The model missed the final outcome (Vejle win 4–2).
The model had projected Esbjerg at 35.6%, but the full-time result went the other way.
Mercados rastreados versus resultado de tiempo completo
Grado de predicción
F
Cada fila compara el modelo previo al partido con el resultado de tiempo completo.
- Mercado Predicción Resultado Resultado
- Más / Menos 2.5 Menos de 2.5 Más de 2.5 (6 objetivos) ✖ Incorrecto
- Ambos Equipos Marcarán BTTS Sí Sí ✔ Correcto
- 1X2 Esbjerg Vejle ✖ Incorrecto
- Perspectivas de marcador exacto 1-1, 0-1, 1-0, 1-2, 2-1 4-2 ✖ Incorrecto
Modelo vs Mercado de Cierre
| Resultado | Modelo | Mercado de cierre | Diferencia | Señal |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vejle | 34.7% | 59.7% | -25.0 pp | Market Higher |
| Draw | 29.6% | 19.9% | +9.7 pp | Model Higher |
| Esbjerg | 35.6% | 20.4% | +15.3 pp | Model Edge |
The closing market estimates Vejle's win probability at 59.7%, compared with the model's estimate of 34.7%, a difference of 25.0 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: PRE5.
Después del tiempo completo, el resultado fue Vejle 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)
- 1X2: model leaned Esbjerg; match finished Vejle
Market lesson
The closing market differed from the model on Esbjerg by 25.0 percentage points (60.6% vs model 35.6%) — in this case the market view proved closer.
Casa de apuestas premium stake: los nuevos usuarios pueden usar el código promoFHn2uDc1 FHn2uDc1. Registrarse
Cronología de predicción
Cómo esta predicción pasó del pronóstico a la revisión a tiempo completo.
-
Aug 21, 2026 · 15:57 UTC Forecast generated
- Model 1X2 · Vejle 34.7% · Draw 29.7% · Esbjerg 35.6%
- xG · Vejle 1.29 — Esbjerg 1.31
-
Aug 21, 2026 · 15:32 UTC Opening odds snapshot PRE30
- 1X2 odds · Vejle 1.59 · Draw 4.77 · Esbjerg 4.66
- Implied 1X2 · Vejle 59.7% · Draw 19.9% · Esbjerg 20.4%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Aug 21, 2026 · 15:57 UTC Closing snapshot recorded PRE5
- 1X2 odds · Vejle 1.59 · Draw 4.77 · Esbjerg 4.66
- Implied 1X2 · Vejle 59.7% · Draw 19.9% · Esbjerg 20.4%
- Bookmaker · Pinnacle
-
Aug 21, 2026 · 16:00 UTC Kickoff
-
FT Full-time result Vejle win · 4–2
-
FT Prediction missed 1X2 lean did not match full-time result
-
Archived Prediction review
Instantánea histórica
Congelado en el inicio: el resultado del modelo tal como estaba antes de que comenzara el partido.
Veredicto histórico:
Cautious / Wait
Etiqueta histórica: Originally displayed as "Wait for validation".
Decisión histórica
Wait
Resultado
Missed
Métricas previas al partido (contexto histórico)
Fiabilidad de predicción
50/100
· Moderate
- Validation: Warning
- Large market gap (25 pp)
Evidencia
★★★★★
- No strong statistical edge
- Market strongly disagrees on price
- Validation warning
Pricing proximity (inverse gap)
0/100
Monitoring Confidence
14/100
Validation Report
Immutable Snapshot
Closing Odds
1.59
AI Fair Odds
—
CLV
Pending
Final Result
Vejle win · Vejle 4–2 Esbjerg
Prediction
✖ Missed
Decision Grade
F
Model Performance
This prediction contributes to:
- Primary Bets ROI (180d): -100.0%
Revisar preguntas frecuentes
- ¿Qué tan precisa fue la predicción?
- Esta página clasifica los mercados direccionales (1X2, Más/Menos de 2,5, BTTS) con respecto al resultado final. El grado de predicción refleja cuántos de esos mercados rastreados coincidieron con la realidad.
- ¿Qué mide la precisión xG?
- xG Accuracy compara el perfil de goles esperados previo al partido del modelo con el marcador real, no si todos los mercados acertaron. Una revisión direccional sólida puede coexistir con una puntuación de precisión xG moderada.
- ¿Por qué no se predijo la puntuación exacta?
- Los resultados de puntuación correcta son colas de baja probabilidad incluso cuando el modelo lee bien el perfil de coincidencia. Destacamos los contenedores de puntuación más altos para el contexto; faltar la línea exacta no invalida una revisión direccional.
- ¿Esto mejora el registro de IA?
- Cada partido finalizado se registra en nuestro proceso de validación. Las tasas de aciertos agregadas y los estudios CLV se publican por separado; esta página es el registro de auditoría por partido.
Las predicciones son sólo para fines informativos. Juega siempre de forma responsable y dentro de tus límites. El rendimiento pasado no garantiza resultados futuros.
El informe IA aún no está disponible para este partido. Vuelva a ejecutar «Generación masiva de cuotas» tras actualizar el servidor para generar el resumen.
View technical JSON
{
"bundle_version": 1,
"content_hash": "24b320390e6f9cc0bcc5b8a7d4a5b03ca005f65733653b34de51a7ce67b6e29b",
"decision_algo_version": "2.5.0",
"facts": {
"ai_fp": {
"away_predicted_xg": 1.31,
"away_win_prob": 0.3564,
"away_win_prob_posterior": null,
"bayes_applied": 0,
"btts_no_prob": 0.455,
"btts_yes_prob": 0.546,
"dc_rho": -0.13,
"draw_prob": 0.2965,
"draw_prob_posterior": null,
"fair_odds_away": 2.81,
"fair_odds_away_posterior": null,
"fair_odds_draw": 3.37,
"fair_odds_draw_posterior": null,
"fair_odds_home": 2.88,
"fair_odds_home_posterior": null,
"home_predicted_xg": 1.29,
"home_win_prob": 0.347,
"home_win_prob_posterior": null,
"over_25_prob": 0.482,
"prediction_confidence": "very_low",
"under_25_prob": 0.518
},
"api_prediction": {
"advice": "Combo Double chance : Vejle or draw and +2.5 goals",
"main_pick_display": "No Strong Winner Bet",
"percent_away": "10%",
"percent_draw": "45%",
"percent_home": "45%",
"winner_name": "Vejle"
},
"away_xg": 1.31,
"betting_insight": {
"bet_label": "Esbjerg",
"confidence": null,
"main_pick_meta": {
"confidence": "low",
"display_text": "No Strong Winner Bet",
"edge": 0.1522,
"edge_gap": 0.0087,
"market": "1X2",
"market_prob": 0.2038,
"model_prob": 0.3559,
"pick_type": "no_strong",
"probabilities": {
"away": 35.6,
"draw": 29.7,
"home": 34.7
},
"reason": "No clear edge in 1X2 market",
"selection": null,
"selection_name": null
},
"market_comparison": [
{
"affi_link": "",
"bookmaker_name": "Pinnacle",
"odd": 4.66
}
],
"risk_color": null,
"risk_key": null,
"stacked_market": null,
"value_bet": {
"best_odds": 4.66,
"bookmaker_id": 0,
"bookmaker_name": "Pinnacle",
"display_market": "Esbjerg Win",
"is_value": true,
"label": "Away",
"market_fair_odds": 4.91,
"market_odds": 4.66,
"model_odds": 2.81,
"overround": 5.3,
"prob_edge": 14.1,
"value_pct": 65.8,
"value_rating": "strong_value"
}
},
"betting_markets": {
"btts": {
"away_clean_sheet": 0,
"away_failed_to_score": 0,
"away_played": 3,
"away_score_rate": 73.0,
"home_clean_sheet": 1,
"home_failed_to_score": 0,
"home_played": 4,
"home_score_rate": 72.5,
"no_prob": 45.5,
"pick": "Yes",
"pick_prob": 54.5,
"source": "xG_dc",
"strong_pick": false,
"yes_prob": 54.5
},
"correct_score": {
"away_expected": 1.31,
"home_expected": 1.29,
"scores": [
