Statistics / Football / France. National 2 - Group B / Chantilly vs Bourges Foot 18

Chantilly vs Bourges Foot 18 Statistics & Analysis

May 09, 2026 - 16:00
1 1.45
1 1.25
xG Accuracy: 82%
Premium betting site 1xbet: New users can use the promo code 1x_3342271 to receive $100 cash.

Tracked markets vs full-time result

Each row compares the model’s highlighted side (or lean) to what happened at full time.

  • Market Prediction Result Outcome
  • Over / Under 2.5 Under 2.5 Under 2.5 (2 goals) ✔ Correct
  • Both Teams To Score BTTS No Yes ✖ Incorrect
  • 1X2 Chantilly Draw ✖ Incorrect
  • Correct Score Insights 0-1 1-1 ✖ Incorrect

AI match briefing

AI Match Summary

Below is a compact, numbers-first snapshot aligned with the same engine as the cards above.

  • League: National 2 - Group B
  • Fixture: Chantilly vs Bourges Foot 18
  • Kickoff: 2026-05-09 18:00:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 10.0% · Draw 45.0% · Away 45.0%
  • xG (showing): Chantilly 1.45 — Bourges Foot 18 1.25 (total xG ≈ 2.7)
  • 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): Structural lean (model): O/U 2.5 Under 2.5 (Under 2.5 63.6% · Over 2.5 36.4%); BTTS No (Yes 43.6% · No 56.4%) Value lean (pricing): O/U 2.5 Under 2.5; BTTS No
  • BTTS (model): Yes 43.6% · No 56.4%
  • Correct score (top bin): 0-1 (14.6%)

The decision block shows no default bet: no tracked line clears the headline minimum +EV threshold at the best prices we have (a leg can still show small +EV below that bar). Lean labels are directional only — not bankroll-sized recommendations.

Prefer skipping to over-staking when the engine is honest about missing edge.

Best Bet + Reason

No clear +EV headline on this snapshot.

Treat this page as a read-only diagnostic: totals/BTTS structure can be informative even when the honest answer is to wait.

Stake sizing should default to zero when no headline +EV exists — experimentation belongs in the discretionary bucket only.

FAQ

Should I still read the 1X2 card?

Yes — it shows whether any winner price clears value. Here it often explains why there is no headline: probabilities can be clustered while prices already embed that uncertainty.

Why is there no “best bet” on this page?

The headline engine uses a minimum +EV threshold (e.g. 2%) for a default pick. A line can still show tiny +EV that fails that bar — we still call it no default bet so readers do not over-size thin edges.

Is the most likely correct score still relevant?

As context only: it is still a low absolute probability tail outcome (often in the single digits, sometimes low teens). It does not override the “no headline +EV” stance — treat score bets as fun-sized if you play them at all.

What do the grey “lean” labels mean then?

They summarise where the model tilts (e.g. Under 2.5 or BTTS No) without claiming a positive economic edge. Use them as context; size to zero unless you deliberately accept discretionary risk.

Risk Factors

  • 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%).

Methodology

  • Inputs: Same structured facts bundle as the public prediction page (xG / Poisson snapshot, market EV where available, decision engine v2).
  • Compliance: Educational framing only; not personalised advice.

Last Updated

May 17, 2026 (UTC)

How to use this
  • Focus on the Primary line when you want one actionable idea.
  • Do not parlay many thin-edge picks together; edges do not add reliably.
  • Treat longshots as optional, high-stake-sizing plays only.

Get Premium Predictions for Chantilly & Bourges Foot 18!

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

Subscribe Now
Back to Statistics
National 2 - Group B National 2 - Group BStandings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Thionville Lusitanos 29 18 6 5 60
2 Haguenau 29 14 8 7 50
3 Bourges Foot 18 29 13 10 6 49
4 Feignies-Aulnoye 29 12 9 8 45
5 St-Pryvé St-Hilaire 29 12 6 11 42
6 Furiani-Agliani 29 12 6 11 42
7 Dieppe 29 11 8 10 41
8 Bastia-Borgo 29 11 7 11 40
9 Biesheim 29 10 10 9 39
10 Epinal 29 10 7 12 37
11 Colmar 29 9 10 10 36
12 Wasquehal 29 10 3 16 33
13 Beauvais 29 8 11 10 32
14 Chambly Thelle FC 29 8 10 11 31
15 Chantilly 29 6 9 14 27
16 Blois 29 6 4 19 22
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Thionville Lusitanos 29 53 32 +21 60
2 St-Pryvé St-Hilaire 29 46 39 +7 42
3 Haguenau 29 42 28 +14 50
4 Feignies-Aulnoye 29 40 23 +17 45
5 Furiani-Agliani 29 40 38 +2 42
6 Colmar 29 38 40 -2 36
7 Beauvais 29 34 41 -7 32
8 Bourges Foot 18 29 33 24 +9 49
9 Bastia-Borgo 29 32 35 -3 40
10 Chambly Thelle FC 29 31 35 -4 31
11 Biesheim 29 30 32 -2 39
12 Chantilly 29 30 39 -9 27
13 Dieppe 29 29 32 -3 41
14 Epinal 29 29 35 -6 37
15 Blois 29 27 45 -18 22
16 Wasquehal 29 25 41 -16 33