Predictions / Football / Scotland. League Two / Clyde vs Forfar Athletic

Prediction Audit: Clyde vs Forfar Athletic Prediction, Odds & AI Betting Tips

Aug 22, 2026 - 14:00
3 1.31
0 1.29
xG Accuracy: 44%

AI correctly predicted the Clyde win.

The match finished 3–0, validating the model's directional assessment.

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 Yes No ✖ Incorrect
  • 1X2 Clyde Clyde ✔ Correct
  • Correct Score Insights 1-1, 1-0, 0-1, 2-1, 1-2 3-0 ✖ Incorrect

Model vs Closing Market

Strong Disagreement

The closing market prices Clyde higher than the statistical model.

Largest probability gap: Clyde -20.9 pp

Outcome Model Closing Market Difference Signal
Clyde 35.6% 56.5% -20.9 pp Market Higher
Draw 29.6% 22.4% +7.2 pp Model Higher
Forfar Athletic 34.7% 21.1% +13.6 pp Model Edge

The closing market estimates Clyde's win probability at 56.5%, compared with the model's estimate of 35.6%, a difference of 20.9 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 (Clyde win 3–0).

Post Match Insights

What worked

  • Expected goals projected a high-scoring match (ΣxG 2.60) — 3 goals materialised

What failed

  • Both Teams To Score: model leaned BTTS Yes; match finished BTTS No
  • 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 Clyde higher (56.5% vs model 35.6%, 20.9 pp), but the model's lean was validated (Clyde win 3–0).

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 22, 2026 · 13:57 UTC Forecast generated
    • Model 1X2 · Clyde 35.6% · Draw 29.7% · Forfar Athletic 34.7%
    • xG · Clyde 1.31 — Forfar Athletic 1.29
  2. Aug 22, 2026 · 13:35 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
    • 1X2 odds · Clyde 1.62 · Draw 4.09 · Forfar Athletic 4.35
    • Implied 1X2 · Clyde 56.5% · Draw 22.4% · Forfar Athletic 21.1%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  3. Aug 22, 2026 · 13:57 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE10
    • 1X2 odds · Clyde 1.62 · Draw 4.09 · Forfar Athletic 4.35
    • Implied 1X2 · Clyde 56.5% · Draw 22.4% · Forfar Athletic 21.1%
    • Bookmaker · Pinnacle
  4. Aug 22, 2026 · 14:00 UTC Kickoff
  5. FT Full-time result Clyde win · 3–0
  6. FT Prediction validated Directional lean matched 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 Validated
Pre-match metrics (historical context)
Prediction Reliability 53/100 · Moderate
  • Validation: Warning
  • Large market gap (21 pp)
Evidence ★★★★★
  • No strong statistical edge
  • Pricing remains divergent
  • Validation warning
Pricing proximity (inverse gap) 0/100
Betting Confidence 34/100

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Aug 16, 2026 · 01:54 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-4225073

Closing Odds 1.62
AI Fair Odds —
CLV Pending
Final Result Clyde win · Clyde 3–0 Forfar Athletic
Prediction ✔ Correct
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: League Two
  • Fixture: Clyde vs Forfar Athletic
  • Kickoff: 2026-08-22 14:00:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 35.6% · Draw 29.7% · Away 34.7%
  • xG (showing): Clyde 1.31 — Forfar Athletic 1.29 (total xG ≈ 2.6)
  • Value headline: None (actionable) — best tracked EV is about +1.1%, 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 (12.6%)

Saying “no value” on a snapshot is a feature, not a bug: it protects readers from forcing a play when the edge is not there.

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

Historical Recommendation

Historical Decision: Wait

Outcome: Validated — Pre-match lean validated against 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 Clyde & Forfar Athletic!

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

Subscribe Now
Back to Predictions
League Two League Two — Standings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Clyde 8 5 2 1 17
2 Stranraer 8 5 1 2 16
3 Spartans 8 3 3 2 12
4 Elgin City 8 3 2 3 11
5 Forfar Athletic 8 3 2 3 11
6 Edinburgh City 8 4 2 2 9
7 Annan Athletic 8 3 0 5 9
8 Dumbarton 8 3 0 5 9
9 Kelty Hearts 8 3 0 5 9
10 Stirling Albion 8 1 2 5 5
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Clyde 8 19 10 +9 17
2 Elgin City 8 19 14 +5 11
3 Spartans 8 19 15 +4 12
4 Edinburgh City 8 19 15 +4 9
5 Stranraer 8 17 8 +9 16
6 Kelty Hearts 8 11 18 -7 9
7 Stirling Albion 8 10 22 -12 5
8 Annan Athletic 8 9 10 -1 9
9 Forfar Athletic 8 8 13 -5 11
10 Dumbarton 8 8 14 -6 9