{
"away": 1,
"home": 1,
"label": "1-1",
"prob": 12.6
},
{
"away": 1,
"home": 0,
"label": "0-1",
"prob": 9.7
},
{
"away": 0,
"home": 1,
"label": "1-0",
"prob": 9.6
},
{
"away": 2,
"home": 1,
"label": "1-2",
"prob": 8.2
},
{
"away": 1,
"home": 2,
"label": "2-1",
"prob": 8.1
}
],
"source": "xG"
},
"double_chance": {
"options": [
{
"key": "1X",
"label": "Vejle or Draw",
"prob": 64.3
},
{
"key": "12",
"label": "Vejle or Esbjerg",
"prob": 70.3
},
{
"key": "X2",
"label": "Draw or Esbjerg",
"prob": 65.2
}
],
"pick_key": "12",
"pick_label": "Vejle or Esbjerg",
"pick_prob": 70.3
},
"match_winner": {
"away_pct": 35.6,
"draw_pct": 29.6,
"home_pct": 34.7,
"lean_key": "away",
"lean_label": "Esbjerg"
},
"over_under": {
"api_hint": "+2.5",
"avg_total": 2.6,
"away_avg_scored": 1.7,
"confidence": "low",
"home_avg_scored": 3.0,
"over_prob": 48.2,
"pick": "Under 2.5",
"pick_prob": 51.8,
"source": "xG_dc",
"strong_pick": false,
"total_expected": 2.6,
"under_prob": 51.8
},
"prob_source": "poisson",
"value_bet_enhanced": {
"bookmaker_id": 0,
"bookmaker_name": "Pinnacle",
"edge": 65.9,
"implied_prob": 21.5,
"is_value": true,
"label": "Away",
"market": "Esbjerg Win",
"model_prob": 35.6,
"odds": 4.66
}
},
"closing_line_bundle": {
"away_team": "Esbjerg",
"closing_1x2_probs_pct": {
"away": 20.38,
"draw": 19.91,
"home": 59.72
},
"closing_bookmaker": "Pinnacle",
"closing_capture": "PRE5",
"closing_fetched_at": "2026-08-21 15:57:10",
"early_bookmaker": "Pinnacle",
"early_capture": "PRE30",
"early_fetched_at": "2026-08-21 15:32:34",
"has_data": true,
"home_team": "Vejle",
"largest_move_kind": null,
"max_abs_move_pp": 0.0,
"model_vs_closing": [
{
"closing_implied_pct": 59.72,
"gap_pp": -24.99,
"kind": "1x2_h",
"model_pct": 34.73
},
{
"closing_implied_pct": 19.91,
"gap_pp": 9.77,
"kind": "1x2_d",
"model_pct": 29.68
},
{
"closing_implied_pct": 20.38,
"gap_pp": 15.22,
"kind": "1x2_a",
"model_pct": 35.59
},
{
"closing_implied_pct": 64.75,
"gap_pp": -16.55,
"kind": "ou_o",
"model_pct": 48.2
},
{
"closing_implied_pct": 35.25,
"gap_pp": 16.55,
"kind": "ou_u",
"model_pct": 51.8
}
],
"movement": [
{
"closing": 1.59,
"early": 1.59,
"implied_closing_pct": 59.72,
"implied_delta_pp": 0.0,
"implied_early_pct": 59.72,
"kind": "1x2_h"
},
{
"closing": 4.77,
"early": 4.77,
"implied_closing_pct": 19.91,
"implied_delta_pp": 0.0,
"implied_early_pct": 19.91,
"kind": "1x2_d"
},
{
"closing": 4.66,
"early": 4.66,
"implied_closing_pct": 20.38,
"implied_delta_pp": 0.0,
"implied_early_pct": 20.38,
"kind": "1x2_a"
},
{
"closing": 1.47,
"early": 1.47,
"implied_closing_pct": 64.75,
"implied_delta_pp": 0.0,
"implied_early_pct": 64.75,
"kind": "ou_o"
},
{
"closing": 2.7,
"early": 2.7,
"implied_closing_pct": 35.25,
"implied_delta_pp": 0.0,
"implied_early_pct": 35.25,
"kind": "ou_u"
}
],
"movement_negligible": true,
"same_bookmaker": true,
"top_value_gap": {
"gap_pp": 16.6,
"kind": "ou_u"
}
},
"correct_score_insight": {
"best_value": null,
"lean_card": {
"diff_pp": 2.1,
"ev": 0.197,
"has_edge": true,
"label": "1-1",
"market_odds": 9.5,
"market_prob": 0.1053,
"market_prob_pct": 10.5,
"model_prob": 0.126,
"model_prob_pct": 12.6,
"n_bookmakers": 10,
"status_key": "positive_edge"
},
"most_likely": {
"label": "1-1",
"prob": 12.6
},
"top5": [
{
"label": "1-1",
"prob": 12.6
},
{
"label": "0-1",
"prob": 9.7
},
{
"label": "1-0",
"prob": 9.6
},
{
"label": "1-2",
"prob": 8.2
},
{
"label": "2-1",
"prob": 8.1
}
]
},
"home_xg": 1.29,
"homepage_pick": null,
"market_cards": [
{
"authority_action": "wait",
"authority_note": "Model validation or guard rules block actionable value signals.",
"consensus_odds": 4.66,
"decision": "value_bet",
"disagreement_label": "Strong",
"disagreement_level": "strong",
"ev": 0.059,
"ev_available": true,
"ev_display": {
"capped": false,
"raw_pct": 5.9,
"text": "+5.9%"
},
"featured": true,
"id": "1x2",
"implied_prob": 0.2038,
"is_extreme_disagreement": false,
"max_ev": 0.059,
"max_ev_display": {
"capped": false,
"raw_pct": 5.9,
"text": "+5.9%"
},
"model_prob": 0.3559,
"raw_edge_display": "+15.2 percentage points",
"raw_edge_pp": 15.2,
"raw_signal_ev": 0.6585,
"raw_signal_ev_display": "+65.8%",
"show_primary_label": false,
"side_label": "Esbjerg",
"sort_key": 10203.1,
"tier": "best"
},
{
"decision": "lean",
"decision_layer": {
"available": false
},
"ev_available": false,
"ev_no": null,
"ev_no_display": null,
"ev_yes": null,
"ev_yes_display": null,
"featured": false,
"id": "btts",
"max_ev": null,
"n_bookmakers": 0,
"no_prob": 45.5,
"sort_key": 4050.0,
"tier": "lean",
"value_side": "yes",
"yes_prob": 54.5
},
{
"decision": "no_bet",
"decision_layer": {
"available": false
},
"ev_available": false,
"ev_over": null,
"ev_over_display": null,
"ev_under": null,
"ev_under_display": null,
"featured": false,
"id": "ou_2_5",
"max_ev": null,
"n_bookmakers": 0,
"over_prob": 48.2,
"sort_key": 2050.0,
"tier": "pass",
"under_prob": 51.8,
"value_side": "under"
},
{
"featured": false,
"id": "correct_score",
"sort_key": 817.8,
"tier": "risk",
"top_label": "1-1",
"top_prob": 12.6
}
],
"market_intelligence": {
"betting_signal": {
"alert_breadth": "14/14",
"alert_breadth_note": "14/14 sportsbooks confirmed",
"alert_move": "\u2191 +15.5%",
"alert_team": "Esbjerg",
"alert_title": "Sharp Money Alert",
"divergence_pp": 25.0,
"has_alert": true,
"hero_edge_pp": -25.02,
"hero_label": "Vejle",
"market_prob_pct": 20.4,
"market_team": "Vejle",
"model_prob_pct": 35.6,
"model_team": "Esbjerg",
"show": true,
"status_icon": "!",
"status_key": "caution",
"status_label": "Use caution",
"status_line": "Use caution \u2014 signals are mixed",
"steam_score": 65,
"steam_subtitle": "Strong sharp signal",
"steam_tier": "A",
"title": "Betting Signal"
},
"decision_chain": {
"academy_links": [
{
"key": "market_disagree",
"read_min": 5,
"title": "When Should You Trust AI Over the Market?",
"url": "/academy/ai-betting/when-should-you-trust-ai-over-the-market/en"
},
{
"key": "steam",
"read_min": 4,
"title": "What Is a Steam Move?",
"url": "/academy/betting-market/what-is-a-steam-move/en"
},
{
"key": "clv_pending",
"read_min": 3,
"title": "Why CLV Matters More Than Win Rate",
"url": "/academy/clv/why-clv-matters-more-than-win-rate/en"
}
],
"alignment": {
"direction_aligned": false,
"direction_key": "conflict",
"gap_pp": 25.0,
"key": "conflict",
"label": "Disagree",
"model_strong": false,
"pricing_aligned": false,
"pricing_key": "low",
"probability_gap_pp": 25.0,
"summary": "The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg."
},
"authority": {
"action": "wait",
"alignment": {
"direction_aligned": false,
"direction_key": "conflict",
"gap_pp": 25.0,
"key": "conflict",
"label": "Disagree",
"model_strong": false,
"pricing_aligned": false,
"pricing_key": "low",
"probability_gap_pp": 25.0,
"summary": "The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg."
