Statistics / Football / China. League One / Heilongjiang Lava Spring vs Meizhou Kejia

Heilongjiang Lava Spring vs Meizhou Kejia Statistics & Analysis

Heilongjiang Lava Spring Heilongjiang Lava Spring
Oct 06, 2026 - 11:30
0 1.33
0 1.27
xG Accuracy: 49%
Meizhou Kejia Meizhou Kejia
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 (0 goals) ✔ Correct
  • Both Teams To Score BTTS No No ✔ Correct
  • 1X2 Heilongjiang Lava Spring Draw ✖ Incorrect
  • Correct Score Insights 1-1, 1-0, 0-1, 2-1, 1-2 0-0 ✖ Incorrect

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Sep 30, 2026 · 01:33 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-11909983

Closing Odds 1.95
AI Fair Odds —
CLV +0.0%
Final Result Draw · Heilongjiang Lava Spring 0–0 Meizhou Kejia
Prediction ✖ Missed
Decision Grade C

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 PRE20 and PRE1 on the prioritized bookmaker snapshot.

Despite limited late movement, the model still prices Draw (1X2), Meizhou Kejia (1X2) 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 Meizhou Kejia (1X2) by about 7.1 percentage points — the clearest mispricing signal summarized on this page.

Model vs. closing implied

Market Model % Closing impl. % Gap (pp)
Heilongjiang Lava Spring (1X2) 36.6 47.1 -10.5
Draw (1X2) 29.6 26.2 +3.4
Meizhou Kejia (1X2) 33.8 26.6 +7.1
What this means

In plain terms: the model lands near 33.8% on Meizhou Kejia (1X2), while the closing snapshot implied about 26.6%. The difference — about 7.1 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: PRE20 → PRE1 · Book: draftkings

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 (PRE20) Closing (PRE1) Implied Δ (pp)
Heilongjiang Lava Spring (1X2) 1.95 1.95 0.0
Draw (1X2) 3.5 3.5 0.0
Meizhou Kejia (1X2) 3.45 3.45 0.0

AI match briefing

AI Match Summary

Quick read on how the model reads this matchup.

  • League: League One
  • Fixture: Heilongjiang Lava Spring vs Meizhou Kejia
  • Kickoff: 2026-10-06 11:30:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 36.6% · Draw 29.6% · Away 33.8%
  • xG (showing): Heilongjiang Lava Spring 1.33 — Meizhou Kejia 1.27 (total xG ≈ 2.6)
  • Best +EV line (same label as hero card when Primary thresholds are not met): Under 2.5 goals
  • Model: 51.8% · Implied: 43.4% · Probability edge: +8.4 pts · Est. EV: +14.5%
  • BTTS (model): Yes 54.5% · No 45.5%
  • Correct score (top bin): 1-1 (12.5%)

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

Early match state can move realised goals away from pre-kick projections.

Historical Recommendation

Historical Decision: No Primary Bet

Outcome: Missed — Pre-match 1X2 lean did not match 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

October 06, 2026 (UTC)

Get Premium Predictions for Heilongjiang Lava Spring & Meizhou Kejia!

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

Subscribe Now
Back to Statistics
League One League One — Standings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Guangzhou E-Power 24 16 6 2 54
2 Guangxi Hengchen 24 13 6 5 45
3 Shenzhen Juniors 24 12 8 4 44
4 Nantong Zhiyun 24 11 9 4 42
5 Shaanxi Union 24 10 6 8 36
6 Yanbian Longding 24 9 8 7 35
7 Wuxi Wugou 24 9 5 10 32
8 Hebei Kungfu 24 8 7 9 31
9 Changchun Yatai 24 10 3 11 29
10 Ningbo Professional 24 9 5 10 29
11 Dalian Huayi 24 7 8 9 29
12 Suzhou Dongwu 24 7 8 9 26
13 Heilongjiang Lava Spring 24 4 11 9 23
14 Nanjing City 24 5 6 13 21
15 Meizhou Kejia 24 7 3 14 15
16 Dongguan United 24 2 7 15 13
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Guangzhou E-Power 24 48 20 +28 54
2 Guangxi Hengchen 24 40 26 +14 45
3 Shenzhen Juniors 24 39 25 +14 44
4 Shaanxi Union 24 38 26 +12 36
5 Changchun Yatai 24 37 40 -3 29
6 Wuxi Wugou 24 36 29 +7 32
7 Heilongjiang Lava Spring 24 35 46 -11 23
8 Nantong Zhiyun 24 33 20 +13 42
9 Yanbian Longding 24 33 27 +6 35
10 Dalian Huayi 24 30 36 -6 29
11 Suzhou Dongwu 24 28 33 -5 26
12 Ningbo Professional 24 27 30 -3 29
13 Meizhou Kejia 24 25 50 -25 15
14 Dongguan United 24 24 49 -25 13
15 Hebei Kungfu 24 22 25 -3 31
16 Nanjing City 24 20 33 -13 21
League One China. League One Predictions