AI correctly predicted the Cooma Tigers FC win.
The match finished 4–2, 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 (6 goals) ✖ Incorrect
- Both Teams To Score BTTS Yes Yes ✔ Correct
- 1X2 Cooma Tigers FC Cooma Tigers FC ✔ Correct
- Correct Score Insights 1-1, 1-0, 2-1, 0-1, 2-0 4-2 ✖ Incorrect
Model vs Closing Market
| Outcome | Model | Closing Market | Difference | Signal |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cooma Tigers FC | 42.4% | 69.9% | -27.5 pp | Market Higher |
| Draw | 29.3% | 15.6% | +13.7 pp | Model Edge |
| Canberra Juventus | 28.4% | 14.5% | +13.9 pp | Model Edge |
The closing market estimates Cooma Tigers FC's win probability at 69.9%, compared with the model's estimate of 42.4%, a difference of 27.5 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 (Cooma Tigers FC win 4–2).
Post Match Insights
What worked
- Expected goals projected a high-scoring match (ΣxG 2.60) — 6 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 (6 goals)
- Exact score: outside the model's top score bins
Market lesson
Large model–market gaps do not automatically mean the market is right. Here the closing market priced Cooma Tigers FC higher (69.9% vs model 42.4%, 27.5 pp), but the model's lean was validated (Cooma Tigers FC win 4–2).
Prediction Timeline
How this prediction moved from forecast to full-time review.
-
Aug 29, 2026 · 05:59 UTC Forecast generated
- Model 1X2 · Cooma Tigers FC 42.4% · Draw 29.2% · Canberra Juventus 28.4%
- xG · Cooma Tigers FC 1.45 — Canberra Juventus 1.15
-
Aug 29, 2026 · 05:29 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
- 1X2 odds · Cooma Tigers FC 1.27 · Draw 5.69 · Canberra Juventus 6.12
- Implied 1X2 · Cooma Tigers FC 69.9% · Draw 15.6% · Canberra Juventus 14.5%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Aug 29, 2026 · 05:59 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE1
- 1X2 odds · Cooma Tigers FC 1.27 · Draw 5.69 · Canberra Juventus 6.12
- Implied 1X2 · Cooma Tigers FC 69.9% · Draw 15.6% · Canberra Juventus 14.5%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Aug 29, 2026 · 06:10 UTC Kickoff
-
FT Full-time result Cooma Tigers FC win · 4–2
-
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.
Historical label: Originally displayed as "Wait for validation".
Pre-match metrics (historical context)
- Validation: Warning
- Large market gap (28 pp)
- No strong statistical edge
- Market strongly disagrees on price
- 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 Cooma Tigers FC & Canberra Juventus!
Unlock in-depth analysis, exclusive betting tips, and match forecasts with our premium subscription service.
Subscribe Now
Capital Territory NPL — Standings
| # | TEAM | MP | W | D | L | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Canberra FC | 20 | 17 | 1 | 2 | 52 |
| 2 | Monaro Panthers | 20 | 15 | 1 | 4 | 46 |
| 3 | Cooma Tigers FC | 20 | 14 | 2 | 4 | 44 |
| 4 | Tuggeranong United | 20 | 14 | 0 | 6 | 42 |
| 5 | Queanbeyan City | 20 | 12 | 2 | 6 | 38 |
| 6 | Canberra Juventus | 20 | 11 | 0 | 9 | 33 |
| 7 | Canberra Olympic | 20 | 7 | 2 | 11 | 23 |
| 8 | O'Connor Knights | 20 | 6 | 2 | 12 | 20 |
| 9 | Belconnen United | 20 | 2 | 3 | 15 | 9 |
| 10 | Brindabella | 20 | 3 | 0 | 17 | 9 |
| 11 | Canberra White Eagles | 20 | 2 | 1 | 17 | 7 |
| # | TEAM | MP | GS | GC | +/- | PTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Monaro Panthers | 20 | 71 | 26 | +45 | 46 |
| 2 | Canberra FC | 20 | 64 | 24 | +40 | 52 |
| 3 | Cooma Tigers FC | 20 | 59 | 24 | +35 | 44 |
| 4 | Tuggeranong United | 20 | 49 | 39 | +10 | 42 |
| 5 | Canberra Olympic | 20 | 45 | 55 | -10 | 23 |
| 6 | Queanbeyan City | 20 | 42 | 28 | +14 | 38 |
| 7 | Canberra Juventus | 20 | 39 | 39 | 0 | 33 |
| 8 | Belconnen United | 20 | 25 | 50 | -25 | 9 |
| 9 | O'Connor Knights | 20 | 24 | 39 | -15 | 20 |
| 10 | Canberra White Eagles | 20 | 17 | 60 | -43 | 7 |
| 11 | Brindabella | 20 | 15 | 66 | -51 | 9 |