},
"alignment_key": "conflict",
"best_consensus_ev": 0.059,
"best_outlier_ev": 0.6586,
"confidence_band": "Moderate\u2013Low",
"decision_strength": 3.0,
"decision_strength_v1": 3.0,
"decision_strength_v2": 3.0,
"decision_type": "VALUE_ALERT",
"execution_confidence": 15,
"extreme_disagreement": false,
"final_verdict_audit": {
"action": "Monitor closing market and validate with CLV.",
"action_label": "Action",
"decision": "Wait - No Primary Bet",
"is_primary": false,
"snapshot": "The Decision Model estimates Esbjerg at 35.6%, compared with a no-vig market probability of 20.4%.",
"why": [
{
"text": "Decision Model identifies Esbjerg as the value side (35.6%)",
"tone": "ok"
},
{
"text": "Market pricing conflicts with the model lean",
"tone": "bad"
},
{
"text": "Model\u2013market disagreement blocks Primary sizing",
"tone": "bad"
},
{
"text": "Market quality / price reliability is insufficient for Primary",
"tone": "bad"
},
{
"text": "Model confidence reduced due to calibration uncertainty",
"tone": "bad"
}
],
"why_label": "Decision Summary"
},
"gap_pp": 15.2,
"gates_failed": [
"Reliability below 65"
],
"has_top_pick": true,
"headline": "Wait - No Primary Bet",
"hero_mode": "default",
"icon": "\u23f8",
"label": "Wait for validation",
"market_signal": "The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg.",
"model_conflict_detail": null,
"model_lean": "Esbjerg",
"no_primary_reasons": {
"all_triggered": [
"market_conflict",
"market_quality",
"calibration_risk"
],
"calibration_mode": "soft",
"codes": [
"market_conflict",
"market_quality"
],
"label": "Reason",
"other_factors": [
{
"code": "market_quality",
"detail": "Price reliability is weak (thin coverage, outlier quote, or low book agreement).",
"name": "Market Quality Risk",
"short": "Market Quality Risk",
"tone": "warn"
}
],
"other_label": "Other factors",
"primary": {
"code": "market_conflict",
"detail": "Model lean and market pricing / drift are not aligned.",
"name": "Market Conflict",
"short": "Market Conflict",
"subtype": "drift_against_model",
"tone": "warn"
},
"secondary": {
"code": "market_quality",
"detail": "Price reliability is weak (thin coverage, outlier quote, or low book agreement).",
"name": "Market Quality Risk",
"short": "Market Quality Risk",
"tone": "warn"
},
"version": "v1"
},
"outlier_detected": true,
"outlier_excluded_panel": "Excluded top quotes (audit row \u2014 never Primary): #1 \u00b7 market 1X2 \u00b7 side Esbjerg \u00b7 decimal odds ~4.66 (derived from model% \u00d7 (1+EV)) \u00b7 EV +66% \u00b7 book: not captured on live render (see odds history / admin snapshot) \u00b7 captured: \u2014 \u00b7 audit_ref: fixture=1551319 \u00b7 snapshot=live-render \u00b7 odds\u22484.66 \u00b7 reason=thin|single-book|\u0394EV\u22653.0%EV \u00b7 book=admin-only \u00b7 trigger: outlier EV \u2212 consensus EV \u2265 +3.0% EV (not probability pp) AND thin/single-book style \u00b7 consensus used +5.9% EV. Excluded quotes cannot clear Primary.",
"primary_allowed": false,
"primary_block_explain": {
"entries": [
{
"key": "positive_ev",
"label": "Consensus EV +5.9% meets Primary gate (\u2265+5.0%)",
"ok": true
},
{
"key": "gate",
"label": "Reliability below 65",
"ok": false
}
],
"lean_ev_threshold_pct": 2.0,
"primary_ev_threshold_pct": 5.0,
"subtitle": "Primary needs consensus EV \u2265 +5.0% plus reliability/execution/calibration gates (Decision Strength is explain-only). Lean/tracked gate is +2.0% (selective only \u2014 not default Primary sizing).",
"title": "Why not Primary?"
},
"primary_gate_checklist": "Gate checklist: Consensus EV +5.9% \u2705 (need \u2265+5.0%) \u00b7 Calibration See checklist \u274c \u2192 Primary blocked. Decision Strength 3.0/10 (explain only, not a Primary gate). If you still act under hard block: example stake 0.10\u20130.20% bankroll (never Primary).",
"primary_gate_snapshot": "Primary Gate Snapshot: Consensus EV +5.9% (gate \u2265+5.0%) \u00b7 Calibration: See checklist \u2192 Primary blocked \u00b7 Decision Strength 3.0/10 (display only)",
"primary_gates": {
"items": [
{
"key": "extreme_gap",
"label": "Extreme gap",
"ok": true,
"value": "no"
},
{
"key": "xg_calibration",
"label": "xG calibration",
"ok": true,
"value": "warning"
},
{
"key": "reliability",
"label": "Rel",
"ok": false,
"value": "53 (\u226565)"
},
{
"key": "execution",
"label": "Exec",
"ok": false,
"value": "15 (\u226565)"
},
{
"key": "alignment",
"label": "Align",
"ok": false,
"value": "conflict"
},
{
"key": "consensus_ev",
"label": "ConsEV",
"ok": true,
"value": "+5.9% (\u2265+5.0%)"
},
{
"key": "top_pick",
"label": "Pick",
"ok": true,
"value": "true"
},
{
"key": "validation",
"label": "Validation",
"ok": false,
"value": "false"
}
],
"passed": 4,
"total": 8
},
"primary_type": null,
"reasons": [
"The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg.",
"Decision strength: 3.0/10",
"Reliability below 65",
"Outlier price +66% EV detected \u2014 not used for Primary (consensus only)."
],
"reliability_score": 53,
"speed_read": "Speed read: Model Signal can look moderate/strong while Decision Strength stays low after calibration \u2014 Strength alone does not block Primary (v2.5+); still check reliability/execution/EV hard gates.",
"strength_v2_breakdown": [
"Base decision score (v1)",
"Market steam conflicts with model",
"Consensus-line +EV",
"Low xG separation (league-average noise)"
],
"subline": "Model validation or guard rules block actionable value signals.",
"thresholds": {
"extreme_gap_pp": 30.0,
"lean_min_consensus_ev": 0.02,
"lean_min_strength": 5.0,
"min_consensus_ev": 0.05,
"min_execution": 65,
"min_reliability": 65,
"min_strength": 7.0,
"source": "db",
"user_id": 2
},
"thresholds_source": "db",
"thresholds_user_id": 2,
"tier": "wait",
"validation_ok": false,
"value_context": {
"consensus_ev": 0.059,
"consensus_ev_display": "+5.9%",
"consensus_odds": 4.66,
"disagreement_label": "Strong",
"disagreement_level": "strong",
"implied_prob": 0.2038,
"is_extreme_disagreement": false,
"model_prob": 0.3559,
"raw_edge_display": "+15.2 percentage points",
"raw_edge_pp": 15.2,
"raw_implied_prob": 0.2145922746781116,
"raw_signal_ev": 0.6585,
"raw_signal_ev_display": "+65.8%"
},
"version": "v2.5",
"xg_calibration": {
"block_value_alert": true,
"calibration_status": "warning",
"deviation_pct": -3.0,
"reasons": [
"Low xG separation gap=0.02 (noise / no edge)"
],
"recommended_action": "monitor",
"strength_delta": -2.0,
"uplift_away": null,
"uplift_home": null,
"xg_separation": {
"band": "flat",
"block_value_alert": true,
"separation_score": -20,
"strength_delta": -2.0,
"xg_gap": 0.02
}
}
},
"bet_status": "wait",
"books_breadth_display": "14/14",
"breadth_ratio": 1.0,
"evidence": {
"score": 57,
"signals": [
{
"icon": "\u25cb",
"key": "statistical_edge",
"label": "No strong statistical edge",
"status": "neutral"
},
{
"icon": "!",
"key": "market_agreement",
"label": "Recent market move conflicts with the model favourite",
"status": "caution"
},
{
"icon": "!",
"key": "steam",
"label": "Market drift conflicts with model",
"status": "caution"
},
{
"icon": "!",
"key": "validation",
"label": "Validation warning",
"status": "caution"
}
],
"stars": 2,
"tier": "moderate",
"tier_label": "Moderate"
},
"forecast_reliability": {
"breakdown": [
{
"key": "validation",
"label": "Validation: Warning",
"tone": "caution"
},
{
"key": "gap",
"label": "Large market gap (25 pp)",
"tone": "caution"
},
{
"key": "steam",
"label": "Market drift conflicts with model",
"tone": "caution"
}
],
"parts": {
"alignment": 12.5,
"data_quality": 12.0,
"market_coverage": 10.0,
"steam_coherence": 0.0,
"validation": 14.0
},
"score": 53,
"stars": 2,
"tier": "moderate",
"tier_label": "Moderate"
},
"lean_gap_pp": 25.02,
"market_agreement": "weak",
"max_gap_pp": 25.02,
"model_calibration": {
"away_xg": 1.31,
"calibration_status": "ok",
"deviation_pct": -3.0,
"elevated": false,
"home_xg": 1.29,
"impact_note": "",
"league_avg_xg": 1.35,
"peak_xg": 1.31,
"status_label": "Within typical league range",
"summary": "Home xG 1.29 \u00b7 Away xG 1.31 \u00b7 League avg 1.35 \u00b7 Peak deviation -3%",
"title": "Model Calibration Check"
},
"move_is_drift": true,
"mv_status": "warning",
"odds_delta_pct": 15.5,
"steam_conflicts": true,
"steam_move_display": "\u2191 +15.5%",
"steam_team": "Esbjerg",
"suppress_execution": true,
"value_split": {
"execution_confidence": {
"label": "Monitoring Confidence",
"score": 15,
"tier": "not_reliable",
"tier_label": "Not reliable"
},
"market_compatibility": {
"label": "Pricing proximity (inverse gap)",
"note": "This score falls as the probability gap (pp) rises \u2014 it is NOT a bet green light. Direction may still agree (see Alignment above). Formula: proximity = max(0, 100 \u2212 5\u00d7pp). Example: 16 pp \u2192 20/100 (diverged).",
"score": 8,
"tier": "not_reliable",
"tier_label": "Not reliable"
},
"model_edge_strength": {
"label": "Model Signal Strength",
"score": 38,
"tier": "low",
"tier_label": "Low"
},
"model_value": {
"label": "Pricing proximity (inverse gap)",
"note": "This score falls as the probability gap (pp) rises \u2014 it is NOT a bet green light. Direction may still agree (see Alignment above). Formula: proximity = max(0, 100 \u2212 5\u00d7pp). Example: 16 pp \u2192 20/100 (diverged).",
"score": 8,
"tier": "not_reliable",
"tier_label": "Not reliable"
},
"recommendation": {
"action": "wait",
"label": "Wait - No Primary Bet"
}
},
"verdict": {
"agree_note": "The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg.",
"alignment": {
"direction_aligned": false,
"direction_key": "conflict",
"gap_pp": 25.0,
"key": "conflict",
"label": "Disagree",
"model_strong": false,
"pricing_aligned": false,
"pricing_key": "low",
"probability_gap_pp": 25.0,
"summary": "The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg."
