Statistics / Football / Tanzania. Ligi kuu Bara / Azam vs Mashujaa

Azam vs Mashujaa Statistics & Analysis

Azam Azam
Jun 16, 2026 - 16:00
2 1.30
0 0.76
xG Accuracy: 67%
Mashujaa Mashujaa
Premium betting site stake: New users can use the promo code FHn2uDc1 to receive $100 cash.

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 Under 2.5 (2 goals) ✔ Correct
  • Both Teams To Score BTTS Yes No ✖ Incorrect
  • 1X2 Azam Azam ✔ Correct
  • Correct Score Insights 1-0, 0-0, 1-1, 2-0, 0-1 2-0 ✔ Correct

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Jul 30, 2026 · 17:26 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-2526405

Closing Odds 1.19
AI Fair Odds —
CLV +0.0%
Final Result Azam win · Azam 2–0 Mashujaa
Prediction ✔ Correct
Decision Grade B-

Model Performance

This prediction contributes to:

  • Primary Bets ROI (180d): -100.0%

Market intelligence

Supporting read on how the prioritized closing feed moved versus the model — use after the Primary pick above.

Market briefing

Market remained largely stable before kickoff. No meaningful late implied-price shift was detected between PRE30 and PRE1 on the prioritized bookmaker snapshot.

Despite limited late movement, the model still prices Draw (1X2), Mashujaa (1X2), Under 2.5 goals meaningfully above what those closing snapshots implied — that gap is a static “model vs. price” read, not a late steam or chase story.

The model still exceeds closing implied on Under 2.5 goals by about 27.4 percentage points — the clearest mispricing signal summarized on this page.

Model vs. closing implied

Market Model % Closing impl. % Gap (pp)
Azam (1X2) 47.7 74.1 -26.4
Draw (1X2) 32.1 17.5 +14.6
Mashujaa (1X2) 20.2 8.4 +11.8
Over 2.5 goals 34.0 61.4 -27.4
Under 2.5 goals 66.0 38.6 +27.4
What this means

In plain terms: the model lands near 66.0% on Under 2.5 goals, while the closing snapshot implied about 38.6%. The difference — about 27.4 percentage points — is the largest model-vs.-market gap highlighted on this page.

Quick definitions: “closing implied” is the probability for that outcome implied by the final captured odds (after a simple de-vig). “Gap (pp)” is the model percentage minus that implied value, in percentage points (pp).

Closing-window line move

Single prioritized bookmaker per snapshot (not all books). Capture path: PRE30 → PRE1 · Book: Pinnacle

Column tags in parentheses: Closing uses the first available snapshot in PRE1→PRE5→PRE10→PRE30; Early uses the first available in PRE30→PRE10→PRE5 that is not the same capture as Closing.

Detailed capture odds are folded below — movement was negligible on de-vig implied prices.

View full line-by-line capture table
Market Early (PRE30) Closing (PRE1) Implied Δ (pp)
Azam (1X2) 1.19 1.19 0.0
Draw (1X2) 5.05 5.05 0.0
Mashujaa (1X2) 10.43 10.43 0.0
Over 2.5 goals 1.48 1.48 0.0
Under 2.5 goals 2.35 2.35 0.0

AI match briefing

AI Match Summary

Quick read on how the model reads this matchup.

  • League: Ligi kuu Bara
  • Fixture: Azam vs Mashujaa
  • Kickoff: 2026-06-16 16:00:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 47.7% · Draw 32.1% · Away 20.2%
  • xG (showing): Azam 1.3 — Mashujaa 0.76 (total xG ≈ 2.06)
  • Value headline: At least one tracked line reaches the headline EV threshold — align with the hero / Primary card if shown.
  • Structural leans (not bets): Value lean (pricing): O/U 2.5 Under 2.5; BTTS Yes
  • BTTS (model): Yes N/A · No N/A
  • Correct score (top bin): N/A

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 - No Primary Bet

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 28, 2026 (UTC)

Get Premium Predictions for Azam & Mashujaa!

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

Subscribe Now
Back to Statistics
Ligi kuu Bara Ligi kuu Bara — Standings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Young Africans 30 23 6 1 75
2 Simba 30 22 7 1 73
3 Azam 30 18 10 2 64
4 Singida Fountain Gate 30 15 5 10 50
5 Kitayosce 30 11 10 9 43
6 JKT Tanzania 30 10 12 8 42
7 Pamba Jiji 30 9 9 12 36
8 Coastal Union 30 9 9 12 36
9 Dodoma Jiji 30 8 11 11 35
10 Namungo 30 7 13 10 34
11 Mashujaa 30 7 12 11 33
12 Singida Big Stars 30 9 6 15 33
13 Tanzania Prisons 30 9 5 16 32
14 Mbeya City 30 7 9 14 30
15 Mtibwa Sugar 30 6 9 15 27
16 KMC 30 2 3 25 9
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Young Africans 30 71 9 +62 75
2 Simba 30 54 11 +43 73
3 Singida Fountain Gate 30 47 35 +12 50
4 Azam 30 46 12 +34 64
5 Kitayosce 30 33 28 +5 43
6 Pamba Jiji 30 32 35 -3 36
7 Coastal Union 30 31 37 -6 36
8 JKT Tanzania 30 30 33 -3 42
9 Namungo 30 25 32 -7 34
10 Dodoma Jiji 30 25 36 -11 35
11 Singida Big Stars 30 25 44 -19 33
12 Mtibwa Sugar 30 25 48 -23 27
13 Mbeya City 30 24 41 -17 30
14 Tanzania Prisons 30 23 41 -18 32
15 KMC 30 16 53 -37 9
16 Mashujaa 30 15 27 -12 33