Statistics / Football / China. Super League / Beijing Guoan vs Sichuan Jiuniu

Beijing Guoan vs Sichuan Jiuniu Statistics & Analysis

Beijing Guoan Beijing Guoan
Aug 07, 2026 - 11:35
4 2.46
0 0.93
xG Accuracy: 51%
Sichuan Jiuniu Sichuan Jiuniu
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 Over 2.5 (4 goals) ✖ Incorrect
  • Both Teams To Score BTTS No No ✔ Correct
  • 1X2 Beijing Guoan Beijing Guoan ✔ Correct
  • Correct Score Insights 2-0, 2-1, 3-0, 1-0, 3-1 4-0 ✖ Incorrect

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Aug 01, 2026 · 01:15 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-2669375

Closing Odds 6.29
AI Fair Odds —
CLV +0.0%
Final Result Beijing Guoan win · Beijing Guoan 4–0 Sichuan Jiuniu
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 Beijing Guoan (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 Beijing Guoan (1X2) by about 3.9 percentage points — the clearest mispricing signal summarized on this page.

Model vs. closing implied

Market Model % Closing impl. % Gap (pp)
Beijing Guoan (1X2) 69.9 66.1 +3.9
Draw (1X2) 18.8 18.7 +0.1
Sichuan Jiuniu (1X2) 11.3 15.2 -3.9
Over 2.5 goals 65.8 67.0 -1.2
Under 2.5 goals 34.2 33.0 +1.2
What this means

In plain terms: the model lands near 69.9% on Beijing Guoan (1X2), while the closing snapshot implied about 66.1%. The difference — about 3.9 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)
Beijing Guoan (1X2) 1.45 1.45 0.0
Draw (1X2) 5.12 5.12 0.0
Sichuan Jiuniu (1X2) 6.29 6.29 0.0
Over 2.5 goals 1.42 1.42 0.0
Under 2.5 goals 2.89 2.89 0.0

AI match briefing

AI Match Summary

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

  • League: Super League
  • Fixture: Beijing Guoan vs Sichuan Jiuniu
  • Kickoff: 2026-08-07 11:35:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 69.9% · Draw 18.8% · Away 11.3%
  • xG (showing): Beijing Guoan 2.46 — Sichuan Jiuniu 0.93 (total xG ≈ 3.39)
  • Best +EV line (same label as hero card when Primary thresholds are not met): BTTS No
  • Model: 43.6% · Implied: 40.0% · Probability edge: +3.6 pts · Est. EV: +4.6%
  • BTTS (model): Yes N/A · No N/A
  • Correct score (top bin): N/A

Use the cards for tiering; this text only restates the same inputs in narrative form.

1X2 can look balanced even when side markets show clearer structure.

Historical Recommendation

Historical Decision: Selective Lean - 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 30, 2026 (UTC)

Get Premium Predictions for Beijing Guoan & Sichuan Jiuniu!

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

Subscribe Now
Back to Statistics
Super League Super League — Standings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Chengdu Better City 26 15 7 4 52
2 Dalian Zhixing 26 12 4 10 40
3 Beijing Guoan 26 11 10 5 38
4 Yunnan Yukun 26 11 5 10 38
5 Qingdao Youth Island 26 8 14 4 38
6 Shandong Luneng 26 13 4 9 37
7 SHANGHAI SIPG 26 10 8 8 33
8 Shanghai Shenhua 26 12 5 9 31
9 Chongqing Tongliang Long 26 7 10 9 31
10 Hangzhou Greentown 26 10 6 10 31
11 Sichuan Jiuniu 26 8 4 14 28
12 Henan Jianye 26 8 9 9 27
13 Shenyang Urban 26 7 4 15 25
14 Tianjin Teda 26 9 8 9 25
15 Wuhan Three Towns 26 5 11 10 21
16 Qingdao Jonoon 26 6 3 17 14
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Yunnan Yukun 26 54 51 +3 38
2 Shanghai Shenhua 26 52 46 +6 31
3 Chengdu Better City 26 51 30 +21 52
4 Beijing Guoan 26 49 33 +16 38
5 Shandong Luneng 26 46 43 +3 37
6 Hangzhou Greentown 26 45 43 +2 31
7 SHANGHAI SIPG 26 40 33 +7 33
8 Wuhan Three Towns 26 39 46 -7 21
9 Dalian Zhixing 26 38 42 -4 40
10 Tianjin Teda 26 36 32 +4 25
11 Sichuan Jiuniu 26 34 45 -11 28
12 Shenyang Urban 26 34 47 -13 25
13 Qingdao Jonoon 26 34 53 -19 14
14 Henan Jianye 26 33 35 -2 27
15 Qingdao Youth Island 26 31 32 -1 38
16 Chongqing Tongliang Long 26 27 32 -5 31
# TEAM MP xG xGC +/- PTS
1 Beijing Guoan 26 4.4 0.1 +4.3 38
2 Shenyang Urban 26 2.8 0.8 +2.0 25
3 Tianjin Teda 26 1.5 0.6 +0.9 25
4 Chengdu Better City 26 2.1 1.5 +0.6 52
5 Qingdao Youth Island 26 1.8 1.2 +0.6 38
6 Yunnan Yukun 26 2.6 2.3 +0.3 38
7 Dalian Zhixing 26 2.3 2.0 +0.3 40
8 Hangzhou Greentown 26 1.7 1.5 +0.2 31
9 Shanghai Shenhua 26 1.5 1.7 -0.2 31
10 Wuhan Three Towns 26 2.0 2.3 -0.3 21
11 Qingdao Jonoon 26 1.5 2.1 -0.6 14
12 SHANGHAI SIPG 26 1.2 1.8 -0.6 33
13 Sichuan Jiuniu 26 0.6 1.5 -0.9 28
14 Chongqing Tongliang Long 26 0.8 2.8 -2.0 31
15 Shandong Luneng 26 2.4 7.0 -4.6 37
16 Henan Jianye 26 — — — 27