},
"authority": {
"action": "wait",
"alignment": {
"direction_aligned": false,
"direction_key": "conflict",
"gap_pp": 25.0,
"key": "conflict",
"label": "Disagree",
"model_strong": false,
"pricing_aligned": false,
"pricing_key": "low",
"probability_gap_pp": 25.0,
"summary": "The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg."
},
"alignment_key": "conflict",
"best_consensus_ev": 0.059,
"best_outlier_ev": 0.6586,
"confidence_band": "Moderate\u2013Low",
"decision_strength": 3.0,
"decision_strength_v1": 3.0,
"decision_strength_v2": 3.0,
"decision_type": "VALUE_ALERT",
"execution_confidence": 15,
"extreme_disagreement": false,
"final_verdict_audit": {
"action": "Monitor closing market and validate with CLV.",
"action_label": "Action",
"decision": "Wait - No Primary Bet",
"is_primary": false,
"snapshot": "The Decision Model estimates Esbjerg at 35.6%, compared with a no-vig market probability of 20.4%.",
"why": [
{
"text": "Decision Model identifies Esbjerg as the value side (35.6%)",
"tone": "ok"
},
{
"text": "Market pricing conflicts with the model lean",
"tone": "bad"
},
{
"text": "Model\u2013market disagreement blocks Primary sizing",
"tone": "bad"
},
{
"text": "Market quality / price reliability is insufficient for Primary",
"tone": "bad"
},
{
"text": "Model confidence reduced due to calibration uncertainty",
"tone": "bad"
}
],
"why_label": "Decision Summary"
},
"gap_pp": 15.2,
"gates_failed": [
"Reliability below 65"
],
"has_top_pick": true,
"headline": "Wait - No Primary Bet",
"hero_mode": "default",
"icon": "\u23f8",
"label": "Wait for validation",
"market_signal": "The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg.",
"model_conflict_detail": null,
"model_lean": "Esbjerg",
"no_primary_reasons": {
"all_triggered": [
"market_conflict",
"market_quality",
"calibration_risk"
],
"calibration_mode": "soft",
"codes": [
"market_conflict",
"market_quality"
],
"label": "Reason",
"other_factors": [
{
"code": "market_quality",
"detail": "Price reliability is weak (thin coverage, outlier quote, or low book agreement).",
"name": "Market Quality Risk",
"short": "Market Quality Risk",
"tone": "warn"
}
],
"other_label": "Other factors",
"primary": {
"code": "market_conflict",
"detail": "Model lean and market pricing / drift are not aligned.",
"name": "Market Conflict",
"short": "Market Conflict",
"subtype": "drift_against_model",
"tone": "warn"
},
"secondary": {
"code": "market_quality",
"detail": "Price reliability is weak (thin coverage, outlier quote, or low book agreement).",
"name": "Market Quality Risk",
"short": "Market Quality Risk",
"tone": "warn"
},
"version": "v1"
},
"outlier_detected": true,
"outlier_excluded_panel": "Excluded top quotes (audit row \u2014 never Primary): #1 \u00b7 market 1X2 \u00b7 side Esbjerg \u00b7 decimal odds ~4.66 (derived from model% \u00d7 (1+EV)) \u00b7 EV +66% \u00b7 book: not captured on live render (see odds history / admin snapshot) \u00b7 captured: \u2014 \u00b7 audit_ref: fixture=1551319 \u00b7 snapshot=live-render \u00b7 odds\u22484.66 \u00b7 reason=thin|single-book|\u0394EV\u22653.0%EV \u00b7 book=admin-only \u00b7 trigger: outlier EV \u2212 consensus EV \u2265 +3.0% EV (not probability pp) AND thin/single-book style \u00b7 consensus used +5.9% EV. Excluded quotes cannot clear Primary.",
"primary_allowed": false,
"primary_block_explain": {
"entries": [
{
"key": "positive_ev",
"label": "Consensus EV +5.9% meets Primary gate (\u2265+5.0%)",
"ok": true
},
{
"key": "gate",
"label": "Reliability below 65",
"ok": false
}
],
"lean_ev_threshold_pct": 2.0,
"primary_ev_threshold_pct": 5.0,
"subtitle": "Primary needs consensus EV \u2265 +5.0% plus reliability/execution/calibration gates (Decision Strength is explain-only). Lean/tracked gate is +2.0% (selective only \u2014 not default Primary sizing).",
"title": "Why not Primary?"
},
"primary_gate_checklist": "Gate checklist: Consensus EV +5.9% \u2705 (need \u2265+5.0%) \u00b7 Calibration See checklist \u274c \u2192 Primary blocked. Decision Strength 3.0/10 (explain only, not a Primary gate). If you still act under hard block: example stake 0.10\u20130.20% bankroll (never Primary).",
"primary_gate_snapshot": "Primary Gate Snapshot: Consensus EV +5.9% (gate \u2265+5.0%) \u00b7 Calibration: See checklist \u2192 Primary blocked \u00b7 Decision Strength 3.0/10 (display only)",
"primary_gates": {
"items": [
{
"key": "extreme_gap",
"label": "Extreme gap",
"ok": true,
"value": "no"
},
{
"key": "xg_calibration",
"label": "xG calibration",
"ok": true,
"value": "warning"
},
{
"key": "reliability",
"label": "Rel",
"ok": false,
"value": "53 (\u226565)"
},
{
"key": "execution",
"label": "Exec",
"ok": false,
"value": "15 (\u226565)"
},
{
"key": "alignment",
"label": "Align",
"ok": false,
"value": "conflict"
},
{
"key": "consensus_ev",
"label": "ConsEV",
"ok": true,
"value": "+5.9% (\u2265+5.0%)"
},
{
"key": "top_pick",
"label": "Pick",
"ok": true,
"value": "true"
},
{
"key": "validation",
"label": "Validation",
"ok": false,
"value": "false"
}
],
"passed": 4,
"total": 8
},
"primary_type": null,
"reasons": [
"The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg.",
"Decision strength: 3.0/10",
"Reliability below 65",
"Outlier price +66% EV detected \u2014 not used for Primary (consensus only)."
],
"reliability_score": 53,
"speed_read": "Speed read: Model Signal can look moderate/strong while Decision Strength stays low after calibration \u2014 Strength alone does not block Primary (v2.5+); still check reliability/execution/EV hard gates.",
"strength_v2_breakdown": [
"Base decision score (v1)",
"Market steam conflicts with model",
"Consensus-line +EV",
"Low xG separation (league-average noise)"
],
"subline": "Model validation or guard rules block actionable value signals.",
"thresholds": {
"extreme_gap_pp": 30.0,
"lean_min_consensus_ev": 0.02,
"lean_min_strength": 5.0,
"min_consensus_ev": 0.05,
"min_execution": 65,
"min_reliability": 65,
"min_strength": 7.0,
"source": "db",
"user_id": 2
},
"thresholds_source": "db",
"thresholds_user_id": 2,
"tier": "wait",
"validation_ok": false,
"value_context": {
"consensus_ev": 0.059,
"consensus_ev_display": "+5.9%",
"consensus_odds": 4.66,
"disagreement_label": "Strong",
"disagreement_level": "strong",
"implied_prob": 0.2038,
"is_extreme_disagreement": false,
"model_prob": 0.3559,
"raw_edge_display": "+15.2 percentage points",
"raw_edge_pp": 15.2,
"raw_implied_prob": 0.2145922746781116,
"raw_signal_ev": 0.6585,
"raw_signal_ev_display": "+65.8%"
},
"version": "v2.5",
"xg_calibration": {
"block_value_alert": true,
"calibration_status": "warning",
"deviation_pct": -3.0,
"reasons": [
"Low xG separation gap=0.02 (noise / no edge)"
],
"recommended_action": "monitor",
"strength_delta": -2.0,
"uplift_away": null,
"uplift_home": null,
"xg_separation": {
"band": "flat",
"block_value_alert": true,
"separation_score": -20,
"strength_delta": -2.0,
"xg_gap": 0.02
}
}
},
"headline": "Wait - No Primary Bet",
"icon": "\u23f8",
"label": "Wait for validation",
"subline": "Model validation or guard rules block actionable value signals.",
"tier": "wait"
},
"why": {
"action_line": "Compare model lean with current best odds before sizing any bet.",
"bullets": [
"Model: Vejle 1.29 xG vs Esbjerg 1.31 \u2192 Esbjerg 35.6%",
"Market: Vejle ~20.4% implied",
"Market Drift: Esbjerg odds \u2191 +15.5%"
],
"one_liner": "Model favours Esbjerg, but the market has moved away from Esbjerg.",
"title": "Why?"
