 | 9 |
| 4 | Northampton | 7 | 1.6 | 0.3 | +1.3 | 6 |
| 5 | Barnet | 7 | 2.8 | 1.8 | +1.0 | 15 |
| 6 | Shrewsbury | 7 | 2.1 | 1.2 | +0.9 | 7 |
| 7 | Crewe | 7 | 1.7 | 0.8 | +0.9 | 11 |
| 8 | Grimsby | 7 | 1.9 | 1.1 | +0.8 | 13 |
| 9 | Oldham | 7 | 1.5 | 0.9 | +0.6 | 7 |
| 10 | Bristol Rovers | 7 | 2.0 | 1.6 | +0.4 | 12 |
| 11 | Fleetwood Town | 7 | 1.9 | 1.5 | +0.4 | 10 |
| 12 | York | 7 | 1.6 | 2.0 | -0.4 | 11 |
| 13 | Chesterfield | 7 | 1.5 | 1.9 | -0.4 | 11 |
| 14 | Port Vale | 7 | 0.9 | 1.5 | -0.6 | 5 |
| 15 | Exeter City | 7 | 1.1 | 1.9 | -0.8 | 6 |
| 16 | Tranmere | 7 | 1.2 | 2.1 | -0.9 | 10 |
| 17 | Crawley Town | 7 | 0.8 | 1.7 | -0.9 | 4 |
| 18 | Salford City | 7 | 1.8 | 2.8 | -1.0 | 10 |
| 19 | Swindon Town | 7 | 0.3 | 1.6 | -1.3 | 10 |
| 20 | Cheltenham | 7 | 0.7 | 2.2 | -1.5 | 12 |
| 21 | Gillingham | 7 | 1.8 | 3.5 | -1.7 | 12 |
| 22 | Colchester | 7 | 0.5 | 3.0 | -2.5 | 9 |
| 23 | Rochdale | 7 | — | — | — | 7 |
| 24 | Newport County | 7 | — | — | — | 6 |