}
},
"edge_rows": [
{
"edge_pp": -25.02,
"fair_prob": 34.7,
"label": "Vejle",
"market_prob": 59.72,
"market_type": "1x2",
"outcome": "home"
},
{
"edge_pp": 9.74,
"fair_prob": 29.65,
"label": "Draw",
"market_prob": 19.91,
"market_type": "1x2",
"outcome": "draw"
},
{
"edge_pp": 15.26,
"fair_prob": 35.64,
"label": "Esbjerg",
"market_prob": 20.38,
"market_type": "1x2",
"outcome": "away"
},
{
"edge_pp": null,
"fair_prob": 48.2,
"label": "Over 2.5",
"market_prob": null,
"market_type": "ou25",
"outcome": "over"
},
{
"edge_pp": null,
"fair_prob": 51.8,
"label": "Under 2.5",
"market_prob": null,
"market_type": "ou25",
"outcome": "under"
},
{
"edge_pp": null,
"fair_prob": 54.5,
"label": "BTTS Yes",
"market_prob": null,
"market_type": "btts",
"outcome": "yes"
},
{
"edge_pp": null,
"fair_prob": 45.5,
"label": "BTTS No",
"market_prob": null,
"market_type": "btts",
"outcome": "no"
}
],
"edge_snapshot": {
"edge_label": "extreme_disagreement",
"edge_pp": -25.02,
"fair_prob_pct": 34.7,
"hero_side": "home",
"hero_team_name": "Vejle",
"market_prob_pct": 59.72,
"status": "strong_market_ahead",
"steam_team_name": "Esbjerg"
},
"fair_source": "poisson_pipeline",
"fair_vs_market": {
"closing_capture": "PRE5",
"closing_footnote": "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: PRE5.",
"comparison_available": true,
"comparison_disabled": false,
"comparison_summary": "The closing market estimates Vejle\u0027s win probability at 59.7%, compared with the model\u0027s estimate of 34.7%, a difference of 25.0 percentage points. This highlights a disagreement between the model and market consensus, without indicating which view is ultimately correct.",
"degraded_note": "",
"divergence_guard": {
"divergence_level": "extreme",
"edge_status": "strong_market_ahead",
"max_gap_pp": 25.02,
"suppress_hero": false,
"suppress_value_language": true
},
"divergence_label": "Extreme model-market divergence",
"divergence_level": "extreme",
"divergence_level_label": "Extreme divergence",
"divergence_note": "The fair estimate differs substantially from current market pricing. Large divergences can occur when rating inputs are incomplete, team-strength estimates are uncertain, or the market incorporates information not present in the model. Interpret with caution.",
"divergence_tier": "extreme",
"edge_label": "Extreme disagreement",
"edge_label_key": "extreme_disagreement",
"fair_confidence": "medium",
"fair_confidence_label": "Medium",
"fair_source_note": "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: PRE5.",
"forecast_assessment": {
"favourite_class": "Balanced match",
"favourite_label": "Esbjerg",
"forecast_certainty_tier": "low",
"headline": "Balanced match",
"market_agreement_label": "Weak",
"market_direction": {
"label": "Conflicts with model",
"positive": false
},
"market_prob_pct": 20.4,
"model_prob_gap_display": "+15.2 percentage points",
"model_prob_gap_pp": 15.2,
"model_prob_pct": 35.6,
"outcome_separation_tier": "low",
"paragraphs": [],
"pricing_convergence": {
"gap_display": "+15.2 percentage points",
"gap_pp": 15.2,
"label": "Low convergence",
"label_key": "mi_fa_pricing_low"
},
"reliability_headline": "Limited reliability",
"reliability_icon": "!",
"reliability_score": 53,
"reliability_tier": "limited",
"summary": "The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg. This disagreement reduces confidence and prevents a Primary bet.",
"tier": "balanced",
"title": "Prediction Assessment",
"validation_label": "Warning",
"value_split": {
"execution_confidence": {
"label": "Monitoring Confidence",
"score": 15,
"tier": "not_reliable",
"tier_label": "Not reliable"
},
"market_compatibility": {
"label": "Pricing proximity (inverse gap)",
"note": "This score falls as the probability gap (pp) rises \u2014 it is NOT a bet green light. Direction may still agree (see Alignment above). Formula: proximity = max(0, 100 \u2212 5\u00d7pp). Example: 16 pp \u2192 20/100 (diverged).",
"score": 8,
"tier": "not_reliable",
"tier_label": "Not reliable"
},
"model_edge_strength": {
"label": "Model Signal Strength",
"score": 38,
"tier": "low",
"tier_label": "Low"
},
"model_value": {
"label": "Pricing proximity (inverse gap)",
"note": "This score falls as the probability gap (pp) rises \u2014 it is NOT a bet green light. Direction may still agree (see Alignment above). Formula: proximity = max(0, 100 \u2212 5\u00d7pp). Example: 16 pp \u2192 20/100 (diverged).",
"score": 8,
"tier": "not_reliable",
"tier_label": "Not reliable"
},
"recommendation": {
"action": "wait",
"label": "Wait - No Primary Bet"
}
},
"why": {
"action_line": "Compare model lean with current best odds before sizing any bet.",
"bullets": [
"Model: Vejle 1.29 xG vs Esbjerg 1.31 \u2192 Esbjerg 35.6%",
"Market: Vejle ~20.4% implied",
"Market Drift: Esbjerg odds \u2191 +15.5%"
],
"one_liner": "Model favours Esbjerg, but the market has moved away from Esbjerg.",
"title": "Why?"
}
},
"forecast_certainty": {
"note": "Three outcomes remain closely bunched \u2014 treat as a relatively open match.",
"tier": "low",
"tier_label": "Low"
},
"forecast_certainty_label": "Low",
"has_market_probs": true,
"hero_edge_pp": -25.02,
"hero_label": "Vejle",
"hero_side": "home",
"market_activity": "Esbjerg odds lengthened \u2191 +15.5%.",
"market_agreement": "weak",
"market_agreement_label": "Weak",
"market_interpretation": {},
"market_narrative": {},
"market_source": "closing_1x2",
"max_gap_pp": 25.02,
"model_validation": {
"score_label_key": "mi_mv_warning",
"status": "warning"
},
"model_validation_label": "Warning",
"outcome_separation": {
"breakdown": [
"No outcome exceeds 50% on the 1X2 grid.",
"Top two 1X2 outcomes within 0.9 percentage points."
],
"lead_gap_pp": 0.9,
"max_prob_pct": 35.6,
"note": "How spread out the model 1X2 probabilities are \u2014 crowded splits mean no single outcome dominates. Not accuracy vs the market.",
"tier": "low",
"tier_label": "Low"
},
"outcome_separation_label": "Low",
"overall_assessment": {
"badge_class": "extreme",
"largest_gap_label": "Vejle",
"largest_gap_pp": -25.0,
"lead": "The closing market prices Vejle higher than the statistical model.",
"level": "extreme",
"max_gap_pp": 25.0,
"title": "Strong Disagreement"
},
"rows": [
{
"difference_pp": -25.02,
"edge_pp": -25.02,
"fair_prob_pct": 34.7,
"is_hero": true,
"label": "Vejle",
"market_prob_pct": 59.72,
"side": "home",
"signal_key": "market_higher",
"signal_label": "Market Higher"
},
{
"difference_pp": 9.74,
"edge_pp": 9.74,
"fair_prob_pct": 29.65,
"is_hero": false,
"label": "Draw",
"market_prob_pct": 19.91,
"side": "draw",
"signal_key": "model_higher",
"signal_label": "Model Higher"
},
{
"difference_pp": 15.26,
"edge_pp": 15.26,
"fair_prob_pct": 35.64,
"is_hero": false,
"label": "Esbjerg",
"market_prob_pct": 20.38,
"side": "away",
"signal_key": "model_edge",
"signal_label": "Model Edge"
}
],
"status": "strong_market_ahead",
"status_label": "Strong Market Ahead",
"steam_note": "",
"unavailable_note": ""
},
"interpretation": {
"has_conflict": true,
"paragraphs": [
"The betting market strongly prefers Vejle (20.4%).",
"However, Esbjerg has seen one of the strongest multi-book drifts of the day (\u2191 +15.5%, 14/14) \u2014 odds lengthened, not shortened.",
"This creates a conflict: Model \u2192 Esbjerg, Market \u2192 Vejle, while Esbjerg odds drifted longer (market fade).",
"Because signals disagree, confidence remains limited."
],
"show": true,
"title": "OddsGPT Interpretation"
},
"lifecycle": {
"closing_implied_pct": 62.89,
"closing_odds": 1.59,
"closing_reason": "",
"closing_status": "recorded",
"closing_status_label": "Recorded",
"clv_pending": true,
"clv_pp": 0.0,
"clv_reason": "",
"clv_status": "pending",
"context": "match",
"current_stage": "waiting_for_kickoff",
"current_stage_detail": "",
"current_stage_label": "Waiting for kickoff",
"entry_implied_pct": 62.89,
"entry_odds": 1.59,
"match_phase": "upcoming",
"match_phase_detail": "",
"match_phase_display": "Upcoming",
"match_phase_label": "Upcoming",
"model_validation_label": "Warning",
"model_validation_status": "warning",
"stages": [
{
"detail": "",
"id": "forecast_generated",
"label": "Prediction Generated",
"status": "done"
},
{
"detail": "",
"id": "market_detected",
"label": "Market Compared",
"status": "active"
},
{
"detail": "",
"id": "model_validated",
"label": "Validation Passed",
"status": "active"
},
{
"detail": "PRE5",
"id": "closing_recorded",
"label": "Closing Recorded",
"status": "done"
},
{
"detail": "",
"id": "clv_evaluated",
"label": "CLV Evaluated",
"status": "pending"
}
]
},
"market_move_intelligence": {
"books_reacting": 14,
"books_reacting_detail": [
{
"bookmaker_id": 4,
"bookmaker_name": "Pinnacle",
"is_sharp": true,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +15.8%",
"odds_delta_pct": 15.8
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 8,
"bookmaker_name": "Bet365",
"is_sharp": true,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +15.5%",
"odds_delta_pct": 15.5
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 36,
"bookmaker_name": "BetVictor",
"is_sharp": false,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +15.5%",
"odds_delta_pct": 15.5
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 3,
"bookmaker_name": "Betfair",
"is_sharp": true,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +13.1%",
"odds_delta_pct": 13.1
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 2,
"bookmaker_name": "Marathonbet",
"is_sharp": false,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +11.8%",
"odds_delta_pct": 11.8
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 11,
"bookmaker_name": "1xBet",
"is_sharp": false,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +11.6%",
"odds_delta_pct": 11.6
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 21,
"bookmaker_name": "888Sport",
"is_sharp": false,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +10.0%",
"odds_delta_pct": 10.0
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 7,
"bookmaker_name": "William Hill",
"is_sharp": false,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +10.0%",
"odds_delta_pct": 10.0
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 1,
"bookmaker_name": "10Bet",
"is_sharp": false,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +9.3%",
"odds_delta_pct": 9.3
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 32,
"bookmaker_name": "Betano",
"is_sharp": false,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +9.3%",
"odds_delta_pct": 9.3
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 9,
"bookmaker_name": "Dafabet",
"is_sharp": false,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +9.1%",
"odds_delta_pct": 9.1
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 34,
"bookmaker_name": "Superbet",
"is_sharp": false,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +8.0%",
"odds_delta_pct": 8.0
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 16,
"bookmaker_name": "Unibet",
"is_sharp": false,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +6.1%",
"odds_delta_pct": 6.1
},
{
"bookmaker_id": 5,
"bookmaker_name": "SBO",
"is_sharp": true,
"move_delta_display": "\u2191 +5.0%",
"odds_delta_pct": 5.0
}
],
"books_total": 14,
"breadth_display": "14/14",
"clv_label": "+0.00 pp",
"clv_status": "evaluated",
"current_odds": 5.0,
"is_drift": true,
"move_context": "Largest move today",
"move_display": "\u2191 +15.5%",
"move_pct_abs": 15.5,
"move_speed_icon": "\ud83d\udc22",
"move_speed_label": "Slow drift over 102h 45m",
"narrative_paragraphs": [
"14/14 books lengthened Esbjerg together (15.5% drift, score 65) \u2014 broad market fade, not a single-book blip.",
"Noticeable drift \u2014 odds lengthened with multi-book confirmation (not steam)."
],
"narrative_title": "Market Narrative",
"odds_delta_pct": 15.5,
"odds_path": {
"chart_y_labels": [
"5.00",
"4.67",
"4.33"
],
"display": "5.00 \u2192 3.97 \u2192 5.00",
"move_speed_icon": "\ud83d\udc22",
"move_speed_label": "Slow drift over 102h 45m",
"pick_team": "Esbjerg",
"points": [
{
"label_key": "open",
"value": "5.00"
},
{
"label_key": "extreme",
"value": "3.97"
},
{
"label_key": "current",
"value": "5.00"
}
],
"sparkline_points": [
4.33,
4.66,
5.0
],
"sparkline_polyline": "0.0,18.0 28.0,9.1 56.0,0.0",
"sparkline_trend": "up",
"sparkline_trend_label": "One-way rise",
"summary_boxes": [
{
"label_key": "open",
"value": "4.33"
},
{
"label_key": "low",
"value": "4.33"
},
{
"label_key": "high",
"value": "5.00"
},
{
"label_key": "current",
"value": "5.00"
}
]
},
"open_odds": 4.33,
"page_alert_line": "Market drift alert: Esbjerg odds \u2191 +15.5% \u2014 pricing moves against this side",
"phase_label": "Market drift",
"phase_tip": "Broad lengthening \u2014 market pricing moves against the tracked side.",
"pick_team": "Esbjerg",
"ref_book": "Bet365",
"seo_title_alert": "Market drift alert: Esbjerg odds \u2191 +15.5% \u2014 pricing moves against this side",
"sharp_leader": "Pinnacle",
"show": true,
"signal_badge_class": "fade",
"signal_icon": "\ud83d\udcc9",
"signal_impact": {
"current_odds": 5.0,
"is_drift": true,
"label": "Market Signal",
"move_display": "\u2191 +15.5%",
"open_odds": 4.33,
"summary": "Market moved away from Esbjerg while the model still favours another side.",
"team": "Esbjerg",
"tone": "against"
},
"signal_key": "strong_drift",
"signal_label": "Strong drift",
"steam_score": 65,
"steam_subtitle": "Strong sharp signal",
"steam_tier": "A",
"title": "Market Move Intelligence"
},
"market_overview": {
"breadth_display": "14/14",
"current_odds": 5.0,
"move_display": "\u2191 +15.5%",
"open_odds": 4.33,
"pick_team": "Esbjerg",
"steam_score": 65,
"steam_team_name": "Esbjerg",
"steam_tier": "A"
},
"premium_teaser": {
"current_divergence_pp": 25.0,
"divergence_label": "Current divergence",
"title": "Premium Market Intelligence",
"unlock_items": [
"Historical similar matches",
"Closing odds analysis",
"CLV tracking",
"Sharp money signals",
"Market efficiency rating",
"Historical model vs market results"
],
"unlock_label": "Unlock"
},
"show": true
},
"match": {
"away_expected_goals": null,
"away_goal_display": null,
"away_team_display_name": "Esbjerg",
"away_team_id": 403,
"away_team_logo": "/static/teams/403.webp",
"away_team_name": "Esbjerg",
"away_team_public_id": "57ljG7b4EDKYYo",
"away_team_slug": "esbjerg",
"country_code": "DK",
"country_display_name": "Denmark",
"country_flag": "/static/images/country/dk.svg",
"country_id": 44,
"country_name": "Denmark",
"fixture_id": 1551319,
"goals_away": null,
"goals_home": null,
"home_expected_goals": null,
"home_goal_display": null,
"home_team_country": "Denmark",
"home_team_display_name": "Vejle",
"home_team_id": 395,
"home_team_logo": "/static/teams/395.webp",
"home_team_name": "Vejle",
"home_team_public_id": "5oU9kXn0Ud4GKL",
"home_team_slug": "vejle",
"league_country": "Denmark",
"league_country_display": "Denmark",
"league_display_name": "Primera Divisi\u00f3n de Dinamarca",
"league_id": 120,
"league_logo": "/static/leagues/120.webp",
"league_name": "Primera Divisi\u00f3n de Dinamarca",
"league_public_id": "3kN7zuBL0Kbxkp",
"league_season": 2026,
"match_date": "2026-08-21 16:00:00",
"public_id": "1Rt1onWSubbNHt",
"score_fulltime_away": null,
"score_fulltime_home": null,
"score_penalty_away": null,
"score_penalty_home": null,
"status_long": "Not Started",
"status_short": "NS",
"venue_city": "Vejle",
"venue_name": "Vejle Stadion"
},
"match_decision": {
"confidence": {
"breakdown": [
"pred_conf_md_max_1x2_under_50",
"pred_conf_md_top_two_close",
"pred_conf_md_line_above_ev"
],
"breakdown_resolved": [
"Max 1X2 prob under 50% (open contest) (\u22121.0)",
"Top two outcomes relatively close in probability (\u22120.5)",
"At least one tracked line above +EV threshold (+0.5)"
],
"score": 6.0
},
"markets": {
"1x2": {
"1x2_ev_mode": "market_first_p15",
"away": {
"alpha": 0.1543,
"best_odd": 4.66,
"calibration": {
"active": false,
"hook": "CALIBRATE_1X2_P_FINAL"
},
"edge": 0.0235,
"ev": 0.059,
"implied_prob": 0.2038,
"joint_probs": {
"away": 0.2038,
"draw": 0.1991,
"home": 0.5972
},
"model_prob": 0.3559,
"p_final": 0.2272
},
"draw": {
"alpha": 0.1707,
"best_odd": 4.77,
"calibration": {
"active": false,
"hook": "CALIBRATE_1X2_P_FINAL"
},
"edge": 0.0167,
"ev": 0.0291,
"implied_prob": 0.1991,
"joint_probs": {
"away": 0.2038,
"draw": 0.1991,
"home": 0.5972
},
"model_prob": 0.2968,
"p_final": 0.2157
},
"ev_available": true,
"home": {
"alpha": 0.3751,
"best_odd": 1.59,
"calibration": {
"active": false,
"hook": "CALIBRATE_1X2_P_FINAL"
},
"edge": -0.0937,
"ev": -0.1995,
"implied_prob": 0.5972,
"joint_probs": {
"away": 0.2038,
"draw": 0.1991,
"home": 0.5972
},
"model_prob": 0.3473,
"p_final": 0.5034
}
},
"1x2_outlier": {
"1x2_ev_mode": "legacy_max_odd",
"away": {
"best_odd": 4.66,
"edge": 0.1413,
"ev": 0.6586,
"implied_prob": 0.2146,
"model_prob": 0.3559
},
"draw": {
"best_odd": 4.77,
"edge": 0.0871,
"ev": 0.4157,
"implied_prob": 0.2096,
"model_prob": 0.2968
},
"ev_available": true,
"home": {
"best_odd": 1.59,
"edge": -0.2816,
"ev": -0.4478,
"implied_prob": 0.6289,
"model_prob": 0.3473
}
},
"btts": {
"btts_ev_mode": "unavailable",
"ev_available": false,
"market_first": {
"available": false
},
"n_bookmakers": 0,
"reliability": "low"
},
"ou25": {
"ev_available": false,
"market_first": {
"available": false
},
"n_bookmakers": 0,
"ou_ev_mode": "unavailable",
"reliability": "low"
}
},
"match_regime": {
"action": "avoid",
"code": "no_edge",
"execution_line_key": "pred_regime_exec_no_actionable",
"insight_line_key": "pred_regime_insight_minor_inefficiency",
"stake_mult": 0.0,
"use_split_strip": true
},
"match_tier": "no_bet",
"min_ev": 0.02,
"total_xg": 2.6,
"variance_flag": false
},
"unified_decision": {
"actionable_ev_threshold": 0.02,
"algorithm": {
"enabled_since": "2026-05-26",
"game_typing_module": true,
"version": "2.5.0"
},
"balanced_alternative": null,
"best_consensus_ev": 0.059,
"best_outlier_ev": 0.6586,
"best_tracked_ev": 0.059,
"confidence": 5.5,
"decision_confidence_v1": {
"breakdown": [
"pred_conf_v1_primary_line",
"pred_conf_v1_max_1x2_under_50",
"pred_conf_v1_multi_ev_lines"
],
"breakdown_resolved": [
"Primary line identified (+1.0)",
"Max 1X2 prob under 50% (no dominant 1X2) (\u22121.0)",
"Two or more valid +EV lines at threshold (+0.5)"
],
"breakdown_v2": [
"Base decision score (v1)",
"Market steam conflicts with model",
"Consensus-line +EV",
"Low xG separation (league-average noise)"
],
"guard_capped": true,
"score": 3.0,
"score_before_guard": 5.5,
"score_v1_legacy": 3.0,
"score_v2_pre_penalty": 3.0,
"strength_v2": true
},
"decision_strength_v2": {
"breakdown": [
"Base decision score (v1)",
"Market steam conflicts with model",
"Consensus-line +EV",
"Low xG separation (league-average noise)"
],
"score": 3.0,
"score_pre_penalty": 3.0
},
"decision_type": "VALUE_ALERT",
"execution": {
"1x2_dominant": false,
"1x2_open_contest": true,
"grade": "B",
"stake_factor": 0.5
},
"favourite_misaligned_1x2": {
"active": false,
"gap": null,
"side": null
},
"final_action": "wait",
"final_decision": {
"action": "wait",
"alignment": {
"direction_aligned": false,
"direction_key": "conflict",
"gap_pp": 25.0,
"key": "conflict",
"label": "Disagree",
"model_strong": false,
"pricing_aligned": false,
"pricing_key": "low",
"probability_gap_pp": 25.0,
"summary": "The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg."
},
"alignment_key": "conflict",
"best_consensus_ev": 0.059,
"best_outlier_ev": 0.6586,
"confidence_band": "Moderate\u2013Low",
"decision_strength": 3.0,
"decision_strength_v1": 3.0,
"decision_strength_v2": 3.0,
"decision_type": "VALUE_ALERT",
"execution_confidence": 15,
"extreme_disagreement": false,
"final_verdict_audit": {
"action": "Monitor closing market and validate with CLV.",
"action_label": "Action",
"decision": "Wait - No Primary Bet",
"is_primary": false,
"snapshot": "The Decision Model estimates Esbjerg at 35.6%, compared with a no-vig market probability of 20.4%.",
"why": [
{
"text": "Decision Model identifies Esbjerg as the value side (35.6%)",
"tone": "ok"
},
{
"text": "Market pricing conflicts with the model lean",
"tone": "bad"
},
{
"text": "Model\u2013market disagreement blocks Primary sizing",
"tone": "bad"
},
{
"text": "Market quality / price reliability is insufficient for Primary",
"tone": "bad"
},
{
"text": "Model confidence reduced due to calibration uncertainty",
"tone": "bad"
}
],
"why_label": "Decision Summary"
},
"gap_pp": 15.2,
"gates_failed": [
"Reliability below 65"
],
"has_top_pick": true,
"headline": "Wait - No Primary Bet",
"hero_mode": "default",
"icon": "\u23f8",
"label": "Wait for validation",
"market_signal": "The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg.",
"model_conflict_detail": null,
"model_lean": "Esbjerg",
"no_primary_reasons": {
"all_triggered": [
"market_conflict",
"market_quality",
"calibration_risk"
],
"calibration_mode": "soft",
"codes": [
"market_conflict",
"market_quality"
],
"label": "Reason",
"other_factors": [
{
"code": "market_quality",
"detail": "Price reliability is weak (thin coverage, outlier quote, or low book agreement).",
"name": "Market Quality Risk",
"short": "Market Quality Risk",
"tone": "warn"
}
],
"other_label": "Other factors",
"primary": {
"code": "market_conflict",
"detail": "Model lean and market pricing / drift are not aligned.",
"name": "Market Conflict",
"short": "Market Conflict",
"subtype": "drift_against_model",
"tone": "warn"
},
"secondary": {
"code": "market_quality",
"detail": "Price reliability is weak (thin coverage, outlier quote, or low book agreement).",
"name": "Market Quality Risk",
"short": "Market Quality Risk",
"tone": "warn"
},
"version": "v1"
},
"outlier_detected": true,
"outlier_excluded_panel": "Excluded top quotes (audit row \u2014 never Primary): #1 \u00b7 market 1X2 \u00b7 side Esbjerg \u00b7 decimal odds ~4.66 (derived from model% \u00d7 (1+EV)) \u00b7 EV +66% \u00b7 book: not captured on live render (see odds history / admin snapshot) \u00b7 captured: \u2014 \u00b7 audit_ref: fixture=1551319 \u00b7 snapshot=live-render \u00b7 odds\u22484.66 \u00b7 reason=thin|single-book|\u0394EV\u22653.0%EV \u00b7 book=admin-only \u00b7 trigger: outlier EV \u2212 consensus EV \u2265 +3.0% EV (not probability pp) AND thin/single-book style \u00b7 consensus used +5.9% EV. Excluded quotes cannot clear Primary.",
"primary_allowed": false,
"primary_block_explain": {
"entries": [
{
"key": "positive_ev",
"label": "Consensus EV +5.9% meets Primary gate (\u2265+5.0%)",
"ok": true
},
{
"key": "gate",
"label": "Reliability below 65",
"ok": false
}
],
"lean_ev_threshold_pct": 2.0,
"primary_ev_threshold_pct": 5.0,
"subtitle": "Primary needs consensus EV \u2265 +5.0% plus reliability/execution/calibration gates (Decision Strength is explain-only). Lean/tracked gate is +2.0% (selective only \u2014 not default Primary sizing).",
"title": "Why not Primary?"
},
"primary_gate_checklist": "Gate checklist: Consensus EV +5.9% \u2705 (need \u2265+5.0%) \u00b7 Calibration See checklist \u274c \u2192 Primary blocked. Decision Strength 3.0/10 (explain only, not a Primary gate). If you still act under hard block: example stake 0.10\u20130.20% bankroll (never Primary).",
"primary_gate_snapshot": "Primary Gate Snapshot: Consensus EV +5.9% (gate \u2265+5.0%) \u00b7 Calibration: See checklist \u2192 Primary blocked \u00b7 Decision Strength 3.0/10 (display only)",
"primary_gates": {
"items": [
{
"key": "extreme_gap",
"label": "Extreme gap",
"ok": true,
"value": "no"
},
{
"key": "xg_calibration",
"label": "xG calibration",
"ok": true,
"value": "warning"
},
{
"key": "reliability",
"label": "Rel",
"ok": false,
"value": "53 (\u226565)"
},
{
"key": "execution",
"label": "Exec",
"ok": false,
"value": "15 (\u226565)"
},
{
"key": "alignment",
"label": "Align",
"ok": false,
"value": "conflict"
},
{
"key": "consensus_ev",
"label": "ConsEV",
"ok": true,
"value": "+5.9% (\u2265+5.0%)"
},
{
"key": "top_pick",
"label": "Pick",
"ok": true,
"value": "true"
},
{
"key": "validation",
"label": "Validation",
"ok": false,
"value": "false"
}
],
"passed": 4,
"total": 8
},
"primary_type": null,
"reasons": [
"The market has moved away from Esbjerg, but the model still strongly favours Esbjerg.",
"Decision strength: 3.0/10",
"Reliability below 65",
"Outlier price +66% EV detected \u2014 not used for Primary (consensus only)."
],
"reliability_score": 53,
"speed_read": "Speed read: Model Signal can look moderate/strong while Decision Strength stays low after calibration \u2014 Strength alone does not block Primary (v2.5+); still check reliability/execution/EV hard gates.",
"strength_v2_breakdown": [
"Base decision score (v1)",
"Market steam conflicts with model",
"Consensus-line +EV",
"Low xG separation (league-average noise)"
],
"subline": "Model validation or guard rules block actionable value signals.",
"thresholds": {
"extreme_gap_pp": 30.0,
"lean_min_consensus_ev": 0.02,
"lean_min_strength": 5.0,
"min_consensus_ev": 0.05,
"min_execution": 65,
"min_reliability": 65,
"min_strength": 7.0,
"source": "db",
"user_id": 2
},
"thresholds_source": "db",
"thresholds_user_id": 2,
"tier": "wait",
"validation_ok": false,
"value_context": {
"consensus_ev": 0.059,
"consensus_ev_display": "+5.9%",
"consensus_odds": 4.66,
"disagreement_label": "Strong",
"disagreement_level": "strong",
"implied_prob": 0.2038,
"is_extreme_disagreement": false,
"model_prob": 0.3559,
"raw_edge_display": "+15.2 percentage points",
"raw_edge_pp": 15.2,
"raw_implied_prob": 0.2145922746781116,
"raw_signal_ev": 0.6585,
"raw_signal_ev_display": "+65.8%"
},
"version": "v2.5",
"xg_calibration": {
"block_value_alert": true,
"calibration_status": "warning",
"deviation_pct": -3.0,
"reasons": [
"Low xG separation gap=0.02 (noise / no edge)"
],
"recommended_action": "monitor",
"strength_delta": -2.0,
"uplift_away": null,
"uplift_home": null,
"xg_separation": {
"band": "flat",
"block_value_alert": true,
"separation_score": -20,
"strength_delta": -2.0,
"xg_gap": 0.02
}
}
},
"game_type": {
"label_zh": "\u5747\u8861\uff08\u5f00\u653e\u8d5b\u679c\uff09",
"scoring_type": "balanced",
"signals": {
"btts_yes_prob": 0.545,
"draw_prob": 0.2968,
"max_1x2_prob": 0.3559,
"over_prob": 0.482,
"total_xg": 2.6,
"under_prob": 0.518,
"xg_diff": 0.02
},
"type": "balanced",
"typing_weights_enabled": true
},
"guard_active": true,
"guard_level": "extreme",
"guard_message": "Model validation failed \u2014 value signals on 1X2 are not actionable until inputs are verified.",
"hero_display_pick": null,
"hero_mode": "default",
"longshot_picks": [
{
"decision": "small_edge",
"ev": 0.0291,
"implied_prob": 0.1991,
"market": "1x2",
"model_prob": 0.2968,
"not_dominant": true,
"risk_band": "speculative",
"risk_tier": "longshot",
"side": "draw",
"side_label": "draw",
"slot": "longshot"
}
],
"markets": {
"1x2": {
"consensus_odds": 4.66,
"decision": "guard_blocked",
"decision_before_guard": "value_bet",
"edge": 0.0235,
"ev": 0.059,
"guard_blocked": true,
"implied_prob": 0.2038,
"max_ev_side": "away",
"model_prob": 0.3559,
"side": "away",
"side_label": "Esbjerg"
},
"btts": {
"decision": "lean",
"decision_layer": {
"available": false
},
"edge": null,
"ev": null,
"implied_prob": null,
"model_prob": 0.545,
"side": "yes",
"value_side": "yes"
},
"ou_2_5": {
"decision": "no_bet",
"decision_layer": {
"available": false
},
"edge": null,
"ev": null,
"implied_prob": null,
"model_prob": 0.518,
"side": "under",
"value_side": "under"
}
},
"match_id": 1551319,
"match_regime": {
"action": "optional",
"actionable": true,
"clear_edge": false,
"code": "thin_edge",
"execution_line_key": null,
"insight_line_key": null,
"max_valid_ev": 0.059,
"min_ev": 0.02,
"stake_mult": 0.25,
"use_split_strip": false
},
"match_tier": "value_game",
"no_clear_primary": false,
"probabilities": {
"away": 0.3559,
"draw": 0.2968,
"home": 0.3473
},
"reason_codes": [
"model_summary",
"longshot_high_variance"
],
"secondary_pick": null,
"secondary_picks": [],
"show_betting_primary_label": false,
"suppressed_primary": null,
"teams": {
"away": "Esbjerg",
"home": "Vejle"
},
"top_pick": {
"composite_score": 0.023098,
"decision": "value_bet",
"ev": 0.059,
"implied_prob": 0.2038,
"market": "1x2",
"model_prob": 0.3559,
"not_dominant": true,
"primary_strength": "weak",
"risk_band": "speculative",
"risk_tier": "primary",
"side": "away",
"side_label": "Esbjerg",
"slot": "primary",
"speculative_primary": true
},
"valid_markets_count": 2,
"value_context_1x2": {
"consensus_ev": 0.059,
"consensus_ev_display": "+5.9%",
"consensus_odds": 4.66,
"disagreement_label": "Strong",
"disagreement_level": "strong",
"implied_prob": 0.2038,
"is_extreme_disagreement": false,
"model_prob": 0.3559,
"raw_edge_display": "+15.2 percentage points",
"raw_edge_pp": 15.2,
"raw_implied_prob": 0.2145922746781116,
"raw_signal_ev": 0.6585,
"raw_signal_ev_display": "+65.8%"
}
}
},
"fixture_id": 1551319,
"generated_at_utc": "2026-08-21T15:57:21.890249+00:00",
"lang_id": "en"
}
Explora Más Contenido de Predicciones
Obtén predicciones premium para Vejle & Esbjerg!
Desbloquea análisis en profundidad, consejos de apuestas exclusivos y pronósticos de partidos con nuestro servicio de suscripción premium.
Suscríbete ahora
Primera División de Dinamarca — Clasificación
| # | EQUIPO | PJ | G | E | P | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hvidovre IF | 9 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 21 |
| 2 | Vejle | 9 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 19 |
| 3 | FC Fredericia | 9 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 14 |
| 4 | Aarhus Fremad | 9 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 13 |
| 5 | Aalborg BK | 9 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 13 |
| 6 | Hobro IK | 9 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 13 |
| 7 | Vendsyssel FF | 9 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 10 |
| 8 | AB Copenhagen | 9 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 9 |
| 9 | Hillerød | 9 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 9 |
| 10 | Kolding IF | 9 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 8 |
| 11 | HB Køge | 9 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 7 |
| 12 | Esbjerg | 9 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 5 |
| # | EQUIPO | PJ | GF | GC | +/- | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Vejle | 9 | 22 | 13 | +9 | 19 |
| 2 | Hvidovre IF | 9 | 18 | 9 | +9 | 21 |
| 3 | Hillerød | 9 | 13 | 14 | -1 | 9 |
| 4 | FC Fredericia | 9 | 12 | 6 | +6 | 14 |
| 5 | Hobro IK | 9 | 12 | 16 | -4 | 13 |
| 6 | AB Copenhagen | 9 | 11 | 10 | +1 | 9 |
| 7 | Aalborg BK | 9 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 13 |
| 8 | HB Køge | 9 | 11 | 17 | -6 | 7 |
| 9 | Aarhus Fremad | 9 | 10 | 9 | +1 | 13 |
| 10 | Kolding IF | 9 | 10 | 12 | -2 | 8 |
| 11 | Vendsyssel FF | 9 | 10 | 14 | -4 | 10 |
| 12 | Esbjerg | 9 | 10 | 19 | -9 | 5 |
